Adherence to Social Distancing Guidelines Throughout the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Roles of Pseudoscientific Beliefs, Trust, Political Party Affiliation, and Risk Perceptions

Vaccinating without complete willingness against COVID-19: Personal and social aspects of Israeli nursing students and faculty members

Soon after the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic outbreak, it became clear that vaccination will be the most useful tool to combat the disease. Despite the apparent safety and efficacy of the developed anti-COVID-19 vaccines, relatively high percentages of the population worldwide refused to get vaccinated, including many health workers and health students. The present cross-sectional study examined the motives, attitudes, and personal characteristics of those who did not get vaccinated against COVID-19 or vaccinated without complete willingness among nursing students and nursing faculty members in Israel (n = 472). Results show that the vast majority of the study participants (97%) received at least one dose of the anti-COVID-19 vaccine. Nearly 37% of the participants indicated that they received the vaccine without complete willingness. As compared to faculty members, nursing students reported lower trust in the efficacy of the vaccine, perceived the COVID-19 pandemic as a health threat to a lesser extent, exhibited lower institutional and personal trust, and had higher levels of posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms. Non-Jewish participants were at risk of vaccinating without complete willingness. These findings underscore the need for developing evidence-based strategies to promote the safety and efficacy of the anti-COVID-19 vaccines in nursing schools.

Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices of Hand Hygiene, Mask Use, and Social Distancing among Public Hospital and Polyclinic Nurses in Barbados during the Coronavirus 2019 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

Nurses are essential members of the healthcare workforce and were among the first-line carers for patients in community and hospital settings during the COVID-19 pandemic. As a result, they were at a heightened risk of infection, resulting in several reported deaths among nursing staff. Several preventive measures were adopted to contain the spread of the COVID-19 virus. This study aims to explore the knowledge, attitudes, and practices (KAP) of nurses regarding hand hygiene, mask wearing, and social distancing measures in healthcare settings in Barbados during the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHOD

An online survey of nurses working in public hospitals and polyclinics (public primary care clinics) in Barbados from March 2021 to December 2021 was conducted. A nonsystematic convenience sampling method was employed to recruit nurses who were readily available and willing to participate. A questionnaire captured the sociodemographic information and knowledge and practices related to hand hygiene, the use of face masks, and social distancing. Each correct response received one mark. Overall knowledge scores were categorized as poor (<60%), average (60-80%), or good (>80-100%).

RESULTS

Of the 192 participants, the majority were female (82.8%) and had >5 years of experience (82%). The findings revealed that 45.8% had poor knowledge of hand hygiene, and that the knowledge of 43.8% of respondents was average. Multivariable logistic regression showed that, after adjustment for age and gender, registered nurses had 2.1 times increased odds (95% confidence interval 1.0, 4.2) of having good knowledge compared to other nursing categories. Regarding mask wearing, 53.6% of nurses had average knowledge, and 27.1% had good knowledge. Multivariable logistic regression showed that, after adjustment for age and gender, registered nurses had 3.3 times increased odds (95% confidence interval 1.5, 7.4) of having good knowledge compared to nursing assistants. A total of 68.6% of respondents followed the correct steps of handwashing every time, and 98.3% wore a mask in public places. More than half of the nurses (51.2%) kept a safe distance from others to avoid spreading SARS-CoV-2; one-third were in a crowded place(s) in the past three months, and 55.8% usually followed guidelines for social isolation as recommended by the WHO.

CONCLUSIONS

The study identified knowledge deficiencies related to hand hygiene and wearing masks among nurses. It is imperative to provide additional training on infection control measures.

Communities of Knowledge in Trouble

The community-of-knowledge framework explains the extraordinary success of the human species, despite individual members' demonstrably shallow understanding of many topics, by appealing to outsourcing. People follow the cues of members of their community because understanding of phenomena is generally distributed across the group. Typically, communities do possess the relevant knowledge, but it is possible in principle for communities to send cues despite lacking knowledge-a weakness in the system's design. COVID-19 in the United States offered a natural experiment in collective-knowledge development because a novel phenomenon arrived at a moment of intense division in political partisanship. We review evidence from the pandemic showing that the thought leaders of the two partisan groups sent radically different messages about COVID, which were, in turn, reinforced by close community members (family, friends, etc.). We show that although actual understanding of the individual plays a role in a key COVID-mitigation behavior (vaccination), it plays a smaller role than perceived understanding of thought leaders and beliefs about COVID-related behaviors of close community members. We discuss implications for theory and practice when all communities are in the same epistemic circumstance-relying on the testimony of others.

