Adherence to physical distancing guidance in Ireland: a nationally representative analysis from the International COVID-19 Awareness and Responses Evaluation (iCARE) study
Open accessAbstract
Background: Physical distancing measures (i.e., limiting physical contact with people outside of one’s household, maintaining a 2-metre distance between oneself and others, avoiding non-essential travel, etc.) are among the primary strategies used to prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). These measures will remain crucial during the rollout of newly developed vaccines to limit community-based spread of COVID-19 and prevent healthcare systems from becoming overburdened. Therefore, it is essential to understand the determinants of public adherence to physical distancing measures to inform current and future public health communications. Methods: As part of the International COVID-19 Awareness and Responses Evaluation (iCARE) study, a cross-sectional survey was conducted to evaluate behavioural responses to physical distancing measures in Ireland. A nationally representative sample of 1000 adults completed the survey over one week in June 2020 during Phase 2 restrictions. Participants completed measures assessing socio-demographic characteristics, theory-based psychological predictors, and physical distancing behaviours. Results: Awareness of restrictions in place at the time of data collection was high overall, as was adherence to most physical distancing measures. Participants aged 25–34 years reported the poorest adherence to maintaining a 2-metre distance from others (71.2%, versus 79–90% for all other age groups), avoiding social gatherings (42.4%, versus 52–62%) and avoiding non-essential travel (63.9%, versus 69–79%). Females were slightly more adherent than were males to most measures. Adherence also varied according to participant beliefs and COVID-19 risk category. Conclusions: These results indicate that adherence to physical distancing guidelines varies depending on the behaviour in question as well as socio-demographic and psychological factors. Although some non-adherence was evident for all physical distancing behaviours, adherence was generally high. Future interventions to improve adherence to physical distancing measures should target individual-level determinants of adherence in tandem with effective public health interventions.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Adherence to social distancing guidelines is generally lower in younger populations.
“This is consistent with previous evidence indicating that adherence to social distancing guidelines is generally lower in younger populations [23, 24].”
From Facilitators and barriers to social distancing for young people during the COVID-19 pandemic (2022) · cites this paper as [24]
The Results (Demographics: Age) report that adults aged 25–34 were least adherent to three physical-distancing measures, supporting lower adherence in one younger group. The broader claim needs qualification: adults aged 18–24 were most adherent to two self-isolation measures, and the paper reports no other notable age differences. (LLM, conf=0.85)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredOther research has indicated that social distancing adherence is lower in men.
“Other research has indicated that social distancing adherence is lower in men [24], further indicating the importance of understanding responses and behaviours among younger men.”
From Facilitators and barriers to social distancing for young people during the COVID-19 pandemic (2022) · cites this paper as [24]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
von Elm, E., Altman, D. G., Egger, M., Pocock, S. J., Gøtzsche, P. C., & Vandenbroucke, J. P. (2008) · Journal of Clinical Epidemiology · doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.11.008 · Cited by 17,893 · see citing works
von Elm, E., Altman, D. G., Egger, M., Pocock, S. J., Gøtzsche, P. C., Vandenbroucke, J. P., & Initiative, F. T. S. (2007) · Annals of Internal Medicine · doi:10.7326/0003-4819-147-8-200710160-00010 · Cited by 17,796 · see citing works
Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine
Polack, F. P., Thomas, S. J., Kitchin, N., Absalon, J., Gurtman, A., Lockhart, S., Perez, J. L., Pérez Marc, G., Moreira, E. D., Zerbini, C., et al. (2020) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa2034577 · Cited by 14,592 · see citing works
Michie, S., van Stralen, M. M., & West, R. (2011) · Implementation Science · doi:10.1186/1748-5908-6-42 · Cited by 13,697 · see citing works
Social Learning Theory and the Health Belief Model
Rosenstock, I. M., Strecher, V. J., & Becker, M. H. (1988) · Health Education Quarterly · doi:10.1177/109019818801500203 · Cited by 5,564 · see citing works
Voysey, M., Clemens, S. A. C., Madhi, S. A., Weckx, L. Y., Folegatti, P. M., Aley, P. K., Angus, B., Baillie, V. L., Barnabas, S. L., Bhorat, Q. E., et al. (2021) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(20)32661-1 · Cited by 4,616 · see citing works
Loneliness Across the Life Span
Qualter, P., Vanhalst, J., Harris, R., Van Roekel, E., Lodder, G., Bangee, M., Maes, M., & Verhagen, M. (2015) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691615568999 · Cited by 1,080 · see citing works
Gender Differences in Risk Assessment: Why do Women Take Fewer Risks than Men?
