Predicting Physical Distancing in the Context of COVID-19: A Test of the Extended Parallel Process Model Among Canadian Adults

The purpose of this study was to test the extended parallel process model (EPPM) in the context of the novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) among a nationally representative sample of Canadians. Intentions to follow government recommendations, physical distancing, and fear control responses (i.e., negative and defensive reactions) were predicted using EPPM (perceived threat and efficacy) and demographic variables (age, gender, and education). Data were collected using a cross-sectional online survey through a third-party market research company. The sample was composed of 1,055 adults (M-age = 48.82, SD = 16.66; 51.2% female). One multiple regression per dependent variable (i.e., intentions to follow government recommendation, physical distancing, and fear control responses) was conducted. Certain two-way and three-way interactions were also included in the models. Older adults, females, and more educated individuals generally had higher intentions, engaged in more physical distancing, and had lower scores for fear control responses. Also, consistent with the EPPM, the overall pattern suggested that people with high scores for both perceived threat and efficacy had the most positive profile (high intentions and physical distancing and low fear control). Perceived efficacy was a particularly strong predictor in analyses. We recommend that public health interventions target males, younger people, and those who are less educated. Furthermore, it is recommended that interventions increase both perceived threat and efficacy (especially efficacy). Although the design was cross-sectional, it was necessary to expedite the study in a time when it is sorely needed. Future research should confirm our findings using experimental designs.

Automated summary

This study tested the EPPM in the context of COVID-19 among Canadians and found that older adults, females, and more educated individuals generally had higher intentions, engaged in more physical distancing, and had lower fear control responses. People with high scores for both perceived threat and efficacy had the most positive profile. Perceived efficacy was a particularly strong predictor in analyses.