Trumpism, climate and COVID: Social bases of the new science rejection

Although the hazards posed by greenhouse warming and COVID-19 are quite different, diagnosis and mitigation prospects for both depend heavily on science. Unfortunately, the reality of both threats has been subject to politicized science rejection in the US, making these deadly problems less tractable. There are substantial parallels between the two cases of science rejection, including common rhetoric and conservative political leadership. Survey research has reached widely-replicated conclusions regarding the social bases of climate-change perceptions. Corresponding studies of COVID-19 perceptions have found some political commonalities, but less agreement on other details. Here, we address this gap using generalized structural equation modeling (GSEM) and 2021 US survey data to make direct comparisons between the social bases of rejecting the reality of anthropogenic climate change (ACC) and rejecting COVID-19 vaccination. Trumpism, operationalized from approval of ex-president Trump, is viewed as an intervening variable that influences both types of science rejection. Trumpism itself is predicted by age, race, evangelical religion, ideology, and receptivity to seemingly non-political conspiracy beliefs. Considering direct as well as indirect effects (through Trumpism), climate change and vaccine rejection are similarly predicted by white and evangelical identity, conspiracism, and by education×ideology and friends×party interactions. The finding that Trumpism exacerbates science rejection could also apply to other science- and expertise-related topics unrelated to climate and COVID. These results invite broader comparisons across topics, with analogous movements in other countries, and continued tracking as US Trumpism evolves beyond Trump.

Communicating scientific uncertainty in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic: A message experiment

The World Health Organization (WHO) officially declared COVID-19 a pandemic on March 11, 2020. It was a time of significant uncertainty as experts were not yet certain whether social distancing behaviors were necessary to slow the spread of the virus. Some public communicators opted to acknowledge uncertainty based on the limited evidence, whereas others downplayed uncertainty. This situation provided researchers with an opportunity to advance theory by explicating and testing cognitive responses to message uncertainty. Immediately following the WHO declaration (March 13-19, 2020), U.S. adults (N = 1186) were randomly assigned to one of six conditions in a 2 (message uncertainty: low, high) × 3 (argument support: expert, threat, precedent) between-participants experiment. Overall, perceived uncertainty negatively mediated the impact of message uncertainty on intentions. However, participant education was a key moderator. For those with more than a high school education, uncertain messages were related to higher intentions to social distance through increased critical reflection. For those with a high school education or less, uncertain messages were related to lower intentions through decreased message credibility.

A planned behavior theory-based explanatory model of protective behavior against COVID-19, with an age perspective

In this study, an explanatory model of protective behaviors against COVID-19 transmission based on the theory of planned behavior is tested using a sample of 904 individuals by adding two relevant variables in the COVID-19 context: skepticism and responsibility toward COVID-19 transmission. Responsibility and the intention to behave in a protective way act as mediators in predicting protective behaviors. The model is invariant between younger and older people, although some path differences were found: the perception that individuals have about the extent to which their reference group adopts protective behaviors directly influences individual protective behavior for younger but not older people, for whom subjective social norms were only indirect predictors of such behavior. Additionally, the rates in all the variables showed that the group under 35 took more risks in the context of protective behaviors against COVID-19: they exhibited more skepticism, lower behavioral control, perceived fewer positive social norms regarding protective behaviors, felt less responsible for spreading the disease, had less intention to behave in a protective way, and finally adopted fewer protective behaviors. Developers of intervention strategies and campaigns should contemplate such variables and focus on differences according to age.

Perceived risk, emotions, and stress in response to COVID-19: The interplay of media use and partisanship

Relationships between risk perceptions, emotions, and stress are well-documented, as are interconnections between stress, emotion, and media use. During the early COVID-19 pandemic, the public responded psychologically to the threat posed by the pandemic, and frequently utilized media for information and entertainment. However, we lack a comprehensive picture of how perceived risk, emotion, stress, and media affected each other longitudinally during this time. Further, although response to the pandemic was highly politicized, research has yet to address how partisan affiliation moderated relationships between risk, emotion, stress, and media use over time. This three-wave (N = 1021) panel study assessed the interplay of risk, emotion, stress, and media use for Americans with different political affiliations between March and May of 2020. Findings indicate that perceived risk, emotion, and stress at Time 1 predicted media use at Time 2, with predictors varying by type of media. Use of entertainment media and social/mobile media predicted later stress (Time 3), but news consumption did not. Later risk perceptions (Time 3) were not influenced by media use at Time 2. The predictors and consequences of different types of media use were notably different for Republicans and Democrats. In particular, risk perceptions predicted greater news use among Democrats but greater entertainment media use among Republicans. Moreover, social/mobile media use resulted in perceiving the risks of COVID-19 as less serious for Republicans while increasing stress over time for Democrats.

Psychometric properties of the Korean version of questionnaires on adherence to physical distancing and health beliefs about COVID-19 in the general population

Introduction

We aimed to examine the psychometric properties of the Korean version of the questionnaires on adherence to physical distancing and health beliefs about COVID-19 in the general population in South Korea. In addition, we investigated how the various sections interacted with each other and with viral anxiety and depression, and ultimately affected adherence to physical distancing.

Methods

An anonymous online survey was conducted among members of the general population in South Korea between 10 and 18 January 2022. We recruited 400 respondents and measured their demographic information, symptoms, and responses to questions about COVID-19. First, we examined the reliability and validity of the questionnaires, which included questions about people's adherence to physical distancing guidelines and COVID-19-related health beliefs. Second, we examined the relationship between physical distancing and viral anxiety or depression, as assessed using the six-item Stress and Anxiety to Viral Epidemics (SAVE-6) scale and the Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9).

