key: cord-1025242-7rie00od
authors: A, Stapleton; Stapleton, Alison
title: Choosing not to follow rules that will reduce the spread of COVID-19
date: 2020-07-10
journal: J Contextual Behav Sci
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcbs.2020.07.002
sha: 6f52395b90a2b9c0013c5ab8d133e44d74e41351
doc_id: 1025242
cord_uid: 7rie00od

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, many authorities have implemented public health measures that place restrictions on individuals. Understanding how individuals respond to these new rules, particularly whether they are likely to follow or break them, is extremely important. Relational frame theory offers unique insights into rule-governed behavior, allowing researchers to develop functional-analytic interpretations of why a listener may understand a rule, have the required response established in their behavioral repertoire, and still choose not to follow the rule. Drawing from research on rule-following in accordance with relational frame theory and cognitive neuroscience, social psychology, and health literature, this paper presents reasons why a rule may be understood but not followed, identifying important considerations for implementing public health measures to reduce the spread of COVID-19. Specifically, rule-givers should attend to their credibility, authority and ability to mediate consequences, rule plausibility, establishing adequate motivative augmental control, whether the behavior specified in the rule opposes habits, and whether the message incites counterpliance.

health measures to reduce the spread of COVID-19, it is extremely important to understand 10 how individuals respond to these new rules, particularly whether they are likely to follow/ 11 break them. 12

This paper describes why an individual may understand the rules and restrictions in 13 place during the COVID-19 pandemic, but still choose not to comply. Determining why a 14 rule may be understood but not followed is important if we are to influence behavior. I will 15 begin by presenting a brief overview of rule-following in accordance with RFT (illustrated 16 using a COVID-19 specific example). Next, drawing from RFT research, cognitive 17 neuroscience, social psychology, and health literature, I will present reasons why a rule may 18 be understood but not followed, with suggestions for reducing the probability of rule -19 breaking in the context of pandemic restrictions presented throughout. It is important to note 20 that this paper adopts the RFT perspective of rule-governed behavior, wherein rules include 21 verbal antecedents (Hayes, Gifford, & Hayes, 1998). I use the term "rule" as a general means 22

to orient readers towards a particular behavioral class. I use "speaker" to refer to the rule-23

giver and "listener" to refer to the rule-recipient (although these can be the same person). 24

Adherence and compliance are treated as translational concepts tied to rule-following. 25

In this example, the individual understood the rule and the required response was 1 already established in their behavioral repertoire (i.e., the individual knew how to engage in 2 social distancing). However, a rule may be understood, the required response may be 3 established in the listener's repertoire, and yet the listener may choose to not follow the rule 4 The influence of speaker credibility on rule-following has been observed in the 1 literature on compliance and obedience. For example, Milgram (1974) observed that when a 2 uniformed experimenter was replaced by an ordinary member of the public (confederate), 3 obedience drastically decreased. One of many interpretations for this finding is that 4 participants likely perceived the ordinary member of the public as less credible (i.e., 5 participants perceived rules delivered by ordinary members of the public as less accurate than 6 rules delivered by a uniformed expert). Beyond the compliance literature, recent research has 7

shown health information source credibility significantly impacts the way individuals receive learning histories and therefore adhered to their rules). 20

In the context of rule-following during the COVID-19 pandemic, if an individual does 21 not perceive the speaker delivering health advice as credible, then they are less likely to 22 adhere to the recommendations. "Why should I do as they say? What would they know?". For 23 example, you may be more likely to adhere to regulations presented by a representative from 24 the World Health Organization than your aunt on your Facebook timeline. Therefore, in order 25 consequences and/ or their verbally ascribed powers of authority (Törneke et al., 2008) . For 10 example, in the context of ability to mediate consequences, a child may follow rules delivered 11 by their parent but not their sibling because reinforcers are delivered by the former (Törneke 12 et al., 2008) . In the context of authority, a child may not adhere to rules delivered by their 13 stepdad, "I don't have to do as you say, you're not my real dad". Although linked to speaker 14 credibility, this approach to understanding why listeners may not follow rules differs in that it 15 is not the apparent accuracy of the rule but perceived availability of consequences that is of 16 interest. 17

Returning to the compliance literature, authority and perceived ability to mediate 18 consequences do appear to impact rule-following. An alternative interpretation of the 19 aforementioned Milgram (1974) uniform variation study is that participants believed the 20 ordinary member of the public was less able to enforce consequences for rule compliance/ 21 non-compliance. Therefore, the participant is less likely to comply with rules delivered by the 22 confederate than those delivered by the experimenter. Similarly, Bickman (1974) reported 23 that individuals were more likely to comply with rules delivered by a guard than a civilian or 24 milkman. This could be due to participants perceiving guards as having a greater capacity to 25 enforce consequences (e.g., enforcing a fine) for non-compliance. In the context of authority, 1 both the Milgram (1974) and Bickman (1974) examples could be interpreted as participants 2 believing they must do as experimenters/ guards say. Within the RFT literature, authority 3 does appear to impact rule-following. Donadeli and Strapasson (2015) found that monitoring 4 increased the probability that the participants would follow rules, with participants exposed to 5 verbal reprimands maintaining rule-following even when it was no longer advantageous to do 6 so. In this study, the presence of an authoritative figure (i.e., the experimenter) who knew 7 whether rules were being followed and would reprimand participants, increased rule-8 following. 9

