Search Results for « Mask Mandate »

We quantify the effect of mask mandates in the United States. Our regression discontinuity design exploits county-level variation in COVID-19 cases, hospital admissions, and deaths across the border between states with and without mandates. We find a significant and substantial effect—mask mandates reduced new weekly COVID-19 cases, hospital admissions, and deaths by 55, 11 and 0.7 per 100,000 inhabitants on average. Crucially, we find that the effect of mask mandates depends on the attitudes toward mask wearing at the county level, with larger effects in counties more positively inclined towards mask wearing. Our results imply that mandates saved 87,000 lives through December 19, 2020, while a nationwide mandate could have saved 58,000 additional lives. These large effects suggest that mask mandates are a crucial tool to counter pandemics, particularly if accepted widely by the population. Our results are thus also relevant for countries who will not be able to immunize large swaths of their population in the short term.

This paper presents the results from a hypothetical set of questions related to mask-wearing behavior and opinions that were asked of a nationally representative sample of over 4,000 participants in early 2022.Mask mandates were hotly debated in public discourse, and though much research exists on benefits of masks, there has been no research thus far on the distribution of perceived costs of compliance.As is common in economic research that aims to assess the value to society of non-market activities, we use survey valuation methods and ask how much participants would be willing to pay to be exempted from rules of mandatory community masking.The survey asks specifically about a 3 month exemption.We find that the majority of respondents (56%) are not willing to pay to be exempted from mandatory masking.However, the average person was willing to pay $525, and a small segment of the population (0.9%) stated they were willing to pay over $5,000 to be exempted from the mandate.Younger respondents stated higher willingness to pay to avoid the mandate than older respondents.Combining our results with standard measures of the value of a statistical life, we estimate that a 3 month masking order was perceived as cost effective through willingness-to-pay questions only if at least 13,333 lives were saved by the policy.

Abstract Mask mandates were controversial policies during the pandemic. Although there is considerable research on the benefits of masks, there has been no research on the distribution of perceived costs of compliance with mask mandates. This article presents the results from a hypothetical set of questions related to mask-wearing behavior and opinions that were asked of a nationally representative sample of over 4,000 participants in early 2022. We use survey valuation methods to assess how much participants would be willing to pay to be exempted from rules of mandatory community masking. The survey asks specifically about a 3-month exemption. We find that the majority of respondents (56%) are not willing to pay to be exempted from mandatory masking. However, the average person was willing to pay $525, and a small segment of the population (0.9%) stated they were willing to pay over $5,000 to be exempted from the mandate. Younger respondents stated higher willingness to pay to avoid the mandate than older respondents. Combining our results with standard measures of the value of a statistical life, we estimate that a 3-month masking order was perceived as cost-effective through willingness to pay questions only if at least 13,333 lives were saved by the policy.

We extend previous studies on the impact of masks on COVID-19 outcomes by investigating an unprecedented breadth and depth of health outcomes, geographical resolutions, types of mask mandates, early versus later waves and controlling for other government interventions, mobility testing rate and weather. We show that mask mandates are associated with a statistically significant decrease in new cases (-3.55 per 100K), deaths (-0.13 per 100K), and the proportion of hospital admissions (-2.38 percentage points) up to 40 days after the introduction of mask mandates both at the state and county level. These effects are large, corresponding to 14% of the highest recorded number of cases, 13% of deaths, and 7% of admission proportion. We also find that mask mandates are linked to a 23.4 percentage point increase in mask adherence in four diverse states. Given the recent lifting of mandates, we estimate that the ending of mask mandates in these states is associated with a decrease of -3.19 percentage points in mask adherence and 12 per 100K (13% of the highest recorded number) of daily new cases with no significant effect on hospitalizations and deaths. Lastly, using a large novel survey dataset of 847 thousand responses in 69 countries, we introduce the novel results that community mask adherence and community attitudes towards masks are associated with a reduction in COVID-19 cases and deaths. Our results have policy implications for reinforcing the need to maintain and encourage mask-wearing by the public, especially in light of some states starting to remove their mask mandates.

We quantify the effect of mask mandates in the United States. Our regression discontinuity design exploits county-level variation in COVID-19 cases, hospital admissions, and deaths across the border between states with and without mandates. We find a significant and substantial effect—mask mandates reduced new weekly COVID-19 cases, hospital admissions, and deaths by 55, 11 and 0.7 per 100,000 inhabitants on average. Crucially, we find that the effect of mask mandates depends on the attitudes toward mask wearing at the county level, with larger effects in counties more positively inclined towards mask wearing. Our results imply that mandates saved 87,000 lives through December 19, 2020, while a nationwide mandate could have saved 58,000 additional lives. These large effects suggest that mask mandates are a crucial tool to counter pandemics, particularly if accepted widely by the population. Our results are thus also relevant for countries who will not be able to immunize large swaths of their population in the short term.

Face masks are an important component in controlling COVID-19, and policy orders to wear masks are common. However, behavioral responses are seldom additive, and exchanging one protective behavior for another could undermine the COVID-19 policy response. We use SafeGraph smart device location data and variation in the date that US states and counties issued face mask mandates as a set of natural experiments to investigate risk compensation behavior. We compare time at home and the number of visits to public locations before and after face mask orders conditional on multiple statistical controls. We find that face mask orders lead to risk compensation behavior. Americans subject to the mask orders spend 11-24 fewer minutes at home on average and increase visits to some commercial locations-most notably restaurants, which are a high-risk location. It is unclear if this would lead to a net increase or decrease in transmission. However, it is clear that mask orders would be an important part of an economic recovery if people otherwise overestimate the risk of visiting public places.