Results

All 400 participants (204 men, age 41.6 ± 10.8) completed the survey. Confirmatory factor analysis revealed a good model fit for adherence to physical distancing (CFI = 1.000, TLI = 1.019, RMSEA = 0.000, and SRMR = 0.034) and health beliefs about COVID-19 (CFI = 0.993, TLI = 0.991, RMSEA = 0.030, and SRMR = 0.052). It also showed good reliability for Factor I (Cronbach's α = 0.826) and Factor II (α = 0.740). Four categories of the COVID-19 health beliefs questionnaire also showed good reliability for perceived susceptibility (α = 0.870), perceived severity (α = 0.901), perceived benefit (α = 0.935), and barriers to following physical distancing (α = 0.833). Structural equation models showed that the effects of health beliefs and viral anxiety and depression were mediated mostly by personal injunctive norms. Goodness-of-fit measures indicated a good fit. (Chi-square = 24.425, df = 7, p < 0.001; CFI = 0.966; RMSEA = 0.079).

Conclusion

The Korean version of the COVID-19 adherence to physical distancing and health beliefs questionnaires showed good reliability and validity in the Korean general population. In addition, the effects of health beliefs, along with viral anxiety and depression, were mainly mediated by personal injunctive norms.

Who do we trust and how do we cope with COVID-19? A mixed-methods sequential exploratory approach to understanding supportive messages across 35 cultures

Based upon a mixed-methods follow-up exploratory model, we examined the link between trust and coping during the early outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic at the society level. Qualitative data were collected from the supportive messages written by 10,072 community adults across 35 societies. Trust and coping were used as the two pre-defined themes in the conceptual content analysis. Five subthemes emerged from the theme trust, depicting five distinct trusted targets: God, a larger us, country/government, science/healthcare, and the affected. Six subthemes emerged from the theme coping, depicting six distinct coping strategies: interpersonal/social coping, religious/spiritual coping, acceptance, blame, wishful thinking, and strength-based coping. A follow-up quantitative investigation also showed that four society-level factors (viz., individualism, cultural tightness, globalization, and severity of pandemic) had differential effects on people's trusted targets and ways of coping with the pandemic. Our study made both methodological and practical contributions to cross-cultural research on COVID-19 by using a mixed-methods approach in a multinational study and demonstrating the importance of making meaningful virtual connection during a time of physical distancing.

Emergent Social Capital during the Coronavirus Pandemic in the United States in Hispanics/Latinos

The coronavirus pandemic has drastically impacted many groups that have been socially and economically marginalized such as Hispanics/Latinos in the United States (U.S.). Our aim was to understand how bonding social capital, bridging social capital, and trust played a role in Hispanics/Latinos over the course of the COVID-19 outbreak, as well as explore the negative consequences of social capital. We performed focus group discussions via Zoom (n = 25) between January and December 2021 with Hispanics/Latinos from Baltimore, MD, Washington, DC, and New York City, NY. Our findings suggest that Hispanics/Latinos experienced bridging and bonding social capital. Of particular interest was how social capital permeated the Hispanic/Latino community's socioeconomic challenges during the pandemic. The focus groups revealed the importance of trust and its role in vaccine hesitancy. Additionally, the focus groups discussed the dark side of social capital including caregiving burden and spread of misinformation. We also identified the emergent theme of racism. Future public health interventions should invest in social capital, especially for groups that have been historically marginalized or made vulnerable, and consider the promotion of bonding and bridging social capital and trust. When prospective disasters occur, public health interventions should support vulnerable populations that are overwhelmed with caregiving burden and are susceptible to misinformation.

Long COVID in the context of social determinants of health

The COVID-19 pandemic has been a challenge for the public health system and has highlighted health disparities. COVID-19 vaccines have effectively protected against infection and severe disease, but some patients continue to suffer from symptoms after their condition is resolved. These post-acute sequelae, or long COVID, continues to disproportionately affect some patients based on their social determinants of health (SDOH). This paper uses the World Health Organization's (WHO) SDOH conceptual framework to explore how SDOH influences long COVID outcomes.

Assessing the role of collectivism and individualism on COVID-19 beliefs and behaviors in the Southeastern United States

America's unique response to the global COVID-19 pandemic has been both criticized and applauded across political and social spectrums. Compared to other developed nations, U.S. incidence and mortality rates were exceptionally high, due in part to inconsistent policies across local, state, and federal agencies regarding preventive behaviors like mask wearing and social distancing. Furthermore, vaccine hesitancy and conspiracy theories around COVID-19 and vaccine safety have proliferated widely, making herd immunity that much more challenging. What factors of the U.S. culture have contributed to the significant impact of the pandemic? Why have we not responded better to the challenges of COVID-19? Or would many people in the U.S. claim that we have responded perfectly well? To explore these questions, we conducted a qualitative and quantitative study of Florida State University faculty, staff, and students. This study measured their perceptions of the pandemic, their behaviors tied to safety and community, and how these practices were tied to beliefs of individualism and collectivism. We found that collectivist orientations were associated with a greater likelihood of wearing masks consistently, severe interruptions of one's social life caused by the pandemic, greater concern for infecting others, and higher levels of trust in medical professionals for behavioral guidelines surrounding the pandemic. These associations largely persist even after adjusting for political affiliation, which we find is also a strong predictor of COVID-19 beliefs and behaviors.

