Dataset Information

Self-controlled responses to COVID-19: Self-control and uncertainty predict responses to the COVID-19 pandemic.

ABSTRACT: Two online studies (Total N = 331) tested the hypothesis that individual differences in self-control and responses to uncertainty would predict adherence to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC, 2020a) guidelines, reported stockpiling, and intentions to engage in hedonic behavior in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Trait self-control (b = 0.27, p = .015), desire for self-control (Study 1: b = 0.28, p = .001; Study 2: b = 0.27, p = .005), and cognitive uncertainty (b = 0.73, p < .001) predicted more CDC adherence. State self-control (Study 1: b = -0.15, p = .012; Study 2: b = -0.26, p < .001) predicted less stockpiling, whereas emotional uncertainty (b = 0.56, p < .001) and cognitive uncertainty (b = 0.61, p < .001) predicted more stockpiling. State self-control (b = -0.18, p = .003) predicted less hedonic behavior, whereas desire for self-control (b = 0.42, p < .001) and emotional uncertainty (b = 0.26, p = .018) predicted more hedonic behavior. Study 2 (pre-registered) also found that emotional uncertainty predicted more stockpiling and hedonic behavior for participants low in state self-control (stockpiling: b = -0.31, p < .001; hedonic behavior: b = 0.28, p = .025), but not for participants high in state self-control (stockpiling: b = 0.03, p = .795; hedonic behavior: b = -0.24, p = .066). These findings provide evidence that some forms of self-control and uncertainty influenced compliance with behavioral recommendations during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-021-02066-y.

SUBMITTER: Rodriguez JE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8272611 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:COVID-19 case was first identified in Canada on January 25, 2020, on a Toronto resident who had travelled to Wuhan China, and not long after, the WHO declared the viral infection a pandemic. Ontario health West created an online self-assessment portal that allowed individuals in the health region and adjourning areas to report any COVID related symptoms. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the utility and usefulness of the Ontario Heath West online COVID-19 self-assessment portal. Record level data obtained from the Ontario Health West self-assessment portal was analyzed. Descriptive statistics using charts and graphs were used to characterize the distribution of responses to the portal. In-depth analysis using correlation, lead-lag analysis, and trend comparison with actual Government of Ontario COVID-19 cases for the region were also conducted. A total of 34,144 distinct responses were recorded on the portal between April 10 and July 29, 2020, with 1,250 (3.7%) responding positively to one of the emergency symptoms questions. Trend analysis showed a peak portal response in May 2020 with a smaller rise subsequently in July 2020, coinciding with the actual COVID-19 peak in the region. The five most reported symptoms on the portal were sore throat (17.2%), headache (12.9%), fatigue (12.3%), digestive problems (12.2%) and cough (9.1%). For four sub-regions, the trend of self-report on the portal positively lagged actual Public Health Ontario reported COVID-19 cases, while for one sub-region, the trend positively led the actual Public Health Ontario reported COVID-19 cases for the area. We found correlation between online COVID-19 self- assessment data and the confirmed COVID-19 cases in the Southwestern region of Ontario. Trends in the COVID-19 associated emergency symptoms reported on the portal also tracked confirmed COVID-19 cases in the community. Peak response to the portal coincided with the peak volume of confirmed cases in Ontario during the first wave of COVID-19 pandemic in Canada, suggesting some consistency between the experiences of portal users and patterns of COVID-19 illness in the community. The portal was a useful tool at the person-level because it provided guidance to individuals about how to access appropriate health services according to the symptoms that they reported and connected them with primary care, reducing unnecessary visit to health facilities for COVID-19 related care.

Project description:BackgroundCommunicating scientific uncertainty about public health threats such as COVID-19 is an ethically desirable task endorsed by expert guidelines on crisis communication. However, the communication of scientific uncertainty is challenging because of its potential to promote ambiguity aversion-a well-described syndrome of negative psychological responses consisting of heightened risk perceptions, emotional distress, and decision avoidance. Communication strategies that can inform the public about scientific uncertainty while mitigating ambiguity aversion are a critical unmet need.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate whether an "uncertainty-normalizing" communication strategy-aimed at reinforcing the expected nature of scientific uncertainty about the COVID-19 pandemic-can reduce ambiguity aversion, and to compare its effectiveness to conventional public communication strategies aimed at promoting hope and prosocial values.MethodsIn an online factorial experiment conducted from May to June 2020, a national sample of 1497 US adults read one of five versions of an informational message describing the nature, transmission, prevention, and treatment of COVID-19; the versions varied in level of expressed scientific uncertainty and supplemental focus (ie, uncertainty-normalizing, hope-promoting, and prosocial). Participants then completed measures of cognitive, emotional, and behavioral manifestations of ambiguity aversion (ie, perceived likelihood of getting COVID-19, COVID-19 worry, and intentions for COVID-19 risk-reducing behaviors and vaccination). Analyses assessed (1) the extent to which communicating uncertainty produced ambiguity-averse psychological responses; (2) the comparative effectiveness of uncertainty-normalizing, hope-promoting, and prosocial communication strategies in reducing ambiguity-averse responses; and (3) potential moderators of the effects of alternative uncertainty communication strategies.ResultsThe communication of scientific uncertainty about the COVID-19 pandemic increased perceived likelihood of getting COVID-19 and worry about COVID-19, consistent with ambiguity aversion. However, it did not affect intentions for risk-reducing behaviors or vaccination. The uncertainty-normalizing strategy reduced these aversive effects of communicating scientific uncertainty, resulting in levels of both perceived likelihood of getting COVID-19 and worry about COVID-19 that did not differ from the control message that did not communicate uncertainty. In contrast, the hope-promoting and prosocial strategies did not decrease ambiguity-averse responses to scientific uncertainty. Age and political affiliation, respectively, moderated the effects of uncertainty communication strategies on intentions for COVID-19 risk-reducing behaviors and worry about COVID-19.ConclusionsCommunicating scientific uncertainty about the COVID-19 pandemic produces ambiguity-averse cognitive and emotional, but not behavioral, responses among the general public, and an uncertainty-normalizing communication strategy reduces these responses. Normalizing uncertainty may be an effective strategy for mitigating ambiguity aversion in crisis communication efforts. More research is needed to test uncertainty-normalizing communication strategies and to elucidate the factors that moderate their effectiveness.

Dataset Information

Self-controlled responses to COVID-19: Self-control and uncertainty predict responses to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Supplementary information

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets