Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42729443›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026

How people evaluate anti-corona measures II-Lessons for future crises from a longitudinal study and qualitative analysis.

Hendrik Godbersen, Susana Ruiz-Fernández

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

2 authors.

Hendrik GodbersenFOM Hochschule für Oekonomie and Management, Essen, Germany.
Susana Ruiz-FernándezDepartment of Psychology, Brandenburg University of Technology, Cottbus-Senftenberg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic represents an unprecedented health crisis in modern times. The pandemic itself and governmental counter-measures severely affected the individual and social lives of people around the globe. Against this backdrop, we examined how people evaluated the main anti-corona measures - restrictions on outdoor activities, tips for hygiene, and tips for mental health - with regard to the elements of the Theory of Planned Behavior (attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control) and four social spheres (close family, wider family and friends, colleagues at work, and society in general). The main objective of this research was to establish how these evaluations changed over the course of the pandemic. Additionally, we examined the evaluation of vaccinations introduced at a later stage and aimed to identify the subjective reasons for people's evaluations of these measures. Accordingly, we compared evaluations of early anti-corona measures at the beginning of the pandemic (March-April 2020;

Indexed as

COVID-19 mitigation measuresCOVID-19 pandemicCOVID-19 vaccinationcrisis managementevaluation of anti-corona measureslongitudinal study and qualitative analysis of perception of anti-Corona measuresMeans-End Theory of Complex Cognitive StructuresTheory of Planned Behavior

Identifiers

PMID42729443
PMCPMC13561983

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.