In science we (should) trust: Expectations and compliance across nine countries during the COVID-19 pandemic

The power of the family in times of pandemic: Cross-country evidence from 93 countries

The majority of the hospitalizations and deaths associated with COVID-19 occurred in people over the age of 65. In addition, previous studies have shown that intergenerational contacts played a key role in COVID-19-related infection and fatality. This paper utilized two large-scale multinational surveys to uncover the important role of family ties in infection prevention across 93 countries. Using the World Values Survey, we measured country-level family ties emphasizing respondents' view of their parents. We elicited individual willingness to uptake infection prevention measures from a panel study conducted each month in the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic between March 2020 and July 2021. We find that in countries with stronger family ties, people show more support for non-pharmaceutical interventions and higher vaccine acceptance; moreover, young people are more supportive of mandatory vaccination. The association between strength of family ties and compliance with infection prevention measures was salient before COVID-19 vaccines became available and was persistent before the global vaccination coverage reached 25%.

Please wear a mask: a systematic case for mask wearing mandates

This paper combines considerations from ethics, medicine and public health policy to articulate and defend a systematic case for mask wearing mandates (MWM). The paper argues for two main claims of general interest in favour of MWM. First, MWM provide a more effective, just and fair way to tackle the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic than policy alternatives such as laissez-faire approaches, mask wearing recommendations and physical distancing measures. And second, the proffered objections against MWM may justify some exemptions for specific categories of individuals, but do not cast doubt on the justifiability of these mandates. Hence, unless some novel decisive objections are put forward against MWM, governments should adopt MWM.

Cognitive influences on biosecurity measure compliance during a global pandemic

Introduction

During the first years of the pandemic, COVID-19 forced governments worldwide to take drastic measures to reduce the spread of the virus. Some of these measures included mandatory confinements, constant use of masks, and social distancing. Despite these measures being mandatory in many countries and the abundance of evidence on their effectiveness at slowing the spread of the virus, many people failed to comply with them.

Methods

This research explored the role of cognitive factors in predicting compliance with COVID-19 safety measures across two separate studies. Building on earlier work demonstrating the relevance of cognitive processes in health behaviour, this study aimed to identify key predictors of adherence to safety guidelines during the pandemic. Utilising hierarchical regression models, we investigated the influence of age, sex, cognitive control, cognitive flexibility (Study 1), working memory, psychological health, and beliefs about COVID-19 (Study 2) on compliance to biosafety measures.

Results

Demographic variables and cognitive control were significant predictors of compliance in both studies. However, cognitive flexibility and working memory did not improve the models' predictive capacities. In Study 2, integrating measures of psychological health and beliefs regarding COVID-19 severity significantly improved the model. Further, interaction effects between age and other variables also enhanced the predictive value.

Discussion

The findings emphasise the significant role cognitive control, age, psychological health, and perceptions about COVID-19 play in shaping compliance behaviour, highlighting avenues for targeted interventions to improve public health outcomes during a pandemic.

Autonomous and policy-induced behavior change during the COVID-19 pandemic: Towards understanding and modeling the interplay of behavioral adaptation

Changes in human behaviors, such as reductions of physical contacts and the adoption of preventive measures, impact the transmission of infectious diseases considerably. Behavioral adaptations may be the result of individuals aiming to protect themselves or mere responses to public containment measures, or a combination of both. What drives autonomous and policy-induced adaptation, how they are related and change over time is insufficiently understood. Here, we develop a framework for more precise analysis of behavioral adaptation, focusing on confluence, interactions and time variance of autonomous and policy-induced adaptation. We carry out an empirical analysis of Germany during the fall of 2020 and beyond. Subsequently, we discuss how behavioral adaptation processes can be better represented in behavioral-epidemiological models. We find that our framework is useful to understand the interplay of autonomous and policy-induced adaptation as a "moving target". Our empirical analysis suggests that mobility patterns in Germany changed significantly due to both autonomous and policy-induced adaption, with potentially weaker effects over time due to decreasing risk signals, diminishing risk perceptions and an erosion of trust in the government. We find that while a number of simulation and prediction models have made great efforts to represent behavioral adaptation, the interplay of autonomous and policy-induced adaption needs to be better understood to construct convincing counterfactual scenarios for policy analysis. The insights presented here are of interest to modelers and policy makers aiming to understand and account for behaviors during a pandemic response more accurately.

Supporting the COVID Response with Solutions from Science

January 2023 marks the 36th month following the World Health Organization’s declaration of COVID-19 as a public health emergency of international concern. Recent and upcoming events show how far the Philippines has come in terms of its response: emerging from what has been referred to as the world’s longest lockdown1, crowds converging in public spacesand participating in mass gatherings demonstrate how people are adapting to COVID-19 as a reality of daily life. The journey to this milestone has not been simple nor straightforward. In addition to the thousands of health care workers who provide frontline services, a multi-disciplinary group of scientists continues to work tirelessly in the background, dedicating their efforts to gain a better understanding of COVID, particularly in the Philippine context. For example:1. The Philippines has contributed over 12,000 sequences to the Global Initiative on Sharing Avian Influenza Data (GISAID) platform.2 This resource provides open access to genomic data on coronavirus and allows real-time surveillance to monitor the emergence of new COVID-19 variants globally.2. The FASSSTER (Feasibility Analysis of Syndromic Surveillance Using Spatio-Temporal Epidemiological Modeler) team of computer and data scientists, mathematical and economics modelers, public health and epidemiological experts provides scenario-based projections for COVID-19 using a disease surveillance and modeling platform.3The platform outputs guide decision making by national and local government agencies for interventions such as community quarantines, granular lockdowns, and vaccination targets.3. The Department of Science and Technology is supporting more than 60 projects and studies through its ARCHER (Addressing and Responding to COVID-19 Through Health Research) program. Aside from the usual focus on diagnosis, treatment and prevention, work is also being done on a broad range of topics, such as AI/ICT-driven prediction models and COVID behavior studies.4 Even as scientists struggled to provide information and technology solutions to guide a rational response, governments followed their advice to varying degrees, sometimes resulting in confusing messages. The pandemic has truly highlighted the “synergies as well as the tensions between science and policy.”5Yin and colleagues explored the connection between science and policy in their 2021 paper published in Science. Matching the scientific references in policy documents obtained from a large-scale database with another publication and citation database provided the team with a “distinct opportunity to examine the role of science in the global policy responseto COVID-19.” They found that policy documents in the COVID-19 pandemic substantially access recent, peer-reviewed, and highimpact science. However, national policy approaches have varied greatly, with some countries being actively antagonistic to scientific advice.6 In a perfect world, science and government should work closely together to formulate evidence-based policy. Bicchieri et al. found the largest gaps between trust in science and trust in government in Colombia and Mexico; in contrast, the smallest were in Germany and South Korea, where policy and science were more aligned. They note that “country-level trust in science, and not in government, becomes a strong predictor of compliance.”7 According to the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, the pandemic response requires a more collaborative relationship between scientists and policymakers. Their recommendations include strengthened use of science in policy, ensuring “open science,” universal access to solutions, and a faster response to scientific findings. Of note, the need for building public trust in science is also emphasized.8 For science to be able to provide solutions to support the COVID response, it must communicate, and it must be heard.

