ArticleBritish journal of health psychology2025
Psychosocial determinants of handwashing and physical distancing behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Netherlands: A longitudinal analysis.
Article in British journal of health psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Seasonal variation in SARS-CoV-2 transmission in The Netherlands, 2020-2022: statistical evidence for an inverse association with solar radiation and temperature.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2025Article
- Trends in the Use of Non-Pharmaceutical Interventions in Schools During the COVID-19 Pandemic, February 2021 to December 2023: A Mixed Methods Study.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Psychosocial determinants of handwashing and physical distancing behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic in the Netherlands: A longitudinal analysis.British journal of health psychology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesPhysical distancing and handwashing can be important infection prevention measures during an infectious disease outbreak such as the COVID-19 pandemic. To stimulate these behaviours, knowledge of psychosocial determinants as well as contextual factors is vital. We present longitudinal, within-person analyses of the impact of contextual and psychosocial factors on handwashing and distancing behaviour.
designWe used individual-level data (186,490 participants completing 971,899 surveys) from the Corona Behavioural Unit COVID-19 Cohort, a dynamic cohort study conducted during 26 months of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Netherlands.
methodsFixed-effects models were employed to estimate within-person associations between psychosocial factors and behaviour, combined with main and moderating effects of contextual factors.
resultsPandemic severity was associated with more handwashing and distancing behaviour, while the duration of the pandemic had little effect. Within-person changes in response efficacy were most relevant for changes in both handwashing and distancing behaviour, while self-efficacy, descriptive norms and perceived severity of infecting others affected behaviour indirectly. These effects were stable over time. Associations were larger in cross-sectional models, indicating that such models tend to overestimate effects.
conclusionsOur study highlights the importance of longitudinal data and within-person models to detect possible causal associations. The results suggest that during an outbreak, government and public health professionals should clearly communicate the severity of the pandemic (e.g., hospitalization rates) and the effectiveness of recommended prevention measures in reducing that risk; and seek to improve people's capabilities and opportunities to adhere to guidelines, for example, by modifying the environment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.