The influence of gain-loss framing and its interaction with political ideology on social distancing and mask wearing compliance during the COVID-19 pandemic

Risk perceptions and behaviors concerning rural tourism and economic-political drivers of COVID-19 policy in 2020

When COVID-19 was first introduced to the United States, state and local governments enacted a variety of policies intended to mitigate the virulence of the epidemic. At the time, the most effective measures to prevent the spread of COVID-19 included stay-at-home orders, closing of nonessential businesses, and mask mandates. Although it was well known that regions with high population density and cold climates were at the highest risk for disease spread, rural counties that are economically reliant on tourism were incentivized to enact fewer precautions against COVID-19. The uncertainty of the COVID-19 pandemic, the multiple policies to reduce transmission, and the changes in outdoor recreation behavior had a significant impact on rural tourism destinations and management of protected spaces. We utilize fine-scale incidence and demographic data to study the relationship between local economic and political concerns, COVID-19 mitigation measures, and the subsequent severity of outbreaks throughout the continental United States. We also present results from an online survey that measured travel behavior, health risk perceptions, knowledge and experience with COVID-19, and evaluation of destination attributes by 407 out-of-state visitors who traveled to Maine from 2020 to 2021. We synthesize this research to present a narrative on how perceptions of COVID-19 risk and public perceptions of rural tourism put certain communities at greater risk of illness throughout 2020. This research could inform future rural destination management and public health policies to help reduce negative socioeconomic, health and environmental impacts of pandemic-derived changes in travel and outdoor recreation behavior.

Psychological variables related to decision making for mask wearing during the COVID-19 pandemic

BACKGROUND

Mask wearing can prevent and/or mitigate the spread of COVID-19. Psychological variables related to decision making can potentially influence mask wearing.

PARTICIPANTS AND PROCEDURE

We surveyed college students (N = 1,085) about wearing a mask inside a store and outside on a busy street. Predictor variables were demographics, COVID-19 variables, and psychological variables of health risk taking, recreational risk taking, consideration of immediate consequences, and consideration of future consequences.

RESULTS

Health risk taking was negatively associated with mask wearing outside on a busy street but was not associated with mask wearing inside a store. Recreational risk taking was not associated with mask wearing either inside a store or outside on a busy street. Consideration of future consequences was significantly positively associated with mask wearing both inside a store and outside on a busy street. Consideration of immediate consequences was not associated with mask wearing either inside a store or outside on a busy street.

CONCLUSIONS

Marketing about store safety requirements of mask wearing may turn certain customers away from shopping inside the store. Their personality may not be of future consequences orientation and no matter how much one attempts to educate or reason with them, these customers will be opposed to mask wearing. Managers then need to decide whether to potentially lose a customer by requiring the customer to wear a mask to shop inside the store.

Persuasive Messages for Improving Adherence to COVID-19 Prevention Behaviors: Randomized Online Experiment

BACKGROUND

Adherence to nonpharmaceutical interventions for COVID-19, including physical distancing, masking, staying home while sick, and avoiding crowded indoor spaces, remains critical for limiting the spread of COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to test the effectiveness of using various persuasive appeals (deontological moral frame, empathy, identifiable victim, goal proximity, and reciprocity) at improving intentions to adhere to prevention behaviors.

METHODS

A randomized online experiment using a representative sample of adult Canadian residents with respect to age, ethnicity, and province of residence was performed from March 3 to March 6, 2021. Participants indicated their intentions to follow public health guidelines, saw one of six flyers featuring a persuasive appeal or no appeal, and then rated their intentions a second time. Known correlates of attitudes toward public health measures were also measured.

RESULTS

Intentions to adhere to public health measures increased in all appeal conditions. The message featuring an empathy appeal resulted in a greater increase in intentions than the control (no appeal) message. Moreover, the effectiveness of persuasive appeals was moderated by baseline intentions. Deontological, empathy, identifiable victim, and reciprocity appeals improved intentions more than the control message, but only for people with lower baseline intentions to adhere to nonpharmaceutical interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Public health marketing campaigns aiming to increase adherence to COVID-19 protective behaviors could achieve modest gains by employing a range of persuasive appeals. However, to maximize impact, it is important that these campaigns be targeted to the right individuals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05722106; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05722106.

Community Mitigation Strategies, Mobility, and COVID-19 Incidence Across Three Waves in the United States in 2020

BACKGROUND

Summarizing the impact of community-based mitigation strategies and mobility on COVID-19 infections throughout the pandemic is critical for informing responses and future infectious disease outbreaks. Here, we employed time-series analyses to empirically investigate the relationships between mitigation strategies and mobility on COVID-19 incident cases across US states during the first three waves of infections.

METHODS

We linked data on daily COVID-19 incidence by US state from March to December 2020 with the stringency index, a well-known index capturing the strictness of mitigation strategies, and the trip ratio, which measures the ratio of the number of trips taken per day compared with the same day in 2019. We utilized multilevel models to determine the relative impacts of policy stringency and the trip ratio on COVID-19 cumulative incidence and the effective reproduction number. We stratified analyses by three waves of infections.

