4.8 Article

Development and validation of the pandemic fatigue scale

Journal

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
Volume 14, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-023-42063-2

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The authors of this study introduce a measurement of pandemic fatigue and report on its existence and changes during the COVID-19 pandemic. They also identify correlates of pandemic fatigue and show that those who experienced more pandemic fatigue were less likely to adhere to various health-protective behaviors.
The existence and nature of pandemic fatigue-defined as a gradually emerging subjective state of weariness and exhaustion from, and a general demotivation towards, following recommended health-protective behaviors, including keeping oneself informed during a pandemic-has been debated. Herein, we introduce the Pandemic Fatigue Scale and show how pandemic fatigue evolved during the COVID-19 pandemic, using data from one panel survey and two repeated cross-sectional surveys in Denmark and Germany (overall N = 34,582). We map the correlates of pandemic fatigue and show that pandemic fatigue is negatively related to people's self-reported adherence to recommended health-protective behaviors. Manipulating the (de)motivational aspect of pandemic fatigue in a preregistered online experiment (N = 1584), we further show that pandemic fatigue negatively affects people's intention to adhere to recommended health-protective behaviors. Combined, these findings provide evidence not only for the existence of pandemic fatigue, but also its psychological and behavioral associations. In this study the authors introduce a measure of pandemic fatigue and report the existence of, and changes in, pandemic fatigue during the COVID-19 pandemic. They also identify correlates of pandemic fatigue and show that those who experienced more pandemic fatigue were less likely to adhere to various health-protective behaviors.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available