MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3186300414 · doi:10.2196/29923

Prosociality and the Uptake of COVID-19 Contact Tracing Apps: Survey Analysis of Intergenerational Differences in Japan

2021· article· en· W3186300414 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Masahiro Shoji, Asei Ito, Susumu Cato, Takashi Iida, Kenji Ishida, Hiroto Katsumata, Kenneth Mori McElwain

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR mhealth and uhealth · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCOVID-19 Digital Contact Tracing
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of Science
KeywordsAgreeablenessPsychologyExploratory factor analysisContact tracingGovernment (linguistics)Prosocial behaviorLogistic regressionSocial psychologyPersonalityBig Five personality traitsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Clinical psychologyMedicineExtraversion and introversionPsychometrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: To control the COVID-19 pandemic, it is essential to trace and contain infection chains; for this reason, policymakers have endorsed the usage of contact tracing apps. To date, over 50 countries have released such apps officially or semiofficially, but those that rely on citizens' voluntary uptake suffer from low adoption rates, reducing their effectiveness. Early studies suggest that the low uptake is driven by citizens' concerns about security and privacy, as well as low perceptions of infection risk and benefits from the usage. However, these do not explore important generational differences in uptake decision or the association between individuals' prosociality and uptake. OBJECTIVE: The objective of our study was to examine the role of individuals' prosociality and other factors discussed in the literature, such as perceived risk and trust in government, in encouraging the usage of contact tracing apps in Japan. We paid particular attention to generational differences. METHODS: A web-based survey was conducted in Japan 6 months after the release of a government-sponsored contact tracing app. Participants were recruited from individuals aged between 20 and 69 years. Exploratory factor analyses were conducted to measure prosociality, risk perception, and trust in government. Logistic regression was used to examine the association between these factors and uptake. RESULTS: There was a total of 7084 respondents, and observations from 5402 respondents were used for analysis, of which 791 respondents (14.6%) had ever used the app. Two factors of prosociality were retained: agreeableness and attachment to the community. Full-sample analysis demonstrated app uptake was determined by agreeableness, attachment to the community, concern about health risks, concern about social risks, and trust in the national government; however, important differences existed. The uptake decision of respondents aged between 20 and 39 years was attributed to their attachment to the community (odds ratio [OR] 1.28, 95% CI 1.11-1.48). Agreeable personality (OR 1.18, 95% CI 1.02-1.35), concern about social risk (OR 1.17, 95% CI 1.02-1.35), and trust in national government (OR 1.16, 95% CI 1.05-1.28) were key determinants for those aged between 40 and 59 years. For those aged over 60 years, concerns about health risks determined the uptake decision (OR 1.49, 95% CI 1.24-1.80). CONCLUSIONS: Policymakers should implement different interventions for each generation to increase the adoption rate of contact tracing apps. It may be effective to inform older adults about the health benefits of the apps. For middle-age adults, it is important to mitigate concerns about security and privacy issues, and for younger generations, it is necessary to boost their attachment to their community by utilizing social media and other web-based network tools.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations31
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR mhealth and uhealthSame topicCOVID-19 Digital Contact TracingFrench-language works237,207