Social distancing and the need for personal interaction: finding the balance

Last week, The Texas Medical Association released a new COVID-19 ‘risk scale’ - a list rating how risky certain activities are on a scale of one to 10. At the lowest end of the spectrum, you will find opening the post, getting takeaways and playing tennis, whereas the highest risk can be seen to come from going to pubs/bars, large public gatherings and exercising at the gym. 

The underlying factor here is clearly the proximity to others - the closer you are to people, and the bigger the group, the more likely you are to contract COVID-19. This isn’t hugely surprising given that one of the biggest measures implemented during the pandemic has been social distancing. However, just because the risk is high, doesn’t mean it puts consumers off doing it.

As we saw from ‘Super Saturday’, Brits in particular were quick to make the most of pubs being open. Does this reflect how consumers will act going forward, or did the sudden freedom lead to a short-lived, overzealous response. Or perhaps it was simply a classic case of media exaggeration, where in truth the majority did in fact follow the rules. 

After all, research from Streetbees found that the most people aren’t yet comfortable being around groups of people - particularly if they’re strangers. Consumers don’t just feel more confident up with family and friends, they believe it’s actually safer, and less of a transmission risk than being around people they don’t know. 

Despite previous research suggesting that you’re more likely to get COVID-19 from close gatherings, particularly those with family and friends, only 14% of Brits believe transmission is a greater risk from people they know than those they don’t. 

On top of this, a minimal 6% actually agree with social distancing being lifted now, with a third happy to wait until the government gives the all clear. Intimacy and personal contact has been something we’ve all missed during lockdown, but it seems that consumers do understand the need for the measures in place - even if they don’t follow them 100%. 

In fact, 71% plan to keep it up even after the government says it’s safe not to. The older consumers get, the more likely they are to continue social distancing - while this is somewhat predictable due to the increased health risk, older consumers are less likely to have missed social contact anyway. Society is well aware of the loneliness risk to older groups - not just in lockdown but in general - which means that effort was made to ensure they weren’t left to their own devices. 

Since the beginning of the pandemic, communities have rallied together to support the most vulnerable - trying to ensure no one is left without basic necessities. Of course, this hasn’t been a perfect process, but on the whole I was touched to see so many stories of kindness and communal fortitude.

Loneliness has been a growing problem for all age groups - fast paced, on the go lifestyles prevented us from dedicating time to cultivating our relationships with others. When lockdown started, it was the lack of socialisation rather than the inability to go out that people found the most difficult. 

Spending time with loved ones is the priority for consumers - which means businesses who can facilitate that while providing a safe environment will no doubt be favoured. However, how will the desire for contact influence the prospect of a second wave - and could localised lockdowns create an even greater loneliness problem than the original peak?