5
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Wearing a face mask against Covid-19 results in a reduction of social distancing

      research-article
      1 , 2 , 1 , *
      PLoS ONE
      Public Library of Science

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          In the context of the Covid-19 pandemic, barrier gestures such as regular hand-washing, social distancing, and wearing a face mask are highly recommended. Critically, interpersonal distance (IPD) depends on the affective dimension of social interaction, which might be affected by the current Covid-19 context. In the present internet-based experimental study, we analyzed the preferred IPD of 457 French participants when facing human-like characters that were either wearing a face mask or displaying a neutral, happy or angry facial expression. Results showed that IPD was significantly reduced when characters were wearing a face mask, as they were perceived as more trustworthy compared to the other conditions. Importantly, IPD was even more reduced in participants infected with Covid-19 or living in low-risk areas, while it was not affected by the predicted health of the characters. These findings shed further light on the psychological factors that motivate IPD adjustments, in particular when facing a collective threat. They are also of crucial importance for policy makers as they reveal that despite the indisputable value of wearing a face mask in the current pandemic context, their use should be accompanied by an emphasis on social distancing to prevent detrimental health consequences.

          Related collections

          Most cited references30

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence

          Summary The December, 2019 coronavirus disease outbreak has seen many countries ask people who have potentially come into contact with the infection to isolate themselves at home or in a dedicated quarantine facility. Decisions on how to apply quarantine should be based on the best available evidence. We did a Review of the psychological impact of quarantine using three electronic databases. Of 3166 papers found, 24 are included in this Review. Most reviewed studies reported negative psychological effects including post-traumatic stress symptoms, confusion, and anger. Stressors included longer quarantine duration, infection fears, frustration, boredom, inadequate supplies, inadequate information, financial loss, and stigma. Some researchers have suggested long-lasting effects. In situations where quarantine is deemed necessary, officials should quarantine individuals for no longer than required, provide clear rationale for quarantine and information about protocols, and ensure sufficient supplies are provided. Appeals to altruism by reminding the public about the benefits of quarantine to wider society can be favourable.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            An interactive web-based dashboard to track COVID-19 in real time

            In December, 2019, a local outbreak of pneumonia of initially unknown cause was detected in Wuhan (Hubei, China), and was quickly determined to be caused by a novel coronavirus, 1 namely severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The outbreak has since spread to every province of mainland China as well as 27 other countries and regions, with more than 70 000 confirmed cases as of Feb 17, 2020. 2 In response to this ongoing public health emergency, we developed an online interactive dashboard, hosted by the Center for Systems Science and Engineering (CSSE) at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA, to visualise and track reported cases of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in real time. The dashboard, first shared publicly on Jan 22, illustrates the location and number of confirmed COVID-19 cases, deaths, and recoveries for all affected countries. It was developed to provide researchers, public health authorities, and the general public with a user-friendly tool to track the outbreak as it unfolds. All data collected and displayed are made freely available, initially through Google Sheets and now through a GitHub repository, along with the feature layers of the dashboard, which are now included in the Esri Living Atlas. The dashboard reports cases at the province level in China; at the city level in the USA, Australia, and Canada; and at the country level otherwise. During Jan 22–31, all data collection and processing were done manually, and updates were typically done twice a day, morning and night (US Eastern Time). As the outbreak evolved, the manual reporting process became unsustainable; therefore, on Feb 1, we adopted a semi-automated living data stream strategy. Our primary data source is DXY, an online platform run by members of the Chinese medical community, which aggregates local media and government reports to provide cumulative totals of COVID-19 cases in near real time at the province level in China and at the country level otherwise. Every 15 min, the cumulative case counts are updated from DXY for all provinces in China and for other affected countries and regions. For countries and regions outside mainland China (including Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan), we found DXY cumulative case counts to frequently lag behind other sources; we therefore manually update these case numbers throughout the day when new cases are identified. To identify new cases, we monitor various Twitter feeds, online news services, and direct communication sent through the dashboard. Before manually updating the dashboard, we confirm the case numbers with regional and local health departments, including the respective centres for disease control and prevention (CDC) of China, Taiwan, and Europe, the Hong Kong Department of Health, the Macau Government, and WHO, as well as city-level and state-level health authorities. For city-level case reports in the USA, Australia, and Canada, which we began reporting on Feb 1, we rely on the US CDC, the government of Canada, the Australian Government Department of Health, and various state or territory health authorities. All manual updates (for countries and regions outside mainland China) are coordinated by a team at Johns Hopkins University. The case data reported on the dashboard aligns with the daily Chinese CDC 3 and WHO situation reports 2 for within and outside of mainland China, respectively (figure ). Furthermore, the dashboard is particularly effective at capturing the timing of the first reported case of COVID-19 in new countries or regions (appendix). With the exception of Australia, Hong Kong, and Italy, the CSSE at Johns Hopkins University has reported newly infected countries ahead of WHO, with Hong Kong and Italy reported within hours of the corresponding WHO situation report. Figure Comparison of COVID-19 case reporting from different sources Daily cumulative case numbers (starting Jan 22, 2020) reported by the Johns Hopkins University Center for Systems Science and Engineering (CSSE), WHO situation reports, and the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention (Chinese CDC) for within (A) and outside (B) mainland China. Given the popularity and impact of the dashboard to date, we plan to continue hosting and managing the tool throughout the entirety of the COVID-19 outbreak and to build out its capabilities to establish a standing tool to monitor and report on future outbreaks. We believe our efforts are crucial to help inform modelling efforts and control measures during the earliest stages of the outbreak.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response

