Back

Trust as a Hidden Driver of Epidemic Dynamics: A Missing Parameter in Compartmental Disease Transmission Models

Zapf, A. J.; Dewey, G.; Ognyanova, K.; Baum, M.; Hanage, W. P.; Lipsitch, M.; Uslu, A. A.; Druckman, J. N.; Perlis, R.; Lazer, D.; Santillana, M.

2026-06-24 epidemiology
10.64898/2026.06.15.26355705 medRxiv
Show abstract

Compartmental models of infectious disease transmission make assumptions about human behaviors. Specifically, they parameterize interactions across population groups, assumed to have distinct epidemiologically-relevant behavioral patterns, primarily through contact matrices stratified by demographic variables such as age, gender, or socioeconomic status. Although such demographic characteristics are readily measurable, they may inadequately capture the social and psychological forces that govern protective behaviors. Drawing on 20 waves of a national survey conducted throughout the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, we show that institutional trust - particularly trust in public health agencies, physicians, and hospitals - is a dominant predictor of protective behavior adoption. For mask wearing during periods of strongest pandemic activity, for example, institutional trust explains more behavioral variance across population groups than age, income, education, and partisan affiliation combined. In unadjusted analyses, the difference in protective behavior adoption between individuals with the highest and lowest trust in the CDC was four- to six-fold larger than the corresponding differences by age, income, or educational attainment, and exceeded the difference between Democratic and Republican respondents. This association was institutionally specific (e.g., the relationship attenuates for trust in banks), and behaviorally specific (e.g., trust in the CDC is associated with protective behaviors but not visiting a doctor). The latter suggests that trust modifies voluntary compliance with public health recommendations rather than access to or use of healthcare. We conclude that compartmental models of disease transmission would be substantially improved by incorporating institutional trust as a stratifying variable. We additionally offer a trust-integrated mathematical modeling framework and recommendations for the data infrastructure needed for its implementation.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of The Royal Society Interface
235 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
13.0%
2
Epidemics
116 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.8%
3
PLOS Computational Biology
1863 papers in training set
Top 5%
6.8%
4
Journal of Theoretical Biology
162 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
6.3%
5
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 28%
5.5%
6
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2444 papers in training set
Top 13%
4.1%
7
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 33%
3.2%
50% of probability mass above
8
Mathematical Medicine and Biology: A Journal of the IMA
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.2%
9
Epidemiology
32 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.8%
10
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 38%
2.7%
11
Royal Society Open Science
214 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.5%
12
Mathematical Biosciences
49 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.4%
13
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 46%
1.9%
14
Epidemiology and Infection
89 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
15
Physical Biology
46 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.5%
16
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
72 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.4%
17
Infectious Disease Modelling
54 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.3%
18
PNAS Nexus
159 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.3%
19
Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.1%
20
Science Advances
1243 papers in training set
Top 24%
1.1%
21
Annals of Epidemiology
21 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.1%
22
American Journal of Epidemiology
67 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.1%
23
Communications Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
24
Bulletin of Mathematical Biology
92 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.0%
25
Communications Physics
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.8%
26
Physical Review Research
49 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.6%
27
Demographic Research
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
0.6%
28
Medical Decision Making
12 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.6%