A scoping review of research on the determinants of adherence to social distancing measures during the COVID-19 pandemic

Behavioural Sciences Contribution to Suppressing Transmission of Covid-19 in the UK: A Systematic Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Governments have relied on their citizens to adhere to a variety of transmission-reducing behaviours (TRBs) to suppress the Covid-19 pandemic. Understanding the psychological and sociodemographic predictors of adherence to TRBs will be heavily influenced by the particular theories used by researchers. This review aims to identify the theories and theoretical constructs used to understand adherence to TRBs during the pandemic within the UK social and legislative context.

METHODS

A systematic review identified studies to understand TRBs of adults in the UK during the pandemic. Identified theoretical constructs were coded to the Theoretical Domains Framework. Data are presented as a narrative summary.

RESULTS

Thirty-five studies (n = 211,209) investigated 123 TRBs, applied 13 theoretical frameworks and reported 50 sociodemographic characteristics and 129 psychological constructs. Most studies used social cognition theories to understand TRBs and employed cross-sectional designs. Risk of sampling bias was high. Relationships between constructs and TRBs varied, but in general, beliefs about the disease (e.g. severity and risk perception) and about TRBs (e.g. behavioural norms) influenced behavioural intentions and self-reported adherence. More studies than not found that older people and females were more adherent.

CONCLUSIONS

Behavioural scientists in the UK generated a significant and varied body of work to understand TRBs during the pandemic. However, more use of theories that do not rely on deliberative processes to effect behaviour change and study designs better able to support causal inferences should be used in future to inform public health policy and practice.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION

CRD42021282699.

Social identification and risk dynamics: How perceptions of (inter)personal and collective risk impact the adoption of COVID-19 preventative behaviors

Public adoption of preventative behaviors to reduce the transmission of COVID-19 is crucial to managing the pandemic, and so it is vital to determine what factors influence the uptake of those behaviors. Previous studies have identified COVID-19 risk perceptions as a key factor, but this work has typically been limited both in assuming that risk means risk to the personal self, and in being reliant on self-reported data. Drawing on the social identity approach, we conducted two online studies in which we investigated the effects of two different types of risk on preventative measure taking: risk to the personal self and risk to the collective self (i.e., members of a group with which one identifies). Both studies involved behavioral measures using innovative interactive tasks. In Study 1 (n = 199; data collected 27 May 2021), we investigated the effects of (inter)personal and collective risk on physical distancing. In Study 2 (n = 553; data collected 20 September 2021), we investigated the effects of (inter)personal and collective risk on the speed at which tests are booked as COVID-19 symptoms develop. In both studies, we find that perceptions of collective risk, but not perceptions of (inter)personal risk, influence the extent to which preventative measures are adopted. We discuss the implications both conceptually (as they relate to both the conceptualization of risk and social identity processes) and also practically (in terms of the implications for public health communications).

Context Matters: Patterns in Physical Distancing Behavior Across Situations and Over Time During the Covid-19 Pandemic in the Netherlands

BACKGROUND

Physical distancing is an effective preventative measure during respiratory infectious disease outbreaks. Prior studies on distancing behaviors have largely ignored context characteristics (physical, social) and time.

PURPOSE

We investigated patterns in physical distancing over time and across situations, as well as sociodemographic variation herein.

METHODS

We employed data from five rounds of a cohort study conducted throughout the pandemic by the Dutch public health institute (RIVM; N ≈ 50.000 per round). We conducted Latent Class Analyses to investigate patterns of physical distancing in a range of situations, followed by regression models to investigate associations between distancing behavior and sociodemographic and context characteristics.

RESULTS

Participants differed in their general tendency to adhere to distancing guidelines across situations, but there were also substantial differences in distancing behavior between situations, particularly at work, with friends and family and outdoors. Distancing at work was strongly associated with work environment characteristics. Younger age groups reported less distancing behavior, particularly with close relations (friends or family) and at work. In periods when the pandemic situation was most severe, people adhered more strongly to distancing guidelines and age differences were most pronounced during these periods.

CONCLUSIONS

Physical and social context matters for physical distancing, highlighting the importance of developing strategies for pandemic preparedness that improve opportunities for physical distancing (e.g., reducing crowding, one-way traffic) and accommodate young people to safely meet even in times of high pandemic severity and lockdowns. Future studies should account for the physical and social context in which distancing behavior is observed.