I want to be safe: understanding the main drivers behind vaccination choice throughout the pandemic

BACKGROUND

Despite being a major advancement in modern medicine, vaccines face widespread hesitancy and refusal, posing challenges to immunization campaigns. The COVID-19 pandemic accentuated vaccine hesitancy, emphasizing the pivotal role of beliefs in efficacy and safety on vaccine acceptance rates. This study explores the influence of efficacy and safety perceptions on vaccine uptake in Italy during the pandemic.

METHODS

We administered a 70-item questionnaire to a representative sample of 600 Italian speakers. Participants were tasked with assessing the perceived effectiveness and safety of each vaccine dose, along with providing reasons influencing their vaccination choices. Additionally, we conducted an experimental manipulation, exploring the effects of four framing messages that emphasized safety and/or efficacy on participants' willingness to receive a hypothetical fourth vaccine dose. Furthermore, participants were asked about their level of trust in the scientific community and public authorities, as well as their use of different information channels for obtaining COVID-19-related information.

RESULTS

Our study reveals a dynamic shift in vaccine efficacy and safety perceptions throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, potentially influencing vaccination compliance. Initially perceived as more effective than safe, this assessment reversed by the time of the third dose. Beliefs regarding safety, rather than efficacy, played a significant role in anticipating future vaccinations (e.g., the booster dose). Safety-focused messages positively affected vaccination intent, while efficacy-focused messages showed limited impact. We also observed a changing trend in reasons for vaccination, with a decline in infection-related reasons and an increase in social related ones. Furthermore, trust dynamics evolved differently for public authorities and the scientific community.

CONCLUSIONS

Vaccine perception is a dynamic process shaped by evolving factors like efficacy and safety perceptions, trust levels, and individual motivations. Our study sheds light on the complex dynamics that underlie the perception of vaccine safety and efficacy, and their impact on willingness to vaccinate. We discuss these results in light of bounded rationality, loss aversion and classic utility theory.

Compliance with COVID-19 preventative health measures in the United Kingdom: a latent profile analysis

Governments have adopted unprecedented measures to assist in slowing the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic, but compliance varies among individuals. This UK study uses latent profile analysis to identify four classes of individuals on factors believed to influence compliance. Those who sought health information from authoritative sources and actively sought information from multiple sources were most compliant. Profile differences in compliance and vaccination status were also primarily driven by trust in healthcare institutions over trust in government. These findings contribute to understanding compliance profiles and emphasise the importance of authoritative information and trust in healthcare systems.

The Politicization of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Political actors and institutions are largely responsible for effectively implementing the latest scientific and medical information in the form of public health measures. However, when politicians' judgments and decision-making are not founded on scientific facts or when scientific findings are misrepresented to further political goals, global crises such as pandemics may be even more galvanized. Like other scientific topics that entered public debate before 2020 (e.g., the debate on climate change), the COVID-19 pandemic has been heavily politicized worldwide. Consequently, COVID-19-related outcomes were strongly affected by politicization-a process of making a non-political issue political, i.e., debating it in the public sphere as an issue of public contestation. The present chapter presents a condensed overview and synthesis of the literature on the politicization of the COVID-19 pandemic in high- and low-income countries. In addition, we discuss several mechanisms explaining why, to some extent universally, conservatives (the right-wing oriented public) were less likely to follow public health recommendations, were more COVID-19 vaccine-hesitant, and had increased infection rates, poor health outcomes, and increased mortality compared to left-wing oriented public. The mechanisms explaining the links include the media, trust, cognitions, and values. We conclude the chapter with lessons learned during the COVID-19 pandemic and future research directions on the pandemics' politicization.

A synthesis of evidence for policy from behavioural science during COVID-19

Scientific evidence regularly guides policy decisions1, with behavioural science increasingly part of this process2. In April 2020, an influential paper3 proposed 19 policy recommendations ('claims') detailing how evidence from behavioural science could contribute to efforts to reduce impacts and end the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we assess 747 pandemic-related research articles that empirically investigated those claims. We report the scale of evidence and whether evidence supports them to indicate applicability for policymaking. Two independent teams, involving 72 reviewers, found evidence for 18 of 19 claims, with both teams finding evidence supporting 16 (89%) of those 18 claims. The strongest evidence supported claims that anticipated culture, polarization and misinformation would be associated with policy effectiveness. Claims suggesting trusted leaders and positive social norms increased adherence to behavioural interventions also had strong empirical support, as did appealing to social consensus or bipartisan agreement. Targeted language in messaging yielded mixed effects and there were no effects for highlighting individual benefits or protecting others. No available evidence existed to assess any distinct differences in effects between using the terms 'physical distancing' and 'social distancing'. Analysis of 463 papers containing data showed generally large samples; 418 involved human participants with a mean of 16,848 (median of 1,699). That statistical power underscored improved suitability of behavioural science research for informing policy decisions. Furthermore, by implementing a standardized approach to evidence selection and synthesis, we amplify broader implications for advancing scientific evidence in policy formulation and prioritization.

Love thy neighbor? The role of trust in neighbors during the COVID-19 crisis

During a pandemic, trust can either promote cooperative behavior, as people pay attention to their actions toward other people's health, or hinder cooperative behavior by decreasing risk perception. By linking South Korea's Community Health Survey data with district-level statistics of the number of confirmed cases, I examine the effect of trust during the pre-pandemic period on district-level infection rates. I find that trust in neighbors is negatively associated with infection rates during the period when people are well aware of social distancing measures. Results of the individual-level analysis demonstrate that trust in neighbors is positively associated with the probability of implementing social distancing measures, particularly, those that are difficult to enforce. This finding implies that trust in neighbors increases people's motivation to cooperate voluntarily with public precautionary measures that can reduce the probability of infection.

Co-evolution of conditional cooperation and social norm

The co-evolution of conditional cooperation and social norms has garnered significant attention, yet the underlying mechanisms remain elusive. Social norms result from empirical expectations, individual expectations of group behavior, and normative expectations, the population's expectations of individual behavior. Aligning these expectations aids in norm formation, but diverse individual reactions to observed behavior and their sensitivity to norm conformity can be challenging. In our study, the agents are initially endowed with diverse conditional expectations, which mirror their anticipations regarding group behavior and their inherent inclination to conform to social norms, indicative of their sensitivity to psychic costs. These agents engage in a repeated public goods game, where their decisions to cooperate are shaped by their conditional expectations and the observed levels of cooperation within their group. Concurrently, free riders experience psychic costs determined by the overall level of cooperation, contribution costs, and the individual's inclination to adhere to social norms. Remarkably, our simulations unveil that agents commencing with random conditional expectations and a propensity to conform to norms can adapt to lower conditional expectations and moderate their propensity to conform to norms when initial cooperation levels are high and the contribution cost is reduced. Interestingly, increasing contribution costs intensify the population's response to norm enforcement, but this doesn't always result in a corresponding increase in cooperation. By incorporating population diversity and accounting for empirical and normative expectations within our model, we gain valuable insights into the intricate relationship between conditional cooperation and the emergence of social norms.

