Abstract：
Public adherence to COVID-19-related government guidance varied during the initial lockdown in the UK, but the determinants of public adherence to such guidance are unclear. We capture spontaneous reflections on adherence to UK government guidance from a representative UK sample, and use the TDF to identify key determinants of COVID-related behaviours.
The design was cross-sectional.
Qualitative data were collected from a large sample of UK adults (N = 2,252) via an online questionnaire as part of a wider survey about the UK public\'s responses to the government\'s COVID-19-related guidance. Summative content analysis was used to identify key guideline terms in the data, followed by latent analysis to interpret the underlying meanings behind the terms using the TDF as an analytical framework.
Six TDF domains were identified in the data: Environmental Context and Resources; Beliefs about Consequences; Social Influences; Memory, Attention and Decision Processes; Emotion; and Knowledge. Although the samples were motivated and capable of adhering, limitations in their environments, resources, and social support mechanisms restricted behaviour. Self-reported adherence was sensitive to positive and negative beliefs about the effectiveness of the measures, in addition to interpretations of the terms \'essential\' and \'necessary\' in the guidance.
Despite extensive structural obstacles to adherence, the majority of the British public were able to follow government COVID-19-related instructions, provided they had sufficient resources, social support, and positive perceptions about the effectiveness of the measures. Ambiguities surrounding key terminology in the guidance left room for interpretation, which may have contributed to non-adherence.
The design was cross-sectional.
Qualitative data were collected from a large sample of UK adults (N = 2,252) via an online questionnaire as part of a wider survey about the UK public\'s responses to the government\'s COVID-19-related guidance. Summative content analysis was used to identify key guideline terms in the data, followed by latent analysis to interpret the underlying meanings behind the terms using the TDF as an analytical framework.
Six TDF domains were identified in the data: Environmental Context and Resources; Beliefs about Consequences; Social Influences; Memory, Attention and Decision Processes; Emotion; and Knowledge. Although the samples were motivated and capable of adhering, limitations in their environments, resources, and social support mechanisms restricted behaviour. Self-reported adherence was sensitive to positive and negative beliefs about the effectiveness of the measures, in addition to interpretations of the terms \'essential\' and \'necessary\' in the guidance.
Despite extensive structural obstacles to adherence, the majority of the British public were able to follow government COVID-19-related instructions, provided they had sufficient resources, social support, and positive perceptions about the effectiveness of the measures. Ambiguities surrounding key terminology in the guidance left room for interpretation, which may have contributed to non-adherence.
摘要：
在英国最初的封锁期间，公众对COVID-19相关政府指导的遵守情况各不相同，但是公众遵守这种指导的决定因素尚不清楚。我们从具有代表性的英国样本中捕获了对遵守英国政府指导的自发思考，并使用TDF确定COVID相关行为的关键决定因素。
设计是横截面的。
定性数据是通过在线问卷从大量英国成年人（N=2,252）中收集的，作为关于英国公众对政府COVID-19相关指南的回应的更广泛调查的一部分。摘要内容分析用于确定数据中的关键指南术语，然后进行潜在分析，以使用TDF作为分析框架来解释术语背后的潜在含义。
在数据中确定了六个TDF域：环境背景和资源；对后果的信念；社会影响；记忆，注意力和决策过程；情绪和知识。尽管样品有动力并且能够粘附，在他们的环境中的限制，资源,社会支持机制限制了行为。自我报告的依从性对措施有效性的积极和消极信念很敏感，除了对指南中的术语“必要”和“必要”的解释之外。
尽管坚持存在广泛的结构性障碍，大多数英国公众能够遵循政府与COVID-19相关的指示，只要他们有足够的资源，社会支持,以及对措施有效性的积极看法。指南中围绕关键术语的歧义留下了解释的空间，这可能导致不遵守。
设计是横截面的。
定性数据是通过在线问卷从大量英国成年人（N=2,252）中收集的，作为关于英国公众对政府COVID-19相关指南的回应的更广泛调查的一部分。摘要内容分析用于确定数据中的关键指南术语，然后进行潜在分析，以使用TDF作为分析框架来解释术语背后的潜在含义。
在数据中确定了六个TDF域：环境背景和资源；对后果的信念；社会影响；记忆，注意力和决策过程；情绪和知识。尽管样品有动力并且能够粘附，在他们的环境中的限制，资源,社会支持机制限制了行为。自我报告的依从性对措施有效性的积极和消极信念很敏感，除了对指南中的术语“必要”和“必要”的解释之外。
尽管坚持存在广泛的结构性障碍，大多数英国公众能够遵循政府与COVID-19相关的指示，只要他们有足够的资源，社会支持,以及对措施有效性的积极看法。指南中围绕关键术语的歧义留下了解释的空间，这可能导致不遵守。
