Luisa Enria1, Naomi Waterlow2, Nina Trivedy Rogers3, Hannah Brindle4, Sham Lal4, Rosalind M Eggo2, Shelley Lees1, Chrissy H Roberts4. 1. Department of Global Health and Development, Faculty of Public Health & Policy, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom. 2. Department of Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Faculty of Epidemiology & Public Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom. 3. UCL Research Department of Epidemiology & Public Health, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University College London, London, United Kingdom. 4. Department of Clinical Research, Faculty of Infectious & Tropical Diseases, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The success of a government's COVID-19 control strategy relies on public trust and broad acceptance of response measures. We investigated public perceptions of the UK government's COVID-19 response, focusing on the relationship between trust and perceived transparency, during the first wave (April 2020) of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom. METHODS: Anonymous survey data were collected (2020-04-06 to 2020-04-22) from 9,322 respondents, aged 20+ using an online questionnaire shared primarily through Facebook. We took an embedded-mixed-methods approach to data analysis. Missing data were imputed via multiple imputation. Binomial & multinomial logistic regression were used to detect associations between demographic characteristics and perceptions or opinions of the UK government's response to COVID-19. Structural topic modelling (STM), qualitative thematic coding of sub-sets of responses were then used to perform a thematic analysis of topics that were of interest to key demographic groups. RESULTS: Most respondents (95.1%) supported government enforcement of behaviour change. While 52.1% of respondents thought the government was making good decisions, differences were apparent across demographic groups, for example respondents from Scotland had lower odds of responding positively than respondents in London. Higher educational levels saw decreasing odds of having a positive opinion of the government response and decreasing household income associated with decreasing positive opinion. Of respondents who thought the government was not making good decisions 60% believed the economy was being prioritised over people and their health. Positive views on government decision-making were associated with positive views on government transparency about the COVID-19 response. Qualitative analysis about perceptions of government transparency highlighted five key themes: (1) the justification of opacity due to the condition of crisis, (2) generalised mistrust of politics, (3) concerns about the role of scientific evidence, (4) quality of government communication and (5) questions about political decision-making processes. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that trust is not homogenous across communities, and that generalised mistrust, concerns about the transparent use and communication of evidence and insights into decision-making processes can affect perceptions of the government's pandemic response. We recommend targeted community engagement, tailored to the experiences of different groups and a new focus on accountability and openness around how decisions are made in the response to the UK COVID-19 pandemic.
BACKGROUND: The success of a government's COVID-19 control strategy relies on public trust and broad acceptance of response measures. We investigated public perceptions of the UK government's COVID-19 response, focusing on the relationship between trust and perceived transparency, during the first wave (April 2020) of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom. METHODS: Anonymous survey data were collected (2020-04-06 to 2020-04-22) from 9,322 respondents, aged 20+ using an online questionnaire shared primarily through Facebook. We took an embedded-mixed-methods approach to data analysis. Missing data were imputed via multiple imputation. Binomial & multinomial logistic regression were used to detect associations between demographic characteristics and perceptions or opinions of the UK government's response to COVID-19. Structural topic modelling (STM), qualitative thematic coding of sub-sets of responses were then used to perform a thematic analysis of topics that were of interest to key demographic groups. RESULTS: Most respondents (95.1%) supported government enforcement of behaviour change. While 52.1% of respondents thought the government was making good decisions, differences were apparent across demographic groups, for example respondents from Scotland had lower odds of responding positively than respondents in London. Higher educational levels saw decreasing odds of having a positive opinion of the government response and decreasing household income associated with decreasing positive opinion. Of respondents who thought the government was not making good decisions 60% believed the economy was being prioritised over people and their health. Positive views on government decision-making were associated with positive views on government transparency about the COVID-19 response. Qualitative analysis about perceptions of government transparency highlighted five key themes: (1) the justification of opacity due to the condition of crisis, (2) generalised mistrust of politics, (3) concerns about the role of scientific evidence, (4) quality of government communication and (5) questions about political decision-making processes. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that trust is not homogenous across communities, and that generalised mistrust, concerns about the transparent use and communication of evidence and insights into decision-making processes can affect perceptions of the government's pandemic response. We recommend targeted community engagement, tailored to the experiences of different groups and a new focus on accountability and openness around how decisions are made in the response to the UK COVID-19 pandemic.
Authors: Ryan P Badman; Ace X Wang; Martin Skrodzki; Heng-Chin Cho; David Aguilar-Lleyda; Naoko Shiono; Seng Bum Michael Yoo; Yen-Sheng Chiang; Rei Akaishi Journal: Behav Sci (Basel) Date: 2022-05-30
Authors: Jessica E Haberer; Ariane van der Straten; Steven A Safren; Mallory O Johnson; K Rivet Amico; Carlos Del Rio; Michele Andrasik; Ira B Wilson; Jane M Simoni Journal: J Int AIDS Soc Date: 2021-08 Impact factor: 6.707
Authors: Isha Berry; Meghan O'Neill; Shelby L Sturrock; James E Wright; Kamal Acharya; Gabrielle Brankston; Vinyas Harish; Kathy Kornas; Nika Maani; Thivya Naganathan; Lindsay Obress; Tanya Rossi; Alison E Simmons; Matthew Van Camp; Xiao Xie; Ashleigh R Tuite; Amy L Greer; David N Fisman; Jean-Paul R Soucy Journal: Sci Data Date: 2021-07-15 Impact factor: 6.444