Your browser doesn't support javascript.
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 47
Filter
1.
PLoS One ; 17(2): e0263039, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1793535

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Distrust, and more broadly, public perception of government's handling of a crisis, has been a widely studied topic within health crisis research and suggests that these perceptions are significantly associated with the behavior of its citizens. PURPOSE: To understand which aspects of the public's perception of government handling of the COVID-19 pandemic predicted engagement of protective behaviors among older adults, who are the most vulnerable to COVID-19. METHODS: Participants were recruited from an ongoing biopsychosocial study on aging amongst community-dwelling older adults. There were two rounds of data collection, during the national lockdown and post-lockdown. The average length of follow-up was 5.88 months. N = 421 completed the first round of data collection and N = 318 subsequently completed the second round of questionnaires. RESULTS: During the lockdown, perceptions that pandemic-related measures in place were sufficient, effective, timely, provided a sense of safety, important information was easily accessible, and government handling of the pandemic could be trusted, were found to significantly predict engagement in protective behaviors. During post-lockdown, only perceptions that measures in place were sufficient, provided a sense of safety, and important information was easily accessible, remained significant predictors. The perception that COVID-19 measures were clear and easy to understand now became a significant predictor. CONCLUSIONS: Public perceptions of government handling of the pandemic predicted engagement in protective behaviors but were less important during post-lockdown. To effectively engage older adults in protective behavior, our findings suggest for pandemic-related information to be accessible, introducing timely safety measures, and having easy-to-understand instructions for nuanced measures.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Crew Resource Management, Healthcare/methods , Trust/psychology , Aged , Communicable Disease Control , Female , Government , Government Programs/trends , Humans , Independent Living/psychology , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged , Pandemics , Perception , SARS-CoV-2 , Singapore/epidemiology , Surveys and Questionnaires
3.
Patient Educ Couns ; 105(7): 2096-2102, 2022 Jul.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1676877

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to investigate how trust in healthcare providers, public health agencies, politicians, and pharmaceutical companies shaped people's attitudes and behavioral intention associated with COVID-19 vaccination, directly and indirectly via the mediation of vaccine evaluation and emotions. METHODS: A two-wave longitudinal survey (N = 534) was employed in late 2020 and early 2021 to assess the direct and indirect relationships between trust on people's attitude toward the COVID-19 vaccine, vaccination intention, and actual vaccine uptake. RESULTS: Results show that trust was positively associated with attitude toward the COVID-19 vaccines and vaccination intention, both directly and indirectly via the mediation of vaccine evaluation, hope, and anger. Vaccination intention also mediated trust's influence on vaccine uptake. CONCLUSION: Trust in health providers, vaccine manufacturers, and public health agencies are vital to public acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccine. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Healthcare providers and vaccine manufacturers may serve as the most effective source to communicate COVID-19 vaccine-related information. Trusted health communicators need to highlight the effectiveness and safety of the vaccine while maintaining a positive tone.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Influenza Vaccines , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Intention , Trust/psychology , Vaccination/psychology
4.
PLoS One ; 17(1): e0261726, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1651026

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: We explored public perceptions about the COVID-19 pandemic to learn how those attitudes may affect compliance with health behaviors. METHODS: Participants were Central Pennsylvania adults from diverse backgrounds purposively sampled (based on race, gender, educational attainment, and healthcare worker status) who responded to a mixed methods survey, completed between March 25-31, 2020. Four open-ended questions were analyzed, including: "What worries you most about the COVID-19 pandemic?" We applied a pragmatic, inductive coding process to conduct a qualitative, descriptive content analysis of responses. RESULTS: Of the 5,948 respondents, 538 were sampled for this qualitative analysis. Participants were 58% female, 56% with ≥ bachelor's degree, and 50% from minority racial backgrounds. Qualitative descriptive analysis revealed four themes related to respondents' health and societal concerns: lack of faith in others; fears of illness or death; frustration at perceived slow societal response; and a desire for transparency in communicating local COVID-19 information. An "us-versus-them" subtext emerged; participants attributed non-compliance with COVID-19 behaviors to other groups, setting themselves apart from those Others. CONCLUSION: Our study uncovered Othering undertones in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, occurring between groups of like-minded individuals with behavioral differences in 'compliance' versus 'non-compliance' with public health recommendations. Addressing the 'us-versus-them' mentality may be important for boosting compliance with recommended health behaviors.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Fear/psychology , Patient Compliance/psychology , Prejudice/psychology , Public Health/ethics , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Health Behavior , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pennsylvania/epidemiology , Qualitative Research , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Surveys and Questionnaires , Trust/psychology
5.
PLoS One ; 17(1): e0261145, 2022.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1613349

