Our ‘Following the Science’ Timeline charts the main behavioural science recommendations from SAGE & Indie SAGE about the measures needed to minimize the spread of COVID-19 alongside what the Westminster Government implemented and when.
🧵+🔗⬇️
2. The timeline covers four main areas: hand and respiratory hygiene, face coverings, physical distancing, and self-isolation...
3. ...it also covers selected events, news, and dates as an aide memoire, and some dates about emerging science (e.g., the airborne nature of Covid) where it had implications for behaviours like wearing face coverings or opening windows.
4. The timeline does not systematically include travel regulations or the testing and vaccination programmes. It also focuses on the Westminster government’s actions, since Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, and England diverged in approach following ‘Stay Alert’ in May 2020.
5. The information underpinning the Timeline draws on SAGE papers and minutes; Independent SAGE reports, statements, and media; media reports of SAGE papers; media articles about changes to guidance and regulation, and @instituteforgov's timeline of lockdowns (links in report).
6. The 'Following the Science' Timeline also builds on and extends our own earlier timelines about UK government messaging and Indie SAGE reports.
7. The timeline shows lots of divergence, from delaying the second ‘circuit-breaker lockdown’ in autumn 2020 to setting out a ‘road map’ based on fixed dates while talking about ‘data not dates’. Here are some of the main behavioural examples:
8. While scientists recommended support, and advised against fines and punitive measures to try to get people to follow regulations - for both adherence and inequalities reasons, the UK government nevertheless introduced fines.
9. Back in April 2020, SAGE advised that, in future, good practice is not to lift measures 'all in one go'. But the 'big bang' headlines came on 19th July 2021 for so-called 'Freedom Day' (although the government is still making recommendations and publishing guidance...).
10. IndieSAGE advised against reducing 2m distancing to 1m/plus. After 'Stay Alert', the messaging became vague (e.g., "2m where possible"; "Stay at least 2m apart; "1m with a face covering or other precautions"). But 2m - easy to remember, approximate, & signpost - stuck anyway.
11. ...and plenty of people in England still want physical distancing measures in place - @YouGov polling from a couple of weeks ago:
12. The government was also slow to implement face-covering requirements. As early as Feb 2020, Nervtag minutes included recommendations for symptomatic people to wear them, though there was much debate for some time about their effectiveness.
13. In March 2020, the Chinese CDC director George Fu Gao said: "The big mistake in the U.S. and Europe, in my opinion, is that people aren't wearing masks. The US CDC recommended them from April 2020. npr.org/sections/goats…
14. The UK gov lifted mask regulations on 19th July in England (but still recommends them!); YouGov polling shows people still want masks on public transport; people think hand/surface washing are more effective than masks and ventilation...
15. Finally, scientists were consistent about the need for good #communication, but UK gov messaging was a problem from ‘Stay Alert’ onwards, marked by a lack of clarity, consistency, timeliness, trustworthiness, and 'enact-ability'.
16. @IndependentSage published a report, with recommendations, on messaging and communication (with another timeline) in November 2020.
The Timeline charts emerging and continuing UK government confusion - from this week's self-isolation changes to the gaps between 'Freedom Day' ('no legal requirements') & nevertheless publishing guidance and recommendations.
Here’s a little case study of the ripple effect of UK government mixed messaging - universities and face coverings.
1. “Face coverings are no longer advised for students, staff and visitors either in teaching rooms or in communal areas” (DfE, 17.8.21)
“no longer advised” 🤨
2. Meanwhile, beyond campus, the government has
“removed the requirement to wear face coverings in law"
"but"
"expects and recommends that they are worn"
"in enclosed and crowded spaces where people may come into contact with people they don’t normally meet.”
3. Back to universities:
“There are no longer restrictions on the approach to teaching and learning in HE... There is no requirement for social distancing or other measures within in person teaching... [and there are no] restrictions to face-to-face provision.”
Regarding @IanCookson72's point below, #EMCA research shows us that whatever appears in the 'answer' slot in a conversation can be assessed (in the moment and post-hoc) for how it addresses the initiating 'question'. News interviews are full of examples.
2. There is a great deal of conversation analytic and other research on media / news / political interviews – too much for a thread – including on the thousands of Newsnight interviews.
3. If you’re not familiar with conversation analysis, transcripts use the ‘Jefferson’ system which, like music notation, includes the precise pace, intonation, etc. of real talk as it is produced, including gaps between and pauses within turns timed to the nearest 0.1 second.
'Build rapport' is at the heart of #communication skills training and #CX
It's obviously good to have good conversations, but what does ‘building rapport’ look like ‘in the wild’ – and does it 'work'?
1. Thread. 🧵
2. What actually counts as rapport building – in terms of words and phrases and 'tone of voice' – is "amorphous” and “nebulous”, says G.B. Rubin (2016) in her thesis on crisis #negotiation
'Active listening' and related concepts sound good but they're also imprecise.
3. One common piece of advice (and instruction) to ‘build rapport’ is to ask, “how are you today?”
‘How are you’ have also been called “the three most useless words in the world of communication"🤔
Let’s have a look at some salespeople ‘building rapport’ in #B2B conversations.
Some questions are *standardized* (e.g., surveys, scripts, instructions) and require reading out loud, word for word.
In business, research, law, medicine, etc., do people "just read them out"?
TL;DR: No. And there are consequences.
1. 🧵
2. We might take it for granted that, when 'standardized', questions will be the same whether spoken or written. The examples in the thread will show they're not.
Without examining actual interaction, we won't know the clinical, diagnostic, legal, etc. consequences either way.
3. Let's start with @rolsi_journal's research on the significant consequences of the way diagnostic instruments about #QualityOfLife are delivered in talk, compared to how they're written on the page.
2. If a person threatening violence can hear you on the phone, using ‘small talk’ - in this case, saying "y'all right" at precisely the place where it would routinely appear in an ordinary conversation - will help you sound like you’re having an ordinary conversation.
3. The caller uses her tacit knowledge that saying "y'all right" (or similar, like “how are you”) at this point in a call is routine and ordinary, helping the conversation sound routine and ordinary.
“How do open-ended questions improve interpersonal communication?”
TL;DR: They do not.
Let’s explore a common #communication assumption about 'open' and 'closed' questions with some data to see what they look like, and what they do, in real interaction.
1. Thread. 🧵
2. Google "open and closed questions” and you’ll find loads of articles and (often written or hypothetical) examples about them - tweet 1 is just one of many.
As @d_galasinski pondered recently: “I wonder who is responsible for fetishising open questions.”
3. When we examine questions as they are actually used - ‘in the wild’ - we find that yes/no (‘closed’) questions routinely receive more than ‘yes/no’ in response.
And just because a question is ‘open’ doesn’t mean it'll be answered.