IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-03244320.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A guilt-free strategy increases self-reported non-compliance with COVID-19 preventive measures: Experimental evidence from 12 countries

Author

Listed:
  • Jean-François Daoust

    (Unknown)

  • Eric Bélanger

    (Unknown)

  • Ruth Dassonneville

    (Unknown)

  • Erick Lachapelle

    (Unknown)

  • Richard Nadeau

    (Unknown)

  • Michael Becher

    (IAST - Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse)

  • Sylvain Brouard

    (Unknown)

  • Martial Foucault

    (Unknown)

  • Christoph Hönninge

    (Unknown)

  • Daniel Stegmueller

    (Unknown)

Abstract

Studies of citizens' compliance with COVID-19 preventive measures routinely rely on survey data. While such data are essential, public health restrictions provide clear signals of what is socially desirable in this context, creating a potential source of response bias in self-reported measures of compliance. In this research, we examine whether the results of a guilt-free strategy recently proposed to lessen this constraint are generalizable across twelve countries, and whether the treatment effect varies across subgroups. Our findings show that the guilt-free strategy is a useful tool in every country included, increasing respondents' proclivity to report non-compliance by 9 to 16 percentage points. This effect holds for different subgroups based on gender, age and education. We conclude that the inclusion of this strategy should be the new standard for survey research that aims to provide crucial data on the current pandemic.

