A Network Approach to Compliance: A Complexity Science Understanding of How Rules Shape Behavior.

To understand how compliance develops both in everyday and corporate environments, it is crucial to understand how different mechanisms work together to shape individuals' (non)compliant behavior. Existing compliance studies typically focus on a subset of theories (i.e., rational choice theories, social theories, legitimacy theories, capacity theories, and opportunity theories) to understand how key variables from one or several of these theories shape individual compliance. The present study provides a first integrated understanding of compliance, rooted in complexity science, in which key elements from these theories are considered simultaneously, and their relations to compliance and each other are explored using network analysis. This approach is developed by analyzing online survey data (N = 562) about compliance with COVID-19 mitigation measures. Traditional regression analysis shows that elements from nearly all major compliance theories (except for social theories) are associated with compliance. The network analysis revealed groupings and interconnections of variables that did not track the existing compliance theories and point to a complexity overlooked in existing compliance research. These findings demonstrate a fundamentally different perspective on compliance, which moves away from traditional narrow, non-network approaches. Instead, they showcase a complexity science understanding of compliance, in which compliance is understood as a network of interacting variables derived from different theories that interact with compliance. This points to a new research agenda that is oriented on mapping compliance networks, and testing and modelling how regulatory and management interventions interact with each other and compliance within such networks. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10551-022-05128-8.

Cross-Theoretical Compliance: An Integrative Compliance Analysis of COVID-19 Mitigation Responses in Israel.

To understand the question why people obey or break rules, different approaches have focused on different theories and subsets of variables. The present research develops a cross-theoretical approach that integrates these perspectives. We apply this in a survey of compliance with COVID-19 pandemic mitigation rules in Israel. The data reveal that compliance in this setting was shaped by a combination of variables originating from legitimacy, capacity, and opportunity theories (but not rational choice or social theories). This demonstrates the importance of moving beyond narrow theoretical perspectives of compliance, to a cross-theoretical understanding-in which different theoretical approaches are systematically integrated.

Social distancing in America: Understanding long-term adherence to COVID-19 mitigation recommendations.

A crucial question in the governance of infectious disease outbreaks is how to ensure that people continue to adhere to mitigation measures for the longer duration. The present paper examines this question by means of a set of cross-sectional studies conducted in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic, in May, June, and July of 2020. Using stratified samples that mimic the demographic characteristics of the U.S. population, it seeks to understand to what extent Americans continued to adhere to social distancing measures in the period after the first lockdown ended. Moreover, it seeks to uncover which variables sustained (or undermined) adherence across this period. For this purpose, we examined a broad range of factors, relating to people's (1) knowledge and understanding of the mitigation measures, (2) perceptions of their costs and benefits, (3) perceptions of legitimacy and procedural justice, (4) personal factors, (5) social environment, and (6) practical circumstances. Our findings reveal that adherence was chiefly shaped by three major factors: respondents adhered more when they (a) had greater practical capacity to adhere, (b) morally agreed more with the measures, and (c) perceived the virus as a more severe health threat. Adherence was shaped to a lesser extent by impulsivity, knowledge of social distancing measures, opportunities for violating, personal costs, and descriptive social norms. The results also reveal, however, that adherence declined across this period, which was partly explained by changes in people's moral alignment, threat perceptions, knowledge, and perceived social norms. These findings show that adherence originates from a broad range of factors that develop dynamically across time. Practically these insights help to improve pandemic governance, as well as contributing theoretically to the study of compliance and the way that rules come to shape behavior.

For whom does deterrence affect behavior? Identifying key individual differences.

Deterrence threats are essential mechanisms for affecting behavior, yet they are often ineffective. The literature is beginning to consider individual differences underlying differential susceptibility to deterrence. The present study sampled 223 adults from Amazon Mechanical Turk and used an experimental cheating paradigm to examine the role of 3 individual differences, including morality, self-control, and rule orientation, underlying differential susceptibility to deterrence. The results indicate that deterrence threats may be more influential for people who have low moral disengagement, who possess more self-control, or who are more rule oriented. These findings indicate that important individual differences underlie susceptibility to deterrence. (PsycINFO Database Record

Explaining the enforcement gap in China: local government support and internal agency obstacles as predictors of enforcement actions in Guangzhou.

This study investigates how local government support for enforcement and internal agency obstacles explain the enforcement gap in Guangzhou, China. It was found that agency obstacles associated with insufficient resources and job ambiguity, in particular, affect enforcement officials' perceptions of enforcement difficulty. Somewhat more surprisingly, however, local government support was not found to be a significant predictor of these perceptions. In addition, this study identified four significant relationships associated with specific enforcement actions. First and second, perceptions of enforcement difficulty appear to lead to fewer inspections, but also have a weak positive effect on the frequency of fines levied. Third, poor coordination within the bureau was found to be associated with fewer violations being processed. Fourth, and contrary to expectations, local government support was found to suppress the frequency of inspections while having no significant effect on violations or fines. Overall, these findings suggest that increased local government support for the enforcement of environmental regulation in China may not necessarily lead to more rigorous enforcement, at least if enforcement rigor is measured in terms of inspections, citations and fines.