The interplay between cognitive and affective risks in predicting COVID-19 precautions: a longitudinal representative study of Americans

OBJECTIVE

Cognitive risk figures prominently in models predicting health behaviors, but affective risk is also important. We examined the interplay between cognitive risk (personal likelihood of COVID-19 infection or death) and affective risk (worry about COVID-19) in predicting COVID-19 precautionary behaviors. We also examined how outbreak severity bias (overestimation of the severity of COVID-19 in one's community) predicted these outcomes.

DESIGN

In a representative sample of U.S. adults (N = 738; M_age = 46.8; 52% women; 78% white), participants who had not had COVID-19 took two online surveys two weeks apart in April 2020.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

We assessed cognitive risk, affective risk, and outbreak severity bias at baseline and at follow-up two precaution variables: prevention behaviors (e.g. social distancing) and behavioral willingness (e.g. vaccinations).

RESULTS

Overall, affective risk better predicted precautions than cognitive risk. Moreover, overestimating the severity of the outbreak predicted more affective risk (but not cognitive risk) and in turn more precautions. Additional analyses showed that when affective risk was lower (as opposed to higher) greater cognitive risk and outbreak severity bias both predicted more precautions.

CONCLUSION

These findings illustrate the importance of affective risk and outbreak severity bias in understanding COVID-19 precautionary behavior.

Comorbidities, sociodemographic factors, and determinants of health on COVID-19 fatalities in the United States

Previous studies have evaluated comorbidities and sociodemographic factors individually or by type but not comprehensively. This study aims to analyze the influence of a wide variety of factors in a single study to better understand the big picture of their effects on case-fatalities. This cross-sectional study used county-level comorbidities, social determinants of health such as income and race, measures of preventive healthcare, age, education level, average household size, population density, and political voting patterns were all evaluated on a national and regional basis. Analysis was performed through Generalized Additive Models and adjusted by the COVID-19 Community Vulnerability Index (CCVI). Effect estimates of COVID-19 fatality rates for risk factors such as comorbidities, sociodemographic factors and determinant of health. Factors associated with reducing COVID-19 fatality rates were mostly sociodemographic factors such as age, education and income, and preventive health measures. Obesity, minimal leisurely activity, binge drinking, and higher rates of individuals taking high blood pressure medication were associated with increased case fatality rate in a county. Political leaning influenced case case-fatality rates. Regional trends showed contrasting effects where larger household size was protective in the Midwest, yet harmful in Northeast. Notably, higher rates of respiratory comorbidities such as asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) diagnosis were associated with reduced case-fatality rates in the Northeast. Increased rates of chronic kidney disease (CKD) within counties were often the strongest predictor of increased case-fatality rates for several regions. Our findings highlight the importance of considering the full context when evaluating contributing factors to case-fatality rates. The spectrum of factors identified in this study must be analyzed in the context of one another and not in isolation.

Mask-wearing behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic in Korea: The role of individualism in a collectivistic country

The behavior of the general public is crucial for an effective COVID-19 response. The Republic of Korea has shown better performance in this regard than many other countries worldwide. Based on the theories of individualism and collectivism, this study analyzes how Korean culture and political preferences influence the mask-wearing behavior of people in Korea. We conducted two online surveys after the first wave and in the middle of the third wave of the pandemic in Korea. The results showed only small partisan differences in the level of mask-wearing behavior in Korea. Additionally, regression analysis results demonstrate that, when demographic variables are controlled, concerns of spreading infection and horizontal individualistic tendencies of younger respondents have a significant positive relation to mask-wearing behavior. Meanwhile, horizontal collectivism had a significant positive relationship with older respondents' mask-wearing behavior, as expected in the collectivistic culture of the Korean people. As a result, horizontal individualism has similar characteristics with horizontal collectivism in Koreans and both have a positive relation to their mask-wearing behavior.

Framing Effects on US Adults’ Reactions to COVID-19 Public Health Messages: Moderating Role of Source Trust

Increasing politicization of health guidance and fluctuating trust in public health institutions have challenged effective coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) public health communication in the United States. Applying the extended parallel process model, this research reports findings from two online survey experiments conducted at different points in the pandemic regarding two advocated risk reduction behaviors. Analyses test US adults’ emotional and argument strength reactions to experimental tweets attributed to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and Prevention which vary with regards to advocated behavior (social distancing; vaccination), emotional appeal, wellbeing orientation (individual vs. collective), and content frame (health vs. economic outcomes). Trust in the CDC is treated as a potential moderator. Results of path analyses indicated that emotional appeal and content frame had little impact on emotional or cognitive responses to the social distancing tweets, though unvaccinated adults with low trust in the CDC experienced greater hope and fear responses to tweets emphasizing collective benefits of vaccination. Hope reactions in both studies predicted greater perceived response efficacy for the advocated behavior, particularly among those with low CDC trust, while message annoyance undermined efficacy among low trust participants. Particularly among adults with low trust in the CDC, fear reactions led to reduced efficacy. Perceived efficacy of vaccination predicted greater intention to receive a COVID-19 vaccine, controlling for prior intention. Messages which inspire hope with regards to risk reduction behaviors and include sound arguments may be more motivating than fear-appeal messages, particularly among individuals with low levels of trust in public health institutions.

