Factors associated with non-adherence to social distancing rules during the COVID-19 pandemic: a logistic regression analysis

Abstract

Background On March 23, 2020, the government of the United Kingdom told the British people to stay home, an unprecedented request designed to limit the spread of the COVID-19 virus and stop the National Health Service from being overwhelmed. Methods This study undertook a cross-sectional design to survey a convenience sample of 681 residents of North London on their social distancing (SD) behaviours, demographics, housing situation, politics, psychology and social support using an online questionnaire. Logistic regression was used to measure the associations between these explanatory factors and non-adherence to all SD rules and intentional non-adherence to SD rules. Results The vast majority (92.8%) of participants did not adhere to all SD rules and nearly half (48.6%) engaged in intentional non-adherence of rules. The odds of not adhering to all SD rules increased if a participant was not identified as highly vulnerable to COVID-19 [OR = 4.5], had lower control over others’ distancing [OR = .724], had lower control over responsibilities for which coming into contact with others was unavoidable [OR = .642], and if SD behaviours were reported after lockdown was first relaxed [OR = .261]. The odds of intentionally not adhering to SD rules increased if a participant had a lower intention to socially distance [OR = .468], had lower control over others’ distancing [OR = .829], had a doctoral degree compared to a master’s degree [OR = .332], a professional qualification [OR = .307], a bachelor’s degree [OR = .361] or work-related qualification [OR = .174], voted for the UK Government compared to not voting for the Government [OR = .461], perceived higher normative pressure from neighbours [OR = 1.121] and had greater support from friends [OR = 1.465]. Conclusions Non-adherence to all SD rules had a stronger association with vulnerability to COVID-19 and control over SD, whereas intentional non-adherence had a stronger association with intention and anti-social psychological factors. It is recommended that people living in high-risk environments, such as those living in houses of multiple occupancy, should be specially supported when asked to stay at home, and public health messaging should emphasise shared responsibility and public consciousness.

Who complies with coronavirus disease 2019 precautions and who does not?

“…In regions with higher proportions of essential workers and a higher population density, the adaptation to physical distancing is less intense [ 28 ]. In cross-sectional self-report surveys [ 27 , 29 , 30 ], some degree of nonadherence to physical distancing was prevalent; however, the majority of these studies used convenience samples, which makes it difficult to quantify and generalise the results to the general population and may also suffer from social desirability bias.…”

Perceived Vulnerability and Severity Predict Adherence to COVID-19 Protection Measures: The Mediating Role of Instrumental Coping

“…Individuals with different global and personal perceptions (severity and vulnerability) of COVID-19 could show different behavioral reactions toward COVID-19. Li et al ( 2020 ), Yildirim and Güler ( 2020 ), or Hills and Eraso ( 2021 ) mention that, in general, perceived susceptibility and severity of the disease seem to increase engagement and compliance with preventive behaviors toward COVID-19.…”

COVID-19 mitigation by digital contact tracing and contact prevention (app-based social exposure warnings)

“… is multiplied by 0.1 in case the infected agent is isolated. This is to account for the fact that perfect self-isolation is not realistic, but also that most violations observed are infrequent and constitute low risk activities 28 , 29 .…”