Public behaviour in response to the Covid-19 pandemic: Understanding the role of group processes

Background
In the absence of a vaccine, behaviour by the public is key to the response to the Covid-19 pandemic. Yet, as with other types of crises and emergencies, there have been doubts about the extent to which the public are able to engage effectively with the required behaviour. These doubts are based on outdated models of group psychology.

Aims and argument
We analyse the role of group processes in the Covid-19 pandemic in three domains: recognition of threat; adherence by the public to the required public health behaviours (and the factors that increase such adherence); and actions of the many community mutual aid groups that arose during lockdown. In each case, we draw upon the accumulated research on behaviour in emergencies and disasters as well as the latest findings in relation to the Covid-19 pandemic to show that explanations in terms of social identity processes make better sense of the patterns of evidence than alternative explanations.

Conclusion
If behaviour in the pandemic is a function of mutable group processes rather than fixed tendencies, then behavioural change is possible. There was evidence of significant change in behaviour from the public, particularly in the early days of the pandemic. Understanding the role of group processes means we can help design more effective interventions to support collective resilience in the public in the face of the pandemic and other threats. We draw out from the evidence a set of recommendations on facilitating the public response to Covid-19 by harnessing group processes.

1. Flaxman S, Mishra S, Gandy A, et al. Estimating the effects of non-pharmaceutical interventions on COVID-19 in Europe. Nature 2020:1-8. doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2405-7 pmid:32512579
2. Bonell C, Michie S, Reicher S, West R, Bear L, Yardley L, Curtis V, Amlôt R, Rubin GJ. Harnessing behavioural science in public health campaigns to maintain ‘social distancing’ in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: key principles. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2020 May 8; 74(8). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jech-2020-214290
3. World Health Organization () Covid-19 press conference. [2020, March 20; cited 2020 Aug 8] Available from https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/transcripts/who...
4. Reicher S, Drury J, Stott, C. The two psychologies and coronavirus. The Psychologist. [Internet] 2020, April [cited 2020 Aug 8]. Available from https://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/two-psychologies-and-coronavirus
5. Drury J, Carter H, Cocking C, Ntontis E, Tekin Guven S, Amlôt R. Facilitating collective resilience in the public in emergencies: Twelve recommendations based on the social identity approach. Frontiers in public health. 2019; 7:141. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2019.00141
6. Canter D. Fires and human behavior. Chichester, UK: Wiley; 1990.
7. Clarke L. Panic: myth or reality? Contexts. (2002) 1:21–6. doi: 10.1525/ctx.2002.1.3.21
8. Sime JD. The concept of “panic”. In: Canter D, editor. Fires and human behaviour. London: David Fulton (1990). p. 63–81.
9. Forsythe D. Introduction to group dynamics. Brooks Cole, CA. 1983.
10. Atwood LE, Major AM. Optimism, pessimism, and communication behavior in response to an earthquake prediction. Public Understanding of Science. 2000 Oct 1;9(4):417-32.
11. Kinsey MJ, Gwynne SMV, Kuligowski ED, Kinateder M. Cognitive biases within decision making during fire evacuations. Fire Technology. 2019 Mar; 55(2), 465-485. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-018-0708-0
12. Becker JS, Paton D, Johnston DM, Ronan KR, McClure J. The role of prior experience in informing and motivating earthquake preparedness. International journal of disaster risk reduction. 2017 Jun 1; 22:179-93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2017.03.006
13. Wormwood JB, Lynn SK, Barrett LF, Quigley KS. Threat perception after the Boston Marathon bombings: The effects of personal relevance and conceptual framing. Cognition and Emotion. 2016 Apr 2;30(3): 539-549. DOI: 10.1080/02699931.2015.1010487
14. Stapel DA, Reicher SD, Spears R. Social identity, availability and the perception of risk. Social cognition. 1994 Mar;12(1):1-7.