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: With the expansion of digital health, it is imperative to consider intervention techniques in order not to be the cause of even more social health inequalities in underserved populations struggling with chronic diseases. Telemedicine solutions for homeless persons might compensate for shortcomings in access to valuable health services in different settings. The main aim of our research was to examine the attitudes and openness of homeless persons regarding telecare on a Hungarian sample. METHODS: Quantitative survey among homeless people (n = 98) was completed in 4 shelters providing mid- and long-term accommodation in Budapest, Hungary. Attitudes regarding healthcare service accessibility and telecare were measured by a self-developed questionnaire of the research team. Telecare attitude comparison was made with data of a Hungarian weighted reference group of non-homeless persons recruited from 2 primary care units (n = 110). RESULTS: A significant fraction of homeless people with mid- or long-term residency in homeless shelters did not oppose the use of telecare via live online video consultation and there was no difference compared to the national reference group (averages of 3.09 vs. 3.15, respectively). Results of the homeless group indicate that those more satisfied with healthcare services, in general, manifest more openness to telecare. It is clearly demonstrated by the multivariate analysis that those participants in the homeless group who had problems getting health care in the last year definitely preferred in-person doctor-patient consultations. CONCLUSION: Digital health technologies offer a potentially important new pathway for the prevention and treatment of chronic conditions among homeless persons. Based on the attitudes towards telecare, initiating an on-site telecare program for mid- and long-term residents of homeless shelters might enable better care continuity. Our results draw attention to the key factors including building trust in the implementation of such programs among underserved and other vulnerable patient groups.


Subject(s)
Attitude/ethnology , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Homeless Persons/psychology , Surveys and Questionnaires/statistics & numerical data , Telemedicine/methods , Trust/psychology , Female , Homeless Persons/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Hungary , Male , Middle Aged
6.
Nat Hum Behav ; 5(11): 1528-1534, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1598409

ABSTRACT

While scholarly attention to date has focused almost entirely on individual-level drivers of vaccine confidence, we show that macro-level factors play an important role in understanding individual propensity to be confident about vaccination. We analyse data from the 2018 Wellcome Global Monitor survey covering over 120,000 respondents in 126 countries to assess how societal-level trust in science is related to vaccine confidence. In countries with a high aggregate level of trust in science, people are more likely to be confident about vaccination, over and above their individual-level scientific trust. Additionally, we show that societal consensus around trust in science moderates these individual-level and country-level relationships. In countries with a high level of consensus regarding the trustworthiness of science and scientists, the positive correlation between trust in science and vaccine confidence is stronger than it is in comparable countries where the level of social consensus is weaker.