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.

Feasibility, Acceptability, and Barriers to Implementing Select Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions to Reduce the Transmission of Pandemic Influenza - United States, 2019

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to assess the feasibility and acceptability of implementing non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) reserved for influenza pandemics (voluntary home quarantine, use of face masks by ill persons, childcare facility closures, school closures, and social distancing at schools, workplaces, and mass gatherings).

METHODS

Public health officials in all 50 states (including Washington, DC) and 8 territories, and a random sample of 822 local health departments (LHDs), were surveyed in 2019.

RESULTS

The response rates for the states/ territories and LHDs were 75% (44/ 59) and 25% (206/ 822), respectively. Most of the state/ territorial respondents stated that the feasibility and acceptability of implementing NPIs were high, except for K-12 school closures lasting up to 6 weeks or 6 months. The LHD respondents also indicated that feasibility and acceptability were lowest for prolonged school closures. Compared to LHD respondents in suburban or urban areas, those in rural areas expressed lower feasibility and acceptability. Barriers to implementing NPIs included financial impact, compliance and difficulty in enforcement, perceived level of disease threat, and concerns regarding political implications.

CONCLUSION

Proactive strategies to systematically address perceived barriers and promote disease prevention ahead of a new pandemic are needed to increase receptivity and consistent adoption of NPIs and other evidence-based countermeasures.

Non-adherence to COVID-19 lockdown: who are they? A cross-sectional study in Portugal

Objectives

The SARS-CoV-2 virus has spread worldwide, leading governments to implement mitigation measures. Understanding the reluctance to adhere to non-pharmacological interventions might help promote adherence to these measures. This study aimed to identify factors associated with non-adherence to the first lockdown in Portugal.

Study design

Cross-sectional study.

Methods

This study used data from a Portuguese community-based survey entitled ‘COVID-19 Barometer: Social Opinion’. Data were collected on risk perception, health status and social experiences using a snowball sampling technique. The event of interest corresponded to participants who reported not staying home during the lockdown period, serving as a proxy for non-adherence to lockdown. Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with non-adherence to the first lockdown.

Results

Responses from 133,601 individual questionnaires that were completed during the first week of the first lockdown in 2020 were analysed. A minority of participants (5.6%) reported non-adherence to lockdown (i.e. leaving home for reasons other than essential situations). Working in the workplace was the factor with the strongest association of non-adherence to the lockdown. Several other factors were also associated with non-adherence to the first lockdown; namely, being a man, being a student, having a low level of education, having a low income, living alone or with a high-infection-risk professional (e.g. doctor, nurse, pharmaceutical, health technician, firefighter, police officer, military, essential services worker), perceiving the risk of getting COVID-19 to be high, not having social support in case of infection, feeling agitated, sad or anxious every day, and considering the preventive measures to be unimportant or inadequate.

Conclusions

Non-adherence to lockdown was associated with socio-economic, trust and perception factors. Future research should investigate the mechanisms underlying these associations to help identify the population groups who are most at risk of non-adherence.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy: A Critical Time Period Analysis

The COVID-19 pandemic has been a devastating, global public health crisis. Public health systems in the United States heavily focused on getting people to adhere to preventive behaviors, and later, to get vaccinated. January through May of 2021 was a critical and volatile time period for COVID-19 cases, deaths, and expanding vaccination programs coinciding with important political and social events which will have a lasting impact on how the public views science, places trust in our government, and views individual rights. Having collected almost 1400 surveys, our goal was to assess vaccine behavior, explore attitudes toward receiving the vaccine, and identify trusted information sources. More than 83% of our survey respondents said they were at least partially vaccinated. Of 246 unvaccinated, 31.3% were somewhat or extremely likely to get vaccinated when available. Their two most common concerns were vaccine effectiveness (41.1%) and safety (40.2%). Significant differences were observed between respondents who were likely to be vaccinated in the future and those who were hesitant on three of five demographic variables. Our data provide unique insight into the history of behavior and motivations related to COVID-19 vaccines—what will be seen as a “wicked problem” for years to come.

Social cohesion and loneliness are associated with the antibody response to COVID-19 vaccination

BACKGROUND

Recent research has suggested that psychosocial factors influence the antibody response to vaccine, including SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) vaccines. Here we investigated whether social cohesion and loneliness were predictive of antibody response to a single dose of a COVID-19 vaccine. We also tested if the association between social cohesion and antibody response was mediated by feelings of loneliness.

METHODS

Participants (N = 676) COVID-19 antibody data were extracted from March 2021 wave of the Understanding Society COVID-19 study from the UK. Relevant socio-demographics, health and lifestyle, loneliness, social cohesion indices were also used in a series of hierarchical linear regression to test our main hypotheses.

RESULTS

After controlling for covariates (e.g., age and chronic health conditions), lower social cohesion was associated with a lower antibody response. Further, the association between social cohesion and poorer antibody responses was mediated by loneliness; those reporting lower social cohesion also reported higher loneliness, which in turn was associated with lower antibody response.

