Timmons Shane, McGinnity Frances, Belton Cameron, Barjaková Martina, Lunn Peter
Economic and Social Research Institute, Dublin, Ireland
School of Psychology, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
J Epidemiol Community Health. 2020 Oct 16. doi: 10.1136/jech-2020-215256.
Accurate measurement of compliance with COVID-19 guidance is important for public health policy and communications. Responses to surveys, however, are susceptible to psychological biases, including framing effects and social desirability. Our aim was to measure the effects of these biases on estimates of compliance with public health guidance (eg, hand-washing, social distancing).
We conducted two online experiments (n=1800) and varied whether questions were framed positively or negatively (eg, 'I always wash my hands…' vs 'I don't always wash my hands…'). We also varied the degree to which anonymity was assured, via a 'list' experiment.
Reported compliance, despite being generally high, was reduced by negatively framing questions and increasing anonymity using a list experiment technique. Effect sizes were large: compliance estimates diminished by up to 17% points and 10% points, respectively.
Estimates of compliance with COVID-19 guidance vary substantially with how the question is asked. Standard tracking surveys tend to pose questions in ways that lead to higher estimates than alternative approaches. Experimental tests of these surveys offer public health officials greater insight into the range of likely compliance estimates to better inform policy and communications.
准确衡量对新冠疫情防控指南的遵守情况对于公共卫生政策和宣传至关重要。然而，调查的回答容易受到心理偏差的影响，包括框架效应和社会期望效应。我们的目的是衡量这些偏差对公共卫生指南（如洗手、保持社交距离）遵守情况估计值的影响。
我们进行了两项在线实验（n = 1800），并改变问题的表述方式，使其为正面或负面（例如，“我总是洗手……”与“我并非总是洗手……”）。我们还通过“列表”实验改变了保证匿名的程度。
尽管报告的遵守率总体较高，但通过负面表述问题和使用列表实验技术增加匿名性，遵守率有所降低。效应量很大：遵守情况估计值分别降低了多达17个百分点和10个百分点。
对新冠疫情防控指南遵守情况的估计会因问题的提问方式而有很大差异。标准跟踪调查提出问题的方式往往会导致比其他方法更高的估计值。对这些调查进行实验测试能让公共卫生官员更深入了解可能的遵守情况估计范围，从而更好地为政策和宣传提供信息。
