Effective but fragile? Responses to repeated nudge-based messages for preventing the spread of COVID-19 infection

Abstract

Nudge-based messages have been employed in various countries to encourage voluntary contact-avoidance and infection-prevention behaviors to control the spread of COVID-19. People have been repeatedly exposed to such messages; however, whether the messages keep exerting a significant impact over time remains unclear. From April to August 2020, we conducted a four-wave online survey experiment to examine how five types of nudge-based messages influence Japanese people’s self-reported preventive behaviors. In particular, we investigate how their behaviors are affected by repeated displays over time. The analysis with 4241 participants finds that only a gain-framed altruistic message, emphasizing their behavioral adherence would protect the lives of people close to them, reduces their frequency of going out and contacting others. We do not find similar behavioral changes in messages that contain an altruistic element but emphasize it in a loss-frame or describe their behavioral adherence as protecting both one’s own and others’ lives. Furthermore, the behavioral change effect of the gain-framed altruistic message disappears in the third and fourth waves, although its impact of reinforcing intentions remains. This message has even an adverse effect of worsening the compliance level of infection-prevention behaviors for the subgroup who went out less frequently before the experiment. The study’s results imply that when using nudge-based messages as a countermeasure for COVID-19, policymakers and practitioners need to carefully scrutinize the message elements and wording and examine to whom and how the messages should be delivered while considering their potential adverse and side effects.

Persuading republicans and democrats to comply with mask wearing: An intervention tournament

“…Though many framing studies involve reading a brief message or nudge for only a few minutes ( Thaler & Sunstein, 2021 ), it is possible that this approach is limited in contexts where attitudes are strongly engrained. Indeed, other interventions also found no evidence for changing COVID-19 related health attitudes or behaviors when using brief messages targeting selfish versus altruistic motivation ( Sasaki, Kurokawa, & Ohtake, 2021 ), prevention versus promotion motivation ( Utych, 2021 ), social norms ( Bilancini, Boncinelli, Capraro, Celadin, & Paolo, 2020 ), or appeals to civic responsibility or limited health care system capacity ( Pink et al, 2020 ). The messages might have been more effective if they were delivered in multiple instances over time or came from an elite, trusted source (see Pink, Chu, Druckman, Rand, & Willer, 2021 ).…”

A longitudinal seizure outcome following the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 and 2021: Transient exacerbation or sustainable mitigation

“…Alternatively, a new normal lifestyle might be neutral for a particular PWE. They may appreciate online communication more than face-to-face communication, as multiple PWE reported in the present study, and people's behavioral change following the gradual reduction in the repeated state of emergency in Japan [ 30 ]. Such chronological habituation along with a substantial seizure reduction could be highlighted only from the present long-term observation, rather than previous studies that investigated only the acute phase of the pandemic [ 3 , 31 ].…”

Diminishing returns: Nudging Covid-19 prevention among Colombian young adults

“…As for industrialized country RCTs, on one hand, Carfora and Catelani [ 30 ], Jordan et al [ 31 ], Lunn et al [ 32 ], Sasaki et al [ 33 ], and Utych and Fowler [ 34 ] find positive effects of informational nudges on attitudes, recent compliance, and/or intended future compliance in Italy, the United States, Ireland, Japan and the United States respectively. On the other hand, however, Barari et al [ 14 ], Favero and Pedersen [ 35 ], Hacquin et al [ 36 ] and Sanders et al [ 37 ], are not able to discern an effect of nudges on attitudes and beliefs about and/or intended compliance with NPIs in Italy, the United States, France, and the United Kingdom respectively.…”