Political orientation, trust and discriminatory beliefs during the COVID-19 pandemic: Longitudinal evidence from the United Kingdom

The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the world in many ways; for example, evidence from the United Kingdom indicates that higher rates of discriminatory behaviours against immigrants have been recorded during this period. Prior research suggests that political orientation and trust are instrumental in discriminatory beliefs against immigrants. A longitudinal study (six waves and a follow-up) was conducted in the United Kingdom during the COVID-19 pandemic (September 2020-August 2021) using convenience sampling (N = 383). The hypotheses enquired about whether political orientation predicts trust in government, trust in science and discriminatory beliefs. Multilevel regression and mediation analyses were conducted, using repeated measures nested within individuals. It was found that conservative views are associated with higher discriminatory beliefs, lower trust in science and higher trust in government. Furthermore, trust in science promotes reduction of discrimination, whereas trust in government, increases discriminatory beliefs. However, a nuance revealed by an interaction effect, shows that a positive alignment between political and scientific authorities may be required to reduce prejudice against immigrants. Exploratory multilevel mediation showed that trust is a mediator between political orientation and discriminatory beliefs.

Demographic and psychometric predictors associated with engagement in risk-associated alternative healthcare behaviours

This paper builds on prior work exploring the use of risk-associated alternative healthcare (RAAH) in Canada. RAAH uptake was surveyed to explore the characteristics of adult RAAH users and the value of established psychometric instruments previously used in alternative healthcare studies in predicting RAAH behaviours: the Control Beliefs Inventory (CBI), the Reward Responsiveness Behavioural Activation System (RBAS) scale, the Positive Attitudes to Science (PAS) scale, the Satisfaction with Orthodox Medicine (SOM) scale, and the brief version of the Susceptibility to Persuasion-II (StP-II-B) scale. Findings suggest RAAH is influenced by gender, age, income, education, employment, chronic illness status, and ethnicity. Engagement in some form of RAAH was common (around 40%) and the most common types of RAAH use reported were physical manipulation and herbal/nutritional supplement use. Other higher-risk AH activities (such as use of toxins and physically invasive procedures) were also reported by about 5% of respondents. The StP-II-B and PAS instruments were predictive of the likelihood of engagement in RAAH behaviours, as illustrated by higher risk tolerance, desire for novelty, positive attitude to advertising and social influence, and positive beliefs about science. The CBI, RBAS, and SOM instruments were not predictive overall. However, the CBI and SOM instruments were predictive of engagement with physical manipulative RAAH activities, while the RBAS was predictive of herbal/nutritional RAAH engagement. These findings can help inform health professionals' understanding of public health-seeking behaviours with respect to risk.

Hidden faces, altered perceptions: the impact of face masks on interpersonal perception

The pandemic has made wearing masks commonplace, prompting researchers to investigate their effects on interpersonal perception. Findings indicate masks obstruct face identification and expression recognition, with lower face cues being most affected. When judging attractiveness, masks can enhance the appeal of less attractive faces, but reduce the appeal of more attractive faces. Trust and speech perception outcomes are inconclusive. Future studies could focus on individual differences in how masks influence our perception of others.

How does the vaccine approval procedure affect COVID-19 vaccination intentions?

People's willingness to vaccinate is critical to combating the COVID-19 pandemic. We devise a representative experiment to study how the design of the vaccine approval procedure affects trust in newly developed vaccines and consequently public attitudes towards vaccination. Compared to an Emergency Use Authorization, choosing the more thorough Conditional Marketing Authorization approval procedure increases vaccination intentions by 13 percentage points. The effects of the increased duration of the approval procedure are positive and significant only for Emergency Use Authorization. Treatment effects do not differ between relevant subgroups, such as respondents who had (did not have) COVID-19, or between vaccinated and unvaccinated respondents. Increased trust in the vaccine is the key mediator of treatment effects on vaccination intentions.

Predicting coping with expectation violations: combining the ViolEx Model and the Covariation Principle

An experimental vignette study examined whether three specific situational cues predict ways of coping with violated expectations. The situational cues (consistency, distinctiveness, consensus) were derived from the Covariation Principle. The assessed coping strategies were based on the ViolEx Model-assimilation (activities to fulfill one's expectation), accommodation (expectation change) and immunization (ignoring the discrepant information). A sample of 124 adults (mean age = 23.60 years; 49.19 percent psychology students) were randomly assigned to an experimental and control condition. Participants of the experimental condition read several vignettes about expectation violations with systematically manipulated situational cues, while participants of the control condition received the same vignettes without such cues. Participants had to rate the usefulness of each coping strategy per vignette. The situational cues mostly led to response shifts in coping tendencies: Situations with low consistency cues mostly led to immunization, whereas high consistency led to assimilation in the case of high distinctiveness and to accommodation in the case of low distinctiveness. Consensus cues only played a minor part in the coping process. The results show that situational characteristics influence people's coping behavior, regardless of their dispositional preferences for certain coping strategies.

Trust in science and belief in misinformation mediate the effects of political orientation on vaccine hesitancy and intention to be vaccinated

In previous studies, anti-vaccination attitudes have been attributed either to far-right voters or to both far-left and far-right voters. The present study investigated the associations of political orientation with vaccine hesitancy and intention to be vaccinated against COVID-19, and the potential mediating roles of trust in science and belief in misinformation. A total of 750 Italian respondents completed an online questionnaire in the period between the second and the third wave of COVID-19 (from 9th March to 9th May 2021). The results showed that political orientation had both direct and indirect associations with vaccine hesitancy and vaccine intention, mediated by trust in science and belief in misinformation. Specifically, right-wing adherents were less trustful of scientists and believed in COVID-19-related misinformation more than left-wing adherents, and these two factors accounted for their higher vaccine hesitancy and reduced willingness to receive an anti-COVID-19 vaccination. Our findings are in line with the predictions of the mindsponge theory and suggest that communicative campaigns aimed at improving the rates of vaccine acceptance in right-wing adherents should be specifically focused on enhancing trust in science and reducing belief in misinformation.

Socioeconomic and risk-related drivers of compliance with measures to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection: evidence from the Munich-based KoCo19 study

OBJECTIVES

Although a growing share of the population in many countries has been vaccinated against the SARS-CoV-2 virus to different degrees, social distancing and hygienic non-pharmaceutical interventions still play a substantial role in containing the pandemic. The goal of this study was to investigate which factors are correlated with a higher compliance with these regulations in the context of a cohort study in the city of Munich, southern Germany, during the summer of 2020, i.e. after the first lockdown phase.

