A global experiment on motivating social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic

Finding communication strategies that effectively motivate social distancing continues to be a global public health priority during the COVID-19 pandemic. This cross-country, preregistered experiment (n = 25,718 from 89 countries) tested hypotheses concerning generalizable positive and negative outcomes of social distancing messages that promoted personal agency and reflective choices (i.e., an autonomy-supportive message) or were restrictive and shaming (i.e., a controlling message) compared with no message at all. Results partially supported experimental hypotheses in that the controlling message increased controlled motivation (a poorly internalized form of motivation relying on shame, guilt, and fear of social consequences) relative to no message. On the other hand, the autonomy-supportive message lowered feelings of defiance compared with the controlling message, but the controlling message did not differ from receiving no message at all. Unexpectedly, messages did not influence autonomous motivation (a highly internalized form of motivation relying on one’s core values) or behavioral intentions. Results supported hypothesized associations between people’s existing autonomous and controlled motivations and self-reported behavioral intentions to engage in social distancing. Controlled motivation was associated with more defiance and less long-term behavioral intention to engage in social distancing, whereas autonomous motivation was associated with less defiance and more short- and long-term intentions to social distance. Overall, this work highlights the potential harm of using shaming and pressuring language in public health communication, with implications for the current and future global health challenges

In COVID-19 Health Messaging, Loss Framing Increases Anxiety with Little-to-No Concomitant Benefits: Experimental Evidence from 84 Countries

The COVID-19 pandemic (and its aftermath) highlights a critical need to communicate health information effectively to the global public. Given that subtle differences in information framing can have meaningful effects on behavior, behavioral science research highlights a pressing question: Is it more effective to frame COVID-19 health messages in terms of potential losses (e.g., "If you do not practice these steps, you can endanger yourself and others") or potential gains (e.g., "If you practice these steps, you can protect yourself and others")? Collecting data in 48 languages from 15,929 participants in 84 countries, we experimentally tested the effects of message framing on COVID-19-related judgments, intentions, and feelings. Loss- (vs. gain-) framed messages increased self-reported anxiety among participants cross-nationally with little-to-no impact on policy attitudes, behavioral intentions, or information seeking relevant to pandemic risks. These results were consistent across 84 countries, three variations of the message framing wording, and 560 data processing and analytic choices. Thus, results provide an empirical answer to a global communication question and highlight the emotional toll of loss-framed messages. Critically, this work demonstrates the importance of considering unintended affective consequences when evaluating nudge-style interventions

A global experiment on motivating social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic

Finding communication strategies that effectively motivate social distancing continues to be a global public health priority during the COVID-19 pandemic. This cross-country, preregistered experiment (n = 25,718 from 89 countries) tested hypotheses concerning generalizable positive and negative outcomes of social distancing messages that promoted personal agency and reflective choices (i.e., an autonomy-supportive message) or were restrictive and shaming (i.e. a controlling message) compared to no message at all. Results partially supported experimental hypotheses in that the controlling message increased controlled motivation (a poorly-internalized form of motivation relying on shame, guilt, and fear of social consequences) relative to no message. On the other hand, the autonomy-supportive message lowered feelings of defiance compared to the controlling message, but the controlling message did not differ from receiving no message at all. Unexpectedly, messages did not influence autonomous motivation (a highly-internalized form of motivation relying on one’s core values) or behavioral intentions. Results supported hypothesized associations between people’s existing autonomous and controlled motivations and self-reported behavioral intentions to engage in social distancing: Controlled motivation was associated with more defiance and less long-term behavioral intentions to engage in social distancing, whereas autonomous motivation was associated with less defiance and more short- and long-term intentions to social distance. Overall, this work highlights the potential harm of using shaming and pressuring language in public health communication, with implications for the current and future global health challenges

Development of a Mobile App for Clinical Research: Challenges and Implications for Investigators

Advances in mobile app technologies offer opportunities for researchers to feasibly collect a large amount of patient data that were previously inaccessible through traditional clinical research methods. Collection of data via mobile devices allows for several advantages, such as the ability to continuously gather data outside of research facilities and produce a greater quantity of data, making these data much more valuable to researchers. Health services research is increasingly incorporating mobile health (mHealth), but collecting these data in current research institutions is not without its challenges. Our paper uses a specific example to depict specific challenges of mHealth research and provides recommendations for investigators looking to incorporate digital app technologies and patient-collected digital data into their studies. Our experience describes how clinical researchers should be prepared to work with variable software and mobile app development timelines; research institutions that are interested in participating in mHealth research need to invest in supporting information technology infrastructures in order to be a part of the growing field of mHealth and gain access to valuable patient-collected data

Using Bandit Algorithms to Maximize SARS-CoV-2 Case-Finding: Evaluation and Feasibility Study

BackgroundThe Flexible Adaptive Algorithmic Surveillance Testing (FAAST) program represents an innovative approach for improving the detection of new cases of infectious disease; it is deployed here to screen and diagnose SARS-CoV-2. With the advent of treatment for COVID-19, finding individuals infected with SARS-CoV-2 is an urgent clinical and public health priority. While these kinds of Bayesian search algorithms are used widely in other settings (eg, to find downed aircraft, in submarine recovery, and to aid in oil exploration), this is the first time that Bayesian adaptive approaches have been used for active disease surveillance in the field. ObjectiveThis study’s objective was to evaluate a Bayesian search algorithm to target hotspots of SARS-CoV-2 transmission in the community with the goal of detecting the most cases over time across multiple locations in Columbus, Ohio, from August to October 2021. MethodsThe algorithm used to direct pop-up SARS-CoV-2 testing for this project is based on Thompson sampling, in which the aim is to maximize the average number of new cases of SARS-CoV-2 diagnosed among a set of testing locations based on sampling from prior probability distributions for each testing site. An academic-governmental partnership between Yale University, The Ohio State University, Wake Forest University, the Ohio Department of Health, the Ohio National Guard, and the Columbus Metropolitan Libraries conducted a study of bandit algorithms to maximize the detection of new cases of SARS-CoV-2 in this Ohio city in 2021. The initiative established pop-up COVID-19 testing sites at 13 Columbus locations, including library branches, recreational and community centers, movie theaters, homeless shelters, family services centers, and community event sites. Our team conducted between 0 and 56 tests at the 16 testing events, with an overall average of 25.3 tests conducted per event and a moving average that increased over time. Small incentives—including gift cards and take-home rapid antigen tests—were offered to those who approached the pop-up sites to encourage their participation. ResultsOver time, as expected, the Bayesian search algorithm directed testing efforts to locations with higher yields of new diagnoses. Surprisingly, the use of the algorithm also maximized the identification of cases among minority residents of underserved communities, particularly African Americans, with the pool of participants overrepresenting these people relative to the demographic profile of the local zip code in which testing sites were located. ConclusionsThis study demonstrated that a pop-up testing strategy using a bandit algorithm can be feasibly deployed in an urban setting during a pandemic. It is the first real-world use of these kinds of algorithms for disease surveillance and represents a key step in evaluating the effectiveness of their use in maximizing the detection of undiagnosed cases of SARS-CoV-2 and other infections, such as HIV

Getting Better Hospital Alarm Sounds Into a Global Standard

The reserved set of audible alarm signals embodied within the global medical device safety standard, IEC 60601-1-8, is known to be problematic and in need of updating. The current alarm signals are not only suboptimal, but there is also little evidence beyond learnability (which is known to be poor) that demonstrates their performance in realistic and representative clinical environments. In this article, we describe the process of first designing and then testing potential replacement audible alarm signals for IEC 60601-1-8, starting with the design of several sets of candidate sounds and initial tests on learnability and localizability, followed by testing in simulated clinical environments. We demonstrate that in all tests, the alarm signals selected for further development significantly outperform the current alarm signals. We describe the process of collecting considerably more data on the performance of the new sounds than exists for the current sounds, which ultimately will be of use to end users. We also reflect on the process and practice of working with the relevant committees and other practical issues beyond the science, which also need constant attention if the alarms we have developed are to be included successfully in an updated version of the standard