OBJECTIVE: Applying protection motivation theory (PMT), this study explored whether the number of total COVID-19 cases/deaths and general anxiety were associated with cross-situational handwashing adherence and whether these associations were mediated by PMT-specific self-regulatory cognitions (threat appraisal: perceived vulnerability, perceived illness severity; coping appraisal: self-efficacy, response efficacy, response costs).
METHOD: The study (#NCT04367337) was conducted in March-September 2020 among 1256 adults residing in 14 countries. Self-reports on baseline general anxiety levels, handwashing adherence across 12 situations, and PMT-related constructs were collected using an online survey at two points in time, four weeks apart. Values of COVID-19 cases and deaths were retrieved twice for each country (one week prior to the individual data collection).
RESULTS: Across countries and time, levels of adherence to handwashing guidelines were high. Path analysis indicated that smaller numbers of COVID-19 cases/deaths (Time 0; T0) were related to stronger self-efficacy (T1), which in turn was associated with higher handwashing adherence (T3). Lower general anxiety (T1) was related to better adherence (T3), with this effect mediated by higher response efficacy (T1, T3) and lower response cost (T3). However, higher general anxiety (T1) was related to better adherence via higher illness severity (T1, T3). General anxiety was unrelated to COVID-19 indicators.
CONCLUSIONS: We found a complex pattern of associations between the numbers of COVID-19 cases/deaths, general anxiety, PMT variables, and handwashing adherence at the early stages of the pandemic. Higher general anxiety may enable threat appraisal (perceived illness severity), but it may hinder coping appraisal (response efficacy and response costs). The indicators of the trajectory of the pandemic (i.e., the smaller number of COVID-19 cases) may be indirectly associated with higher handwashing adherence via stronger self-efficacy.
PURPOSE: This study explored whether strictness of containment and health policies was related to handwashing adherence and whether such associations were mediated by HAPA-specified self-regulatory cognitions.
METHODS: The study (NCT04367337) was conducted among 1,256 adults from Australia, Canada, China, France, Gambia, Germany, Israel, Italy, Malaysia, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Singapore, and Switzerland. Self-report data on cross-situational handwashing adherence were collected using an online survey at two time points, 4 weeks apart. Values of the index of strictness of containment and health policies, obtained from the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker database, were retrieved twice for each country (1 week prior to individual data collection).
RESULTS: Across countries and time, levels of handwashing adherence and strictness of policies were high. Path analysis indicated that stricter containment and health policies were indirectly related to lower handwashing adherence via lower self-efficacy and self-monitoring. Less strict policies were indirectly related to higher handwashing adherence via higher self-efficacy and self-monitoring.
CONCLUSIONS: When policies are less strict, exposure to the SARS-CoV-2 virus might be higher, triggering more self-regulation and, consequently, more handwashing adherence. Very strict policies may need to be accompanied by enhanced information dissemination or psychosocial interventions to ensure appropriate levels of self-regulation.
METHODS: The observational study (#NCT04367337) enrolled 6064 adults residing in Australia, Canada, China, France, Gambia, Germany, Israel, Italy, Malaysia, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Singapore, and Switzerland. Data on handwashing adherence across 8 situations (indicated in the WHO guidelines) were collected via an online survey (March-July 2020). Individual-level handwashing data were matched with the date- and country-specific values of the 6 indices of the trajectory of COVID-19 pandemic, obtained from the WHO daily reports.
RESULTS: Multilevel regression models indicated a negative association between both accumulation of the total cases of COVID-19 morbidity (B = -.041, SE = .013, p = .013) and mortality (B = -.036, SE = .014 p = .002) and handwashing. Higher levels of total COVID-related morbidity and mortality were related to lower handwashing adherence. However, increases in recent cases of COVID-19 morbidity (B = .014, SE = .007, p = .035) and mortality (B = .022, SE = .009, p = .015) were associated with higher levels of handwashing adherence. Analyses controlled for participants' COVID-19-related situation (their exposure to information about handwashing, being a healthcare professional), sociodemographic characteristics (gender, age, marital status), and country-level variables (strictness of containment and health policies, human development index). The models explained 14-20% of the variance in handwashing adherence.
CONCLUSIONS: To better explain levels of protective behaviors such as handwashing, future research should account for indicators of the trajectory of the COVID-19 pandemic.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.Gov, # NCT04367337.