Subject(s)
Attitude to Health , Consensus , Science , Trust , Vaccines/therapeutic use , Adult , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/psychology , COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , Female , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Humans , Male , Surveys and Questionnaires , Trust/psychology , /psychology
9.
PLoS One ; 16(11): e0258985, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1515478

ABSTRACT

Anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs among parents can reduce vaccination intentions. Parents' beliefs in anti-vaccine conspiracy theories are also related to their perceptions of other parents' conspiracy beliefs. Further, research has shown that parents hold misperceptions of anti-vaccine conspiracy belief norms: UK parents over-estimate the anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs of other parents. The present study tested the effectiveness of a Social Norms Approach intervention, which corrects misperceptions using normative feedback, to reduce UK parents' anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs and increase vaccination intentions. At baseline, 202 UK parents of young children reported their personal belief in anti-vaccine conspiracy theories, future intentions to vaccinate, and their perceptions of other UK parents' beliefs and intentions. Participants were then randomly assigned to a normative feedback condition (n = 89) or an assessment-only control condition (n = 113). The normative feedback compared participants' personal anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs and perceptions of other UK parents' beliefs with actual normative belief levels. Parents receiving the normative feedback showed significantly reduced personal belief in anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs at immediate post-test. As hypothesised, changes in normative perceptions of anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs mediated the effect of the intervention. The intervention, did not directly increase vaccination intentions, however mediation analysis showed that the normative feedback increased perceptions of other parents' vaccination intentions, which in turn increased personal vaccination intentions. No significant effects remained after a six-week follow-up. The current research demonstrates the potential utility of Social Norms Approach interventions for correcting misperceptions and reducing anti-vaccine conspiracy beliefs among UK parents. Further research could explore utilising a top-up intervention to maintain the efficacy.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Parents/psychology , Perception , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Social Norms , Trust/psychology , Vaccination Refusal/psychology , Vaccination/psychology , Adult , Awareness , COVID-19/virology , Child, Preschool , Feedback, Psychological , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Infant , Intention , Male , Surveys and Questionnaires , United Kingdom/epidemiology
10.
PLoS One ; 16(10): e0258282, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1463314

ABSTRACT

In the absence of widespread vaccination for COVID-19, governments and public health officials have advocated for the public to wear masks during the pandemic. The decision to wear a mask in public is likely affected by both beliefs about its efficacy and the prevalence of the behavior. Greater mask use in the community may encourage others to follow this norm, but it also creates an incentive for individuals to free ride on the protection afforded to them by others. We report the results of two vignette-based experiments conducted in the United States (n = 3,100) and Italy (n = 2,659) to examine the causal relationship between beliefs, social norms, and reported intentions to engage in mask promoting behavior. In both countries, survey respondents were quota sampled to be representative of the country's population on key demographics. We find that providing information about how masks protect others increases the likelihood that someone would wear a mask or encourage others to do so in the United States, but not in Italy. There is no effect of providing information about how masks protect the wearer in either country. Additionally, greater mask use increases intentions to wear a mask and encourage someone else to wear theirs properly in both the United States and Italy. Thus, community mask use may be self-reinforcing.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/epidemiology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Masks , Pandemics/prevention & control , Risk Reduction Behavior , SARS-CoV-2 , Social Norms , Trust/psychology , Adult , COVID-19/psychology , COVID-19/virology , Female , Humans , Intention , Italy/epidemiology , Male , Middle Aged , Motivation , Public Health/methods , Random Allocation , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States/epidemiology
12.
JAMA Netw Open ; 4(9): e2127582, 2021 09 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1441918

