When, why, and how do People Deviate from Physical Distancing Measures During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Mixed-Methods Study.

IF 2.7 4区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Psychologica Belgica Pub Date : 2021-09-02 eCollection Date: 2021-01-01 DOI:10.5334/pb.1089
Maité Van Alboom, Fleur Baert, Aline Wauters, Melanie Beeckman, Sarah Maes, Ama Kissi, Elke Veirman, Dimitri M L Van Ryckeghem, Annick De Paepe, Louise Poppe
{"title":"When, why, and how do People Deviate from Physical Distancing Measures During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Mixed-Methods Study.","authors":"Maité Van Alboom,&nbsp;Fleur Baert,&nbsp;Aline Wauters,&nbsp;Melanie Beeckman,&nbsp;Sarah Maes,&nbsp;Ama Kissi,&nbsp;Elke Veirman,&nbsp;Dimitri M L Van Ryckeghem,&nbsp;Annick De Paepe,&nbsp;Louise Poppe","doi":"10.5334/pb.1089","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>To limit the spread of COVID-19, many countries, including Belgium, have installed physical distancing measures. Yet, adherence to these newly installed behavioral measures has been described as challenging and effortful. Based on the Health Action Process Approach (HAPA) model, this study performed an in-depth evaluation of when, why, and how people deviated from the physical distancing measures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An online mixed-method study was conducted among Belgian adults (N = 2055) in the beginning of May 2020. Participants were recruited via an open call through email and social media platforms, using snowball sampling. Conditions wherein people deviated from the physical distancing measures were assessed by means of an open-ended question. HAPA determinants were assessed in a quantitative way.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Half of the sample reported to deviate from the measures. Further, deviation from the measures was associated with each determinant outlined by the HAPA. Findings highlight that many people deviated from the measures because of their need for social contact. The majority of the people who deviated from the measures stated that they carefully weighed the risks of their behavior.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Need for social contact pushed people to deviate from physical distancing measures in a deliberate manner. Potential areas for future interventions aimed at promoting adherence to physical distancing measures and enhancing psychosocial well-being are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":46662,"journal":{"name":"Psychologica Belgica","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8415177/pdf/","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychologica Belgica","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/pb.1089","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Introduction: To limit the spread of COVID-19, many countries, including Belgium, have installed physical distancing measures. Yet, adherence to these newly installed behavioral measures has been described as challenging and effortful. Based on the Health Action Process Approach (HAPA) model, this study performed an in-depth evaluation of when, why, and how people deviated from the physical distancing measures.

Methods: An online mixed-method study was conducted among Belgian adults (N = 2055) in the beginning of May 2020. Participants were recruited via an open call through email and social media platforms, using snowball sampling. Conditions wherein people deviated from the physical distancing measures were assessed by means of an open-ended question. HAPA determinants were assessed in a quantitative way.

Results: Half of the sample reported to deviate from the measures. Further, deviation from the measures was associated with each determinant outlined by the HAPA. Findings highlight that many people deviated from the measures because of their need for social contact. The majority of the people who deviated from the measures stated that they carefully weighed the risks of their behavior.

Conclusions: Need for social contact pushed people to deviate from physical distancing measures in a deliberate manner. Potential areas for future interventions aimed at promoting adherence to physical distancing measures and enhancing psychosocial well-being are discussed.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在COVID-19大流行期间,人们何时、为何以及如何偏离身体距离措施:一项混合方法研究
导言:为限制COVID-19的传播,包括比利时在内的许多国家都采取了保持身体距离的措施。然而,坚持这些新安装的行为措施被描述为具有挑战性和努力。基于健康行动过程方法(HAPA)模型,本研究对人们何时、为何以及如何偏离物理距离措施进行了深入评估。方法:2020年5月初,在比利时成年人(N = 2055)中进行了一项在线混合方法研究。参与者是通过电子邮件和社交媒体平台公开招募的,采用滚雪球抽样的方式。通过开放式问题评估人们偏离物理距离措施的情况。定量评估HAPA的决定因素。结果:一半的样本报告偏离了测量。此外,偏离措施与HAPA概述的每个决定因素有关。调查结果强调,许多人因为需要社会交往而偏离了这些措施。大多数偏离标准的人表示,他们仔细权衡了自己行为的风险。结论:社会接触的需求促使人们有意地偏离身体距离措施。讨论了未来干预措施的潜在领域,旨在促进遵守身体距离措施和加强社会心理健康。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Psychologica Belgica
Psychologica Belgica PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
5.00%
发文量
22
审稿时长
4 weeks
期刊最新文献
Harnessing Available Evidence in Single-Case Experimental Studies: The Use of Multilevel Meta-Analysis. The Brief Experiential Avoidance Questionnaire: Validation of the French Version in Non-clinical Adults. Exploration of the Links Between Psychosocial Well-being and Face Recognition Skills in a French-Speaking Sample. Relationship Between Neurodevelopmental Areas and Difficulties in Emotional-Behavioural Variables in Children With Typical Development Under 2 Years of Age: Sex Differences. Body Aware: Adolescents' and Young Adults' Lived Experiences of Body Awareness.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1