Abstract
Staying home and avoiding unnecessary contact is an important part of the effort to contain COVID-19 and limit deaths. Every state in the United States enacted policies to encourage distancing, and some mandated staying home. Understanding how these policies interact with individuals’ voluntary responses to the COVID-19 epidemic is critical for estimating the transmission dynamics of the pathogen and assessing the impact of policies. We use the variation in policy responses along with smart device data, which measures the amount of time Americans stayed home, to show that there was substantial voluntary avoidance behavior. We disentangle the extent to which observed shifts in behavior are induced by policy and find evidence of a non-trivial voluntary response to local reported COVID-19 cases and deaths, such that around 45 cases in a home county is associated with the same amount of time at home as a stay-at-home order. People responded to the risk of contracting COVID-19 and to policy orders, though the response to policy orders crowds out or displaces a large share of the voluntary response, suggesting that, during early stages of the U.S. outbreak, better compliance with social distancing recommendations could have been achieved with policy crafted to complement voluntary behavior.
Significance Statement Americans are spending substantially more time at home to reduce the spread of COVID-19. This behavioral shift is a mix of voluntary disease avoidance and policy-induced behavioral changes. Both need to be accounted for. Disentangling voluntary from policy-induced behavioral changes is critical for governments relaxing or renewing restrictions. A substantial share of the behavioral response appears to be voluntary, but this behavior was offset by strong stay-at-home orders. Local testing and rapid reporting is a first step to making better use of voluntary behavioral changes.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
Youpei Yan and Eli P. Fenichel are supported by the Knobloch Family Foundation and the Tobin Center for Economic Policy Analysis and Amyn A. Malik and Saad B. Omer are supported by the Yale Institute for Global Health. We acknowledge support from Amazon Web Service Diagnostic Development Initiative.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
An IRB approval for this study was not required.
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Author Contributions Youpei Yan and Amyn A. Malik conducted the analysis; Jude Bayham and Eli P. Fenichel designed research in consultation with Saad B. Omer, Youpei Yan, Amyn A. Malik; Youpei Yan, Amyn A. Malik and Eli P. Fenichel lead writing; all contributed to writing.
This version has been updated to include more analysis and tease out the interaction between policy responses mandating behavioral change and voluntary behavioral change.
Data Availability
Data used for this analysis are publicly available from Safe Graph, New York Times, and COVID-19 US state policy database maintained by colleagues at Boston University.
