“Creative Non-compliance”: Complying with the “Spirit of the Law” Not the “Letter of the Law” under the Covid-19 Lockdown Restrictions

Can Social Concern Theory Explain Quarantine-Related Misbehavior During the COVID-19 Pandemic? An Inquiry in the Urban Context of Iran

“…Recent research has begun to assess the nature and extent of COVID-19, as well as its causes and effects (e.g., Harris, 2020;Meers et al, 2021;Rosli et al, 2021). Building on this scholarship, the present study explored the utility of social concern theory in explaining why some people engage in COVID-19 misbehavior during a period of lockdown.…”

“…Therefore, criminologists anticipated that lockdowns might differentially affect crime types, with certain crimes decreasing (e.g., theft and property crime) and others increasing (e.g., cybercrime; Hardyns et al, 2022). These research questions, and others, have been subjected to empirical testing through a variety of recent studies (e.g., Harris, 2020; Leal, Kurland, et al, 2021; Leal, Piquero, et al, 2021; Meers et al, 2021; Rosli et al, 2021).…”

How vicarious experiences influence non‐compliance with COVID‐19 prevention regulations

“…However, the broken windows theory explains only non‐compliance in low‐intensity regulation environments; the mechanism of vicarious experiences on non‐compliance in high‐intensity regulation environments has not yet been thoroughly investigated. Although research has explored the circumstances and factors that influence individual non‐compliance with prevention regulation measures (Daoust, Bélanger et al., 2021; Nivette et al., 2021), only a few studies have discussed the influence of vicarious experiences on individual non‐compliance in pandemic prevention regulation (Meers et al., 2021).…”

“We've all got the virus inside us now”: Disaggregating public health relations and responsibilities for health protection in pandemic London

“…Amidst the challenges to population health protection posed by COVID-19, issues of non/compliance were presented in British media as an on-going topic of public debate. Socio-legal scholars have suggested that ‘rule-bending’ during the COVID-19 pandemic ‘is not a proxy for rule cynicism,’ as non-compliance with PH control measures is creatively rationalised and justified as falling within government guidance premised on using ‘common sense’ ( Meers et al, 2021 : 2). Hence, public non-compliance with restrictions was perceived ‘as being entirely consistent with the norms underpinning regulations – not by rejecting or supplanting these norms’ ( Meers et al, 2021 : 16).…”

“…Socio-legal scholars have suggested that ‘rule-bending’ during the COVID-19 pandemic ‘is not a proxy for rule cynicism,’ as non-compliance with PH control measures is creatively rationalised and justified as falling within government guidance premised on using ‘common sense’ ( Meers et al, 2021 : 2). Hence, public non-compliance with restrictions was perceived ‘as being entirely consistent with the norms underpinning regulations – not by rejecting or supplanting these norms’ ( Meers et al, 2021 : 16). While such accounts focus on individual calculations of risk or ‘rule-bending,’ minority constituents were instead collectivised as ‘non-compliant communities.’ As in many countries, minorities were accused of undermining the immunity of the body politic through collective non-compliance with PH control measures and vaccine ‘hesitancy’ (removed for review, 2022).…”