CONCLUSION

This study confirms that feelings of 'being in it together' relate to the strength of the antibody response to COVID-19 vaccination, emphasising the importance of the social cohesion agenda during the pandemic.

Determinants of Preventive Behavioral Measures in Polling Stations during General Election in Indonesia

BACKGROUND: Various preventive measures have been taken aimed to prevent the spread of COVID-19, which caused major changes in most aspects of human life. One of activities impacted by the presence of the disease is national or regional elections. To prevent the spread of the disease during the election, the Indonesian General Election Commission issued a regulation to control the COVID-19 transmission. However, there was lack of information regarding the implementation of the COVID-19 preventive behavioral measures in polling stations during the election. AIM: The objective of this study is aimed to: (1) Describe and analyze determinants of the implementation of preventive behavioral measures implementation in polling stations during the local election and (2) examine differences of the COVID-19 daily cases before and after the local election in Indonesia. METHODS: The design of this study is cross-sectional. The data were collected in the election day until the next 7 days, from December 9–15, 2020, in Depok and South Tangerang cities. All of 463 respondents participated in this study with online self-administered questionnaire. Chi-squared test with CI 95% has been used to determine the item which is related to support voters and personnel in implementing the health protocols. RESULTS: The results of this study indicated the significant relationship between voter status and mask wearing (p = 0.017), physical distancing (p = 0.011), and hand washing (p = 0.036). The COVID-19 daily cases before and after the local election tend to fluctuate but there was an increase from November to December 2020. There was a significant difference of the COVID-19 daily cases before and after local elections in cities in Indonesia. CONCLUSION: The availability of facilities in polling stations and strengthening the policy will influence voters to do preventive behaviors such as mask wearing, physical distancing, and hand washing during the election. This study recommends the stakeholders to provide health protocol facilities at polling station and to create programs to increase the community compliance regarding the prevention of infectious diseases during the voting process.

Change the medium, change the message: creativity is key to battle misinformation

Marshall McLuhan's groundbreaking work regarding the role of context and medium in communication is very relevant today. By limiting the medium of science communication to dense, jargon-rich academic journals, we restrict the impact of discovery to the scientific community. We are also allowing the propagation of misinformation, as the nonexpert is forced to resource unreliable media to answer their scientific queries. To compete with pseudoscience, we need to improve science literacy and make science accessible through the same media on which pseudoscience thrives. As scientists and educators, we believe it is our responsibility to reconceptualize science literacy as a lifelong process and take greater accountability over the future of science communication. We hypothesize that increasing the accessibility of scientific literature to the public through adopting mainstream media forms and increasing access to informal science education (ISE) opportunities will decrease the proliferation of pseudoscience. To accomplish this, we propose eight recommendations housed under three action areas: 1) modify undergraduate science education by increasing opportunities for informal science communication, 2) increase accessibility to informal science education, and 3) bridge the gap between formal and informal science learning opportunities.

Acceptance and Adherence to COVID-19 Preventive Measures are Shaped Predominantly by Conspiracy Beliefs, Mistrust in Science and Fear - A Comparison of More than 20 Psychological Variables

The global coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic sparked a great interest in psychological factors that determine or explain peoples' responses to the novel threatening situation and the preventive measures (e.g. wearing masks, social distancing). In this study, we focused on contaminated mindware (conspiracy and paranormal beliefs) and investigated its relationship with both acceptance of and adherence to COVID-19 preventive measures, along with other variables from the domains of emotion (trait anxiety, fear), traditional personality traits (Big 5, locus of control, optimism/pessimism) and motivation (self-control, dispositional regulatory focus). A total of 22 variables were measured in an online survey (N = 374) that took place during the second wave of COVID-19 (Nov. 2020 – March 2021) in Switzerland. Of all variables, the endorsement of specific COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs was most strongly associated with lower acceptance and adherence to the preventive measures, together with mistrust in science and a more right-wing political orientation. In contrast, fear of COVID-19 and prevention regulatory focus were positively associated with acceptance and adherence. Our results therefore highlight the importance of fighting (conspiratorial) misinformation and of increasing the perceived credibility of science in reducing the spread of the coronavirus. Moreover, when acceptance was used as predictor for adherence, agreeableness and dispositional prevention regulatory focus still explained unique variance in adherence, suggesting that such personality and motivational variables play an important role in adhering and regulating preventive behaviour independent from the attitude towards the preventive measures themselves.

The Role of Just World Beliefs in Responding to the COVID-19 Pandemic

This study investigated whether people's personal belief in a just world (BJW) is linked to their willingness to physically distance themselves from others during the COVID-19 pandemic. Past research found personal BJW to be positively related to prosocial behavior, justice striving, and lower risk perceptions. If social distancing reflects a concern for others, high personal BJW should predict increased interest in social distancing. If social distancing reflects a concern for one's personal risk, high personal BJW should predict decreased interest in social distancing. Results of a pre-registered internet-based study from Germany (N = 361) indicated that the higher people's personal BJW, the more they generally practiced social distancing. This association still occurred when controlling for empathy, another significant predictor of social distancing. There were no mediation effects of empathy and risk perception. The findings extend knowledge on the correlates of social distancing in the COVID-19 pandemic which could be used to increase compliance among citizens.