Psychological and psychosocial determinants of COVID Health Related Behaviours (COHeRe): An evidence and gap map

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus, has resulted in illness, deaths and societal disruption on a global scale. Societies have implemented various control measures to reduce transmission of the virus and mitigate its impact. Individual behavioural changes are crucial to the successful implementation of these measures. Common recommended measures to limit risk of infection include frequent handwashing, reducing the frequency of social interactions and the use of face coverings. It is important to identify those factors that can predict the uptake and maintenance of these protective behaviours.

Objectives

We aimed to identify and map the existing evidence (published and unpublished) on psychological and psychosocial factors that determine uptake and adherence to behaviours aimed at reducing the risk of infection or transmission of COVID-19.

Search Methods

Our extensive search included electronic databases (n = 12), web searches, conference proceedings, government reports, other repositories including both published peer reviewed, pre-prints and grey literature. The search strategy was built around three concepts of interest including (1) context (terms relating to COVID-19), (2) behaviours of interest and (3) terms related to psychological and psychosocial determinants of COVID Health-Related Behaviours and adherence or compliance with recommended behaviours, to capture both malleable and non-malleable determinants (i.e. determinants that could be changed and those that could not).

Selection Criteria

This Evidence and Gap Map (EGM) includes all types of studies examining determinants of common recommended behaviours aimed at mitigating human-to-human spread of COVID-19. All potential malleable and non-malleable determinants of one or more behaviours are included in the map. As part of the mapping process, categories are used to group determinants. The mapping categories were based on a previous rapid review by Hanratty 2021. These include: 'behaviour', 'cognition', 'demographics', 'disease', 'emotions', 'health status', 'information', 'intervention', and 'knowledge'. Those not suitable for categorisation in any of these groups are included in the map as 'other' determinants.

Data Collection and Analysis

Results were imported to a bibliographic reference manager where duplications of identical studies gathered from multiple sources were removed. Data extraction procedures were managed in EPPI-Reviewer software. Information on study type, population, behaviours measured and determinants measured were extracted. We appraised the methodological quality of systematic reviews with AMSTAR-2. We did not appraise the quality of primary studies in this map.

Main Results

As of 1 June 2022 the EGM includes 1034 records reporting on 860 cross-sectional, 68 longitudinal, 78 qualitative, 25 reviews, 62 interventional, and 39 other studies (e.g., mixed-methods approaches). The map includes studies that measured social distancing (n = 487), masks and face coverings (n = 382), handwashing (n = 308), physical distancing (n = 177), isolation/quarantine (n = 157), respiratory hygiene/etiquette (n = 75), cleaning surfaces (n = 59), and avoiding touching the T-zone (n = 48). There were 333 studies that assessed composite measures of two or more behaviours. The largest cluster of determinants was 'demographics' (n = 730 studies), followed by 'cognition' (n = 496 studies) and determinants categorised as 'other' (n = 447). These included factors such as 'beliefs', 'culture' and 'access to resources'. Less evidence is available for some determinants such as 'interventions' (n = 99 studies), 'information' (n = 101 studies), and 'behaviour' (149 studies).

Authors' Conclusions

This EGM provides a valuable resource for researchers, policy-makers and the public to access the available evidence on the determinants of various COVID-19 health-related behaviours. The map can also be used to help guide research commissioning, by evidence synthesis teams and evidence intermediaries to inform policy during the ongoing pandemic and potential future outbreaks of COVID-19 or other respiratory infections. Evidence included in the map will be explored further through a series of systematic reviews examining the strength of the associations between malleable determinants and the uptake and maintenance of individual protective behaviours.

Predictors of changing patterns of adherence to containment measures during the early stage of COVID-19 pandemic: an international longitudinal study

BACKGROUND

Identifying common factors that affect public adherence to COVID-19 containment measures can directly inform the development of official public health communication strategies. The present international longitudinal study aimed to examine whether prosociality, together with other theoretically derived motivating factors (self-efficacy, perceived susceptibility and severity of COVID-19, perceived social support) predict the change in adherence to COVID-19 containment strategies.

