ArticleBMC public health2023
COVID-19, stigma, and habituation: evidence from mobility data.
Article in BMC public health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Inferring the timing of individual mobility decisions from accommodation reservation data during the COVID-19 outbreak.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Resilience of mobility network to dynamic population response across COVID-19 interventions: Evidences from Chile.PLoS computational biology · 2025Article
- Public holidays increased the transmission of COVID-19 in Japan, 2020-2021: a mathematical modelling study.Epidemiology and health · 2024Article
- Unravelling habituation for COVID-19-related information: A panel data study in Japan.PloS one · 2024Article
- Stigma Experienced by Patients Who Recovered from COVID-19 in Post-Vaccination Period in Thailand; Prevalence and Associated Factors.Psychology research and behavior management · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe Japanese government has restricted people's going-out behavior by declaring a non-punitive state of emergency several times under COVID-19. This study aims to analyze how multiple policy interventions that impose non-legally binding restrictions on behavior associate with people's going-out. THEORY: This study models the stigma model of self-restraint behavior under the pandemic with habituation effects. The theoretical result indicates that the state of emergency's self-restraint effects weaken with the number of times.
methodsThe empirical analysis examines the impact of emergency declarations on going-out behavior using a prefecture-level daily panel dataset. The dataset includes Google's going-out behavior data, the Japanese government's policy interventions based on emergency declarations, and covariates that affect going-out behavior, such as weather and holidays.
resultsFirst, for multiple emergency declarations from the beginning of the pandemic to 2021, the negative association between emergency declarations and mobility was confirmed in a model that did not distinguish the number of emergency declarations. Second, in the model that considers the number of declarations, the negative association was found to decrease with the number of declarations.
conclusionThese empirical analyses are consistent with the results of theoretical analyses, which show that the negative association between people's going-out behavior and emergency declarations decreases in magnitude as the number of declarations increases.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.