The impact of stay-at-home orders on vulnerability assessments and precautionary intentions during a pandemic

In 2020, a novel emerging infectious disease - COVID-19 - became a global pandemic and prompted unprecedented social distancing measures. We examined the associations of voluntary stay-at-home (SAH) orders during the COVID-19 pandemic with vulnerability assessments and precautionary intentions (e.g. social distancing, hand washing). A quasi-experimental study using an online adult sample was conducted in U.S. states with and without voluntary SAH orders during the COVID-19 pandemic. Self-report surveys assessed vulnerability assessments and precautionary intentions. Participants living in states with SAH orders showed inflated vulnerability assessments for contracting COVID-19, and this association was stronger for affect-laden than cognitively-based assessments. Moreover, only affect-laden vulnerability assessments were uniquely associated with precautionary intentions and accounted for the relationship between SAH orders and precautionary intentions. Our study was among the first to explore the impact of voluntary SAH orders on vulnerability assessments and precautionary intentions. Results are discussed in terms of their implications for health behavioral models and applications for promoting self-protective actions during a pandemic.

Trust, Care Avoidance, and Care Experiences among Kenyan Women Who Delivered during the COVID-19 Pandemic

We explore how the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with avoidance of, and challenges with, antenatal, childbirth and postpartum care among women in Kiambu and Nairobi counties, Kenya; and whether this was associated with a report of declined trust in the health system due to the pandemic. Women who delivered between March and November 2020 were invited to participate in a phone survey about their care experiences (n = 1122 respondents). We explored associations between reduced trust and care avoidance, delays and challenges with healthcare seeking, using logistic regression models adjusted for women's characteristics. Approximately half of respondents said their trust in the health care system had declined due to COVID-19 (52.7%, n = 591). Declined trust was associated with higher likelihood of reporting barriers accessing antenatal care (aOR 1.59 [95% CI 1.24, 2.05]), avoiding care for oneself (aOR 2.26 [95% CI 1.59, 3.22]) and for one's infant (aOR 1.77 [95% CI 1.11, 2.83]), and of feeling unsafe accessing care (aOR 1.52 [95% CI 1.19, 1.93]). Since March 2020, emergency services, routine care and immunizations were avoided most often. Primary reported reasons for avoiding care and challenges accessing care were financial barriers and problems accessing the facility. Declined trust in the health care system due to COVID-19 may have affected health care-seeking for women and their children in Kenya, which could have important implications for their health and well-being. Programs and policies should consider targeted special "catch-up" strategies that include trust-building messages and actions for women who deliver during emergencies like the COVID-19 pandemic.

Differences in Attitudes of Front-Line Clinicians, Healthcare Workers, and Non-Healthcare Workers Toward COVID-19 Safety Protocols

Background

The advent of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has generated varying opinions toward adhering to safety protocols among public health experts. With decreasing restrictions on public gatherings, lax protective behaviors, distortion of facts, and increasing availability of COVID-19 vaccines, response to public health guidelines vary greatly. Personal experiences with COVID-19, education, and work environment may influence decisions on safety recommendations and vaccination protocols among the public and healthcare professionals alike. To better understand how individuals process and make decisions regarding COVID-19 safety measures, this study investigated the attitudes among clinical and non-clinical healthcare workers and non-healthcare workers toward COVID-19 safety protocols.

Methodology

Cross-sectional data were collected from Florida residents using an online, 20-item anonymous questionnaire. Participants were recruited using the Florida Department of Health database for physician emails, social media, and snowball sampling strategies. The survey consisted of demographic items and questions regarding patient attitudes toward safety protocols for COVID-19 (e.g., likeliness to wear a mask in public despite state regulations being lifted, maintaining a distance of at least 6 feet between close friends and family, dining at restaurants/bars, gathering in groups larger than 10 people, getting a COVID-19 vaccine if one becomes available). Data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance and chi-square test using SPSS version 27 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA).

Results

Of the 373 participants who completed the survey, 183 (49.1%) worked in the healthcare field, with 100 (28.6%) providing direct patient care. The rest (n = 190; 50.9%) reported that they do not work in the healthcare industry. Findings suggest that those working in healthcare with direct involvement in patient care were more likely to get the COVID-19 vaccine than those not working in healthcare. Additionally, those working in healthcare and providing direct patient care were more likely to think that masks were effective in reducing the spread of COVID-19 compared to those who worked in healthcare but did not provide direct patient care.

Conclusions

This study provides new insights into the attitudes of front-line clinicians, non-clinical healthcare workers, and the general population. Increasing health promotion efforts and debunking myths about COVID-19 may prove useful in mitigating the spread of the disease.

