Social distancing intentions to reduce the spread of COVID-19: The extended theory of planned behavior

Abstract

Background Due to the absence of a vaccine of SARS-CoV-2 virus pandemic, the most effective way to reduce transmission of the virus is by applying social distancing practices. Exploring factors that determine whether people adopt social distancing measures is, therefore, critical to reducing the spread of the virus. This study aimed to investigate people’s intentions to socially distance based on the extended Theory of Planned Behavior. Methods A questionnaire was distributed to the sample population and collected through social media online and WhatsApp groups from March 26, 2020 to March 29, 2020. There were 823 analyzed out of 1870 responses. The extended TPB variables and risk perception were measured using a 7-point scale (scored from 1 to 7). Data were analyzed using the partial least squares (PLS) structural equation modeling method. Results Study found that the factors influencing the intention to perform social distancing were subjective norms and perceived behavior control. Risk perception affected attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control. Media exposure was found to determine attitudes, subjective norms, and risk perceptions. The relationship between attitudes and intentions, and media use and perceived behavior control were not significant. The better and effective risk communication that can change the level of risk perception, raise family and religious leader as well as increase to control behavior are the keys to people’s perform social distancing. Results from a multigroup analysis revealed that younger individuals showed a stronger relationship between the influence of risk perception and PBC and media use on risk perception. The predictive strength of subjective norms from risk perception and risk perception from media use was more strongly associated with rural populations. Conclusions The results of study provide an initial understanding of the level of the public’s risk perception to reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2. Findings also revealed the role of media use in determining risk perception, attitudes and subjective norms and, in turn, change people’s intention to socially distance. This study may add to the literature of behavioral changes in pandemic and provide a framework for both policymakers and practitioners to formulate effective interventions in the future.

Social cognition theories and behavior change in COVID-19: A conceptual review

“…General trends from this research suggest that beliefs about utility such as attitudes and response efficacy (e.g., Clark et al, 2020 ; Rabin & Dutra, 2021 ; Yu et al, 2021 ), normative beliefs such as subjective and descriptive norms (e.g., Das et al, 2021 ; Gibson et al, 2021 ; Peterson et al, 2021 ), and beliefs about capacity such as self-efficacy and perceived behavioral control (e.g., Adiyoso & Wilopo, 2021 ; Das et al, 2021 ; Norman et al, 2020 ) account for unique variance in intentions or behavior in these behavioral contexts. Beliefs about threat or risk from COVID-19, such as risk perceptions or perceived severity and susceptibility, have also been shown to have unique effects on intentions and behavior for these behaviors (e.g., Betsch et al, 2021 ; Vandrevala et al, 2022 ), but effect sizes tend to be modest by comparison, or even non-significant, when included as predictors in parallel other theory constructs ( Adiyoso & Wilopo, 2021 ; Derksen et al, 2020 ; Hamilton, Smith, et al, 2020 ; Rabin & Dutra, 2021 ). This is consistent with research indicating that beliefs reflecting behavioral engagement tend to account for substantially more variance in intention and behavior than beliefs about risk from the conditions they are purported to prevent ( Hagger & Orbell, 2021 ) – likely a consequence of the close correspondence between the measures of the beliefs and the behavior, but also because decisions to engage in these preventive behaviors is seldom focused solely on risk reduction.…”

“…The demonstrated efficacy of social cognition theories in accounting for behavior provides impetus for their application to predict COVID-19 preventive behaviors. Specifically, leading social cognition theories have been adopted to predict intention toward, and actual participation in, general COVID-19 preventive behaviors (e.g., Clark, Davila, Regis, & Kraus, 2020 ; Norman et al, 2020 ; Peterson, Helweg-Larsen, & DiMuccio, 2021 ; Rabin & Dutra, 2021 ), or specific preventive behaviors such as social or physical distancing ( Adiyoso & Wilopo, 2021 ; Das, Abdul Kader Jilani, Uddin, Uddin, & Ghosh, 2021 ; Gibson, Magnan, Kramer, & Bryan, 2021 ; Yu, Lau, & Lau, 2021 ), wearing face coverings (e.g., Barile et al, 2020 ; Irfan et al, 2021 ), hand hygiene (e.g., Derksen, Keller, & Lippke, 2020 ; Luszczynska et al, 2021 ), and COVID-19 testing adherence (e.g., McElfish, Purvis, James, Willis, & Andersen, 2021 ; Vandrevala, Montague, Terry, & Fielder, 2022 ). General trends from this research suggest that beliefs about utility such as attitudes and response efficacy (e.g., Clark et al, 2020 ; Rabin & Dutra, 2021 ; Yu et al, 2021 ), normative beliefs such as subjective and descriptive norms (e.g., Das et al, 2021 ; Gibson et al, 2021 ; Peterson et al, 2021 ), and beliefs about capacity such as self-efficacy and perceived behavioral control (e.g., Adiyoso & Wilopo, 2021 ; Das et al, 2021 ; Norman et al, 2020 ) account for unique variance in intentions or behavior in these behavioral contexts.…”

