[论文解读] The effect of messaging and gender on intentions to wear a face covering to slow down COVID-19 transmission

Valerio Capraro, Hélène Barcelo|arXiv (Cornell University)|May 11, 2020

COVID-19 Pandemic Impacts被引用 15

一句话总结

这项在美国进行的预注册在线实验（N=2,459）研究了不同公共卫生信息框架——针对‘你’、‘你的家人’、‘你的社区’或‘你的国家’——在新冠疫情背景下对佩戴口罩意愿的影响。研究发现，强调‘你的社区’的信息最能提升佩戴口罩的意愿；而男性在意愿上的较低水平则源于其更高的感知污名感和更低的个人风险感知，这在一定程度上解释了其较低的依从性。

ABSTRACT

Now that various countries are or will soon be moving towards relaxing shelter-in-place rules, it is important that people use a face covering, to avoid an exponential resurgence of the spreading of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19). Here we report a pre-registered online experiment (N=2,459) using a heterogenous, although not representative, sample of people living in the USA, where we test the relative effect of messages highlighting that the coronavirus is a threat to "you" vs "your family" vs "your community" vs "your country" on self-reported intentions to wear a face covering. Results show that focusing on "your community" promotes intentions to wear a face covering relative to the baseline; the trend is the same when comparing "your community" to the other conditions, but not significant. We also conducted pre-registered analyses of gender differences on intentions to wear a face covering. We find that men less than women intend to wear a face covering, but this difference almost disappears in counties where wearing a face covering is mandatory. We also find that men less than women believe that they will be seriously affected by the coronavirus, and this partly mediates gender differences in intentions to wear a face covering (this is particularly ironic because official statistics actually show that men are affected by the COVID-19 more seriously than women). Finally, we also find gender differences in self-reported negative emotions felt when wearing a face covering. Men more than women agree that wearing a face covering is shameful, not cool, a sign of weakness, and a stigma; and these gender differences also mediate gender differences in intentions to wear a face covering.

研究动机与目标

• 调查不同信息框架（针对自我、家人、社区或国家）如何影响疫情期间佩戴口罩的意愿。
• 考察佩戴口罩意愿中的性别差异及其潜在心理机制。
• 评估个人风险感知和佩戴口罩的污名化是否在性别与口罩佩戴意愿之间起中介作用。
• 评估强制佩戴口罩政策是否调节观察到的性别依从意愿差距。

提出的方法

• 通过亚马逊机械土耳其机器人招募的异质性美国样本（N=2,459）进行了一项预注册的在线实验。
• 参与者被随机分配至四种信息条件之一：威胁目标为‘你’、‘你的家人’、‘你的社区’或‘你的国家’。
• 使用标准化自评量表测量佩戴口罩的意愿。
• 通过中介分析检验个人风险感知和佩戴口罩的污名化是否解释了性别在意愿上的差异。
• 亚组分析检验了在实施强制口罩政策的县，性别意愿差距是否减小。
• 统计模型控制了人口学协变量，并依据预注册的假设检验显著性。

实验结果

研究问题

• RQ1 与其它信息框架相比，将新冠疫情威胁框架为影响‘你的社区’是否会提高佩戴口罩的意愿？
• RQ2 在佩戴口罩意愿方面是否存在显著的性别差异？若存在，哪些心理因素中介了这一差异？
• RQ3 个人感染COVID-19的感知风险在性别与口罩佩戴意愿之间关系中的中介程度如何？
• RQ4 与佩戴口罩相关的感知污名（如羞耻感或软弱感）在性别依从意愿差距中的中介作用有多大？
• RQ5 若某县实施了强制佩戴口罩政策，是否会减小佩戴口罩意愿的性别差距？

主要发现

• 将威胁框架为影响‘你的社区’相较于基线条件，提高了自我报告的口罩佩戴意愿，但与其他所有条件相比，该差异在统计上不显著。
• 男性报告的口罩佩戴意愿显著低于女性，且在强制佩戴口罩政策合法化的县，这一性别差距显著缩小。
• 男性比女性更少认为自己会严重受COVID-19影响，这种较低的个人风险感知部分中介了性别在口罩佩戴意愿上的差异。
• 男性更强烈认同佩戴口罩是羞耻的、不酷的、软弱的表现，且这种感知显著中介了性别在依从意愿上的差距。
• 研究发现一种矛盾现象：尽管官方数据显示男性受COVID-19影响更严重，但男性却感知自身风险更低，这导致了依从性下降。
• 污名化的中介作用非常稳健，男性报告的与佩戴口罩相关的负面情绪和社会不适感显著高于女性。