Public Preferences for Social Distancing Behaviors to Mitigate the Spread of COVID-19: A Discrete Choice Experiment

Policies to promote social distancing can minimize COVID-19 transmission, but come with substantial social and economic costs. Quantifying relative preferences of the public for such practices can inform policy prioritization and optimize uptake. We used a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to quantify relative “utilities” (preferences) for five COVID-19 pandemic social distances strategies (e.g., closure of restaurants, restriction of large gatherings) against the hypothetical risk of acquiring COVID-19 and anticipated income loss. The survey was distributed in Missouri in May-June, 2020. We applied inverse probability sampling weights to mixed logit and latent class models to generate mean preferences and identify preference classes. Overall ( n =2,428), the strongest preference was for the prohibition of large gatherings, followed by preferences to keep outdoor venues, schools, and social and lifestyle venues open, 75% of the population showing probable support for a strategy that prohibited large gatherings and closed lifestyle and social venues. Latent class analysis, however revealed four preference sub-groups in the population - “risk eliminators”, “risk balancers”, “altruistic” and “risk takers”, with men twice as likely as women to belong to the risk-taking group. In this setting, public health policies which as a first phase prohibit large gatherings, as well as close social and lifestyle venues may be acceptable and adhered to by the public. In addition, policy messages that address preference heterogeneity, for example by targeting public health messages at men, could improve adherence to social distancing measures and prevent further COVID-19 transmission prior to vaccine distribution and in the event of future pandemics. Significance Statement Preferences drive behavior – DCE’s are a novel tool in public health that allow examination of preferences for a product, service or policy, identifying how the public prioritizes personal risks and cost in relation to health behaviors. Using this method to establish preferences for COVID-19 mitigation strategies, our results suggest that, firstly, a tiered approach to non-essential business closures where large gatherings are prohibited and social and lifestyle venues are closed as a first phase, would be well aligned with population preferences and may be supported by the public, while school and outdoor venue closures may require more consideration prior to a second phase of restrictions. And secondly, that important distinct preference phenotypes - that are not captured by sociodemographic (e.g., age, sex, race) characteristics - exist, and therefore that messaging should be target at such subgroups to enhance adherence to prevention efforts.