Abstract
Social distancing measures implemented by governments worldwide during the COVID-19 pandemic have proven an effective intervention to control the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. There is a growing literature on predictors of adherence behaviours to social distancing measures, however, there are no comprehensive insights into the nature and types of non-adherence behaviours. To address this gap in the literature, we studied non-adherence in terms of counts of infringements and people’s accounts on their behaviours in a representative sample of North London residents. We focused on the following social distancing rules: keeping 2 mts. distancing, meeting family and friends, and going out for non-essential reasons.
A mixed-methods explanatory sequential design was used comprising an online survey (1st – 31st May 2020) followed by semi-structured in-depth interviews held with a purposive sample of survey respondents (5th August – 21st September 2020). A negative binomial regression model (quantitative) and Framework Analysis (qualitative) were undertaken.
681 individuals completed the survey, and 30 individuals were interviewed. We integrated survey and interview findings following three levels of the Social Ecological model: individual, interpersonal and community levels. We identified non-adherence behaviours as unintentional (barriers beyond individual’s control) and intentional (deliberate decision). Unintentional adherence was associated with and reported as emotional inability to stay at home, lack of controllability in keeping 2 mts. distancing, social responsibility towards the community and feeling low risk. Intentional non-adherence included individual risk assessment and decision-making on the extent to following the rules, support from friends, and perceived lack of adherence in the local area. Our findings indicate that unintentional and intentional non-adherence should be improved by Government partnerships with local communities to build trust in social distancing measures; tailored messaging to young adults emphasising the need of protecting others whilst clarifying the risk of transmission; and ensuring COVID-secured environments by working with environmental health officers.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by the Transformation Fund (Higher Education Innovation Fund), London Metropolitan University.
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:
Ethical approval for this study was granted by London Metropolitan University Research Ethics Committee (reference: GSBL200401).
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
Data Availability
The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
