Acceptance of COVID-19-related Government Restrictions

A Vignette Experiment on Effects of Procedural Fairness

Abstract

To prevent the spread of COVID-19, governments asked citizens to stay at home. Unlike coercive measures such as lockdowns, in the case of non-coercive measures, the effectiveness of such requests depends on the extent to which citizens accept the measures. This study examines what factors influence the procedural fairness associated with the measures and how such procedural fairness improved or deteriorated citizens’ acceptance of measures. Japan, which relied mostly on non-coercive measures, offers a good case to test this question. We carried out a survey in Japan during March 2021 and conducted a vignette experiment within the survey. The vignette experiment led us to the following conclusion: First, citizens’ perception of fairness regarding the decision-making process was negatively affected by the prime minister’s opinion, which did not necessarily coincide with recommendations of epidemiological experts in our scenario. Still, the prime minister’s opinion did not show a significant effect on the eventual acceptance of measures. Second, the non-transparent decision-making process in the government decreased the perception of fairness and acceptance of measures. Third, the elements of opinion and transparency influenced policy acceptance through the mediation of fairness perception. Fourth, higher trust in epidemiological experts mitigated the negative effect of procedural unfairness.