ABSTRACT

Importance: The COVID-19 pandemic has had disproportionate effects on racial and ethnic minority communities, where preexisting clinical and social conditions amplify health and social disparities. Many of these communities report lower vaccine confidence and lower receipt of the COVID-19 vaccine. Understanding factors that influence the multifaceted decision-making process for vaccine uptake is critical for narrowing COVID-19-related disparities. Objective: To examine factors that members of multiethnic communities at high risk for COVID-19 infection and morbidity report as contributing to vaccine decision-making. Design, Setting, and Participants: This qualitative study used community-engaged methods to conduct virtual focus groups from November 16, 2020, to January 28, 2021, with Los Angeles County residents. Potential participants were recruited through email, video, and telephone outreach to community partner networks. Focus groups were stratified by self-identified race and ethnicity as well as age. Transcripts were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Main Outcomes and Measures: Themes were categorized by contextual, individual, and vaccine-specific influences using the World Health Organization's Vaccine Hesitancy Matrix categories. Results: A total of 13 focus groups were conducted with 70 participants (50 [71.4%] female) who self-identified as American Indian (n = 17 [24.3%]), Black/African American (n = 17 [24.3%]), Filipino/Filipina (n = 11 [15.7%]), Latino/Latina (n = 15 [21.4%]), or Pacific Islander (n = 10 [14.3%]). A total of 39 participants (55.7%) were residents from high-poverty zip codes, and 34 (48.6%) were essential workers. The resulting themes included policy implications for equitable vaccine distribution: contextual influences (unclear and unreliable information, concern for inequitable access or differential treatment, references to mistrust from unethical research studies, accessibility and accommodation barriers, eligibility uncertainty, and fears of politicization or pharmaceutical industry influence); social and group influences (inadequate exposure to trusted messengers or information, altruistic motivations, medical mistrust, and desire for autonomy); and vaccination-specific influences (need for vaccine evidence by subpopulation, misconceptions on vaccine development, allocation ambiguity, vaccination safety preferences, the importance of perceiving vaccine equity, burden of vaccine scheduling, cost uncertainty, and desire for practitioner recommendation). Conclusions and Relevance: In this qualitative study, participants reported a number of factors that affected their vaccine decision-making, including concern for inequitable vaccine access. Participants endorsed policy recommendations and strategies to promote vaccine confidence. These results suggest that support of informed deliberation and attainment of vaccine equity will require multifaceted, multilevel policy approaches that improve COVID-19 vaccine knowledge, enhance trust, and address the complex interplay of sociocultural and structural barriers to vaccination.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines/therapeutic use , COVID-19/prevention & control , Minority Groups/statistics & numerical data , Patient Participation/statistics & numerical data , Trust/psychology , COVID-19/psychology , Female , Health Services Accessibility/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Los Angeles , Male , Minority Groups/psychology , Motivation , Patient Participation/psychology
13.
PLoS One ; 16(9): e0256159, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1398931

ABSTRACT

What influences the adoption of SARS-CoV-2 mitigation behaviors-both personal, such as mask wearing and frequent handwashing, and social, such as avoiding large gatherings and physical contact-across countries? Understanding why some individuals are more willing to change their behavior to mitigate the spread of a pandemic will not only help us to address the current SARS-CoV-2 pandemic but also to respond to future ones. Researchers have pointed to a variety of factors that may influence individual adoption of personal and social mitigation behaviors, including social inequality, risk perception, personality traits, and government policies. While not denying the importance of these factors, we argue that the role of trust and confidence has received insufficient attention to date. Our study explores whether there is a difference in the way trust and confidence in particular leaders and organizations affect individual compliance and whether this effect is consistent across different types of mitigation behaviors. Specifically, we utilize an original cross-national survey conducted during the first wave of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic (May-June 2020) to investigate how trust in scientists, medical professionals, politicians, and religious leaders and confidence in global, national, and local health organizations affects individual compliance in 16 countries/territories across five world regions. Our analyses, which control for the aforementioned factors as well as several others, suggest that trust in politicians and confidence in national health ministries have the most consistent influence on whether individuals adopt both personal and social mitigation behaviors. Across our sample, we find that greater trust in politicians is associated with lower levels of individual compliance with public health directives, whereas greater confidence in the national health ministry is associated with higher levels of individual compliance. Our findings suggest the need to understand trust and confidence as among the most important individual level characteristics driving compliance when developing and delivering messaging about the adoption of mitigation behaviors. The content of the message, it seems, will be most effective when citizens across countries trust its source. Trusted sources, such as politicians and the national health ministry, should thus consider working closely together when determining and communicating recommended health behaviors to avoid contradicting one another.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/psychology , Health Behavior/physiology , Pandemics/prevention & control , Trust/psychology , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Government , Hand Disinfection/methods , Humans , Male , Masks , Middle Aged , SARS-CoV-2/pathogenicity , Social Behavior , Surveys and Questionnaires , Young Adult
14.
PLoS One ; 16(9): e0250823, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1394537