METHODS

Using self-reported compliance with six regulations and personal hygiene rules (washing hands, avoiding touching face, wearing a mask, keeping distance, avoiding social gatherings, avoiding public spaces) we extracted two compliance factor scores, namely compliance with personal hygiene measures and compliance with social distancing regulations. Using linear and logistic regressions, we estimated the correlation of several socio-demographic and risk perception variables with both compliance scores.

RESULTS

Risk aversion proved to be a consistent and significant driver of compliance across all compliance behaviors. Furthermore, being female, being retired and having a migration background were positively associated with compliance with personal hygiene regulations, whereas older age was related with a higher compliance with social distancing regulations. Generally, socioeconomic characteristics were not related with compliance, except for education, which was negatively related with compliance with personal hygiene measures.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that for a targeted approach to improve compliance with measures to prevent SARS-CoV-2 infection, special attention should be given to younger, male and risk-prone individuals.

Danger control and fear control during public health emergencies: Considering the roles of fear and hope in the EPPM across different levels of trust

Public health emergencies pose considerable threats to global health and safety. The control of these emergencies requires the efforts of healthcare professionals and calls for the public to take protective actions. The present study not only puts fear back in the extended parallel process model (EPPM) but also considers another similarly productive emotion: hope. We examined the mechanisms behind the effects of four cognitive perceptions on protective actions (i.e., danger control) and information avoidance (i.e., fear control). A national online survey was conducted with 1676 participants during the outbreak of COVID-19 in China from February 1 to 29, 2020. The results revealed that perceived severity and susceptibility could lead to fear, positively affecting protective actions. On the other hand, perceived response efficacy and self-efficacy induced hope, which was positively associated with protective actions but negatively associated with information avoidance. Furthermore, the mechanisms behind the relationships among cognitions, emotions, and behaviors varied across levels of trust in healthcare systems.

Moral, self-interested, and social motivation each predict compliance with social distancing rules: utilitarianism is an indirect positive predictor

BACKGROUND

Social distancing rules have proven to be essential in reducing the spread of COVID-19. However, we can optimise these rules if we identify factors which predict compliance. Thus, in this study we investigated whether compliance with distancing rules is predicted by whether an individual is motivated by moral, self-interested, or social reasons. We also investigated the impact of an individual's utilitarian orientation both on compliance itself and on reasons for compliance.

METHODS

Our sample consisted of 301 participants recruited from four US states - California, Oregon, Mississippi, and Alabama - who completed an anonymous online survey. Six vignettes describing hypothetical social distancing rules were developed for the study. Participants indicated (i) how likely they were to violate each hypothetical distancing rule, (ii) how morally wrong violating each rule would be, (iii) how much risk of contracting COVID-19 they would tolerate in order to violate each rule, and (iv) how much social condemnation they would tolerate in order to violate each rule. Based on these responses, we gauged each participant's overall degree of compliance with social distancing rules as well as the extent to which each participant's compliance is motivated by moral, self-interested, and social reasons. We also measured other variables that could affect compliance including personality, level of religiosity, and inclination to engage in utilitarian reasoning. Multiple regression and exploratory structural equation modelling were used to determine predictors of compliance with social distancing rules.

RESULTS

We found that moral, self-interested, and social motivation each positively predicted compliance, with self-interested motivation being the strongest predictor. Furthermore, utilitarian orientation indirectly predicted compliance, with moral, self-interested, and social motivation as positive mediating factors. No controlled covariates (personality factors, religiosity, political orientation, or other background variables) predicted compliance.

CONCLUSION

These findings have implications not only for the design of social distancing rules but also for efforts to ensure vaccine uptake. Governments need to consider how to harness moral, self-interested, and social motivation to promote compliance, perhaps by co-opting utilitarian reasoning, which positively influences these motivational forces.

The roles of social norms and leadership in health communication in the context of COVID-19

The global struggle with the COVID-19 pandemic has lasted for almost three years. Although national and local leaders have often called on the public to comply with preventive measures through health communication, large sections of society sometimes violated precautions and did not adequately follow these calls. We propose that social norms and leaders' identity entrepreneurship characteristics could be essential in effective health communication. In line with this notion, we investigated the effects of social norm types and leadership on complying with preventive measures, the intention to be vaccinated, and prosocial behavioral tendency through a high-powered experiment that focused on three factors: leadership quality (presence/lack of entrepreneurship), descriptive norm (supportive/obstructive), and injunctive norm (supportive/obstructive). Results showed that when support for injunctive and descriptive norms was present, people tended to more readily adhere to preventive measures, get vaccinated, and engage in prosocial behavior. There was also a significant effect of the interaction between descriptive and injunctive norms on compliance with preventive measures. The compliance level was highest when both norm types were supportive and lowest when both were obstructive. The effect decreased in the discrepant norms condition, where one type of norm was supportive and the other obstructive. There is also a significant interaction between leadership and the descriptive norm, indicating that a combination of an entrepreneur leader and a supportive descriptive norm increases compliance with the preventive measure. We discussed the role of leadership and social norms in effective health communication.

Clinical pathway of COVID-19 patients in primary health care in 30 European countries: Eurodata study

BACKGROUND

Most COVID-19 patients were treated in primary health care (PHC) in Europe.

OBJECTIVES

To demonstrate the scope of PHC workflow during the COVID-19 pandemic emphasising similarities and differences of patient's clinical pathways in Europe.

METHODS

Descriptive, cross-sectional study with data acquired through a semi-structured questionnaire in PHC in 30 European countries, created ad hoc and agreed upon among all researchers who participated in the study. GPs from each country answered the approved questionnaire. Main variable: PHC COVID-19 acute clinical pathway. All variables were collected from each country as of September 2020.

RESULTS

COVID-19 clinics in PHC facilities were organised in 8/30. Case detection and testing were performed in PHC in 27/30 countries. RT-PCR and lateral flow tests were performed in PHC in 23/30, free of charge with a medical prescription. Contact tracing was performed mainly by public health authorities. Mandatory isolation ranged from 5 to 14 days. Sick leave certification was given exclusively by GPs in 21/30 countries. Patient hotels or other resources to isolate patients were available in 12/30. Follow-up to monitor the symptoms and/or new complementary tests was made mainly by phone call (27/30). Chest X-ray and phlebotomy were performed in PHC in 18/30 and 23/30 countries, respectively. Oxygen and low-molecular-weight heparin were available in PHC (21/30).

CONCLUSION

In Europe PHC participated in many steps to diagnose, treat and monitor COVID-19 patients. Differences among countries might be addressed at European level for the management of future pandemics.

