Abstract

In the period from May to July, the United States repealed statewide and local lockdown measures, reopened society, and became the global leader in reported infections and deaths from the coronavirus COVID-19. During this timeframe, the country saw some of the largest civil rights protests in United States history, and increasing politicization of the pandemic leading up to the Presidential elections. Throughout these events, social distancing recommendations have remained in force. However, social distancing was no longer the focus of the public health response, and was largely overshadowed by face masks – despite evidence of its effectiveness for reducing virus transmission. This study examines to what extent Americans have continued to adhere to social distancing measures across these developments, and which factors sustained adherence. Our findings, based on three waves of nationally representative and cross-sectional studies conducted in May, June, and July, show that adherence to social distancing measures declined from May to July, as did knowledge of these measures, citizens’ practical capacity to adhere to them, and the social norms for adherence. At the same time, opportunities to violate these measures have increased. However, adherence levels stabilized in July, and support for social distancing measures among Americans has remained high throughout. These findings provide important insight into what motivated Americans to adhere to social distancing measures when distancing ceased to be the focus of the public health response. It thereby identifies important directions through which public health policy could sustain or promote adherence to mitigation measures in the United States.

Highlights

  • The global COVID-19 outbreak in 2020 has made clear that the initial defense against a new deadly infectious disease requires large scale behavioral modification

  • Our research focused on five major questions: (1) To what extent have Americans adhered to social distancing measures in the period after the first wave lockdown, between May and July 2020, (2) how have the various predictors that were hypothesized to influence adherence developed during this period, (3) which of these predictors influenced adherence during this period, (4) how has the influence of these predictors on adherence changed across this period, and (5) how do the in- and decreases in the level of these predictors that occurred during this period explain the observed changes in adherence? our analysis consisted of three steps

  • analyses of covariance (ANCOVA) using parameter estimates with robust standard errors indicated that average levels of adherence among Americans declined from May to June (b = -.23, robust SE = .05, p < .001, Cohen’s d = .15), but did not change further from June to July (b = -.01, robust SE = .06, p = .797, Cohen’s d = .00)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The global COVID-19 outbreak in 2020 has made clear that the initial defense against a new deadly infectious disease requires large scale behavioral modification. Until there is a vaccine or a cure that can halt a pandemic outbreak, the only protection that people have is to ensure that the spread of the disease is minimized This entails a range of changes in basic human conduct, from things that have limited economic and social consequences, such as better hand hygiene and the adoption of face masks, to profound, costly changes such as social distancing, forced isolation, quarantine, and broader lockdowns. Such measures only work, if people effectively follow them. These included for instance deterrence where neither the threat of stricter punishment nor more certain punishment predicted compliance

Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.