Too stringent or too Lenient: Antecedents and consequences of perceived stringency of COVID-19 policies in the United States

Abstract

In the United States, federal and local governments have attempted to contain the spread of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) by implementing a variety of policies such as stay-at-home orders and mask mandates. Perceptions can influence behaviors; therefore, it is important to understand how people perceive the stringency of COVID-19 policies, what factors shape perceived policy stringency, and whether and how policy perceptions impact the practice of prevention behaviors. With rolling-cross sectional survey data collected in the US from June to October 2020 and other external sources of data, the study examines the impact of objective risk of the pandemic, information seeking, and political ideology at the individual and the state levels on perceived policy stringency, and the impact of perceived policy stringency on prevention behaviors such as mask wearing and social distancing. The findings reveal that objective risk and political ideology are significantly associated with perceived policy stringency. The perceived policy stringency has negative associations with prevention behaviors. The findings provide important implications for the development process of compulsory public health policies during the pandemic.