Why trust? A mixed-method investigation of the origins and meaning of trust during the COVID-19 lockdown in Denmark

Trust is highlighted as central to effective disease management. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Denmark seemed to embody this understanding. Characterizing the Danish response were high levels of public compliance with government regulations and restrictions coupled with high trust in the government and other members of society. In this article, we first revisit prior claims about the importance of trust in securing compliant citizen behaviour based on a weekly time-use survey that we conducted during the first weeks of the COVID-19 pandemic (2 April-18 May 2020). Analysis of activity episodes, rather than merely self-reported compliance, both reconfirms the importance of institutional trust and nuances prior suggestions of detrimental effects of trust in other citizens. These survey-based results are further augmented through thematic analysis of 21 in-depth interviews with respondents sampled from the survey participants. The qualitative analysis reveals two themes, the first focusing on trust in others in Danish society and the second on the history of trust in Denmark. Both themes are based on narratives layered in cultural, institutional and inter-personal levels and further underline that institutional and social trust are complementary and not countervailing. We conclude by discussing how our analysis suggests pathways towards an increased social contract between governments, institutions and individuals that might be of use during future global emergencies and to the overall functioning of democracies.

Trust, social protection, and compliance: Moral hazard in Latin America during the COVID-19 pandemic

Political trust is an important predictor of compliance with government policies, especially in the face of natural disasters or public health emergencies. During the COVID-19 pandemic, for example, multiple studies related political trust to increased compliance with mobility restrictions. Yet these findings come mostly from high-income countries where political trust and wealth correlate positively. In Latin America, both variables correlate negatively, allowing for better testing of competing explanations. Using a difference-in-differences design, we find that in Latin America wealth and, counterintuitively, low political trust predict increased compliance. To understand mechanisms, we decompose political trust and wealth into underlying predictors (social protection, corruption, and education) and reinsert them into the model. While education, as a wealth proxy, predicts decreased mobility across all periods, social protection, which was the strongest predictor of political trust, relates significantly to increased mobility, but only at the beginning of the lockdown prior to distribution of emergency support. This suggests the existence of a public health moral hazard early in the pandemic, whereby citizens who benefited previously from government benefits may have been more risk tolerant in the face of the COVID-19 threat. We interpret these findings within the context of the region's recent "inclusionary turn." Future studies should explore the distinct relationships between political trust, risk perception, and compliance, especially in low- and middle-income countries, and their implications for policy responses to national emergencies.

Providing normative information increases intentions to accept a COVID-19 vaccine

Despite the availability of multiple safe vaccines, vaccine hesitancy may present a challenge to successful control of the COVID-19 pandemic. As with many human behaviors, people's vaccine acceptance may be affected by their beliefs about whether others will accept a vaccine (i.e., descriptive norms). However, information about these descriptive norms may have different effects depending on the actual descriptive norm, people's baseline beliefs, and the relative importance of conformity, social learning, and free-riding. Here, using a pre-registered, randomized experiment (N = 484,239) embedded in an international survey (23 countries), we show that accurate information about descriptive norms can increase intentions to accept a vaccine for COVID-19. We find mixed evidence that information on descriptive norms impacts mask wearing intentions and no statistically significant evidence that it impacts intentions to physically distance. The effects on vaccination intentions are largely consistent across the 23 included countries, but are concentrated among people who were otherwise uncertain about accepting a vaccine. Providing normative information in vaccine communications partially corrects individuals' underestimation of how many other people will accept a vaccine. These results suggest that presenting people with information about the widespread and growing acceptance of COVID-19 vaccines helps to increase vaccination intentions.

Global law, policy, and governance for effective prevention and control of COVID-19: A comparative analysis of the law and policy of Pakistan, China, and Russia

Global health governance is a developing system in this complex institutional regime. The local and regional health policies sometimes challenge global health governance due to diverse discourse in various countries. In the wake of COVID-19, global health governance was reaffirmed as indifferent modules to control and eliminate the pandemic; however, the global agencies later dissected their own opinion and said that "countries must learn to live with a pandemic." Given the controversial statement, this research focuses on the strong and effective policies of the Russian Federation, Pakistan, and China. The research uses the law and governance results and newly developed policies of the three countries formed under the global health policies. The conclusion is based on the statement that in order to live with the pandemic, strong health measures are required at each level.

A cross-sectional study exploring the Covid-19 vaccination landscape in Malta through social media: An insight into experiences, attitudes, and perspectives

Background and Aims

Covid-19 vaccines were disseminated across Europe from the end of 2020. Malta had one of the fastest vaccination rollouts in Europe and by March 2022 most adults had their booster dose. The aim was to investigate adult's perspectives, experiences, and attitudes regarding vaccination in Malta.

Methods

An anonymous online survey targeting adult social media users living in Malta was disseminated through social media, with a snowball technique. Demographic information, vaccination uptake, side-effects, perceptions, and experiences were gathered through quantitative and qualitative means. Participants were sub-grouped according to their vaccination status and descriptive analysis through frequency was performed. χ 2/Fisher test testing followed by logistic regressions were performed to assess the vaccination perspectives according to vaccination status.

Results

Out of 611 participants 79.87% had the booster, 4.91% had two doses awaiting booster, 6.55% refused booster while, 8.67% refused any dose. Booster sub-group when compared to vaccine hesitant sub-group exhibited an association with the perception for the need to "continue wearing masks, maintaining physical distance and hand washing following vaccination" (odds ratio [OR]: 5.97 confidence interval [CI] 95%: 1.09-32.36 p = 0.04). Those waiting for the booster dose when compared to those refusing booster, exhibited an association with the perspective that "COVID-19 vaccine is the solution to returning to normality" (OR: 5.00 CI 95%: 1.12-22.35 p = 0.04). The commonest reason for inoculation was to protect against severe disease (63.08% CI 95%: 58.91-67.07). More pronounced booster adverse effects raised concern about future booster doses uptake. Unwillingness among anti-booster and vaccine hesitant arose among high socioeconomic background participants, with concern for vaccine safety and adverse effects.

Conclusion

Vaccine hesitancy is low yet, vaccination unwillingness even among highly educated may act as a barrier to control the pandemic. Clear, transparent public health communication which targets concerns is crucial, with unified messages from governing bodies optimizing population safety.

The distinct associations of ingroup attachment and glorification with responses to the coronavirus pandemic: Evidence from a multilevel investigation in 21 countries

While public health crises such as the coronavirus pandemic transcend national borders, practical efforts to combat them are often instantiated at the national level. Thus, national group identities may play key roles in shaping compliance with and support for preventative measures (e.g., hygiene and lockdowns). Using data from 25,159 participants across representative samples from 21 nations, we investigated how different modalities of ingroup identification (attachment and glorification) are linked with reactions to the coronavirus pandemic (compliance and support for lockdown restrictions). We also examined the extent to which the associations of attachment and glorification with responses to the coronavirus pandemic are mediated through trust in information about the coronavirus pandemic from scientific and government sources. Multilevel models suggested that attachment, but not glorification, was associated with increased trust in science and compliance with federal COVID-19 guidelines. However, while both attachment and glorification were associated with trust in government and support for lockdown restrictions, glorification was more strongly associated with trust in government information than attachment. These results suggest that both attachment and glorification can be useful for promoting public health, although glorification's role, while potentially stronger, is restricted to pathways through trust in government information.

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.

