Scary new BCP lockdown message appears illiterate of attitude-change psychology, but will worsen anxiety disorder epidemic

Local Greens have written an urgent open letter to Conservative-run BCP Council‘s Covid resilience chief. They have shared scientific evidence which suggests that BCP’s new shock-tactic messaging to encourage people to stay at home during the current national lockdown: 

1. risks backfiring in its effects on virus-spreading public attitudes and behaviour; and
2. at the same time is likely to exacerbate the epidemic of anxiety disorders associated with the pandemic.

The letter to Councillor Nicola Greene goes on to suggest a potentially ‘smarter’ alternative approach, of reminding the public of which specific actions, interactions and stop-offs while unavoidably out and about make them and other people vulnerable to potentially deadly infection – while still emphasising that if people don’t have a valid reason to go out at this time, they shouldn’t.

The letter has been drafted by Chris Henderson, a graduate member of the British Psychological Society and an MA psychology student at Bournemouth University, and previously a town hall manager, in collaboration with co-signatories Councillor Simon Bull and Councillor Chris Rigby.

Chris Henderson commented: “Everyone wants their local authorities to be proactive in doing anything they responsibly can at this time to help stop the spread of Covid-19. We can all understand why BCP Council has been tempted to reach for shock tactics, when reckless and unlawful mixing, and inattentiveness to hygiene principles, appear to be significant drivers of the terrible toll of infection and death.

“Unfortunately. psychologists have developed a substantial base of evidence that ‘scare’ tactics can really prove counter-productive. Council chiefs designing a campaign which uses this kind of tactics really need to have got on top of some of the science of how human brains will actually respond.

“Humans have mental ‘switch-off’ avoidance mechanisms against unmanageable levels of anxiety. The research evidence has identified specific criteria which give fear-based campaigns a reasonable chance of being successful, rather than backfiring. Unfortunately, BCP don’t appear to have hit any of them with this campaign.

Graph showing the core research finding: ‘Moderate’ levels of fear seem to work at changing attitudes, but if you overdo the fear levels it’s likely to work less well.

“Additionally, if you want residents to raise their game at avoiding risky actions while they are unavoidably out and about – for work, shopping or daily exercise – then deliberately ratcheting up anxiety levels in the middle of an anxiety disorder epidemic is really not the way to do it. Anxiety disorders inherently reduce mental ‘regulation’. People struggling with them are therefore less likely to retain the grounded brainspace to be spatially aware of their distance from other people, to avoid touching surfaces or their face, and so on. 

Councillor Chris Rigby added: “There are already people who’ve developed crippling anxiety over the past 12 months. Messaging like this does not help, and it’ll also not deter those who flout the rules either.”

The letter to BCP’s portfolio holder for Covid resilience notes: “Pushing into the faces of nurses who rely on long bus journeys to reach Royal Bournemouth Hospital or Poole Hospital for work every day that their every journey may cause people to ‘die’ is not doing anything useful for them. It merely further exacerbates their anxiety at the truly harrowing situation they are on the front line of daily. 45% of doctors and nurses based in Intensive Care Units met the threshold for probable PTSD, anxiety or depression during June and July of last year.”

Chris Henderson further commented: “These glaring issues really raise questions about how competent and responsible the design of this campaign was. We’re asking for answers, and we hope they will be forthcoming soon, for the sake of public confidence in the soundness of BCP’s Covid awareness activity.”

The letter suggests “potentially smarter” copy for a public awareness campaign, focused on specific behaviours which are known factors in actual vulnerabilty to infection, as follows:

If you don’t need to go out, don’t. 1 in 3 people infected with Covid-19 don’t show symptoms, but many of all ages are still dying.

Need to go out? Here are some key tips to minimise the risk of spreading the virus:

• Wash your hands for at least 20 seconds before you go out, and after you get home again.
• Pop some hand-sanitiser in your bag or coat pocket before you go out, and use it frequently while out.
• Take a mask, always wear it in shops and other indoor premises (unless medically exempt)… and it’s a good idea to wear one in busy outdoor areas too.
• Use your toilet before you go out, if it might save you from needing a public toilet while outdoors.
• Take some food and/or drink with you if you might need sustenance while outdoors, so that you don’t have to make an extra visit to a shop.
• If you can, walk or cycle instead of taking the bus or train.
• Stay 2 metres apart at all times from people you don’t live with.
• Exercise with at most one other person.
• Don’t shout or sing close to other people.
• Avoid touching things which other people have touched.
• Try to avoid touching your face.
• Don’t go into shops just to browse, or without planning what you need to buy.
• Remember not to get too close to the worker at non-screened shop counters.

The letter ends with a series of questions to BCP’s portfolio holder for Covid resilience:

• What expert advice and/or evidence, from the fields of psychology and/or public health behavioural change, was taken by BCP Council during the process of deciding that this messaging would bring net benefits?
• Was the Public Health department involved in devising and approving this campaign?
• What assessment was made of the potential negative impacts on vulnerable residents, including the many key worker heroes living with significant mental health issues at this time, of the deliberately anxiety-inducing nature of the messaging?
• What assessment was made of the ‘shaming’ potential regarding genuine needs to go outdoors (including legally permitted needs for physical and mental health), particularly for those struggling with anxiety disorders, and the practical mental health impacts on vulnerable residents of any such phenomenon? 
• What frameworks are you using to assess the success, and any negative consequences, of this campaign?
• As the social media campaign reported in Saturday’s Bournemouth Daily Echo appears at this stage only to have been run as Facebook and Instagram “stories” which are no longer visible, can you confirm whether the Council intends to run this messaging again?
• If so, and if those involved in approving this messaging were not aware of any of the scientific issues that we have raised, will you undertake to appropriately review the scientific evidence we have cited and reflect on our stated concerns before repeating this campaign?

The text of the letter, including scientific citations and a ‘more political’ footnote, follows.