Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Appears in Collections:Psychology Journal Articles
Peer Review Status: Refereed
Title: Interventions to promote physical distancing behaviour during infectious disease pandemics or epidemics: A systematic review
Author(s): Epton, Tracy
Ghio, Daniela
Ballard, Lisa M
Allen, Sarah F
Kassianos, Angelos P
Hewitt, Rachael
Swainston, Katherine
Fynn, Wendy Irene
Rowland, Vickie
Westbrook, Juliette
Jenkinson, Elizabeth
Morrow, Alison
McGeechan, Grant J
Stanescu, Sabina
Swanson, Vivien
Keywords: Systematic review
Physical distancing
Social distancing
Issue Date: Jun-2022
Date Deposited: 10-Jun-2022
Citation: Epton T, Ghio D, Ballard LM, Allen SF, Kassianos AP, Hewitt R, Swainston K, Fynn WI, Rowland V, Westbrook J, Jenkinson E, Morrow A, McGeechan GJ, Stanescu S & Swanson V (2022) Interventions to promote physical distancing behaviour during infectious disease pandemics or epidemics: A systematic review. Social Science and Medicine, 303, Art. No.: 114946.
Abstract: Objectives Physical distancing, defined as keeping 1–2m apart when co-located, can prevent cases of droplet or aerosol transmitted infectious diseases such as SARS-CoV2. During the COVID-19 pandemic, distancing was a recommendation or a requirement in many countries. This systematic review aimed to determine which interventions and behavior change techniques (BCTs) are effective in promoting adherence to distancing and through which potential mechanisms of action (MOAs). Methods Six databases were searched. The review included studies that were (a) conducted on humans, (b) reported physical distancing interventions, (c) included any comparator (e.g., pre-intervention versus post-intervention; randomized controlled trial), and (d) reported actual distancing or predictors of distancing behavior. Risk of bias was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. BCTs and potential MoAs were identified in each intervention. Results Six articles (with seven studies and 19 comparisons) indicated that distancing interventions could successfully change MoAs and behavior. Successful BCTs (MoAs) included feedback on behavior (e.g., motivation); information about health consequences, salience of health consequences (e.g., beliefs about consequences), demonstration (e.g., beliefs about capabilities), and restructuring the physical environment (e.g., environmental context and resources). The most promising interventions were proximity buzzers, directional systems, and posters with loss-framed messages that demonstrated the behaviors. Conclusions The evidence indicates several BCTs and potential MoAs that should be targeted in interventions and highlights gaps that should be the focus of future research.
DOI Link: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2022.114946
Rights: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons CC-BY license (, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. You are not required to obtain permission to reuse this article.
Notes: Additional co-authors: Aysha A. Yousuf, Nisha Sharma, Suhana Begum, Eleni Karasouli, Daniel Scanlan. Gillian W. Shorter, Madelynne A. Arden, Christopher J. Armitage, Daryl B. O'Connor, Atiya Kamal, Emily McBride, Jo Hart, Lucie Byrne-Davis, Angel Chater, John Drury
Licence URL(s):

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
1-s2.0-S0277953622002520-main.pdfFulltext - Published Version922.87 kBAdobe PDFView/Open

This item is protected by original copyright

A file in this item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons

Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

The metadata of the records in the Repository are available under the CC0 public domain dedication: No Rights Reserved

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.