Non-pharmaceutical interventions and urban vehicle mobility in Seoul during the COVID-19 pandemic

Non-pharmaceutical interventions to control human mobility are important in preventing COVID-19 transmission. These interventions must also help effectively control the urban mobility of vehicles, which can be a safer travel mode during the pandemic, at any time and place. However, few studies have identified the effectiveness of vehicle mobility in terms of time and place. This study demonstrates the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions at both local and national levels on intra- and inter-urban vehicle mobility by time of day in Seoul, South Korea, by applying the autoregressive integrated moving average with exogenous variables. The study found that social distancing measures at the national level were effective for intra-urban vehicle mobility, especially at night-time, but not for inter-urban mobility. Information provision with emergency text messages by cell phone was effective in reducing vehicle mobility in daytime and night-time, but not during morning peak hours. At the local level, both restrictions on late-night transit operations and stricter social distancing measures were mostly significant in reducing night-time mobility only in intra-urban areas. The study also indicates when (what time of the day), where (which area within the city), and which combination strategy could be more effective in containing urban vehicle mobility. This study recommends that restrictions on human mobility should also be extended to vehicle mobility, especially in inter-urban areas and during morning peak hours, by systematically designing diverse non-pharmaceutical interventions.

Within-family influences on compliance with social-distancing measures during COVID-19 lockdowns in the United Kingdom

The compliance of adolescents, who are often unfairly portrayed as spreaders of COVID-19, with public health measures is essential for containing diseases. But does adolescents' compliance develop independently from their parents? Using nationally representative longitudinal data and cross-lagged structural equation panel models, here I study compliance with social-distancing measures of 6,752 triplets that comprise the adolescent child (age 19), their mother and their father during two national lockdowns in the United Kingdom. The results show that adolescents have the lowest and their mothers have the highest levels of compliance, and compliance generally drops over time. Moreover, mothers, whether the child lives at home or not, and fathers, when the child lives at home, have significant influence on their adolescent child's compliance. The child also influences their fathers' compliance. The parental influence on adolescents' compliance documented here suggests that family dynamics play a role in compliance with social-distancing guidelines, which may be useful for informing future health policy.

Americans' Trust in COVID-19 Information from Governmental Sources in the Trump Era: Individuals' Adoption of Preventive Measures, and Health Implications

This study analyzes differences among Americans in their trust in COVID-19 information from governmental sources and how trust is associated with personal adoption of preventative measures under the Trump administration. Based on our analysis of data from a nationally representative survey conducted in October 2020 (effective sample size after weighting = 2615), we find that Americans in general have more trust in COVID-19 information from state/local governments than from the federal government. Variables such as age, party affiliation, religiosity, and race are significantly associated with Americans' trust or lack of trust in COVID-19 information from governmental sources. During the study period, Republicans had more trust in the federal government as a COVID-19 information source than Democrats did, while Democrats had more trust in state/local governments. African Americans had the least trust in the federal and state/local governments as COVID-19 information sources, while Asian Americans had the most trust in both institutions. Trust in the state/local governments as COVID-19 information sources was positively associated with physical distancing and mask-wearing while trust in the federal government as a COVID-19 information source was negatively associated with physical distancing and mask-wearing, suggesting the distinctive roles that state/local governments and the federal government played in mobilizing Americans to adopt preventive measures.

Trust in social media and COVID-19 beliefs and behaviours

The study investigates the relationship between trust in social media and beliefs and preventive behaviours in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. We surveyed 1008 respondents in South Africa to study how trust in social media relative to other information sources predicts perceived risk and adoption of preventive behaviours. Although engagement with and trust in social media do not predict less adoption of preventive behaviours, trusting information from social media more than information from mass media or scientists is associated with less risk perception from COVID-19 and reduces the adoption of preventive behaviours (including vaccines).

Cognitive predictors of COVID-19 mitigation behaviors in vaccinated and unvaccinated general population members

BACKGROUND

Given the long-term threat posed by COVID-19, predictors of mitigation behaviors are critical to identify. Prior studies have found that cognitive factors are associated with some COVID-19 mitigation behaviors, but few studies employ representative samples and no prior studies have examined cognitive predictors of vaccination status. The purpose of the present study was to examine associations between cognitive variables (executive function, delay discounting, and future orientation) and COVID-19 mitigation behaviors (mask wearing, social distancing, hand hygiene and vaccination) in a population representative sample.

METHODS

A population representative sample of 2,002 adults completed validated measures of delay discounting, future orientation, and executive function. Participants also reported frequency of mitigation behaviors, vaccination status, and demographics.

RESULTS

Future orientation was associated with more mask wearing (β = 0.160, 95 % CI [0.090, 0.220], p < 0.001), social distancing (β = 0.150, 95 % CI [0.070, 0.240], p < 0.001), hand hygiene behaviors (β = 0.090, 95 % CI [0.000, 0.190], p = 0.054), and a higher likelihood of being fully vaccinated (OR = 0.80, 95 % CI [0.670, 0.970], p = 0.020). Lower delay discounting predicted more consistent mask wearing (β = -0.060, 95 % CI[-0.120, -0.010], p = 0.032) and being fully vaccinated (OR = 1.28, 95 % CI [1.13, 1.44], p < 0.001), while more symptoms of executive dysfunction predicted less mask wearing (β = -0.240, 95 % CI [-0.320, -0.150] p < 0.001) and hand hygiene (β = -0.220, 95 % CI [-0.320, -0.130], p < 0.001), but not vaccination status (OR = 0.96, 95 % CI [0.80, 1.16], p = 0.690) or social distancing behaviors (β = -0.080, 95 % CI [-0.180, 0.020], p = 0.097). Overall, social distancing was the least well-predicted outcome from cognitive factors, while mask wearing was most well-predicted. Vaccination status was not a significant moderator of these effects of cognitive predictors on mitigation behaviors.

CONCLUSIONS

Cognitive variables predict significant variability in mitigation behaviors. regardless of vaccination status. In particular, thinking about the future and discounting it less may encourage more consistent implementation of mitigating behaviors.

Does pro-sociality or trust better predict staying home behavior during the Covid-19?

Voluntary compliance of preventive and mitigation measures due to social concerns can play a crucial role in slowing down the spread of the Covid-19. The existing economic models for disease spread however do not direct a lot of focus on the possible role of pro-social behavior and general trust in predicting preventive behaviors amid the Covid-19. Therefore, this study analyzes whether pro-sociality and general trust measured in the short run (2020 and 2019) and in the long run (2015 and 2010) predict attitudes towards the stay home behavior and the intended stay home behavior in case the government mandates it due to the Covid-19 in the Netherlands. The results suggest that these preferences positively influence attitudes towards staying home behavior. However, trust in comparison to pro-sociality is a stable and robust predictor of stay home attitudes both in the short as well as long run. On the other hand, neither trust nor pro-sociality influences the intended stay home behavior in case the government mandates the lockdown, and it is most likely due to the timing of the survey coinciding with a significant drop in the Covid-19 infections and easing out of the lockdown restrictions by the Dutch government.

