Back

Intention of UK residents to wear facemasks and practise social distancing during the next respiratory virus pandemic

Smith, D. R.; Buckell, J.; Hancock, T. O.; Morrell, L.; Pouwels, K.

2026-05-30 public and global health
10.64898/2026.05.21.26353824 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: Wearing facemasks and practising social distancing slow the spread of respiratory pathogens. However, in the event of a new pandemic emerging, the willingness of populations to voluntarily adopt these behaviours is unclear. Methods: A discrete choice experiment was conducted among 2,006 UK-based adults. Participants were presented with hypothetical scenarios describing the emergence of a respiratory virus pandemic and were asked to choose when they would wear facemasks and practise social distancing. A mixed multinomial logit model was used to jointly estimate how disease severity and prevalence, uncertainty in these quantities, and individual-level characteristics influence behavioural choices. Findings: Participants were averse to facemasks and social distancing in the absence of pandemic risk. For each ten-unit increase in severity (10 additional hospitalisations/1,000 infections), the odds of always wearing a facemask outside the home increased by 15.9% (95%CI: 14.3%, 17.5%), relative to rarely/never, and the odds of avoiding all people as much as possible increased by 16.4% (14.6%, 18.2%), relative to not avoiding anyone. Greater disease prevalence, uncertainty in disease severity or disease prevalence, a university education, prior COVID-19 vaccination and non-white ethnicity were also associated with choosing to always wear facemasks and avoid all people as much as possible. The probability of participants choosing to rarely/never wear facemasks varied from 13.4% (11.9%, 14.9%) in the lowest-risk scenario to 1.4% (1.2%, 1.7%) in the highest-risk scenario. Interpretation: Perceived risks of disease and associated uncertainty drive intention of UK adults to adapt their behaviour in a future pandemic.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.