Abstract
AIM: The goal of this research was to assess the influence of adult attachment, personality, and cultural orientation on social distancing and attitudes toward COVID-19 mitigation interventions. METHODS: Survey data was collected across two samples (N(MTurk) = 201, N(snowball) = 242) in the US from April 29 to May 11, 2020. Adult attachment was assessed via the Experiences in Close Relationships Scale-Short Form (ECR-S; Wei, M., Russell, D. W., Mallinckrodt, B., & Vogel, D. L. (2007). The experiences in close relationship scale (ECR)-short form: Reliability, validity, and factor structure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 88(2), 187-204), personality was assessed via the Ten Item Personality Inventory (TIPI; Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B. (2003). A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37(6), 504-528), cultural orientation was assessed via the Horizontal and Vertical Individualism and Collectivism Scale (Triandis, H. C., & Galfand, M. J. (1998). Converging measurement of horizontal and vertical individualism and collectivism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(1), 118-128), and social distancing and attitudes toward mitigation interventions were assessed via self-report measures developed for this assessment. RESULTS: In the MTurk sample, agreeableness (β = .19) and conscientiousness (β = .26) predicted positive mitigation intervention attitudes. Agreeableness (β = .24) and vertical collectivism (β = .25) positively predicted social distancing, while attachment anxiety (β = -.32) and vertical individualism (β = -.32) negatively predicted social distancing. In our snowball sample, residing primarily in New York, openness (β = .18) and horizontal collectivism (β = .16) predicted positive intervention attitudes, while horizontal individualism (β = -.20) predicted negative attitudes. Social contact in this sample was low and not associated with predictor variables. In both samples, mitigation attitudes and social distancing were only moderately correlated. IMPLICATIONS: Our findings highlight the inherent inconsistency between attitudes and behaviors as well as the potential impact of mandated interventions on both attitudes and behavior.