Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36441720›Full record

ArticlePloS one2022

Contextual factors predicting compliance behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic: A machine learning analysis on survey data from 16 countries.

Nandor Hajdu, Kathleen Schmidt, Gergely Acs, Jan P Röer, Alberto Mirisola, Isabella Giammusso, Patrícia Arriaga, Rafael Ribeiro, Dmitrii Dubrov, Dmitry Grigoryev and 15 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2022. 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. Article
  2. Review
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

25 authors.

Nandor HajduDoctoral School of Psychology, ELTE, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary.ORCID 0000-0003-4012-4932
Kathleen SchmidtAshland University, Ashland, Ohio, United States of America.ORCID 0000-0002-9946-5953
Gergely AcsDepartment of Networked Systems and Services, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Budapest, Hungary.
Jan P RöerDepartment of Psychology and Psychotherapy, Witten/Herdecke University, Witten, Germany.
Alberto MirisolaDepartment of Psychology, Educational Science and Human Movement, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-7591-1058
Isabella GiammussoDepartment of Psychology, Educational Science and Human Movement, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-8784-8810
Patrícia ArriagaISCTE-University Institute of Lisbon, CIS-IUL, Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-5766-0489
Rafael RibeiroISCTE-University Institute of Lisbon, CIS-IUL, Lisboa, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0001-6290-3182
Dmitrii DubrovNational Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russian Federation.ORCID 0000-0001-8146-4197
Dmitry GrigoryevNational Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russian Federation.ORCID 0000-0003-4511-7942
Nwadiogo C ArinzeAlex Ekwueme Federal University, Ndufu-Alike, Abakaliki, Nigeria.ORCID 0000-0002-2531-6250
Martin VoracekDepartment of Cognition, Emotion, and Methods in Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-6109-6155
Stefan StiegerDivision Psychological Methodology, Department of Psychology and Psychodynamics, Karl Landsteiner University of Health Sciences, Krems an der Donau, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-7784-6624
Matus AdamkovicInstitute of Psychology, Faculty of Arts, University of Presov, Prešov, Slovakia.ORCID 0000-0002-9648-9108
Mahmoud ElsherifDepartment of Psychology, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-0540-3998
Bettina M J KernDepartment of Cognition, Emotion, and Methods in Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0003-1591-7236
Krystian BarzykowskiInstitute of Psychology, Faculty of Philosophy, Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland.ORCID 0000-0003-4016-3966
Ewa IlczukInstitute of Psychology, Faculty of Philosophy, Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland.
Marcel MartončikInstitute of Psychology, Faculty of Arts, University of Presov, Prešov, Slovakia.
Ivan RopovikFaculty of Education, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.ORCID 0000-0001-5222-1233
Susana Ruiz-FernandezFOM University of Applied Sciences, Essen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-1709-1506
Gabriel BaníkInstitute of Psychology, Faculty of Arts, University of Presov, Prešov, Slovakia.ORCID 0000-0002-6601-3619
José Luis UlloaPrograma de Investigación Asociativa (PIA) en Ciencias Cognitivas, Centro de Investigación en Ciencias Cognitivas (CICC), Facultad de Psicología, Universidad de Talca, Talca, Chile.
Balazs AczelInstitute of Psychology, ELTE, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary.
Barnabas SzasziInstitute of Psychology, ELTE, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Voluntary isolation is one of the most effective methods for individuals to help prevent the transmission of diseases such as COVID-19. Understanding why people leave their homes when advised not to do so and identifying what contextual factors predict this non-compliant behavior is essential for policymakers and public health officials. To provide insight on these factors, we collected data from 42,169 individuals across 16 countries. Participants responded to items inquiring about their socio-cultural environment, such as the adherence of fellow citizens, as well as their mental states, such as their level of loneliness and boredom. We trained random forest models to predict whether someone had left their home during a one week period during which they were asked to voluntarily isolate themselves. The analyses indicated that overall, an increase in the feeling of being caged leads to an increased probability of leaving home. In addition, an increased feeling of responsibility and an increased fear of getting infected decreased the probability of leaving home. The models predicted compliance behavior with between 54% and 91% accuracy within each country's sample. In addition, we modeled factors leading to risky behavior in the pandemic context. We observed an increased probability of visiting risky places as both the anticipated number of people and the importance of the activity increased. Conversely, the probability of visiting risky places increased as the perceived putative effectiveness of social distancing decreased. The variance explained in our models predicting risk ranged from < .01 to .54 by country. Together, our findings can inform behavioral interventions to increase adherence to lockdown recommendations in pandemic conditions.

Indexed as

COVID-19Communicable Disease ControlHumansMachine LearningPandemicsPhysical Distancing

Identifiers

PMID36441720
PMCPMC9704675

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.