A guilt-free strategy increases self-reported non-compliance with COVID-19 preventive measures: Experimental evidence from 12 countries.


Journal

PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
2021
Historique:
received: 16 10 2020
accepted: 26 03 2021
entrez: 21 4 2021
pubmed: 22 4 2021
medline: 20 5 2021
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Studies of citizens' compliance with COVID-19 preventive measures routinely rely on survey data. While such data are essential, public health restrictions provide clear signals of what is socially desirable in this context, creating a potential source of response bias in self-reported measures of compliance. In this research, we examine whether the results of a guilt-free strategy recently proposed to lessen this constraint are generalizable across twelve countries, and whether the treatment effect varies across subgroups. Our findings show that the guilt-free strategy is a useful tool in every country included, increasing respondents' proclivity to report non-compliance by 9 to 16 percentage points. This effect holds for different subgroups based on gender, age and education. We conclude that the inclusion of this strategy should be the new standard for survey research that aims to provide crucial data on the current pandemic.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33882102
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0249914
pii: PONE-D-20-32568
pmc: PMC8059824
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

e0249914

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Références

Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2020 Nov 3;117(44):27285-27291
pubmed: 33060298
Science. 2020 Jun 5;368(6495):1063-1065
pubmed: 32439658
Lancet. 2020 Jun 27;395(10242):1973-1987
pubmed: 32497510
Nat Hum Behav. 2020 May;4(5):451-459
pubmed: 32377018
Sci Adv. 2020 Jun 05;6(23):eabc0764
pubmed: 32548274
Behav Res Methods. 2015 Dec;47(4):1237-1259
pubmed: 25410404
Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2021 Mar;42(3):375-376
pubmed: 32408917
PLoS One. 2018 Aug 14;13(8):e0201770
pubmed: 30106973

Auteurs

Jean-François Daoust (JF)

University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom.

Éric Bélanger (É)

McGill University, Montreal, Canada.

Ruth Dassonneville (R)

Université de Montréal, Montreal, Canada.

Erick Lachapelle (E)

Université de Montréal, Montreal, Canada.

Richard Nadeau (R)

Université de Montréal, Montreal, Canada.

Michael Becher (M)

IAST & IE University, Segovia, Spain.

Sylvain Brouard (S)

Sciences Po-CEVIPOF, Paris, France.

Martial Foucault (M)

Sciences Po-CEVIPOF, Paris, France.

Christoph Hönnige (C)

University of Hanover, Hanover, Germany.

Daniel Stegmueller (D)

Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, United States of America.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH