Global Health Literacy Academy, Denmark.
University of Education Freiburg, Germany.
Glob Health Promot. 2021 Mar;28(1):5-14. doi: 10.1177/1757975920986126. Epub 2021 Jan 24.
Amidst the COVID-19 outbreak, the term 'social distancing' received immense attention in the mainstream and social media and was embraced by governments as a universal precaution to stem the coronavirus pandemic. 'Social distancing' belongs technically to a set of non-pharmaceutical infection control actions intended to stop or slow down the spread of a contagious disease. However, several weeks into the outbreak, scholars discussed whether the term was, in fact, misleading and could be counterproductive. To study the arguments, the study design included (1) analysis of the performance of the concepts 'social distancing' and 'physical distancing' based on Google Trends (15 February-15 June 2020); (2) analysis of the arguments used in media discussions of 'social distancing versus physical distancing' in the period 15 March-15 April 2020, derived from a Google search; and (3) a scientific literature review in PubMed. The study was conducted in English. The trend analysis showed the peak and the decrease of the relative popularity of 'social distancing' and 'physical distancing' during spring 2020. The thematic analysis of Google sources yielded an overview of arguments based on nine themes with two to five sub-themes reflecting on the misleading concept, the historical perspective, the sociological perspective, the public health perspective, alternative proposals regarding the social and the physical dimensions, the distinction of terms, the political choice, and the need for rebranding. Two papers were included in the scientific literature review, which both stressed the need for a change of terminology. In conclusion, the study emphasizes that the choice of terminology matters when life-saving public health messages are designed. It is therefore recommended to rebrand 'social distancing' to 'physical distancing' to enhance clear communication during the current COVID-19 pandemic in order to prepare for future pandemics.
在 COVID-19 疫情期间，“社交距离”一词在主流和社交媒体上引起了极大关注，各国政府也将其作为阻止冠状病毒大流行的普遍预防措施。“社交距离”从技术上讲属于一套非药物性传染病控制措施，旨在阻止或减缓传染病的传播。然而，疫情爆发数周后，学者们开始讨论这个术语是否确实具有误导性，并且可能适得其反。为了研究这些论点，研究设计包括：(1) 基于 Google Trends（2020 年 2 月 15 日至 6 月 15 日）分析“社交距离”和“身体距离”这两个概念的表现；(2) 分析 2020 年 3 月 15 日至 4 月 15 日期间媒体讨论中关于“社交距离与身体距离”的论点，该论点源自 Google 搜索；(3) 在 PubMed 上进行科学文献综述。该研究以英文进行。趋势分析显示，2020 年春季“社交距离”和“身体距离”的相对流行度呈峰值和下降趋势。Google 来源的主题分析提供了基于九个主题的论点概述，其中两个至五个子主题反映了误导性概念、历史观点、社会学观点、公共卫生观点、关于社会和身体维度的替代建议、术语区分、政治选择和重新命名的必要性。科学文献综述包括两篇论文，这两篇论文都强调了术语变更的必要性。总之，该研究强调了在设计救生的公共卫生信息时，术语选择很重要。因此，建议在当前 COVID-19 大流行期间将“社交距离”重新命名为“身体距离”，以增强清晰沟通，为未来的大流行做好准备。
