COVID-19 Warning
When I was reading the Stern and Kalof reading about methods of scientific inquiry, my mind naturally went to the current coronavirus crisis. I doubt this will be a very original blog post, considering that most people’s minds are on COVID-19, but this entire situation will be analyzed for years to come. Not only is it a serious pandemic, but it affects almost every sector of life. Labor, the economy, education, government, healthcare, sports, and more have been deeply affected by COVID-19. So how will we analyze this crisis?
The first way is through naturalistic observation, answering this basic question: what happens in a pandemic? I’m sure there are people tracking how colleges and universities, sports leagues, and different industries have responded to coronavirus. Journalists and historians are likely documenting the situation as well, trying to figure out what is going right and wrong. This applies across all of the areas that COVID-19 has affected. But naturalistic observation is more likely to raise questions than answers. For example, we know how different governments responded to the crisis, but how can they improve for next time? That question can be best answered by retrospective case study.
It is likely that COVID-19 will serve as the case study for most future pandemics, because it actually escalated to the highest point of any pandemic in the last 100 years. It also takes place at a moment of unprecedented ability to document information for future study, making it easy to go back and study what happened. Of course, the operations of government and politics in this period will be studied, but another interesting angle is the rise of teleworking. How much efficiency do companies actually lose from employees working at home, and could this lead to a future where offices are less necessary to run a business? Despite all of the destruction and havoc caused by the coronavirus, it could very well lead to huge changes in how our lives function after the crisis is over.
I think you’re right in that a variety of interesting questions will arise from the studying of this virus. I listened to a podcast the other day that believes that this crisis will spark a deeper investigation and re-evaluation of the insurance and healthcare industry in this country because both of those things are not designed to sustain a pandemic.
I am interested to see the results of these many findings to these questions as a result of the pandemic. Especially the questions regarding what could be done differently the next time something like this occurs. I’m certain every country will have their own right answer to these questions and apply for the next time it happens.
I like how you talked about naturalistic observations and retrospective case studies here because they are both very concrete; pp. 26 of the reading says they are both “concrete and relatively uncluttered by anyone’s theories and conclusions.” I think that it is important to think about this and contemplate the “naturalistic questions” even right now, given that many people are not actively engaging in social distancing and are disregarding professional medical advice.
I think you’re absolutely right that this crisis and our response to it will be studied for decades to come. Something of this magnitude hasn’t happened in a century, and how people will deal with just pieces of it such as social distancing and quarantines will be incredibly interesting to study.
I would find it extremely interesting to observe people in their homes during this pandemic. However, the IRB would have a problem with this because it infringes upon people’s privacy as well as their ability to consent. I wish there was a way in which we could observe people without gaining their consent because then we truly would see how they behave (as messed up as that seems)