METHOD

In wave 1 of data collection, adults from eight geographical regions completed online surveys beginning in April 2020, and wave 2 began in June and ended in September 2020. Hypothesized predictors included prosociality, self-efficacy in following COVID-19 containment measures, perceived susceptibility to COVID-19, perceived severity of COVID-19 and perceived social support. Baseline covariates included age, sex, history of COVID-19 infection and geographical regions. Participants who reported adhering to specific containment measures, including physical distancing, avoidance of non-essential travel and hand hygiene, were classified as adherence. The dependent variable was the category of adherence, which was constructed based on changes in adherence across the survey period and included four categories: non-adherence, less adherence, greater adherence and sustained adherence (which was designated as the reference category).

RESULTS

In total, 2189 adult participants (82% female, 57.2% aged 31-59 years) from East Asia (217 [9.7%]), West Asia (246 [11.2%]), North and South America (131 [6.0%]), Northern Europe (600 [27.4%]), Western Europe (322 [14.7%]), Southern Europe (433 [19.8%]), Eastern Europe (148 [6.8%]) and other regions (96 [4.4%]) were analyzed. Adjusted multinomial logistic regression analyses showed that prosociality, self-efficacy, perceived susceptibility and severity of COVID-19 were significant factors affecting adherence. Participants with greater self-efficacy at wave 1 were less likely to become non-adherence at wave 2 by 26% (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.74; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.77; P < .001), while those with greater prosociality at wave 1 were less likely to become less adherence at wave 2 by 23% (aOR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.79; P = .04).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides evidence that in addition to emphasizing the potential severity of COVID-19 and the potential susceptibility to contact with the virus, fostering self-efficacy in following containment strategies and prosociality appears to be a viable public health education or communication strategy to combat COVID-19.

Cross-Theoretical Compliance: An Integrative Compliance Analysis of COVID-19 Mitigation Responses in Israel

To understand the question why people obey or break rules, different approaches have focused on different theories and subsets of variables. The present research develops a cross-theoretical approach that integrates these perspectives. We apply this in a survey of compliance with COVID-19 pandemic mitigation rules in Israel. The data reveal that compliance in this setting was shaped by a combination of variables originating from legitimacy, capacity, and opportunity theories (but not rational choice or social theories). This demonstrates the importance of moving beyond narrow theoretical perspectives of compliance, to a cross-theoretical understanding-in which different theoretical approaches are systematically integrated.

Determinants of social distancing adherence

Introduction

Governments and public health authorities across many jurisdictions implemented social (physical) distancing measures to contain the spread of the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Adherence to these measures is variable and likely influenced by various factors. This study aimed to 1) identify the individual sociodemographic, COVID-19 and social distancing related, and psychological determinants of social distancing adherence, and 2) explore regional differences in social distancing adherence in the United States (U.S.) and English-speaking Canada based on each region's discrepant response to social distancing restrictions.

Methods

A web-based repeated cross-sectional survey was conducted in 4,942 English-speaking participants from the four most populous U.S. states, specifically New York, California, Texas, and Florida, and Canada (www.covid19-database.com). The study was conducted at two timepoints, from May 1 to 5, 2020 (n = 1,019, Canadian participants only) and from July 6 to 10, 2020 (n = 3,923). Separate univariate models were computed for individual sociodemographic, COVID-19 and social distancing related, and psychological determinants of social distancing adherence. To determine the total variance explained, a univariate analysis including all of the determinants was performed. Regional differences in social distancing were compared between the four U.S. states and Canada, and between the U.S. as a whole and Canada.

Results

Adherence to social distancing was higher in May (mean = 4.4/5.0±0.7) compared to July (mean = 4.3/5.0±0.7) [t ₍₄₉₄₀₎ = 6.96, p < 0.001], likely a reflection of relaxing restrictions. There were no regional differences in adherence. Sociodemographic, COVID-19 and social distancing related, and psychological determinants explained 10, 36, and 23% of the variance of social distancing adherence, respectively. Higher perceived seriousness of COVID-19 [β (SE) = 0.39 (0.01), p < 0.001, partial η² = 0.22], lower risk propensity [β (SE) = -0.15 (0.01), p < 0.001, partial η² = 0.06], germ aversion [β (SE) = 0.12 (0.01), p < 0.001, partial η² = 0.03], age [β (SE) = 0.01 (0.00), p < 0.001, partial η² = 0.02], and greater social support [β (SE) = 0.03 (0.00), p < 0.001, partial η² = 0.02] had the largest effects on social distancing adherence.

