Covid-19 Post-Shielding Research: October 2023

1. Background and methodology

1.1 Background

The Scottish Government commissioned the Diffley Partnership to conduct research exploring Covid-19 post-shielding experiences and behaviours. This research was conducted between July and October 2023.

The purpose of the research was to understand the behaviours, knowledge, and attitudes of the Scottish population and those who had been asked to shield at this point in the Covid-19 pandemic.

The Highest Risk List (HRL) ended on 31 May 2022 and the Scottish Government undertook research among people on the HRL throughout to understand their lived experience and their knowledge of, behaviours and attitudes towards Covid-19 measures and communications.

There were roughly 185,000 individuals who were on the list, which accounts for approximately 3% of the Scottish population.

The aims of the study were to:

• Explore how those previously on the HRL are adapting to living with Covid in terms of their behaviour and how they continue to protect themselves as well as their views towards the current approach to managing Covid,
• Measure the scale and nature of any ongoing shielding behaviours, and whether those are necessary or may be preventing a return to a better quality of life unnecessarily,
• Explore the views of those previously on the HRL on the support, communications, and guidance available to them.

1.2 Methodology

To address the research aims, a mixed methods approach was adopted, incorporating quantitative and qualitative elements. The quantitative research involved a large-scale survey, while the qualitative research involved interviews and a stakeholder roundtable.

A large-scale national survey of over 3,000 adults in Scotland was issued thought the ScotPulse online panel. The project aimed to include 500 people who identified as having been asked to shield during the Covid-19 pandemic.

Diffley Partnership designed the survey instrument, creating several iterations in the lead-up to approval by the Scottish Government, scripting and testing (see Appendix A).

The survey received a total of 3,316 responses. Of these, 547 were people who identified as having been asked to shield or follow additional advice between March 2020 and May 2022.

The quantitative research aimed to allow for insights to be drawn about the views, attitudes, beliefs, and experiences of people across Scotland, exploring the views of those with shielding experience and testing variables to see if any differences between this sub-group and the population as a whole.

Further qualitative research was conducted comprising interviews with 15 people who identified as having been asked to shield and a roundtable of stakeholders who represent groups who had been asked to shield. These interviews were conducted online or by phone as per the preference of the participant from September to October 2023. Interviews typically lasted up to 30 minutes. After taking part, participants were thanked for their time with an incentive to the value of £20. To guide each one-to-one interview, researchers used a discussion guide (see Appendix B).

Lastly, a stakeholder roundtable was held on 11 September 2023. Potential participants were suggested by the client and the representatives of four organisations took part. This roundtable was facilitated online using a bespoke discussion guide (see Appendix C).

Overall, this mixed methods approach gives a nuanced picture of the experiences of those on the Highest Risk List following the end of the list in May 2022.

1.3 Analysis and Reporting

For the survey, descriptive statistics were conducted first to establish frequencies. Appendix D shows the results for each survey question.

The survey findings indicate the prevalence of views and experiences in answer to the survey questions. Where percentages do not sum to 100% this is due to rounding, the exclusion of ‘don’t know’ categories, or multiple answers. Aggregate percentages (e.g. ‘satisfied’/’not satisfied’) are calculated from the absolute values and presented throughout the report. Therefore, aggregate percentages may differ from the sum of the individual scores due to rounding of percentage totals. Throughout the report, an asterisk (*) denotes any value of less than half a percent and a dash (-) denotes zero. For questions where the number of people is less than 30, the number of times a response has been selected (N) rather than the percentage is given.

Next, bivariate analysis was conducted to look for any differences between any sub-populations. Significance testing, at a 95% confidence level (p < 0.05) was applied. Differences are only reported when statistically significant. Reporting does not include every result of every statistical test conducted; the most relevant results are highlighted.

Therefore, this report summarises the key findings of the survey, drawing out noteworthy findings and between-groups differences. For clarity, those with any shielding experience ‘ASE’ refers to those who were on the HRL having been asked to shield at any point during the existence of the list, and ‘HRL’ refers to those who recalled still being on the list when it ended in May 2022. Those in the ‘HRL’ group are also contained in figures relating to ‘ASE’.

Following the completion of qualitative interviews, transcripts were compiled, studied in-depth and thematically analysed to identify patterns in the data. From this analysis process, a series of themes emerged, and a systematic coding process was undertaken to code qualitative contributions in relation to research topics. This process allowed researchers to identify key insights.

To ensure the identity of participants was protected during the analysis stage, personal details such as full names, were held by the project manager. Across the research team, the first names and key demographic variables of the participants were known and referred to within the analysis. Quotes are included in the report, and these are accompanied by any health conditions of the participant in brackets.

This next chapter of the report shares information about the research participants.

The following chapters include results from both quantitative and qualitative strands of research. Together, these mixed-methods results give an in-depth understanding of public behaviours and attitudes.