ABSTRACT

Since the 1970s, there has been a growing interest in how individuals appropriate scientific knowledge, which has recently been reinforced by societal issues such as vaccine releases and skepticism about global warming. Faced with the health and social consequences of the mistrust of scientific knowledge, there is an urgent need for tools to measure the acceptance or rejection of scientific knowledge, while at the same time gaining a more detailed understanding of the processes involved. This is the purpose of this article. Thus, we conducted 4 empirical studies to provide a validation of the Credibility of Science Scale from the perspective of a French population, which aims to assess the credibility that individuals attribute to science and to empirically evaluate the link that may exist between the different levels of credibility attributed to science and the social representations of science. Studies 1a and 1b demonstrated good structural validity, the good fidelity (homogeneity and temporal stability), and the good criterion validity of the French version of the scale. In Study 2, we observed the same psychometric qualities of the French version of the scale. We also noted a structuring of the social representation of science based on age (Factor 1) and on the credibility attributed to science (Factor 2). Our results also raise the question of possible means of intervention to promote a better perception of science.


Subject(s)
Science , Trust/psychology , Humans , Personality Inventory , Psychometrics
16.
J Nerv Ment Dis ; 209(11): 779-782, 2021 11 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1381065

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: Public trust in the credibility of medicine and physicians has been severely tested amid the COVID-19 pandemic and growing sociopolitical fissures in the United States. Physicians are being asked to be ambassadors to the public of scientific information. Psychiatrists have an opportunity to help the public understand and accept a "new normal" during a time of such uncertainty. Using a case example, we review the impact of uncertainty and fear on scientific and medical credibility. Although the pandemic provides an opportunity for systemic change, the consequences of any change remain unknown. To help patients navigate the uncertainty, we conclude by offering four guidelines to clinicians: the public has little interest in understanding the scientific method; we need to acknowledge that we do not have all the answers; credibility and trustworthiness are linked to our ability to be trusted, believable messengers; and we can retain scientific credibility while acknowledging uncertainty.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/psychology , Physician's Role , Psychiatry/methods , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Male , Pandemics , Psychiatry/standards , SARS-CoV-2 , Trust/psychology , Uncertainty , United States/epidemiology
17.
Sci Rep ; 11(1): 17369, 2021 08 30.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1379333

ABSTRACT

Despite the widespread use of face masks to combat COVID-19, little is known about their social and behavioral consequences. To understand the impact of face masks on interpersonal trust, we designed a novel experiment to assess the causal impact of face mask use on whether individuals follow economically relevant advice from a stranger. From a survey of more than 2000 US citizens, conducted during July and August 2020, we find that almost 5% fewer individuals trust advice when it is given by someone wearing a mask than when it is given by someone not wearing a mask. While, surprisingly, health-related risks do not seem to alter the way masks affect trust, the effects of masks are particularly large among individuals whose households face economic risks due to COVID-19 and those with below-average normative beliefs about mask wearing. Our results highlight the non-health-related meaning that face masks have developed during COVID-19 and suggest that mask use undermines trust in others among a substantial share of the US population.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/psychology , Trust/psychology , Humans , Masks , Surveys and Questionnaires , United States
18.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A ; 118(29)2021 07 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1307381

ABSTRACT

During the rapid development and rolling out of vaccines against COVID-19, researchers have called for an approach of "radical transparency," in which vaccine information is transparently disclosed to the public, even if negative information can decrease vaccine uptake. Consistent with theories about the psychology of conspiracy beliefs, these calls predict that a lack of transparency may reduce trust in health authorities and may facilitate the spread of conspiracy theories, which may limit the long-term capabilities of health authorities during and after the pandemic. On the basis of preregistered experiments conducted on large, representative samples of Americans and Danes (N > 13,000), the current study contrasts the effects of vague vaccine communication with transparent communication, which discloses either positive or negative vaccine features. The evidence demonstrates that transparent negative communication may indeed harm vaccine acceptance here and now but that it increases trust in health authorities. Furthermore, the alternative of vague, reassuring communication does not increase vaccine acceptance either and leads to both lower trust and higher endorsement of conspiracy theories.


Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , Health Communication , Patient Acceptance of Health Care/psychology , Trust/psychology , COVID-19/prevention & control , Humans , SARS-CoV-2/immunology , Truth Disclosure , Vaccination/psychology
19.
Res Nurs Health ; 44(5): 776-786, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1287388

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic poses significant challenges to healthcare systems worldwide. A key consideration is the adverse psychological impact on healthcare workers (HCWs). This study aimed to investigate the variable levels of psychological distress, perceived safety, trust, and self- and collective-efficacy during the COVID-19 crisis amongst varied HCWs. A survey was disseminated to nurses, physicians, interns, and administrative and logistical staff at an acute-care hospital in Israel during the first wave of COVID-19. The survey consisted of items on a 5-point Likert scale, measuring HCW's perceptions concerning the aforementioned variables as well as demographic information. A total of 716 hospital personnel completed the survey. Nurses reported higher levels of psychological distress and lower levels of trust in the hospital's COVID-19 guidelines compared to physicians (2.3 vs. 2.0 and 3.7 vs. 4.0, respectively). Nurses and interns felt the least safe when working in the hospital. Nurses reported the highest levels of concern regarding fear of uncontrollable spread, infection, and family transmission of the virus. Interns reported the lowest levels of self- and collective-efficacy. In a regression model, the variables that predicted 32% of distress among nurses were age, gender, level of religiosity, indices of perceived safety, and self-efficacy. This study demonstrated differences in distress and perceived safety, trust, and efficacy between varied HCWs during COVID-19. This variability should be considered when designing policies to protect HCWs' wellbeing during future pandemics.


Subject(s)
COVID-19/complications , Health Personnel/psychology , Perception , Adult , Analysis of Variance , COVID-19/prevention & control , COVID-19/psychology , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patient Safety/standards , Patient Safety/statistics & numerical data , Self Efficacy , Stress, Psychological , Surveys and Questionnaires , Trust/psychology
20.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A ; 118(24)2021 06 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: covidwho-1246476

ABSTRACT

Because of the outbreak of COVID-19, most countries have implemented measures aimed at reducing the number of infected people. However, these measures only work if they are generally accepted by the public. We conducted a two-wave longitudinal survey in Switzerland (n = 1,223) to study the factors that would influence perceived risks and the acceptance of the measures. Our findings showed that people with individualistic worldviews, high general interpersonal trust, low social trust, a low level of perceived risks, and the conviction that risks other than health risks were neglected had less acceptance of the implemented measures compared with people who held the opposite views on the mentioned variables. The number of infected people declined between survey waves 1 and 2. This desired effect not only reduced people's perceived risks but also decreased their social trust and increased the conviction that other risks were neglected. Finally, the acceptance of the measures declined. Our data also support the idea that reduced risk perceptions and a decline in social trust are important drivers for the reduction in the acceptance of the measures in survey wave 2. Our results suggest that as soon as the measures attain success or the public is tired of the implemented restrictions, public acceptance declines, and it seems difficult to prolong the measures as may be desirable from an epidemiological standpoint. The importance of worldviews and trust for public acceptance of the measures further suggests the necessity of a political discussion about the implemented measures.


Subject(s)
Attitude , COVID-19/psychology , Perception , Public Health , SARS-CoV-2 , Trust/psychology , Adult , Aged , COVID-19/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged , Switzerland/epidemiology
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL