Trust and Compliance with COVID-19 Preventive Behaviors during the Pandemic.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Ayalon L
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7967340 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Political trust is an important predictor of compliance with government policies, especially in the face of natural disasters or public health emergencies. During the COVID-19 pandemic, for example, multiple studies related political trust to increased compliance with mobility restrictions. Yet these findings come mostly from high-income countries where political trust and wealth correlate positively. In Latin America, both variables correlate negatively, allowing for better testing of competing explanations. Using a difference-in-differences design, we find that in Latin America wealth and, counterintuitively, low political trust predict increased compliance. To understand mechanisms, we decompose political trust and wealth into underlying predictors (social protection, corruption, and education) and reinsert them into the model. While education, as a wealth proxy, predicts decreased mobility across all periods, social protection, which was the strongest predictor of political trust, relates significantly to increased mobility, but only at the beginning of the lockdown prior to distribution of emergency support. This suggests the existence of a public health moral hazard early in the pandemic, whereby citizens who benefited previously from government benefits may have been more risk tolerant in the face of the COVID-19 threat. We interpret these findings within the context of the region's recent "inclusionary turn." Future studies should explore the distinct relationships between political trust, risk perception, and compliance, especially in low- and middle-income countries, and their implications for policy responses to national emergencies.
| S-EPMC9760614 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The magnitude and nature of the COVID-19 pandemic prevents public health policies from relying on coercive enforcement. Practicing social distancing, wearing masks and staying at home becomes voluntary and conditional on the behavior of others. We present the results of a large-scale survey experiment in nine countries with representative samples of the population. We find that both empirical expectations (what others do) and normative expectations (what others approve of) play a significant role in compliance, beyond the effect of any other individual or group characteristic. In our vignette experiment, respondents evaluate the likelihood of compliance with social distancing and staying at home of someone similar to them in a hypothetical scenario. When empirical and normative expectations of individuals are high, respondents' evaluation of the vignette's character's compliance likelihood goes up by 55% (relative to the low expectations condition). Similar results are obtained when looking at self-reported compliance among those with high expectations. Our results are moderated by individuals' trust in government and trust in science. Holding expectations high, the effect of trusting science is substantial and significant in our vignette experiment (22% increase in compliance likelihood), and even larger in self-reported compliance (76% and 127% increase before and after the lockdown). By contrast, trusting the government only generates modest effects. At the aggregate level, the country-level trust in science, and not in government, becomes a strong predictor of compliance.
| S-EPMC8177647 | biostudies-literature
Project description:As a response to the COVID-19 pandemic, an increase in social cohesion was observed during the first wave and its aftermath. A closer look reveals heterogeneous responses regarding aspects of cohesion-such as trust in others and compliance with containment measures-that differ by individual socioeconomic and cultural characteristics. How these characteristics affect social cohesion in combination is rarely investigated. Therefore, we introduce the concept of social milieus, which addresses the interrelation of socioeconomic and cultural characteristics on the level of social groups, into the international debate. While previous studies have applied this concept to the analysis of social cohesion during the pandemic, they exhibit theoretical and empirical shortcomings. Hence, we develop a new theoretical model of social milieus and an empirical typology using the German sample of the European Social Survey. This typology is matched with data from the Research Institute Social Cohesion (RISC) for a milieu-specific analysis of social cohesion. Results show considerable heterogeneity in social cohesion during the first wave of the pandemic in Germany. Three social milieus with potentially conflicting modes of social cohesion regarding trust and compliance stand out while other milieus are less diverging as presumed in the literature. These modes can be interpreted as emerging from a combination of the milieus' socioeconomic position and basic human values. Thus, the new theoretical model and empirical typology of social milieus contribute to the understanding of how social cohesion has been contested between social milieus early in the pandemic.
| S-EPMC9811820 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAccording to a recent paper by Gelfand et al., COVID-19 infection and case mortality rates are closely connected to the strength of social norms: "Tighter" cultures that abide by strict social norms are more successful in combating the pandemic than "looser" cultures that are more permissive. However, countries with similar levels of cultural tightness exhibit big differences in mortality rates. We are investigating potential explanations for this fact. Using data from Germany and Japan-two "tight" countries with very different infection and mortality rates-we examined how differences in socio-demographic and other determinants explain differences in individual preventive attitudes and behaviors.MethodsWe compared preventive attitudes and behaviors in 2020 based on real-time representative survey data and used logit regression models to study how individual attitudes and behaviors are shaped by four sets of covariates: individual socio-demographics, health, personality, and regional-level controls. Employing Blinder-Oaxaca regression techniques, we quantified the extent to which differences in averages of the covariates between Japan and Germany explain the differences in the observed preventive attitudes and behaviors.ResultsIn Germany and Japan, similar proportions of the population supported mandatory vaccination, avoided travel, and avoided people with symptoms of a cold. In Germany, however, a significantly higher proportion washed their hands frequently and avoided crowds, physical contact, public transport, peak-hour shopping, and contact with the elderly. In Japan, a significantly higher proportion were willing to be vaccinated. We also show that attitudes and behaviors varied significantly more with covariates in Germany than in Japan. Differences in averages of the covariates contribute little to explaining the observed differences in preventive attitudes and behaviors between the two countries.ConclusionConsistent with tightness-looseness theory, the populations of Japan and Germany responded similarly to the pandemic. The observed differences in infection and fatality rates therefore cannot be explained by differences in behavior. The major difference in attitudes is the willingness to be vaccinated, which was much higher in Japan. Furthermore, the Japanese population behaved more uniformly across social groups than the German population. This difference in the degree of homogeneity has important implications for the effectiveness of policy measures during the pandemic.
| S-EPMC9010522 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundResearch suggests that preventive measures are critical to reducing the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but evidence regarding the association between trust in government and the practice of preventive measures is limited.ObjectiveTo examine whether the practice of preventive measures against COVID-19 differs by one's level of trust in government.DesignA cross-sectional analysis using the Japan COVID-19 and Society Internet Survey (JACSIS) conducted in August and September 2020.ParticipantsA nationally representative sample of Japanese individuals aged 15 through 79 years.Main measuresThe primary outcome was the composite score for COVID-19 preventive measures, defined as the percentage of preventive measures an individual reported to be practicing (out of nine measures: social distancing, wearing masks, avoiding closed spaces, avoiding crowded spaces, avoiding close contact settings, hand washing, avoiding touching one's face, respiratory hygiene, and surface disinfection). The secondary outcomes were (1) support for stay-at-home requests, (2) use of a contact-tracing app, and (3) receipt of the influenza vaccine in the previous season.Key resultsOur analysis included a total of 25,482 individuals. After adjusting for potential confounders, we found that individuals with high trust in government were likely to practice preventive measures more frequently compared to those with low trust (adjusted composite scores, 83.8% for high- vs. 79.5% for low-trust individuals; adjusted difference, +4.3 percentage points [pp]; 95% CI, +2.4 to +6.2pp; P<0.001). We also found that high trust in government was associated with higher likelihoods of support for stay-at-home requests, use of a contact-tracing app, and receipt of the influenza vaccine in the previous season.ConclusionsHigh trust in government was associated with a higher intensity of practicing COVID-19 preventive measures among Japanese individuals at the national level. Our findings may provide useful information to develop and design effective public health interventions.
| S-EPMC8218973 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The COVID -19 pandemic represents a global health crisis, so adherence to government guidelines and public health advice is critical in reducing transmission rates. Despite this, it has been reported that a minority of people do not comply with the governmental guidelines. When considering the reasons why some people do not comply with preventive measures, previous studies have shown that beliefs in COVID-19 conspiracy theories negatively predict responsible pandemic-related behaviour. This, in turn, could seriously undermine success in combating the pandemic. Our aim was, therefore, to further investigate the relationship between conspiracy beliefs and adherence to official COVID-19 medical guidelines by including mediating roles of beliefs in pseudoscientific information and trust in government officials. A total of 1882 adults from Croatia provided sociodemographic information and completed several scales related to COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs, beliefs in pseudoscientific information, trust in government officials, and adherence to official COVID-19 guidelines. A multiple mediation analysis revealed a direct negative effect of COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs on compliance with the preventive measures. In addition, conspiracy beliefs were indirectly related to compliance via trust in government officials. The present study builds upon emerging research showing that conspiracy beliefs may have significant social consequences and pose a potential risk to public health. Practical implications of these findings are discussed further.Supplementary informationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-021-01898-y.