Social expectations and government incentives in Malaysia's COVID-19 vaccine uptake

High vaccination rates are integral to reducing infection and severity rates of COVID-19 infections within a community. We examine the role of social expectations in COVID-19 vaccination take-ups and its interaction with potential government actions in Malaysia. We find that individuals' expectations of others in their social groups towards vaccination predicts those individuals' vaccination registrations. Using a vignette experiment, we examine the extent of normative expectations in normalizing pro-vaccination behavior beyond an individual's reference group. We find that unless moderated by a high level of public trust, individuals prefer punitive policies as a way to increase vaccination rates in their communities.

Experts vs. policymakers in the COVID-19 policy response

We build an evolutionary game-theoretic model of the interaction between policymakers and experts in shaping the policy response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Players' decisions concern two alternative strategies of pandemic management: a "hard" approach, enforcing potentially unpopular measures such as strict confinement orders, and a "soft" approach, based upon voluntary and short-lived social distancing. Policymakers' decisions may also rely upon expert advice. Unlike experts, policymakers are sensitive to a public consensus incentive that makes lifting restrictions as soon as possible especially desirable. This incentive may conflict with the overall goal of mitigating the effects of the pandemic, leading to a typical policy dilemma. We show that the selection of strategies may be path-dependent, as their initial distribution is a crucial driver of players' choices. Contingent on cultural factors and the epidemiological conditions, steady states in which both types of players unanimously endorse the strict strategy can coexist with others where experts and policymakers agree on the soft strategy, depending on the initial conditions. The model can also lead to attractive asymmetric equilibria where experts and policymakers endorse different strategies, or to cyclical dynamics where the shares of adoption of strategies oscillate indefinitely around a mixed strategy equilibrium. This multiplicity of equilibria can explain the coexistence of contrasting pandemic countermeasures observed across countries in the first wave of the outbreak. Our results suggest that cross-country differences in the COVID-19 policy response need not be the effect of poor decision making. Instead, they can endogenously result from the interplay between policymakers and experts incentives under the local social, cultural and epidemiological conditions.

Risky business: A mixed methods study of decision-making regarding COVID-19 risk at a public university in the United States

Introduction

Until vaccines became available in late 2020, our ability to prevent the spread of COVID-19 within countries depended largely on voluntary adherence to mitigation measures. However, individual decision-making regarding acceptable COVID-19 risk is complex. To better understand decision-making regarding COVID-19 risk, we conducted a qualitative substudy within a larger Berkeley COVID-19 Safe Campus Initiative (BCSCI) during the summer of 2020, and completed a mixed-methods analysis of factors influencing decision-making.

Materials and methods

We interviewed 20 participants who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and 10 who remained negative, and analyzed quantitative survey data from 3,324 BCSCI participants. The BCSCI study enrolled university-affiliated people living in the local area during summer of 2020, collected data on behaviors and attitudes toward COVID-19, and conducted SARS-CoV-2 testing at baseline and endline.

Results

At baseline, 1362 students (57.5%) and 285 non-students (35.1%) said it had been somewhat or very difficult to comply with COVID-19-related mandates. Most-cited reasons were the need to go out for food/essentials, difficulty of being away from family/friends, and loneliness. Eight interviewees explicitly noted they made decisions partially because of others who may be at high risk. We did not find significant differences between the behaviors of students and non-students.

Discussion

Despite prevailing attitudes about irresponsibility of college students during the COVID-19 pandemic, students in our study demonstrated a commitment to making rational choices about risk behavior, not unlike non-students around them. Decision-making was driven by perceived susceptibility to severe disease, need for social interaction, and concern about risk to others. A harm reduction public health approach may be beneficial.

The dark side of belief in Covid-19 scientists and scientific evidence

We draw from an interdisciplinary literature on convictions to examine the manifestations and consequences of firmly held beliefs in Covid-19 (C19) science. Across three studies (N = 743), we assess participants' beliefs in C19 experts, and beliefs in supported and unsupported empirical evidence. Study 1 establishes the basic theoretical links and we show that an individual's belief in science on C19 is associated with dispositional belief in science and moralization of C19 mitigation measures. Our subsequent two studies show how stronger belief in C19 science influences distrust in unmasked individuals past the mandates, and greater endorsement of pandemic mitigation authoritarianism. We document the dark side that emerges when belief in C19 science extends beyond the generally desirable scientific literacy and manifests as a conviction that public health experts are the only ones who can handle the pandemic, and that even unsupported claims about C19 are supported by scientific evidence (e.g., risk of outdoor transmission is high). We also highlight our political ideology findings showing that both liberals and conservatives mis-calibrate C19 risks in different ways, and we conclude with discussing how examining the darker side of scientific beliefs can inform our understanding of people's reactions to the pandemic.

Revisiting COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy around the world using data from 23 countries in 2021

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to impact daily life, including health system operations, despite the availability of vaccines that are effective in greatly reducing the risks of death and severe disease. Misperceptions of COVID-19 vaccine safety, efficacy, risks, and mistrust in institutions responsible for vaccination campaigns have been reported as factors contributing to vaccine hesitancy. This study investigated COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy globally in June 2021. Nationally representative samples of 1,000 individuals from 23 countries were surveyed. Data were analyzed descriptively, and weighted multivariable logistic regressions were used to explore associations with vaccine hesitancy. Here, we show that more than three-fourths (75.2%) of the 23,000 respondents report vaccine acceptance, up from 71.5% one year earlier. Across all countries, vaccine hesitancy is associated with a lack of trust in COVID-19 vaccine safety and science, and skepticism about its efficacy. Vaccine hesitant respondents are also highly resistant to required proof of vaccination; 31.7%, 20%, 15%, and 14.8% approve requiring it for access to international travel, indoor activities, employment, and public schools, respectively. For ongoing COVID-19 vaccination campaigns to succeed in improving coverage going forward, substantial challenges remain to be overcome. These include increasing vaccination among those reporting lower vaccine confidence in addition to expanding vaccine access in low- and middle-income countries.

Engaging community in the translational process: Environmental scan of adaptive capacity and preparedness of Clinical and Translational Science Award Program hubs

This paper is part of the Environmental Scan of Adaptive Capacity and Preparedness of Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) hubs, illuminating challenges, practices, and lessons learned related to CTSA hubs' efforts of engaging community partners to reduce the spread of the virus, address barriers to COVID-19 testing, identify treatments to improve health outcomes, and advance community participation in research. CTSA researchers, staff, and community partners collaborated to develop evidence-based, inclusive, accessible, and culturally appropriate strategies and resources helping community members stay healthy, informed, and connected during the pandemic. CTSA institutions have used various mechanisms to advance co-learning and co-sharing of knowledge, resources, tools, and experiences between academic professionals, patients, community partners, and other stakeholders. Forward-looking and adaptive decision-making structures are those that prioritize sustained relationships, mutual trust and commitment, ongoing communication, proactive identification of community concerns and needs, shared goals and decision making, as well as ample appreciation of community members and their contributions to translational research. There is a strong need for further community-engaged research and workforce training on how to build our collective and individual adaptive capacity to sustain and improve processes and outcomes of engagement with and by communities-in all aspects of translational science.

