Social Distancing in America: Understanding Long-term Adherence to Covid-19 Mitigation Recommendations

A crucial question in the governance of infectious disease outbreaks is how to ensure that people continue to adhere to mitigation measures for the longer duration of the pandemic. The present paper examines this question by means of a nationally representative cross-sectional set of studies conducted in the United States in May, June, and July 2020. It seeks to understand to what extent Americans continued to adhere to social distancing measures in the period after the first lockdown ended during the first wave of COVID-19. Moreover, it seeks to uncover which situational and motivational variables sustained (or undermined) adherence. Our findings reveal a mix of situational and motivational variables that contributed to adherence in the period after the first lockdown: individuals’ knowledge of social distancing measures, their practical capacity to adhere to them, their opportunities for not doing so, and their impulsivity (situational influences), as well as their moral alignment with mitigation measures against the virus, perceptions of its health threat, and perceived norms for adherence in their community (motivational influences). The results also reveal, however, that adherence among Americans declined during this period, as did important situational and motivational processes that sustained this. The findings show that adherence does not just originate in motivations and that situational variables play a central role. Moreover, they show that adherence is dynamic, as the core variables that sustain can change over a short period of time. These insights help to advance understanding of pandemic governance, as well as illuminating the interaction between rules and human conduct and compliance more generally. Moreover, they identify important avenues for policy to promote and sustain adherence to mitigation measures during the COVID-19 pandemic and in future outbreaks.