| S-EPMC8153526 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a highly contagious and potentially fatal infectious disease that has swept the globe. To reduce the spread, it is important to engage in preventive behaviors recommended by health authorities, such as washing your hands, wearing a face mask, and social distancing. Aim: In the present study, we draw from the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) to examine the associations between perceived behavioral control, attitudes, and subjective norm and whether people engage in eight different preventive behaviors. Methods: For each of the preventive behaviors (washing hands; using hand sanitizer; not touching your face; social distancing; wearing a face mask; disinfecting surfaces; coughing in your elbow; staying home if sick), we conducted separate logistic regressions predicting whether the participants (N = 2,256; age range = 1898 years) reported engaging in the behavior from their perceived behavioral control, attitudes, and subjective norm. Results: We found that perceived behavioral control, attitudes, and subjective norm had independent significant associations with each preventive behavior. Moderation analyses revealed that for most behaviors the associations with perceived behavioral control were stronger for older adults than for younger adults. Limitation: The present study was cross-sectional; future longitudinal studies and interventions are needed to disentangle directionality. Conclusion: Our findings suggest several ways to increase adherence to health behaviors that reduce the spread of coronavirus and other infectious diseases.
| S-EPMC8139398 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In the UK, discussion of good citizenship during the COVID-19 pandemic largely focused on compliance and non-compliance with government rules. In this paper, we offer an alternative point of focus. Pandemic governance proceeded not only through rules/morality, but also through freedom/ethics. Good citizenship, therefore, involved practical reasoning in response to situations. We demonstrate this using diaries and other forms of writing collected by Mass Observation during the first six months of the pandemic. Responses to government rules and guidance varied by situation. Many people found governance through freedom/ethics confusing and burdensome. Faced with ethical dilemmas, they managed risks and responsibilities by deliberating, weighing justifications, and sometimes falling back on rules of thumb or heuristics. Discussion of good citizenship during future emergencies would benefit from a greater focus on situations, dilemmas, and justifications.
| S-EPMC9874751 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSafety precautions and activity restrictions were common in the early, pre-vaccine phases of the COVID-19 pandemic. We hypothesized that higher levels of participation in potentially risky social and other activities would be associated with greater life satisfaction and perceived meaning in life. At the same time, prosocial COVID-preventive activities such as mask wearing should enhance life satisfaction.MethodWe assessed the impact of COVID-preventive behaviors on psychological well-being in October 2020. A nationally representative sample of U.S. adults (n = 831) completed a demographic questionnaire, a COVID-related behaviors questionnaire, a Cantril's Ladder item, and the Multidimensional Existential Meaning Scale. Two hierarchical linear models were used to examine the potential impact of COVID-preventive behaviors on life satisfaction and meaning in life while accounting for the influence of demographic factors.ResultsThe study revealed significant positive relationships between COVID-preventive behaviors and subjective well-being. Wearing a mask was significantly associated with higher life satisfaction, while maintaining social distancing of six feet and avoiding large groups were significantly associated with higher perceived meaning in life. Social activities including dining at restaurants and visiting friends and family were also significantly associated with higher life satisfaction and meaning in life, respectively.ConclusionThe study's findings support the conclusion that disease prevention measures such as social distancing and mask wearing do not reduce, and may enhance, subjective well-being during a pandemic. Utilizing the unique context of the COVID-19 pandemic to examine relationships between behavior and subjective well-being, the study also indicates that shallow or medium-depth social activities are likely to be more central to life satisfaction, whereas narrower, deeper social interactions with friends and family are more important to perceived meaning in life.
| S-EPMC10521491 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-BSST1055 | biostudies-other