Lockdown Efficacy in Controlling the Spread of COVID-19 May Be Waning Due to Decline in Public Compliance, Especially among Unvaccinated Individuals: A Cross-Sectional Study in Israel

Public compliance is paramount for the success of public health measures and decision making, such as lockdowns, in controlling the spread of diseases. The aim of this population-based cross-sectional study was to investigate the level of reported compliance with home isolation among the adult Israeli population (n = 940) during the first three national lockdowns, compliance with a potential fourth national lockdown if enacted, risk perception of COVID-19, vaccination uptake status, perceived effectiveness of the vaccine, and compliance with additional protective health behaviors (e.g., mask wearing and social distancing). Following widespread compliance with initial lockdowns (90.7% reported "high" or "very high" compliance), as few as 60.1% of participants indicated that they would comply with a fourth lockdown if the government decides to enact it. Non-vaccinated individuals reported the lowest levels of compliance with previous lockdowns, compared to participants who received one or two vaccines and participants vaccinated with three doses. Adjusted for gender and age, the results suggest that fearing being infected with COVID-19, perceiving the vaccine to be effective, and reporting being compliant with other health behaviors-such as mask wearing and maintaining social distance from others-are predictors of lockdown compliance. Considering the effect of pandemic lockdown fatigue, there is little support for additional lockdowns among the Israeli public, unless dramatic changes occur in the characteristics of the COVID-19 pandemic. Compliance with lockdowns is reduced among individuals who are at higher risk of contracting COVID-19, therefore rendering this non-pharmaceutical intervention even less effective in reducing the spread of the disease.

COVID-19 Conspiracies, Trust in Authorities, and Duty to Comply with Social Distancing Restrictions

In 2020 governments worldwide implemented various laws and social distancing restrictions to contain the spread of the COVID-19 virus. At the same time, conspiracy theories emerged purporting that authorities were using the COVID-19 pandemic to permanently control or harm citizens. These conspiracies undermined government responses to the pandemic and in some cases elicited civil disobedience. Using survey data from 779 Australians collected eight months into the pandemic, we examined the relationship between conspiracy beliefs, trust in the government, and duty to comply with authorities during the COVID-19 pandemic. We also examined whether trust in government moderated the association between conspiracy beliefs and duty to comply. We found that those prone to conspiracy theory beliefs and who distrusted government were less likely to comply with authorities during the pandemic. We also found that trust in the government moderated the negative relationship between conspiracy beliefs and duty to comply; high trust served as a protective factor against conspiracy beliefs. Importantly, we found that how government actions were experienced and perceived during the pandemic were important correlates of Australians’ level of trust in the government. Our findings point to the importance of governments maintaining high trust in their efficacy and approach during a crisis.

An anchor in troubled times: Trust in science before and within the COVID-19 pandemic

Researchers, policy makers and science communicators have become increasingly been interested in factors that affect public’s trust in science. Recently, one such potentially important driving factor has emerged, the COVID-19 pandemic. Have trust in science and other science-related beliefs changed in Germany from before to during the pandemic? To investigate this, we re-analyzed data from a set of representative surveys conducted in April, May, and November 2020, which were obtained as part of the German survey Science Barometer, and compared it to data from the last annual Science Barometer survey that took place before the pandemic, (in September 2019). Results indicate that German’s trust in science increased substantially after the pandemic began and slightly declined in the months thereafter, still being higher in November 2020 than in September 2019. Moreover, trust was closely related to expectations about how politics should handle the pandemic. We also find that increases of trust were most pronounced among the higher-educated. But as the pandemic unfolded, decreases of trust were more likely among supporters of the populist right-wing party AfD. We discuss the sustainability of these dynamics as well as implications for science communication.

Relationship Between COVID-19 Threat Beliefs and Individual Differences in Demographics, Personality, and Related Beliefs

Individual differences in demographics, personality, and other related beliefs are associated with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) threat beliefs. However, the relative contributions of these different types of individual differences to COVID-19 threat beliefs are not known. In this study, a total of 1,700 participants in Croatia (68% female; age 18-86 years) completed a survey that included questions about COVID-19 risks, questions about related beliefs including vaccination beliefs, trust in the health system, trust in scientists, and trust in the political system, the HEXACO 60 personality inventory, as well as demographic questions about gender, age, chronic diseases, and region. We used hierarchical regression analyses to examine the proportion of variance explained by demographics, personality, and other related beliefs. All three types of individual differences explained a part of the variance of COVID-19 threat beliefs, with related beliefs explaining the largest part. Personality facets explained a slightly larger amount of variance than personality factors. These results have implications for communication about COVID-19.

Trust in the scientific research community predicts intent to comply with COVID-19 prevention measures: An analysis of a large-scale international survey dataset

In the present study, I explored the relationship between people's trust in different agents related to the prevention of the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and their compliance with pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical preventive measures. The COVIDiSTRESSII Global Survey dataset, which was collected from international samples, was analysed to examine the aforementioned relationship across different countries. For data-driven exploration, network analysis and Bayesian generalised linear model (GLM) analysis were performed. The result from network analysis demonstrated that trust in the scientific research community was most central in the network of trust and compliance. In addition, the outcome from Bayesian GLM analysis indicated that the same factor, trust in the scientific research community, was most fundamental in predicting participants' intent to comply with both pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical preventive measures. I briefly discussed the implications of the findings, the importance of trust in the scientific research community in explaining people's compliance with a measure to prevent the spread of COVID-19.

Exploring the Role of Trust in Scientists to Explain Health-Related Behaviors in Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic

The devastating COVID-19 pandemic has cast a light on the question of why trust in scientists is important. This mixed-method study aimed to explore the study participants' trust in scientists about getting the COVID-19 vaccine. It also aimed to reveal which key sources of information participants followed about the pandemic. Participants' health-related behaviors and justifications for their behaviors as a response to the pandemic were also explored to understand how trust in scientists and sources of information played a role in the fight against COVID-19. The responses of 1233 participants across Turkey were analyzed. The findings indicated that trust in scientists and compliance with the scientists' suggested behaviors among the participants were quite high. It was also revealed that, for both trust and non-trust groups, participants questioned the reliability of information and the sources. Participants justified their behaviors mainly by referring to policies, e.g., masks, distance, and hygiene, developed and implemented with the collaboration of government, scientists, and the World Health Organization. Moreover, trust issues regarding scientists, government authorities, or other citizens were mentioned in participants' justifications. The current study also shed light on the importance of building trust through an open and healthy dialogue among scientists, government authorities, and the public to overcome the COVID-19 pandemic. The study highlighted the need for scientifically informed citizens to deal with the problems, i.e., misinformation and disinformation, in the post-truth era such as not jeopardizing effective solutions to eliminate the pandemic, e.g., taking the vaccine.