Coping during COVID-19: how attitudinal, efficacy, and personality differences drive adherence to protective measures.

INTRODUCTION:COVID-19 has had a devastating impact on people's lives since its initial outbreak and global spread in 2020. While the U.S. government and public health officials have recommended best practices such as social distancing, wearing a mask, and avoiding large public gatherings, these orders have been met with varying levels of acceptance from the public. Given the disparate compliance, this study builds on Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) to explore individual differences and personal motivation factors in order to better understand what may influence one's likelihood to adhere to COVID-19 protective measures. METHODS:A U.S. national survey (N = 2,049) was conducted April-May 2020, roughly one month after stay-at-home orders were issued in some states. Participants were asked to report their likelihood of taking individual and community protective measures. Multivariate hierarchical linear regressions were run to analyze the extent to which participants' concerns about COVID-19's impact, individual and collective self-efficacy, coping behaviors, and personality traits influenced the dependent variables. RESULTS:Findings showed that COVID-19-related health concerns, collective efficacy, and proactive coping strategies were positively related to participants' likelihood of taking protective measures. Those with greater concerns about their general well-being and the economy, adverse coping strategies like denial and joking, as well as sensation-seeking personalities, were less likely to take protective measures. CONCLUSION:The discussion considers how individual differences fit into broader global efforts to stem COVID-19. Practical implications for public health messaging are that communication may focus on facilitating efficacy in order to boost compliance with protective measures.