In a classic study by Lichenstein, Slovic, Fischoff, Layman and Combs (1978), two biases were identified. The first was a primary bias, which is the human tendency to overestimate low-risk causes of death and to underestimate high-risk causes of death. The second was a secondary bias, which is the tendency to exaggerate the probability of sensational causes of death.

Cercopithecine herpesvirus 1 is a disease with 70% mortality rate in humans. The risk of contracting the fatal illness Cercopithecine herpesvirus 1 from macaques is relatively low, with only 40 documented cases so far and all of them occurring in laboratory settings (Engel & Jones-Engel, 2011). Hence, it is prone to the primary bias. While no studies on this have been done yet, theory predicts that the public will probably overestimate the likelihood of contracting fatal Cercopithecine herpesvirus 1 from macaques.

Similarly, studies by Sha et al. (2009b) have concluded that the benign human-macaque conflict in Singapore is greatly exaggerated by the media. A retaliatory attack by macaques can be a dramatic thing, which makes death from Cercopithecine herpesvirus 1 prone to secondary bias. It could be that a general fear of contracting diseases contributes to exaggerated depiction of human-macaque conflict in Singapore.

Keeping in mind these factors, perhaps effort could be put in to reassure the public that the risk of contracting diseases from macaques is relatively low if respect is given to the space of macaques. In fact, there is a higher likelihood that the macaques contract a disease from humans (Engel & Jones-Engel, 2011). Once any possible fear from the public is addressed, further steps can be taken to dealt with the human-macaque conflict. However, it should be kept in mind that there is still a small risk in contracting diseases from macaques, and that this risk is increased with contact.