Looking back at Covid-19 government restrictions: were local lockdown regions with tighter restrictions less adherent before the restrictions and more adherent after?

It is assumed that increases in Covid-19 cases are caused by people not adhering to advised individual transmission-reducing behaviours. Upon the implementation of restrictions, the hypothesis is that those individuals will change their behaviour. We aimed to retrospectively explore adherence to physical distancing before and after restrictions (e.g., lockdowns) were implemented in a region of Scotland. We assessed adherence, intention, and self-efficacy to physical distancing in a series of cross-sectional telephone surveys of a representative sample of adults in Scotland. We included data from before regional restrictions and after restrictions and examined whether regions with and without restrictions differed in adherence. A total of 1724 Scottish adults (675 men, M age = 52.79 years, SD = 17.92) participated (879 (51.0%) pre-restriction, 466 (27.0%) from a restricted region). ANOVA showed that none of the main effects (for region or time) nor the interaction effect were significant. There was a main effect of time on self-efficacy, such that self-efficacy was lower post-restriction measures (M = 4.13, SD = 0.81) compared to pre-restriction time (M = 4.22, SD = 0.79). There was no evidence that adherence was weaker before restrictions were implemented in regions with higher case rates. Nor was there evidence that imposing restrictions increased adherence. In a future pandemic, it is advisable to assess behaviour and beliefs about Covid-19, risk, and behaviours on an ongoing basis and to use that as indicators of the need for intervention even before cases rates start to go up.