MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3137350096 · doi:10.1017/s0033291721001306

Trust in government regarding COVID-19 and its associations with preventive health behaviour and prosocial behaviour during the pandemic: a cross-sectional and longitudinal study

2021· article· en· W3137350096 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Qing Han, Bang Zheng, Mioara Cristea, Maximilian Agostini, Jocelyn J. Bélanger, Ben Gützkow, Jannis Kreienkamp, N. Pontus Leander

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychological Medicine · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Capital and Networks
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSabancı ÜniversitesiMenofia UniversityNational Research University Higher School of EconomicsUniversity of ThessalyUniversidad de ChileCalifornia State University, East BayThammasat UniversityTaras Shevchenko National University of KyivUniversität BielefeldUniversity of PeshawarUniversidad de CórdobaUniversitas UdayanaKing Saud UniversityUniversità degli Studi di CamerinoUniversiteit UtrechtEötvös Loránd TudományegyetemSveučilište u ZagrebuUniversiteit van AmsterdamRijksuniversiteit GroningenUniversiteit LeidenUniversidad Nacional de Educación a DistanciaYork UniversityDurham UniversityUniversitas IndonesiaUniversity of ExeterIslamic Azad UniversityLingnan UniversityUniversità degli Studi di SienaSungkyunkwan UniversityInternational Islamic University MalaysiaNew York University ShanghaiDe La Salle UniversityNew York University Abu DhabiNederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk OnderzoekUniversité Clermont-AuvergneVanderbilt UniversityYale-NUS CollegeYale University
KeywordsProsocial behaviorGovernment (linguistics)PandemicPsychologyBaseline (sea)Multilevel modelPublic healthLongitudinal studyStructural equation modelingSurvey data collectionCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Cross-sectional studySocial psychologyMedicinePolitical scienceDiseaseInfectious disease (medical specialty)StatisticsNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The effective implementation of government policies and measures for controlling the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic requires compliance from the public. This study aimed to examine cross-sectional and longitudinal associations of trust in government regarding COVID-19 control with the adoption of recommended health behaviours and prosocial behaviours, and potential determinants of trust in government during the pandemic. Methods This study analysed data from the PsyCorona Survey, an international project on COVID-19 that included 23 733 participants from 23 countries (representative in age and gender distributions by country) at baseline survey and 7785 participants who also completed follow-up surveys. Specification curve analysis was used to examine concurrent associations between trust in government and self-reported behaviours. We further used structural equation model to explore potential determinants of trust in government. Multilevel linear regressions were used to examine associations between baseline trust and longitudinal behavioural changes. Results Higher trust in government regarding COVID-19 control was significantly associated with higher adoption of health behaviours (handwashing, avoiding crowded space, self-quarantine) and prosocial behaviours in specification curve analyses (median standardised β = 0.173 and 0.229, p < 0.001). Government perceived as well organised, disseminating clear messages and knowledge on COVID-19, and perceived fairness were positively associated with trust in government (standardised β = 0.358, 0.230, 0.056, and 0.249, p < 0.01). Higher trust at baseline survey was significantly associated with lower rate of decline in health behaviours over time ( p for interaction = 0.001). Conclusions These results highlighted the importance of trust in government in the control of COVID-19.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.109
GPT teacher head0.444
Teacher spread0.335 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations393
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychological MedicineSame topicSocial Capital and NetworksFrench-language works237,207