Abstract
This systematic review explores the social and psychological dynamics and consequences of COVID-19 control measures and their implications for human rights. Through a lens of social psychology, the review considers factors such as social influence, obedience, perceived control, social comparison, cognitive dissonance, propaganda, surveillance, fearmongering, incentives, coercion, persuasion, censorship, obfuscation, isolation, and rewards and punishment. By analyzing the influence of these factors on individuals and group responses to the pandemic and the manipulation of social and psychological dynamics by institutions to shape compliance, this review provides insights into the determinants that drive adherence to control measures and their negative consequences. The findings of the 13 selected studies contribute to understanding the multifaceted factors that influence compliance and inform the development of effective public health interventions to avoid consequences. The review emphasizes the importance of upholding human rights during the implementation of control measures, given the reported violations across the world. By providing insights to policymakers, politicians, health practitioners, and researchers, this review enables the formulation of strategies that promote public health while respecting human and individual rights and well-being. In conclusion, this study sheds light on the social and psychological dynamics, human rights, and implications of COVID-19 control measures, providing valuable insights for future interventions.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. The systematic review was conducted as part of the author's master's degree dissertation and was self-funded.
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:
This manuscript, a systematic review, synthesizes existing research findings and does not involve new human participant data. All studies included were assessed for adherence to ethical standards as reported in their publications. The review relied on publicly available data from studies with ethical approval by respective institutional review boards or ethics committees.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
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, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Footnotes
Competing interests: None declared.
Data Availability
This systematic review analyzes data derived entirely from publicly available sources. The findings and conclusions presented are based on a comprehensive review of peer-reviewed articles, reports, and official documents, which have been previously published and are accessible in the public domain. The review methodology, including detailed search strategies, selection criteria, and theoretical frameworks, is thoroughly outlined within the manuscript, specifically in the Methods section. Specific data extraction tables, risk of bias assessments, and narrative syntheses are provided in the Results and Discussion sections, offering full transparency on the data synthesized in this review. The databases searched during the study include ProQuest, Science Direct, PsycINFO/PsycNET, and PubMed. Due to the nature of this research as a systematic review, no primary dataset was generated. Hence, the original articles and sources can be accessed directly through the respective databases and journals in which they are published. For any queries regarding the search methodology or to request the search strategies employed (presented in the manuscript), interested researchers can contact the corresponding author. No proprietary or confidential data were used in this study. As such, there are no legal or ethical restrictions on the data, and no exemptions to the data availability policy are requested.