Influencing factors for public risk perception of COVID-19 --perspective of the pandemic whole life cycle

The public's risk perception of public health emergencies will determine their behavior choices to a certain extent. Research on public risk perception of emergencies is an integral part of crisis management. From the perspective of the whole life cycle, this article takes the COVID-19 epidemic as an example. It conducts empirical analysis to study the influencing factors of public risk perception of public health emergencies. The results show that: (1) the public's risk perception is affected by individual factors, event characteristics, social influencing factors, and individual relationship factors. (2) The more the public is familiar with the epidemic, the lower the risk of the epidemic. The more the public can control the loss of the epidemic risk, the perceived epidemic risk will be reduced. The more the public trusts the supreme power of the government, the lower the risk of the epidemic in their hearts is. The higher the closeness of the risk and impact of the epidemic to individuals, the higher the level of risk perception is. (3)The public's risk perception will evolve with the development of the situation, and there are differences in recognition of government departments' control measures at different stages of public health emergencies. The relevant departments should effectively guide the public's risk response behavior in combination with the life cycle of public health emergencies. The research conclusions of this article clarify the dynamic evolution of risk perception and provide a specific reference for the emergency management of public health emergencies.

Descriptive Norms and Prototypes Predict COVID-19 Prevention Cognitions and Behaviors in the United States: Applying the Prototype Willingness Model to Pandemic Mitigation

Background

Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, prevention behavior adoption occurred in a rapidly changing context. In contrast to expectancy-value theories, the Prototype Willingness Model (PWM) is well-suited for investigating novel and socially informed behaviors.

Purpose

We explored whether PWM social cognitions predicted coronavirus prevention behaviors.

Method

A representative sample of United States adults (N = 738; M_age = 46.8; 51.8% women; 78% white; April 2020) who had not had COVID-19 reported PWM predictor variables (perceived vulnerability, prevention descriptive norms, prototypes engaging in prevention behavior, and prevention behavioral intentions). Two weeks later, participants reported their prevention behaviors (handwashing, mask-wearing, social distancing, etc.) and future public health behavioral willingness (contact tracing, temperature checks, etc.).

Results

Controlling for putative demographic, past behavior, and coronavirus-contextual (e.g., local infection rates) covariates, mediation models indicated that higher norms and favorable prototypes were associated with greater prevention behavioral intentions, which in turn predicted increased prevention behavior, F(18, 705) = 92.20, p < .001, R² = .70. Higher norms and favorable prototypes associated both directly and indirectly (through greater prevention behavioral intention) with greater willingness to engage in emerging public health behaviors, F(15, 715) = 21.49, p < .001, R² = .31.

Conclusions

Greater descriptive norms and favorable prototypes for prevention behavior predicted: (a) future prevention behaviors through increases in behavioral intentions and (b) willingness to participate in emerging public health behaviors. These results held across demographic groups, political affiliation, and severity of regional outbreaks. Public health efforts to curb pandemics should highlight normative prevention participation and enhance positive prototypes.

Politicization of COVID-19 health-protective behaviors in the United States: Longitudinal and cross-national evidence

During the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, U.S. conservative politicians and the media downplayed the risk of both contracting COVID-19 and the effectiveness of recommended health behaviors. Health behavior theories suggest perceived vulnerability to a health threat and perceived effectiveness of recommended health-protective behaviors determine motivation to follow recommendations. Accordingly, we predicted that-as a result of politicization of the pandemic-politically conservative Americans would be less likely to enact recommended health-protective behaviors. In two longitudinal studies of U.S. residents, political conservatism was inversely associated with perceived health risk and adoption of health-protective behaviors over time. The effects of political orientation on health-protective behaviors were mediated by perceived risk of infection, perceived severity of infection, and perceived effectiveness of the health-protective behaviors. In a global cross-national analysis, effects were stronger in the U.S. (N = 10,923) than in an international sample (total N = 51,986), highlighting the increased and overt politicization of health behaviors in the U.S.

Trusting Others During a Pandemic: Investigating Potential Changes in Generalized Trust and Its Relationship With Pandemic-Related Experiences and Worry

Generalized trust, the belief that most other people can be trusted, has positive consequences for health and wellbeing. An increased sense of community is often seen in times of crisis or disaster, but it is unclear whether this is the case in the COVID-19 pandemic. The objectives of the current study were to assess whether generalized trust increased in an early pandemic phase compared to pre-pandemic levels, and whether trust was lower in individuals who felt particularly threatened or burdened in the pandemic. We compared levels of generalized trust in a population-representative Norwegian sample (n = 1,041) with pre-pandemic levels from the European Social Survey (ESS). Age- and gender-adjusted expected scores were compared to observed scores, using weighted data. Secondly, we tested whether indicators of pandemic-related strain, perceived health risks, or pandemic-related worry were associated with a lower level of generalized trust. This cross-sectional study was conducted in an early opening-up phase (May, 2020). The observed levels of generalized trust in an early pandemic phase did not differ significantly from expected levels based on pre-pandemic measures. Higher trust was found among individuals who reported personal experience with the COVID-19 disease (tested positive, admitted to hospital, or lost someone to the disease). Pandemic-related worry and a high perceived health threat were both associated with a lower level of generalized trust. These results indicate that personal experiences with the COVID-19 pandemic could influence trust in others, although this link may be context-dependent. Generalized trust is considered to be an important asset in society, and promote health and well-being. As the pandemic evolves, there is a risk that we may lose, or a chance that we could gain, trust, with potential consequences for our health.