Social Distance during the COVID-19 Pandemic Reflects Perceived Rather Than Actual Risk.
COVID-19
anxiety
interpersonal space
risk perception
social distancing
Journal
International journal of environmental research and public health
ISSN: 1660-4601
Titre abrégé: Int J Environ Res Public Health
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101238455
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
21 05 2021
21 05 2021
Historique:
received:
06
05
2021
revised:
14
05
2021
accepted:
16
05
2021
entrez:
2
6
2021
pubmed:
3
6
2021
medline:
5
6
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Interpersonal space (IPS) is the area surrounding our own bodies in which we interact comfortably with other individuals. During the COVID-19 pandemic, keeping larger IPS than usual, along with wearing a face mask, is one of the most effective measures to slow down the COVID-19 outbreak. Here, we explore the contribution of actual and perceived risk of contagion and anxiety levels in regulating our preferred social distance from other people during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy. In this study, 1293 individuals from six Italian regions with different levels of actual risk of infection participated in an online survey assessing their perceived risk to be infected, level of anxiety and IPS. Two tasks were adopted as measures of interpersonal distance: the Interpersonal Visual Analogue Scale and a questionnaire evaluating interpersonal distance with and without face mask. The results showed that the IPS regulation was affected by how people subjectively perceived COVID-19 risk and the related level of anxiety, not by actual objective risk. This clarifies that the role of threat in prompting avoidant behaviors expressed in increased IPS does not merely reflect environmental events but rather how they are subjectively experienced and represented.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34063754
pii: ijerph18115504
doi: 10.3390/ijerph18115504
pmc: PMC8196577
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Références
Cognition. 2011 Jun;119(3):448-53
pubmed: 21396630
Br J Psychol. 2021 May;112(2):433-454
pubmed: 32710656
Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2009 Mar;33(3):297-304
pubmed: 18926850
PLoS One. 2020 Dec 7;15(12):e0243023
pubmed: 33284812
Behav Res Methods. 2010 Nov;42(4):1096-104
pubmed: 21139177
Risk Anal. 2000 Feb;20(1):1-11
pubmed: 10795334
Risk Anal. 2012 Jun;32(6):957-72
pubmed: 21992607
Br J Clin Psychol. 1983 Nov;22 (Pt 4):245-9
pubmed: 6640176
Attach Hum Dev. 2004 Sep;6(3):285-304
pubmed: 15513270
J Neurosci. 2014 Mar 19;34(12):4123-34
pubmed: 24647934
Health Serv Res. 1987 Oct;22(4):537-51
pubmed: 3679842
PLoS One. 2018 Sep 6;13(9):e0203491
pubmed: 30188950
J Gerontol Nurs. 1978 Jan-Feb;4(1):40-3
pubmed: 246453
Behav Res Methods. 2009 Nov;41(4):1149-60
pubmed: 19897823
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2015 Oct;161:131-6
pubmed: 26386781
Nat Hum Behav. 2020 May;4(5):460-471
pubmed: 32355299
Iperception. 2018 Jun 13;9(3):2041669518781141
pubmed: 29977491
Int J Aging Hum Dev. 1974 Winter;5(1):3-5
pubmed: 4406534
J Soc Psychol. 1995 Jun;135(3):281-97
pubmed: 7650932
Arthritis Care Res (Hoboken). 2011 Nov;63 Suppl 11:S467-72
pubmed: 22588767
Int J Aging Hum Dev. 1981;13(1):53-60
pubmed: 7345031
J Psychosom Res. 1999 Mar;46(3):283-9
pubmed: 10193919
Nat Neurosci. 2009 Oct;12(10):1226-7
pubmed: 19718035
Int J Ment Health Addict. 2020 Jun 4;:1-17
pubmed: 32837425
Br J Soc Psychol. 2006 Sep;45(Pt 3):579-97
pubmed: 16984722
Sociometry. 1965 Sep;28:289-304
pubmed: 14341239
Am Psychol. 2020 Jul-Aug;75(5):605-606
pubmed: 32673007
R Soc Open Sci. 2020 Sep 16;7(9):200742
pubmed: 33047037
Br J Soc Clin Psychol. 1978 Jun;17(2):127-33
pubmed: 647167
Br J Health Psychol. 2010 Nov;15(Pt 4):797-824
pubmed: 20109274
Int J Ment Health Addict. 2020 Apr 27;:1-14
pubmed: 32346359
Nat Hum Behav. 2020 Jul;4(7):746-755
pubmed: 32572175
Arch Gen Psychiatry. 1964 Dec;11:651-6
pubmed: 14209746
Lancet. 2020 Jun 27;395(10242):1973-1987
pubmed: 32497510
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1969 Feb;11(2):93-7
pubmed: 5778351