Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34540263›Full record

ArticlePsychologica Belgica2021

When, why, and how do People Deviate from Physical Distancing Measures During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Mixed-Methods Study.

Maité Van Alboom, Fleur Baert, Aline Wauters, Melanie Beeckman, Sarah Maes, Ama Kissi, Elke Veirman, Dimitri M L Van Ryckeghem, Annick De Paepe, Louise Poppe

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Psychologica Belgica, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Maité Van AlboomGhent Health Psychology Lab, Department of Experimental-Clinical and Health Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Ghent University, BE.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3883-8549
Fleur BaertGhent Health Psychology Lab, Department of Experimental-Clinical and Health Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Ghent University, BE.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7602-5859
Aline WautersGhent Health Psychology Lab, Department of Experimental-Clinical and Health Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Ghent University, BE.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9337-0531
Melanie BeeckmanPhysical Activity & Health Research Group, Department of Movement and Sports Sciences, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, BE.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7755-3581
Sarah MaesGhent Health Psychology Lab, Department of Experimental-Clinical and Health Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Ghent University, BE.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7843-1711
Ama KissiGhent Health Psychology Lab, Department of Experimental-Clinical and Health Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Ghent University, BE.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5234-9237
Elke VeirmanGhent Health Psychology Lab, Department of Experimental-Clinical and Health Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Ghent University, BE.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3072-8129
Dimitri M L Van RyckeghemGhent Health Psychology Lab, Department of Experimental-Clinical and Health Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Ghent University, BE.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4981-8896
Annick De PaepeGhent Health Psychology Lab, Department of Experimental-Clinical and Health Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, Ghent University, BE.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9366-3692
Louise PoppeHealth Promotion Research Group, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, BE.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9285-6962

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTo limit the spread of COVID-19, many countries, including Belgium, have installed physical distancing measures. Yet, adherence to these newly installed behavioral measures has been described as challenging and effortful. Based on the Health Action Process Approach (HAPA) model, this study performed an in-depth evaluation of when, why, and how people deviated from the physical distancing measures.

methodsAn online mixed-method study was conducted among Belgian adults (N = 2055) in the beginning of May 2020. Participants were recruited via an open call through email and social media platforms, using snowball sampling. Conditions wherein people deviated from the physical distancing measures were assessed by means of an open-ended question. HAPA determinants were assessed in a quantitative way.

resultsHalf of the sample reported to deviate from the measures. Further, deviation from the measures was associated with each determinant outlined by the HAPA. Findings highlight that many people deviated from the measures because of their need for social contact. The majority of the people who deviated from the measures stated that they carefully weighed the risks of their behavior.

conclusionsNeed for social contact pushed people to deviate from physical distancing measures in a deliberate manner. Potential areas for future interventions aimed at promoting adherence to physical distancing measures and enhancing psychosocial well-being are discussed.

Indexed as

COVID-19HAPAmotivation for deviationphysical distancing measures

Identifiers

PMID34540263
PMCPMC8415177

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.