15. Cruwys, T., Stevens, M, Greenaway KH. A social identity perspective on COVID‐19: Health risk is affected by shared group membership. British Journal of Social Psychology 2020 May 31;59(3):584-593. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12391
16. Reicher S, Drury J. Don’t personalize, collectivize! The Psychologist [Internet] 2020, Mar [cited 2020 Aug 8] Available from https://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/dont-personalise-collectivise
17. Foster L. [Internet] BBC Coronavirus: Young men 'more likely to ignore lockdown'. [2020 May 9; cited 2020 Aug 9] Available from https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-52587368
18. Proulx G. Why building occupants ignore fire alarms. National Research Council of Canada (2000).
19. Fancourt D, Bu F, Mak HW, Steptoe A. Covid-19 Social Study. Results Release 3. London: UCL; 2020 Apr 8) [cited 2020 Aug 8] Available from: https://b6bdcb03-332c-4ff9-8b9d-28f9c957493a.filesusr.com/ugd/3d9db5...
20. ONS. Coronavirus and the social impacts on Great Britain: 9 April 2020. Office for National Statistics. [cited 2020 Aug 8] Available from:. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialc...
21. Biddlestone M, Green R, Douglas KM. Cultural orientation, power, belief in conspiracy theories, and intentions to reduce the spread of COVID‐19. British Journal of Social Psychology. 2020 Jun; 59(3): 663-673. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12397
22. Turner JC. Social influence. Thomson Brooks/Cole Publishing Co; 1991.
23. Haslam SA. Leadership. In: Jetten J, Reicher SD, Haslam SA, Cruwys T. Together apart: The psychology of Covid-10. Sage.
24. Templeton A, Guven ST, Hoerst C, Vestergren S, Davidson L, Ballentyne S, Madsen H, Choudhury S. Inequalities and identity processes in crises: Recommendations for facilitating safe response to the COVID‐19 pandemic. British Journal of Social Psychology. 2020 Jun 25; 59(3): 674-685. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12400
25. Conn D, Lawrence F, Lewis P, Carrell S, Pegg D, Davies H, Evans R. Guardian [internet] Revealed: the inside story of the UK's Covid-19 crisis [2020 Apr 29; cited 2020 Aug 9] Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/29/revealed-the-inside-st...
26. Rubin GJ, Wessely S. Coronavirus: The psychological effects of quarantining a city. The BMJ Opinion. 2020 January 24 [cited 2020 Aug 9]. Available from https://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2020/01/24/coronavirus-the-psychological-e...
27. Jones E Air raids and the crowd – citizens at war The Psychologist 2020; 29.486-487. Available from https://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/volume-29/june-2016/air-raids-and...
28. Carter H, Drury J, Rubin GJ, Williams R, Amlôt R. Communication during mass casualty decontamination: highlighting the gaps. Int J Emerg Serv. (2013) 2:29–48. doi: 10.1108/IJES-06-2012-0026
29. Carter H, Drury J, Amlôt R, Rubin GJ, Williams R. Perceived responder legitimacy and group identification predict cooperation and compliance in a mass decontamination field exercise. Basic Appl Soc Psychol. (2013) 35:575–85. doi: 10.1080/01973533.2013.840634
30. Carter H, Drury J, Rubin GJ, Williams R, Amlôt R. The effect of communication on anxiety and compliance during mass decontamination. Disas Prevent Manag. (2013) 22:132–47. doi: 10.1108/09653561311325280
31. Carter H, Drury J, Rubin GJ, Williams R, Amlôt R. Effective responder communication improves efficiency and psychological outcomes in a mass decontamination field experiment: implications for public behaviour in the event of a chemical incident. PLoS ONE. (2014) 9:e89846. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0089846
32. Symons C, Rubin G J, Carter H, Amlôt R. Effects of threat and efficacy messages on expected adherence to decontamination protocols in an immersive simulated chemical incident: A randomised controlled experiment. Journal of Crisis and Contingencies Management. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5973.12320
33. BBC. Behavioural science and the pandemic. BBC. 2020 July 20. [heard 2020 Aug 9]. Available from https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000l207
34. Smith LE, Amlôt R, Lambert H, Oliver I, Robin C, Yardley L, Rubin GJ. Factors associated with adherence to self-isolation and lockdown measures in the UK; a cross-sectional survey. Public Health Sept 2020 187:21-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2020.07.024
35. Webster RK, Brooks SK, Smith LE, Woodland L, Wessely S, Rubin GJ. How to improve adherence with quarantine: Rapid review of the evidence. Public Health. 2020 Mar 30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2020.03.007
36. Independent SAGE. Final independent SAGE integrated find test trace isolate support. [cited 2020 Aug 9]. Available from:https://www.independentsage.org/final-independent-sage-integrated-fi...
