Skip directly to site content Skip directly to page options Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link Skip directly to A-Z link
Volume 27, Number 1—January 2021
Research Letter

Attitudes about COVID-19 Lockdown among General Population, France, March 2020

Patrick Peretti-WatelComments to Author , Valérie Seror, Sébastien Cortaredona, Odile Launay, Jocelyn Raude, Pierre Verger, François Beck, Stéphane Legleye, Olivier L’Haridon, Jeremy Ward, Enquête Longitudinale, and for the Coronavirus and Confinement and COCONEL and Study Group
Author affiliations: VITROME (Vecteurs–Infections Tropicales et Méditerranéennes), Institut Méditerranée Infection, Aix Marseille Université, Marseille, France (P. Peretti-Watel, V. Seror, S. Cortaredona, J. Ward); Observatoire Régional de la Santé Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur, Marseille (P. Peretti-Watel, P. Verger); Centre d’Investigation Clinique Cochin-Pasteur, Paris, France (O. Launay) ; École des Hautes Études en Santé Publique, Rennes (J. Raude); Centre de Recherche en Épidémiologie et Santé des Populations, Villejuif, France (F. Beck, S. Legleye); Université de Rennes, Rennes (O. L’Haridon); Groupe d’Étude des Méthodes de l’Analyse Sociologique de la Sorbonne, Paris (J. Ward)

Main Article

Table

Opinion about the coronavirus disease lockdown among 1,012 respondents to the Coronavirus and Confinement: Enquête Longitudinale (COCONEL) survey, France, March 27–29, 2020*

Statement or condition % Respondents who agreed with statement, by income level (+ MoE)
p value
Overall Lower income, n = 216 Medium income, n = 566 Higher income, n = 230
The lockdown:
Is the only effective way to fight the epidemic 88 (+2) 81 (+5) 90 (+2) 93 (+3) <0.001
Should last several more weeks to be effective 93 (+1) 89 (+4) 94 (+2) 98 (+2) <0.01
Should be strengthened to be effective 80 (+2) 75 (+6) 82 (+3) 81 (+5) NS
Is disproportionate considering the real gravity of the epidemic 20 (+2) 35 (+6) 18 (+3) 10 (+4) <0.001
Should be less coercive to be more acceptable 22 (+3) 33 (+6) 21 (+3) 13 (+4) <0.001
Is the consequence of the lack of hospital resources 66 (+3) 72 (+6) 68 (+4) 54 (+6) <0.001
Could have been avoided by the widespread wearing of masks 50 (+3) 61 (+7) 51 (+4) 40 (+6) <0.001
Could be replaced by mass screening tests 65 (+3) 74 (+6) 65 (+4) 60 (+6) <0.01
Has already disastrous economic consequences 93 (+2) 93 (+3) 91 (+2) 96 (+2) NS
Will cause family tragedies 76 (+3) 78 (+6) 76 (+4) 75 (+6) NS
Causes too much restriction on civil liberties 41 (+3) 58 (+7) 40 (+4) 28 (+6) <0.001
Is an opportunity to develop local solidarity
91 (+2)
92 (+4)
90 (+2)
91 (+4)
NS
Experiencing financial difficulties because of the lockdown 19 (+2) 40 (+7) 16 (+3) 6 (+3) <0.001
Confined in an overcrowded household† 9 (+2) 23 (+6) 7 (+2) 1 (+1) <0.001

*Sample was randomly drawn from online research panel of >750,000 nationally representative households of the general population in France, developed and maintained by the Institut Français d’Opinion Publique, a survey research firm (https://www.ifop.com). Collected data were weighted to match official national census statistics for sex, age, occupation, size of population in the area of residence, and region. The study design was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University Hospital Institute Méditerranée Infection (approval no. 2020-018). MoE, margin of error at 95% confidence level; NS, not statistically significant. 
†Defined as <194 square feet per capita.

Main Article

Page created: September 29, 2020
Page updated: December 21, 2020
Page reviewed: December 21, 2020
The conclusions, findings, and opinions expressed by authors contributing to this journal do not necessarily reflect the official position of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, the Public Health Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, or the authors' affiliated institutions. Use of trade names is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by any of the groups named above.
file_external