In the context of rule-following during the COVID-19 pandemic, if a speaker does not 10 have the authority/ does not appear to be able to mediate consequences for following the rule, 11 then a listener will be less likely to adhere to their rules. "What right have you to enforce 12 these rules? What will you do if I don't follow these rules?". For example, an armed guard 13 telling you to wear personal protective equipment will likely be more effective in producing 14 rule-following than your younger sibling telling you the same thing (i.e., the guard has 15 authority and an ability to deliver consequences that your younger sibling does not). 16 Therefore, in order to promote adherence to rules, speakers should ensure the listener 17 believes they have authority and can deliver consequences for non-compliance. For example, 18 a government official presenting restrictions for social distancing in line with 19 recommendations from the World Health Organisation (i.e., they have authority) may refer to 20 guards patrolling the streets to monitor individuals' rule-following (i.e., they can enforce 21 consequences). 22 with the listener's learning history, it is less likely to be followed (Törneke et al., 2008) . For 3 example, consider the rule "if you want to predict and influence behavior, then you must 4 adopt a mechanistic approach and focus on describing behavior". For functional 5

contextualists, this rule would be incoherent with their existing relational networks and thus 6 is unlikely to be followed. Related to rule plausibility is perceived self-efficacy, wherein the 7 extent to which the listener believes they can follow the rule impacts whether it is followed 8 Similarly, this approach allows the individual to examine perceived self-efficacy and work 18 with their physician to tailor regimens as required. Moreover, individuals with higher levels 19

of health literacy report greater adherence than those with lower health literacy (Miller, 20 2016 reinforcers. However, these new rules are incoherent with the previous rules and therefore are 5 less likely to be followed right away. 6

In the context of rule-following during the COVID-19 pandemic, if a rule is 7 contradictory or incoherent with the listener's learning history then it is unlikely to be 8 followed. For example, even if an authoritative figure tells you that injecting disinfectant may 9 kill the virus, you are unlikely to attempt this if your learning history allows you to frame 10 "ingesting disinfectant" in opposition to "staying alive". Therefore, in order to promote 11 adherence to evidence-based rules to reduce the spread of COVID-19, speakers must ensure 12 their rules are sensical within listeners' learning histories, extending listeners' relational 13 networks as required. This will be particularly important when professionals are 14 communicating with the public about COVID-19 immunity (e.g., COVID-19 is not the same 15 as the chickenpox so claims about immunity may be incoherent for some). Regarding 16 perceived self-efficacy, a listener must believe they can follow the rule. This could be 17 achieved by reassuring listeners of their capabilities, modifying the rule based on listener 18 feedback, or even teaching the listener how to follow the rule. 19 Consider the following example of an individual aged 65 who has chronic lung disease in the 12 context of the COVID-19 pandemic. When first advised to cocoon (i.e., stay at home at all 13 times and avoid any face-to-face contact), they did not comply due to low perceived self-14 efficacy, "I can't cope with being cooped up for that long". However, after speaking to their 15 physician, they were informed that unless they cocoon, they are in immediate danger. 16

Following this, the individual began cocooning, despite previous failed attempts to do so. In 17 this example, the individual evaluates the immediate effects of following the rule less 18 negatively by valuing the consequences of following the rule more highly (i.e., coping with 19 being cooped up is less aversive than being in immediate danger). In line with this, within the 20 RFT imagine now that the individuals breaking lockdown are reminded that they are putting their 3 family members at risk. "You may not get sick and die but you could infect your family and 4 they could get sick". If this reminder changes the probability of these individuals breaking 5 lockdown, then it is functioning as an adequate motivative augmental. It is important to note 6 that listeners likely endorse different values which means that the motivative augmentals that 7 function for one group will not necessarily work with another (e.g., reminders that family 8 members are at risk if you break lockdown are only likely to reduce rule-breaking if you care 9 about your family members). 10 11

A rule is less likely to be followed if the behavior specified in the rule is not habitual. suggest that instrumental behavior is particularly likely to become habitual when subject to 6 variable interval schedules of reinforcement and the individual is disinclined to deliberate 7 about the behavior. The latter of these could relate to authority. 8