Conclusion

Public service initiatives to emphasize the serious consequences of infection and targeted interventions toward certain sociodemographic groups, such as younger adults and vulnerable individuals in greater need of social support, may help enhance the public's adherence to social distancing measures during subsequent waves of COVID-19 and future pandemics.

Group-based trajectories and predictors of adherence to physical distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic

Objective: This study sought to identify psychosocial predictors of trajectories of adherence to physical distancing alongside changes in public health measures during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design: A three-time point longitudinal survey during the first two waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Participants (N = 1003) completed self-report measures of adherence to physical distancing over an 8-month period at the start (T1) and end (T2) of the first wave of the pandemic, and the start of the second wave of the pandemic (T3). Participants also completed measures of their health beliefs related to the self and others, social norms, emotional distress, and sociodemographic characteristics. Results: Using group-based trajectory modeling, four trajectories of adherence to physical distancing emerged: a high-adherence trajectory, a slow-declining trajectory, a fluctuating trajectory, and a fast-declining trajectory. The most important psychosocial predictors of poorer adherence trajectories included perceptions of lower self-efficacy and higher barriers to adherence, as well as lower prosocial attitudes towards physical distancing. Conclusion: Public health messages targeting these factors may be most relevant to promote sustained adherence to physical distancing over time in the context of a pandemic.

Establishing open science research priorities in health psychology: a research prioritisation Delphi exercise

OBJECTIVE

Research on Open Science practices in Health Psychology is lacking. This meta-research study aimed to identify research question priorities and obtain consensus on the Top 5 prioritised research questions for Open Science in Health Psychology.

METHODS AND MEASURES

An international Delphi consensus study was conducted. Twenty-three experts in Open Science and Health Psychology within the European Health Psychology Society (EHPS) suggested research question priorities to create a 'long-list' of items (Phase 1). Forty-three EHPS members rated the importance of these items, ranked their top five and suggested their own additional items (Phase 2). Twenty-four EHPS members received feedback on Phase 2 responses and then re-rated and re-ranked their top five research questions (Phase 3).

RESULTS

The top five ranked research question priorities were: 1. 'To what extent are Open Science behaviours currently practised in Health Psychology?', 2. 'How can we maximise the usefulness of Open Data and Open Code resources?', 3. 'How can Open Data be increased within Health Psychology?', 4. 'What interventions are effective for increasing the adoption of Open Science in Health Psychology?' and 5. 'How can we increase free Open Access publishing in Health Psychology?'.

CONCLUSION

Funding and resources should prioritise the research questions identified here.

Psychosocial Determinants of Hand Hygiene, Facemask Wearing, and Physical Distancing During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Hand hygiene, facemask wearing, and physical distancing play a crucial role in the prevention of the COVID-19 pandemic. Identifying the key psychosocial determinants of these precautionary behaviors contributes to effective intervention and policymaking for COVID-19 and future pandemics.

PURPOSE

This study aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze available evidence on psychosocial determinants of the general population's practice of three precautionary behaviors, based on the Risk, Attitudes, Norms, Abilities, and Self-regulation (RANAS) framework.

METHODS

Literature was identified by searching seven databases and relevant review papers. Observational and experimental studies targeting the general population (≥18 years) published between January 2020 to September 2021 were included. Pooled effect sizes were calculated with the inverse-variance method using random-effects models.

RESULTS

A total of 51 studies (64 samples) were included in the qualitative synthesis, of which 30 studies (42 samples) were included in the meta-analysis. RANAS-based constructs including knowledge, pros attitudes, and perceived norms were identified as significant determinants of all three behaviors in the meta-analysis. Perceived susceptibility and cons attitudes showed no significant associations with any behaviors. Perceived severity, perceived control, self-efficacy, and behavioral intention were significantly associated with one or two behaviors. Country (western vs. eastern hemispheres) significantly moderated the effects of certain risk and ability factors.

CONCLUSIONS

More research is needed with respect to the intention-behavior relationship, self-regulatory and reflexive factors of precautionary behaviors, as well as the exploration of the potential moderating effect of sociodemographic factors.