RESULTS

Every five-point increase in the stringency index was associated with 2.89% (95% confidence interval = 1.52, 4.26%) and 5.01% (3.02, 6.95%) reductions in COVID-19 incidence for the first and third waves, respectively. Reducing the number of trips taken by 50% compared with the same time in 2019 was associated with a 16.2% (-0.07, 35.2%) decline in COVID-19 incidence at the state level during the second wave and 19.3% (2.30, 39.0%) during the third wave.

CONCLUSIONS

Mitigation strategies and reductions in mobility are associated with marked health gains through the reduction of COVID-19 infections, but we estimate variable impacts depending on policy stringency and levels of adherence.

Exploring the drivers of COVID-19 protective behaviors among Singaporean tourists to Indonesia using travel bubbles

This study investigats the relationships among positive emotions, perceived threats, protection motivation, coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination intentions, quarantine-free travel intentions and COVID-19 protective behaviors in the context of quarantine-free travel. Data were collected from Singaporean tourists in Batam and Bintan of Indonesia using travel bubbles. A total of 387 respondents completed the questionnaires. The findings can help tourism managers create and implement market-driven service initiatives to increase positive emotions, protection motivation, and intentions to take quarantine-free travel and decrease perceived threats in order to enable tourists to have accurate COVID-19 protective behaviors.

Outgroup threat, ideology, and favorable evaluations of the government's responses to COVID-19

Based on social psychological theories of intergroup relations, perceptions of threat from outgroups contribute to ingroup favoritism. This research examined the effects of the perceived threat from outgroups (the US) on Chinese people's favorable evaluations of their government's responses to coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Study 1 conducted an experiment and found that the US' criticism of China's responses to the pandemic increased Chinese citizens' favorable evaluations of the government's performance. Study 2 was a correlational design and found that the relationship between perceptions of outgroup threats and evaluations of the government's performance was moderated by ideology and the approval of lockdown policies. These results show that outgroups are sophisticatedly employed by politicians to increase ingroup favoritism and suggest that ideological divide is an important moderator in the association between outgroup threat and the evaluation of ingroup.

Effect of Information Framing on Wearing Masks During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Interaction With Social Norms and Information Credibility

Objective

The main objectives of this study were to use the effect of information framing (different expressions of the same issue, e.g., positive messages and negative messages) to explore key factors that influence the attitude of and intention of the public toward wearing masks and to understand the internal and external factors of intervention on information framing perception.

Methods

This study performed an online questionnaire survey to explore the influence of demographic characteristics, information framing, social norms, and information credibility on the attitude of the public toward masks and their intention to wear them.

Results

(1) Information framing had a significant impact on the attitudes of people toward masks and their intention to wear them, and the persuasion effect of gain-framed messages was higher than that of loss-framed messages. (2) Gender, income, occupation, educational background, and residence have no significant difference in attitude and intention to wear masks. There was a significant correlation between age and wearing of masks (p = 0.041 < 0.05). (3) Social norms affected people's perception of information framing and their attitude toward wearing masks, but only the impact of loss-framed messages on intention was significant. (4) Information framing affected people's perception of information credibility, which had a positive impact on their intention to wear masks; however, information credibility only had a significant impact on attitude toward wearing masks under the gain-framed messages and played an intermediary role.

Conclusion

The impact of information framing on the attitude of people toward masks and their intention to wear them varies. Individuals involved in the publicity of health information related to this issue should pay attention to the influence of information framing and content on the public wearing masks as a means of enhancing public health awareness.

The impact of COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Behavioral responses to the COVID-19 pandemic have become highly polarized, and public health initiatives often try to use different frames to influence behavior. If the polarization of behaviors is related to differences in responses to frames, then different health messages could be targeted to different groups to influence behavior.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether risk preferences and susceptibility to gain/loss frames have been affected by COVID-19 and whether they differ along partisan lines.

METHODS

Using repeated cross-sectional data from a nationally representative dataset in the United States replicating the disease outbreak scenario collected before and after the onset of COVID-19, we test whether responsiveness to the gain/loss frames has changed over time and whether the responsiveness varies by political affiliation.

RESULTS

The experimental results show that the risk preferences of the U.S. population is very susceptible to the framing of choices, consistent with the literature finding risk loving preferences under the loss frame and risk aversion under the gain frame. However, the experience of COVID-19 does not appear to have changed the responsiveness, nor are there significant differences between conservatives/Republicans and liberals/Democrats.

CONCLUSION

Targeting different partisan groups with different risk-related message frames is unlikely to be effective at altering behaviors.

The effect of risk framing on support for restrictive government policy regarding the COVID-19 outbreak

This confirmatory research investigates the influence of risk framing of COVID-19 on support for restrictive government policy based on two web survey experiments in Russia. Using 2x2 factorial design, we estimated two main effects-factors of risk severity (low vs. high) and object at risk (individual losses vs. losses to others). First, focusing on higher risks had a positive effect on support for the government's restrictive policy. Second, focusing on the losses for others did not produce stronger support for the restrictive policy compared to focusing on personal losses. However, we found a positive moderation effect of such prosocial values as universalism and benevolence. We found that those with prosocial values had a stronger positive effect in the "losses for others" condition and were more willing to support government restrictive policy when others were included. The effects found in our experimental study reveal both positive and negative aspects in risk communication during the pandemic, which may have a great and long-term impact on trust, attitudes, and behavior.