One of the most successful strategies for reducing interference from habits in daily 9 life and experimental tasks involved attending to slip-ups and thinking "Don't do it" (Quinn, 10 Pascoe, Wood, & Neal, 2010) . This worked, not by decreasing habit strength, but by 11 enhancing cognitive control (i.e., the ability to focus on task-relevant information, while 12 inhibiting non-task-relevant information) (Quinn et al., 2010) . Another successful strategy 13 involved tying inhibitory plans to cues that activate habits (Adriaanse et al., 2010) . Conscious 14 self-monitoring is central to reducing interference from habits. In the context of rule-15 following during the COVID-19 pandemic, a listener may struggle to follow a rule which 16 requires behavior that conflicts with their habits. For example, consider the rule "If I want to 17 reduce the spread of COVID-19, then I must not shake hands at work meetings". If shaking 18 hands had become habitual for the listener, they may need to consciously replace that action 19 with a response that opposes the muscle movements required to shake hands (e.g., waving 20 instead). Providing people with suggestions for alternative opposing actions to replace habits 21 will reduce habit interference and likely increase rule-following. 22 touching you" game that is popular among siblings. In this game, the individual avoids 10 touching their sibling but intentionally comes close to doing so. This typically annoys their 11 sibling who asks them to "stop touching". The individual is technically not touching their 12 sibling and is technically adhering to their sibling's request. However, the individual is aware 13 that their sibling meant for them to "stop almost touching" them. In a similar vein, 14 counterpliance may be understood as rule-governed behavior under the control of a history of 15 socially-mediated reinforcement for a lack of correspondence between the rule and relevant 16 behavior. Simply put, counterpliance occurs when a listener intentionally does not follow the 17 rule they believe the speaker intended. 18 While there has been a dearth of RFT research on counterpliance, it is highly relevant 19 to rule-following and rule-breaking. In the context of rule-following during the COVID- 19 20 pandemic, a listener may not adhere to rules based on a history of peer support for behavior 21 that explicitly deviates from established rules. For example, an adolescent may intentionally 22 break rules around personal protective equipment, removing their mask in public and fake 23 coughing, in order to receive negative attention. The social psychology literature provides 24 important insights into ways to manage counterpliance (referred to as "reactance" in this body of literature). From this perspective, reactance serves to reestablish an individual's 1 sense of freedom (Steindl, Jonas, Sittenthaler, Traut-Mattausch, & Greenberg, 2015) and is 2 extremely similar to counterpliance. Reactance is less likely to occur when rule-following is 3 monitored and the contingencies for rule-following are stronger than those for rule-breaking 4 (Hayes et al., 1989; Steindl et al., 2015) . This appears to relate to authority and reinforcer 5 availability. 6

In the context of rule-following during the COVID-19 pandemic, Reynolds-Tylus 7 (2019) is particularly useful. Reynolds-Tylus (2019) presents features of persuasive health 8 communications that are likely to impact reactance. Freedom-threatening language, message 9 sensation, and other-referencing messages are of particular importance in the pandemic 10 context. Regarding freedom-threatening language, while messages with the objective of 11 enacting behavior change must be direct in advocating for specific actions, explicit messages 12 are more likely to incite reactance due to their freedom threatening nature (Reynolds-Tylus, 13 2019). Regarding message sensation, messages that are high in sensation value (i.e., are 14 dramatic, exciting, and novel), are perceived as more persuasive, with high sensation and low 15 controlling language perceived as most effective (Xu, 2015) . Regarding other-referencing 16 messages (i.e., messages that emphasize the influence of individuals' choices on others), 17 relative to self-referencing messages, other-referencing messages incited less reactance, with 18 participants responding more favorably to both the message and advocated health behaviors Specifically, speakers should attend to their credibility, authority and ability to mediate 8 consequences, rule plausibility, establishing adequate motivative augmental control, whether 9 the behavior specified in the rule opposes habits, and whether the message incites 10 counterpliance. These guidelines may be of use to applied researchers developing public 11 health interventions to promote rule-following. While strict rule-following in every single 12 context is undoubtedly problematic, in the context of a global pandemic, we must be able to 13 promote adherence to rules based on guidelines and evidence from appropriate organizations. 14 

When planning is not enough: Fighting unhealthy snacking habits 3 by mental contrasting with implementation intentions (MCII)

Strategies to enhance patient adherence: 6 Making it simple

Relational frame theory: A post-Skinnerian account of human language and 10 cognition

The differential effect of instructions on dysphoric and nondysphoric persons. The 13 Row

Health literacy and adherence to medical treatment in chronic and acute 12 illness: A meta-analysis

Generalized pliance in relation 15 to contingency insensitivity and mindfulness

Instructional control: Developing a relational 18 frame analysis

On habits and addiction: an associative analysis of 21 compulsive drug seeking

Can't control yourself? Monitor 1 those bad habits

Psychological reactance and persuasive health communication: A 4 review of the literature

Action selection in complex routinized 7 sequential behaviors

Development 10 and initial validation of the Generalized Pliance Questionnaire

Verbal behavior

Adolescent correlates of the Generalized Pliance 14

Understanding psychological reactance: New developments and findings. Zeitschrift 18 fur Psychologie

Rule-governed behavior and 20 psychological problems

Conceptual advances in the cognitive 23 neuroscience of learning: Implications for relational frame theory

Mastering the clinical conversation: 12 Language as intervention

Health information, 14 credibility, homophily, and influence via the Internet: Web sites versus discussion 15 groups

The transformation of consequential 17 functions in accordance with the relational frames of more than and less than

Psychology of habit

Designing messages with high sensation value: When activation meets 23 reactance

• Listeners may understand rules, have the required response available and not comply• Speaker credibility, authority, and consequence availability impact rule-following• Rule plausibility and motivative augmental control impact rule-following• A rule is less likely to be followed if it opposes habits or incites counterpliance This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.Declarations of interest: none.