Suggested Citation

  • Jean-François Daoust & Eric Bélanger & Ruth Dassonneville & Erick Lachapelle & Richard Nadeau & Michael Becher & Sylvain Brouard & Martial Foucault & Christoph Hönninge & Daniel Stegmueller, 2021. "A guilt-free strategy increases self-reported non-compliance with COVID-19 preventive measures: Experimental evidence from 12 countries," Post-Print hal-03244320, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03244320
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0249914
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-03244320v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-03244320v1/document
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0249914?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert West & Susan Michie & G. James Rubin & Richard Amlôt, 2020. "Applying principles of behaviour change to reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(5), pages 451-459, May.
    2. Daoust, Jean-François & Nadeau, Richard & Dassonneville, Ruth & Lachapelle, Erick & Bélanger, Éric & Savoie, Justin & van der Linden, Clifton, 2020. "How to survey citizens’ compliance with COVID-19 public health measures? Evidence from three survey experiments," SocArXiv gursd, Center for Open Science.
    3. Blair, Graeme & Imai, Kosuke, 2012. "Statistical Analysis of List Experiments," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(1), pages 47-77, January.
    4. Jonathan de Quidt & Johannes Haushofer & Christopher Roth, 2018. "Measuring and Bounding Experimenter Demand," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(11), pages 3266-3302, November.
    5. repec:osf:socarx:gursd_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Martin Larsen & Jacob Nyrup & Michael Bang Petersen, 2020. "Do Survey Estimates of the Public’s Compliance with COVID-19 Regulations Suffer from Social Desirability Bias?," Journal of Behavioral Public Administration, Center for Experimental and Behavioral Public Administration, vol. 3(2).
    7. Diana C. Mutz & Robin Pemantle & Philip Pham, 2019. "The Perils of Balance Testing in Experimental Design: Messy Analyses of Clean Data," The American Statistician, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 73(1), pages 32-42, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sarah Kelley & M. D. R. Evans & Jonathan Kelley, 2023. "Happily Distant or Bitter Medicine? The Impact of Social Distancing Preferences, Behavior, and Emotional Costs on Subjective Wellbeing During the Epidemic," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 18(1), pages 115-162, February.
    2. Lin, Tian & Harris, Elizabeth A. & Heemskerk, Amber & Van Bavel, Jay J. & Ebner, Natalie C., 2021. "A multi-national test on self-reported compliance with COVID-19 public health measures: The role of individual age and gender demographics and countries’ developmental status," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 286(C).
    3. Vincenzo Carrieri & Maria De Paola & Francesca Gioia, 2021. "The health-economy trade-off during the Covid-19 pandemic: Communication matters," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(9), pages 1-25, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Daoust, Jean-François & Bélanger, Éric & Dassonneville, Ruth & Lachapelle, Erick & Nadeau, Richard & Becher, Michael & Brouard, Sylvain & Foucault, Martial & Hönnige, Christoph & Stegmueller, Daniel, 2020. "Face-Saving Strategies Increase Self-Reported Non-Compliance with COVID-19 Preventive Measures: Experimental Evidence from 12 Countries," SocArXiv tkrs7, Center for Open Science.
    2. repec:osf:socarx:tkrs7_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Daoust, Jean-François & Nadeau, Richard & Dassonneville, Ruth & Lachapelle, Erick & Bélanger, Éric & Savoie, Justin & van der Linden, Clifton, 2020. "How to survey citizens’ compliance with COVID-19 public health measures? Evidence from three survey experiments," SocArXiv gursd, Center for Open Science.
    4. Lata Gangadharan & Tarun Jain & Pushkar Maitra & Joe Vecci, 2022. "Lab-in-the-field experiments: perspectives from research on gender," The Japanese Economic Review, Springer, vol. 73(1), pages 31-59, January.
    5. Lara Berger & Anna Kerkhof & Felix Mindl & Johannes Münster, 2023. "Debunking "Fake News" on Social Media: Short-Term and Longer-Term Effects of Fact Checking and Media Literacy Interventions," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 262, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    6. repec:plo:pone00:0235590 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Michael Becher & Daniel Stegmueller & Sylvain Brouard & Eric Kerrouche, 2021. "Ideology and compliance with health guidelines during the COVID‐19 pandemic: A comparative perspective," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(5), pages 2106-2123, September.
    8. repec:osf:socarx:gursd_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Felix Chopras & Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth, 2024. "The Demand for News: Accuracy Concerns Versus Belief Confirmation Motives," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 134(661), pages 1806-1834.
    10. Francesco Capozza & Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2021. "Studying Information Acquisition in the Field: A Practical Guide and Review," CEBI working paper series 21-15, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI).
    11. John List, 2025. "Valuing Non-Marketed Goods and Services Using a List Field Experiment," Framed Field Experiments 00809, The Field Experiments Website.
    12. Mechtenberg, Lydia & Perino, Grischa & Treich, Nicolas & Tyran, Jean-Robert & Wang, Stephanie W., 2024. "Self-signaling in voting," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 231(C).
    13. Lasse J. Jessen & Sebastian Koehne & Patrick Nüß & Jens Ruhose, 2024. "Socioeconomic Inequality in Life Expectancy: Perception and Policy Demand," CESifo Working Paper Series 10940, CESifo.
    14. Schnorpfeil, Philip & Weber, Michael & Hackethal, Andreas, 2023. "Households' response to the wealth effects of inflation," SAFE Working Paper Series 400, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    15. Kessel, Dany & Mollerstrom, Johanna & van Veldhuizen, Roel, 2021. "Can simple advice eliminate the gender gap in willingness to compete?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 138, pages 1-1.
    16. repec:zbw:bofrdp:2020_017 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Andrea F.M. Martinangeli & Lisa Windsteiger, 2019. "Immigration vs. Poverty: Causal Impact on Demand for Redistribution in a Survey Experiment," Working Papers tax-mpg-rps-2019-13, Max Planck Institute for Tax Law and Public Finance.
    18. Aycinena, Diego & Bogliacino, Francesco & Kimbrough, Erik O., 2024. "Measuring norms: Assessing the threat of social desirability bias to the Bicchieri and Xiao elicitation method," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 225-239.
    19. Barrera, Oscar & Guriev, Sergei & Henry, Emeric & Zhuravskaya, Ekaterina, 2020. "Facts, alternative facts, and fact checking in times of post-truth politics," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    20. Peter Schwardmann & Egon Tripodi & Joël J. van der Weele, 2022. "Self-Persuasion: Evidence from Field Experiments at International Debating Competitions," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(4), pages 1118-1146, April.
    21. Cattaneo, Maria & Lergetporer, Philipp & Schwerdt, Guido & Werner, Katharina & Woessmann, Ludger & Wolter, Stefan C., 2020. "Information provision and preferences for education spending: Evidence from representative survey experiments in three countries," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    22. Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2023. "Designing Information Provision Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 3-40, March.
    23. Ronconi, Lucas & Zarazaga S.J., Rodrigo, 2015. "Labor Exclusion and the Erosion of Citizenship Responsibilities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 453-461.
    24. Cavapozzi, Danilo & Francesconi, Marco & Nicoletti, Cheti, 2024. "Dividing Housework between Partners: Individual Preferences and Social Norms," IZA Discussion Papers 17370, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03244320. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.