RAPID: A Multi-Level Analysis of Social and Behavioral Responses to COVID-19

Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences - The COVID-19 outbreak represents a rapidly unfolding and important challenge to the United States and to the world at large with the potential for significant social and economic impact. Non-pharmaceutical interventions were implemented as part of a broader effort to slow the spread of the disease. U.S. citizens were instructed to increase hygiene efforts such as hand-washing and to increase social distancing by limiting contact with other people, especially in large crowds. In some states, school and business closures, as well as other forms of mandated restrictions, also began impacting people and families. Understanding the public?s response to this ongoing outbreak is vital, and social psychological and decision-science perspectives may uniquely contribute to the effectiveness of governmental and non-governmental efforts to respond effectively to further crises. This project examines predictors of behavior during the outbreak (for example, engaging in social distancing), emotional and coping responses (for example, seeking social support), and changes in social attitudes (for example, trust in public policies). The research tests the idea that both personal welfare and collective/national welfare can facilitate appropriate health behaviors. By following people over time during 2020, the study provides periodic snapshots of public responses to the outbreak as well as testing important scientific questions that will inform future public health and disaster-response interventions.

This RAPID project is centered on a four-wave longitudinal survey of a representative sample of 3,000 U.S. residents. Study participants are first contacted in March, 2020, and then again at three later time-points roughly every 12 weeks. The research is designed to provide an index of the evolving public response to the outbreak throughout the year. Threats are conceptualized as either threats to the self or threats to the national welfare. Similarly, reactions to those threats are framed as requiring personal responsibility or requiring a national response. Because the study assesses the same participants over time, the research addresses how changes in people?s circumstances predict changes in psychological and behavioral responses. One question is whether changes in concerns regarding the broader social impact predict adherence to public health advice and mandates differently than concerns about personal health impacts. The study also identifies participants? geographic location; over time, survey responses will be integrated with publicly available data to examine how local factors influence psychological responses. This will help address whether people in states and communities with greater investment in community resilience (e.g., public health funding) show better coping responses to the outbreak than in states and communities with lower investments in community resilience. The study design incorporates communication interventions at waves 2 and 3 to test the role of social norm information and shared (versus individual) responsibility on people?s willingness to follow public health guidelines and mandates. Using these longitudinal, geographic, and experimental methods, the research will test hypotheses on four broad topics: personal and social responsibility, norms and social influence, coping and emotion regulation, and impacts of the outbreak on social cohesion and conflict. The new knowledge will inform future public health and policy interventions.

This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.