37. Drury J, Reicher S, Stott C. Me to we: In an emergency, collectivize to survive. Novara Media. (2020, March 22nd). Available from: https://novaramedia.com/2020/03/22/from-me-to-we-in-an-emergency-col...
38. Aguilar-Garcia C. Coronavirus: Google data shows how people’s movements have changed since outbreak. Sky News. (2020 April 8). Available at: https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-trips-to-the-shops-fall-by-85...
39. ONS. Coronavirus and the social impacts on Great Britain: 30 April 2020. Office for National Statistics. [cited 2020 Aug 8] Available from: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialc...
40. Clark C, Davila A, Regis M, Kraus S. Predictors of COVID-19 voluntary compliance behaviors: An international investigation. Global Transitions. 2020 Jun. Doi https://doi.org/10.1016/j.glt.2020.06.003
41. Parveen N, McIntyre N. Britons think UK will be more united after coronavirus recovery. Guardian. 2020 May 29. Available from https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/29/britons-think-uk-will-...
42. Goldberg M, Gustafson A, Maibach E, van der Linden S, Ballew MT, Bergquist P, Kotcher J, Marlon JR, Rosenthal S, Leiserowitz A. Social norms motivate COVID-19 preventive behaviors. PsyArXiv Preprints [Internet]. 2020 May [cited 2020 Aug 9]. Available from https://psyarxiv.com/9whp4
43. Vignoles V, Jaser Z, Taylor F, Ntontis E. Harnessing shared identities to mobilise resilient responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. 2020. doi:10.31234/osf.io/g9q5u . Available from https://psyarxiv.com/g9q5u/
44. Everett JA, Colombatto C, Chituc V, Brady WJ, Crockett M. The effectiveness of moral messages on public health behavioral intentions during the COVID-19 pandemic. PsyArXiv Preprints [Internet]. 2020 Mar [cited 2020 Aug 9]. Available from https://psyarxiv.com/9yqs8/
45. Pfattheicher S, Nockur L, Böhm R, Sassenrath C, Petersen MB. The emotional path to action: Empathy promotes physical distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic. PsyArXiv Preprints [Internet]. 2020 March [cited 2020 Aug 9]. Available from https://psyarxiv.com/y2cg5/
46. Jackson J, Posch C, Bradford B, Hobson Z, Kyprianides A, Yesberg J. The lockdown and social norms: why the UK is complying by consent rather than compulsion. 2020 April 27. [cited 2020 Aug 9]. Available at:. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/lockdown-social-norms/
47. Sharkey P. The US has a collective action problem that’s larger than the coronavirus crisis. Vox [Internet]. 2020 Apr 10 [cited 2020 Aug 9]. Available from https://www.vox.com/2020/4/10/21216216/coronavirus-social-distancing...
48. Van Bavel, J. J., Cichocka, A., Capraro, V., Sjåstad, H., Nezlek, J. B., Alfano, M., … Gualda, E. (2020, September 2). National identity predicts public health support during a global pandemic. Available at https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/ydt95
49. Wolf LJ, Haddock G, Manstead AS, Maio GR. The importance of (shared) human values for containing the COVID‐19 pandemic. British Journal of Social Psychology. 2020 Jul; 59(3): 618-627. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12401
50. Prosser A M, Judge M, Bolderdijk J W, Blackwood L, Kurz T.. ‘Distancers’ and ‘non‐distancers’? The potential social psychological impact of moralizing COVID‐19 mitigating practices on sustained behaviour change. British Journal of Social Psychology. 2020 Jul 1; 59(3):653-662. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12399
51. Public Health England. Disparities in the risk and outcomes of COVID-19. 2020 June. Available from: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/u...
52. Fancourt D, Bu F, Mak HW, Steptoe A. Covid-19 Social Study. Results Release 9. London: UCL; 2020 May 20) [cited 2020 Aug 8] Available from: https://b6bdcb03-332c-4ff9-8b9d-28f9c957493a.filesusr.com/ugd/3d9db5...
53. Fancourt D, Bu F, Mak HW, Steptoe A. Covid-19 Social Study. Results Release 16. London: UCL; 2020 July 20) [cited 2020 Aug 8] Available from: https://b6bdcb03-332c-4ff9-8b9d-28f9c957493a.filesusr.com/ugd/3d9db5...
54. ONS. Coronavirus and the social impacts on Great Britain: 29 May 2020. Office for National Statistics. [cited 2020 Aug 8] Available from:. https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialc...
55. Fancourt D, Bu F, Mak HW, Steptoe A. Covid-19 Social Study. Results Release 17. London: UCL; 2020 July 20) [cited 2020 Aug 8] Available from: https://b6bdcb03-332c-4ff9-8b9d-28f9c957493a.filesusr.com/ugd/3d9db5...
56. ONS. Coronavirus and the social impacts on Great Britain: 17 July 2020. Office for National Statistics. [cited 2020 Aug 8] Available from: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialc...
57. Fancourt D, Bu F, Mak HW, Steptoe A. Covid-19 social study. Results Release 16. London: UCL; 2020 July 15) [cited 2020 Aug 8] Available from: https://b6bdcb03-332c-4ff9-8b9d-28f9c957493a.filesusr.com/ugd/3d9db5...
58. Duffy B, & Allington D. The Trusting, the Dissenting and the Frustrated: how the UK is dividing as lockdown is eased. Policy Institute/ King's College London. 2020. Available from https://www.kcl.ac.uk/policy-institute/assets/how-the-uk-is-dividing...
59. Fancourt D, Steptoe A, Wright L. The Cummings effect: politics, trust, and behaviours during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Lancet. August 2020. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31690-1
60. Jackson J, Bradford B, Yesberg J, Hobson Z, Kyprianides A, Pósch K, Solymosi R. Public compliance and COVID-19: Did Cummings damage the fight against the virus, or become a useful anti-role model? 2020 June 15. Available from: https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/public-compliance-covid19-...
61. Turk V. How Dominic Cummings could ruin the UK’s coronavirus response. Wired. 2020 May 28. Available from: https://www.wired.co.uk/article/dominic-cummings-coronavirus-lockdow...
62. Cabinet Office. Strategic National Framework on Community Resilience. London: Cabinet Office (2011).
63. HM Government. Community resilience development framework. 2019. Available from: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/u...