“…Specifically, leading social cognition theories have been adopted to predict intention toward, and actual participation in, general COVID-19 preventive behaviors (e.g., Clark, Davila, Regis, & Kraus, 2020 ; Norman et al, 2020 ; Peterson, Helweg-Larsen, & DiMuccio, 2021 ; Rabin & Dutra, 2021 ), or specific preventive behaviors such as social or physical distancing ( Adiyoso & Wilopo, 2021 ; Das, Abdul Kader Jilani, Uddin, Uddin, & Ghosh, 2021 ; Gibson, Magnan, Kramer, & Bryan, 2021 ; Yu, Lau, & Lau, 2021 ), wearing face coverings (e.g., Barile et al, 2020 ; Irfan et al, 2021 ), hand hygiene (e.g., Derksen, Keller, & Lippke, 2020 ; Luszczynska et al, 2021 ), and COVID-19 testing adherence (e.g., McElfish, Purvis, James, Willis, & Andersen, 2021 ; Vandrevala, Montague, Terry, & Fielder, 2022 ). General trends from this research suggest that beliefs about utility such as attitudes and response efficacy (e.g., Clark et al, 2020 ; Rabin & Dutra, 2021 ; Yu et al, 2021 ), normative beliefs such as subjective and descriptive norms (e.g., Das et al, 2021 ; Gibson et al, 2021 ; Peterson et al, 2021 ), and beliefs about capacity such as self-efficacy and perceived behavioral control (e.g., Adiyoso & Wilopo, 2021 ; Das et al, 2021 ; Norman et al, 2020 ) account for unique variance in intentions or behavior in these behavioral contexts. Beliefs about threat or risk from COVID-19, such as risk perceptions or perceived severity and susceptibility, have also been shown to have unique effects on intentions and behavior for these behaviors (e.g., Betsch et al, 2021 ; Vandrevala et al, 2022 ), but effect sizes tend to be modest by comparison, or even non-significant, when included as predictors in parallel other theory constructs ( Adiyoso & Wilopo, 2021 ; Derksen et al, 2020 ; Hamilton, Smith, et al, 2020 ; Rabin & Dutra, 2021 ).…”

Changes in travel behaviors and intentions during the COVID-19 pandemic and recovery period: A case study of China

“…Particularly, many scholars used TPB to study people's behaviors and behavioral intentions in the face of natural disasters and crises, for example, preparation intention for natural disasters such as earthquakes ( Ong et al, 2021 ), help-seeking intention after a natural disaster ( Shi & Hall, 2021 ), veterans' leisure behaviors ( Taff et al, 2016 ), pro-environmental behaviors after disasters ( Zhang et al, 2014 ), and the impact of climate change on pro-environmental behaviors ( Elias et al, 2019 ). After the outbreak of COVID-19, TPB has also been applied to study residents' behaviors regarding food and beverage purchases ( Li et al, 2020 ), the impact of public opinion on acceptance in social distancing ( Qazi et al, 2020 ), the impact of COVID-19 on overseas tourists' behaviors ( Han et al, 2020 ), people's willingness to visit national parks ( Seong & Hong, 2021 ), and the impact of social media reports of COVID-19 on people's willingness to travel ( Adiyoso & Wilopo, 2021 ).…”

Investigating the trade-off between self-quarantine and forced quarantine provisions to control an epidemic: An evolutionary approach

“…Quarantine, lockdowns, and other distancing restrictions may be the only way to stop a pandemic from spreading, especially if there are no vaccinations or proper medications available to treat the symptoms of infection [1] , [2] , [3] , [4] , [5] , [6] , [7] , [8] , [9] , [10] , [11] , [12] , [13] , [14] , [15] . Epidemiologists and other professionals usually define these social principles but putting them into practice can be very difficult [ 9 , 16 ].…”