Keeping each other safe: A social identity account of Canadian responses to COVID-19.

Abstract

Community mitigation strategies in a pandemic rely largely on individuals' voluntary compliance with public health measures (e.g., social and physical distancing). That these measures are crucial from a societal and community perspective-not just as means of self-protection-suggests that a sense of solidarity encourages their adoption by individuals. We conceptualized Canadians' responses early in the COVID-19 crisis as a form of collective action motivated by the perceived threat of the novel coronavirus, national identification, and efficacy beliefs (e.g., people's sense that their actions would make a difference in "flattening the curve" of infections). Analyses of responses of a cross-sectional sample of Canadians (N = 499) in April 2020 provided support for effects derived from this social identity account: perceived threat predicted Canadian national identification, and both threat and identification were positively associated with efficacy beliefs, which in turn predicted endorsement of public health measures. We highlight the roles of social identification and efficacy beliefs with a focus on how they might be incorporated into public health messaging. Public Significance StatementSuccessful responses to the COVID-19 crisis required widespread acceptance of public health measures such as social distancing. This study showed that Canadians' endorsement of these measures was related to the perceived threat of the novel coronavirus, their national identification, and their sense that their own behaviours would make a difference in "flattening the curve" of infections. Thus, public health messages that highlight solidarity and collective responsibility may be effective means of encouraging compliance.

“All in this together?” tracking the polarization of discourse on COVID-19 in Manitoba.

“…Threat conditions can temporarily override group distinctions but are also known to inflame both intra- and intergroup conflict, which might make AITT constructions inherently precarious (Magnus, 2022). In a Canadian study, the degree to which people perceived COVID-19 as a threat predicted national identification; both threat and identification predicted the perceived efficacy of public health measures, which in turn predicted compliance (Cameron & Cook, 2023). Yet, the combination of high identification and threat also predisposes people to protect their in-group by punishing deviants (Kreindler, 2005).…”

“…Presumably, not everyone interpreted the implications of identifying as “human” identically (perhaps especially because the identity activation was not embedded in a public health message). The implications of national identity can also be interpreted in radically different ways; national identification has been found to predict support for COVID-19 measures but also belief in conspiracy theories about the virus’ origins (Cameron & Cook, 2023; Chan et al, 2021; Chen et al, 2022). The potential for social identities to be flexibly reinterpreted is what makes identity-based persuasion possible (Haslam et al, 2011), but it can also be its downfall.…”