Harris, C. R., & Jenkins, M. A. (2006) · Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1017/s1930297500000346 · Cited by 843 · see citing works
Predictors of COVID-19 voluntary compliance behaviors: An international investigation
Clark, C., Dávila, A., Regis, M., & Kraus, S. (2020) · Global Transitions · doi:10.1016/j.glt.2020.06.003 · Cited by 650 · see citing works
Islam, N., Sharp, S. J., Chowell, G., Shabnam, S., Kawachi, I., Lacey, B., Massaro, J. M., D’Agostino, R. B., & White, M. (2020) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.m2743 · Cited by 601 · see citing works
Pfattheicher, S., Nockur, L., BOHM, R. M., Sassenrath, C., & Petersen, M. B. (2020) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797620964422 · Cited by 576 · see citing works
Gender differences in health information behaviour: a Finnish population-based survey
Ek, S. (2015) · Health Promotion International · doi:10.1093/heapro/dat063 · Cited by 559 · see citing works
Atchison, C., Bowman, L. R., Vrinten, C., Redd, R., Pristerà, P., Eaton, J., & Ward, H. (2021) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043577 · Cited by 379 · see citing works
Jordan, J. J., Yoeli, E., & Rand, D. G. (2021) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-97617-5 · Cited by 350 · see citing works
Glasziou, P., Sanders, S., & Hoffmann, T. (2020) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.m1847 · Cited by 330 · see citing works
Quantifying the impact of COVID-19 control measures using a Bayesian model of physical distancing
Anderson, S. C., Edwards, A. M., Yerlanov, M., Mulberry, N., Stockdale, J. E., Iyaniwura, S. A., Falcão, R. C., Otterstatter, M. C., Irvine, M. A., Janjua, N. Z., et al. (2020) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1008274 · Cited by 93 · see citing works
Bacon, S., Lavoie, K., Boyle, J., Stojanović, J., & Joyal-Desmarais, K. (2021) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2020-046127 · Cited by 44 · see citing works
Self-citationCorona Virus Outbreak: Keep Physical Distancing, Not Social DistancingPreprint
KUMAR, S. (2020) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3568435 · Cited by 14 · see citing works
Durand, H., Bacon, S., Byrne, M., Kenny, E., Lavoie, K., McGuire, B. E., McSharry, J., Meade, O., Mooney, R., Noone, C., et al. (2020) · HRB Open Research · doi:10.12688/hrbopenres.13090.2 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Self-citationDurand, H., Molloy, G. J., Kenny, E., Byrne, M., Noone, C., McGuire, B. E., O’Connor, L. L., Meade, O., McSharry, J., Lavoie, K., et al. (2020) · doi:10.17605/osf.io/jmkyc · Cited by 4 · see citing works
Self-citationiCARE Collaborator DocumentsPreprint
Lavoie, K., Bacon, S., Barrera, V., Saade, J., Deslauriers, F., Léger, C., Packwood, K., Vakambi, M. D., & Bertachas, C. (2020) · doi:10.17605/osf.io/nswcm · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Self-citationThe impact of Covid-19 restrictions on workers: Who is most exposed?Preprint
Crowley, F., Doran, J., & Ryan, G. (2020) · RePEc: Research Papers in Economics · Cited by 1 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Facilitators and barriers to social distancing for young people during the COVID-19 pandemic
Berry, E., Jenkins, C., & Allen, S. (2022) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/s12889-022-13325-3 · Cited by 19 · see citing works
“This is consistent with previous evidence indicating that adherence to social distancing guidelines is generally lower in younger populations [23, 24].”
BackgroundResultFarrell, K. D., Durand, H., McSharry, J., Meade, O., Panel, T. H. P. P. A., Kenny, E., Noone, C., O’Connor, L. L., Lavoie, K., Byrne, M., et al. (2021) · HRB Open Research · doi:10.12688/hrbopenres.13295.1 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
Self-citationHennelly, N., Lalor, G., Gibney, S., Kenny, R. A., & Ward, M. D. (2021) · HRB Open Research · doi:10.12688/hrbopenres.13336.1 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Determinants of adherence to COVID-19 preventive behaviours in Canada: Results from the iCARE StudyPreprint
Lavoie, K., Boucher, V. G., Stojanovic, J., Voisard, B., Szczepanik, G., Boyle, J. A., Bélanger‐Gravel, A., Bacon, S., & for the iCARE Study Team (2021) · medRxiv · doi:10.1101/2021.06.09.21258634 · Cited by 8 · see citing works
Self-citationDurand, H., McSharry, J., Meade, O., Byrne, M., Kenny, E., Lavoie, K., & Molloy, G. J. (2021) · HRB Open Research · doi:10.12688/hrbopenres.13357.1 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Self-citationSocioeconomic Status, Crowding, COVID-19 Perceptions, and Protective Behavior
Özden, M., Baruh, L., Cemalcılar, Z., & Kuru, O. (2023) · Health Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.5334/hpb.40 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Berry, E., Jenkins, C., & Allen, S. (2021) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/yf6hk
Facilitators and Barriers to Social Distancing for Young People During the COVID-19 PandemicPreprint
Berry, E., Jenkins, C., & Allen, S. (2022) · Research Square · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-1276231/v1
McGovern, M., Burton, E., Fanning, L. J., Killeen, G. F., O’Sullivan, K., O’Mullane, J., Fitzgerald, A. P., Byrne, M., & Kearney, P. M. (2023) · HRB Open Research · doi:10.12688/hrbopenres.13648.1
Self-citation
- Authors
- Durand, H., Bacon, S. L., Byrne, M., Farrell, K., Kenny, E., Lavoie, K. L., McGuire, B. E., McSharry, J., Meade, O., Mooney, R., Noone, C., O'Connor, L. L., O'Flaherty, K., Molloy, G. J., & The iCARE Study Team
- Affiliations
- Ollscoil na Gaillimhe – University of Galway (IE)
- Hôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal (CA)
- Université du Québec à Montréal (CA)
- Government of Ireland (IE)
- Corresponding author
- Durand, Hannah
- ORCID
- Venue
- HRB Open Research
- Publisher
- F1000 Research Ltd
- Published
- 2021-04-19
- Volume
- 4
- Pages
- 36
- ISSN
- 2515-4826 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3154358594
- Cited by
- 9
- References
- 23
- Citations by year
- 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5
- FWCI
- 3.12
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- HRB Open Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Funders
- Health Research Board & Irish Research Council (COV19-2020-097)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › COVID-19 Prevention and Impact
- Physical Sciences › Mathematics › Modeling and Simulation › COVID-19 epidemiological studies
- Social Sciences › Communication › Communication and COVID-19 Impact
- Keywords
- social distancing, COVID-19 pandemic, SARS-CoV-2, age differences, gender differences, COVID-19 risk perception, public health communication, Ireland
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