64. Drury J. The role of social identity processes in mass emergency behaviour: An integrative review. European Review of Social Psychology 2018 ;29(1):38-81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2018.1471948
65. Drury J, Novelli D, Stott C. Managing to avert disaster: Explaining collective resilience at an outdoor music event. European Journal of Social Psychology. 2015 Jun;45(4):533-47. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.2108
66. Haslam, C., Haslam C, Cruwys T, Haslam SA, Jetten J. Social connectedness and health. Encyclopaedia of geropsychology. 2015 Jan 1;2015:46-1. DOI: 10.1007/978-981-287-080-3_46-2
67. Aldrich DP, Meyer MA. Social capital and community resilience. American Behavioral Scientist. 2015 Feb;59(2):254-69. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764214550299
68. Ntontis E, Drury J, Amlôt R, Rubin GJ, Williams R. What lies beyond social capital? The role of social psychology in building community resilience to climate change. Traumatology. 2019 Sep 30 [cited 2020 Aug9]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/trm0000221
69. Drury J, Brown R, González R, Miranda D. Emergent social identity and observing social support predict social support provided by survivors in a disaster: Solidarity in the 2010 Chile earthquake. European Journal of Social Psychology. 2016 Mar; 46(2):209-23. DOI: 10.1002/ejsp.2146
70. Monbiot G. The horror films got it wrong. The virus has turned us into caring neighbours. The Guardian. 2020 Mar 31 [cited 2020 Aug 9];Opinion Communities: Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/mar/31/virus-neighbou...
71. Drury J, Novelli D, Stott C. Representing crowd behaviour in emergency planning guidance: ‘Mass panic’or collective resilience?. Resilience. 2013 Apr 1;1(1):18-37.
72. Charles M. ComeUnity and community in the face of impunity. In: Bulley, D, Edkins J, El-Nany N. After Grenfell: Violence, resistance and response. London: Pluto Press; 2019. p. 167-192
73. Hogan G. Neighbors mobilize to help each other during coronavirus pandemic. gothamist [Internet]. 2020 Mar 19 [cited 2020 Aug 9]. Available from: https://gothamist.com/news/neighbors-mobilize-help-each-other-during...
74. ONS. Coronavirus and the social impacts on Great Britain: 3 April 2020. Office for National Statistics. [cited 2020 Aug 8] Available from: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialc...
75. Butler P. NHS coronavirus crisis volunteers frustrated at lack of tasks. The Guardian 2020 May 3 [cited 2020 Aug 9]; Available from: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/03/nhs-coronavirus-crisis...
76. Tiratelli L, Kaye S. Communities vs Coronavirus: The rise of mutual aid. 2020 New Local Government Network.
77. Abrams D, Lalot F, Broadwood J, Platts-Dunn I. Beyond Us and Them: Perception of Covid-19 and social cohesion. 2020 Available from: https://www.belongnetwork.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/Research-...
78. Fritz CE. Disasters and Mental Health: Therapeutic Principles Drawn From Disaster Studies. University of Delaware, Disaster Research Center. Historical and comparative disaster series #10 (1996; written 1961).
79. Kaniasty K, Norris F. The experience of disaster: individuals and communities sharing trauma. In: Gist R, Lubin B, editors. Response to Disaster: Psychosocial, Community and Ecological Approaches. Philadelphia, PA: Brunner/Mazel (1999). p. 25–61.
80. Ntontis E, Drury J, Amlôt R, Rubin GJ, Williams R. Endurance or decline of emergent groups following a flood disaster: implications for community resilience. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. 2020 Jan 18: 45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101493
81. Scally G, Jacobson B, Abbasi K. The UK’s public health response to covid-19. BMJ; 369 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m1932
82. Carter H, Drury J, Rubin GJ, Williams R, Amlôt R. Applying crowd psychology to develop recommendations for the management of mass decontamination. Health Security. 2015 Feb 1;13(1):45-53.
83. Elcheroth G, Drury J. Collective resilience in times of crisis: Lessons from the literature for socially effective responses to the pandemic. British Journal of Social Psychology. 2020 Jul;59(3):703-13.
84. Jetten J, Reicher SD, Haslam SA, Cruwys T, editors. Together apart: The psychology of Covid-19. Sage: London; 2020.
85. Chater AM, Arden M, Armitage C, Byrne-Davis L, Chadwick P, Drury J, Hart J, Lewis L, McBride E, Perriard-Abdoh S, Thompson S. Behavioural science and disease prevention: psychological guidance. British Psychological Society. 2020
86. Haslam SA, Reicher SD, Platow MJ. The new psychology of leadership: Identity, Influence and Power (2nd edition). Psychology Press; 2020.