Determinants of observing health protocols related to preventing COVID-19 in adult women: A qualitative study in Iran

Background

The best way to prevent COVID-19 is to observe health protocols. Therefore, identifying the reasons of following these protocols in order to plan and make intervention seems necessary. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to identify the determinants of observing health protocols related to prevention of COVID-19 among the Iranian adult women with a qualitative approach.

Method

In this qualitative study, the conventional content analysis approach was used. saturation was obtained after face-to-face semi-structured interviews with 38 women from Kermanshah who were selected through purposeful sampling and snowball sampling. Guba and Lincoln criteria were used for the strength of the research and Graneheim and Lundman method was used for its analysis.

Results

After analyzing the interviews, 5 categories, 12 subcategories and 110 initial codes were obtained. Categories and sub-categories were: 1- Individual factors (personality traits, health literacy about COVID-19); 2- Perceived risk having underlying disease in oneself and family, history of getting COVID-19 and death in close relatives; 3- Fear of the destructive consequences of the disease (concern about the economic consequences of getting the disease, concern about the treatment process); 4- Social and cultural factors (social monitoring, religious insight, ability to properly manage social interactions, impressionability from important others); 5- Environmental factors (supportive living environment, access to health and anti-infective materials).

Conclusion

Increasing the adherence of adult women to health instructions related to COVID-19 requires interventions at different levels of individual, environmental and social, and without accurate knowledge of the customs and culture of a society effective interventions cannot be established.

Patterns of social mixing in England changed in line with restrictions during the COVID-19 pandemic (September 2020 to April 2022)

Social mixing contributes to the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. We developed a composite measure for risky social mixing, investigating changes during the pandemic and factors associated with risky mixing. Forty-five waves of online cross-sectional surveys were used (n = 78,917 responses; 14 September 2020 to 13 April 2022). We investigated socio-demographic, contextual and psychological factors associated with engaging in highest risk social mixing in England at seven timepoints. Patterns of social mixing varied over time, broadly in line with changes in restrictions. Engaging in highest risk social mixing was associated with being younger, less worried about COVID-19, perceiving a lower risk of COVID-19, perceiving COVID-19 to be a less severe illness, thinking the risks of COVID-19 were being exaggerated, not agreeing that one’s personal behaviour had an impact on how COVID-19 spreads, and not agreeing that information from the UK Government about COVID-19 can be trusted. Our composite measure for risky social mixing varied in line with restrictions in place at the time of data collection, providing some validation of the measure. While messages targeting psychological factors may reduce higher risk social mixing, achieving a large change in risky social mixing in a short space of time may necessitate a reimposition of restrictions.

Measuring citizens' engagement during emergencies: Psychometric validation of the Public Health Engagement Scale for Emergency Settings (PHEs-E)

The Covid-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of citizens' behaviors in the containment of the virus. Individuals might change their intention to adhere to public health prescriptions depending on various personal characteristics, including their own emotional status, which has been recognized to be a crucial psychological factor in orienting people's adherence to public health recommendation during emergency settings. In particular, it is crucial to support citizens' alliance with authorities and feeling of trust: public engagement is a concept that refers to the general involvement of citizens into public affairs which is generally considered an effective approach to enhance citizens' understanding of their crucial role in public affairs. However, so far there is no agreement on the metrics and indexes that should be used to measures public engagement during a health crisis. The aim of this paper is to validate a psychometric scale (PHEs-E), which intends to measure the readiness of individuals to adhere to the prescribed behavioral change to contain the emergency. Data were collected throughout the pandemic in Italy: in particular, five independent samples were recruited starting from March 2020 to March 2021. Results showed that the proposed measure has good psychometric characteristics. A general linear model was computed to assess the differences of public engagement across the different data points and among citizens with different sociodemographic characteristics. Correlations with other psychological constructs (i.e. Anxiety, Depression and Self-Efficacy) were also tested, showing that more engaged citizens have a lower level of anxiety and depression, and a higher self-efficacy. This study's findings indicate that individuals' characteristics may differentiate citizens' motivation to engage in public health behavioral recommendation to prevent the COVID-19 contagion. However the scale could be useful to perform a psychological monitoring of psychological readiness to engage in public health strategies to face critical events and settings.