              The COVID-19 pandemic represents a massive global health crisis. Because the crisis requires large-scale behaviour change and places significant psychological burdens on individuals, insights from the social and behavioural sciences can be used to help align human behaviour with the recommendations of epidemiologists and public health experts. Here we discuss evidence from a selection of research topics relevant to pandemics, including work on navigating threats, social and cultural influences on behaviour, science communication, moral decision-making, leadership, and stress and coping. In each section, we note the nature and quality of prior research, including uncertainty and unsettled issues. We identify several insights for effective response to the COVID-19 pandemic and highlight important gaps researchers should move quickly to fill in the coming weeks and months.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: SoftwareRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Formal analysisRole: Funding acquisitionRole: InvestigationRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: ResourcesRole: SupervisionRole: ValidationRole: VisualizationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS One
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                7 December 2020
                2020
                7 December 2020
                : 15
                : 12
                : e0243023
                Affiliations
                [1 ] CNRS, UMR 9193 - SCALab - Sciences Cognitives et Sciences Affectives, Univ. Lille, Lille, France
                [2 ] Inserm, CHU Lille, U1172 - LilNCog - Lille Neuroscience & Cognition, Univ. Lille, Lille, France
                National Institutes of Health, UNITED STATES
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0918-8869
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7148-0561
                Article
                PONE-D-20-15197
                10.1371/journal.pone.0243023
                7721169
                33284812
                da289fc9-ba8a-4f6a-876b-76bbfee6c873
                © 2020 Cartaud et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 20 May 2020
                : 15 November 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 1, Tables: 1, Pages: 9
                Funding
                Funded by: French National Research Agency
                Award ID: ANR-11-EQPX-0023
                Award Recipient :
                This work was funded by the French National Research Agency (ANR-11-EQPX-0023). A.C. was financed by a grant from the Region Hauts-de-France and the University of Lille.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Anatomy
                Head
                Face
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Anatomy
                Head
                Face
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Medical Conditions
                Infectious Diseases
                Viral Diseases
                Covid 19
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Psychology
                Behavior
                Nonverbal Communication
                Facial Expressions
                Social Sciences
                Psychology
                Behavior
                Nonverbal Communication
                Facial Expressions
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Psychology
                Emotions
                Social Sciences
                Psychology
                Emotions
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Epidemiology
                Medical Risk Factors
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Medical Conditions
                Infectious Diseases
                Infectious Disease Control
                Social Distancing
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Epidemiology
                Pandemics
                Biology and Life Sciences
                Ecology
                Community Ecology
                Ecological Risk
                Ecology and Environmental Sciences
                Ecology
                Community Ecology
                Ecological Risk
                Custom metadata
                All relevant data are available at DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/UTB4C.
                COVID-19

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article