Introduction

The outbreak of Coronavirus (COVID-19) is one of the world’s worst pandemic. This deadly disease came to light when China informed the World Health Organization on December 31, 2019, about the outbreak of pneumonia of an unknown reason first seen in Wuhan City in Hubei Province. In a very short period, the disease spread to the entire world which compelled the World Health Organization to declare it a pandemic. The new virus named SARS-CoV-2 causes a respiratory disease characterized by flu-like symptoms such as cough, fever and difficulty in breathing. Due to its easy and fast infectious nature, the pandemic has caused a very large number of people to get affected in a very short period. It has affected more than 213 countries and caused more than 18, 48, 439 confirmed cases of infection and 1, 17, 217 cases of deaths as on April 15, 2020 (World Health Organization, 2020).
            There are many negative consequences of a pandemic. It has been reported that pandemic may lead people to face a variety of psychological stress (Brooks et al., 2020), physical health problems (Zhang et al., 2020) and decreased social support (Reblin & Uchino, 2008). In the case of COVID-19, the negative consequences may be much bigger and serious due to its fast infectious nature, and incurability and unavoidable interdependency of human beings. The World Health Organization (2020) has reported that there is no vaccine or medication for the prevention and treatment of COVID-19 and the only way to fight against this pandemic is to adopt preventive measures and to observe quarantine. Social distancing, frequent hands washing, avoiding the frequent touch of eyes, nose and mouth, practising respiratory hygiene and staying informed about the latest information on the COVID-19 outbreak are some of the preventive measures suggested by World Health Organization (2020). The prevention and checking the spreading of the disease are only possible through quarantine and social distancing which demand a mass behaviour change.
            Owing to the situation created by the outbreak of COVID-19, the Government of India declared to observe a symbolic lockdown for March 22, 2020, in the selected parts of Indian territories. Later, to break the cycle of infection a complete lockdown of the three weeks was declared on March 24, 2020 (The Economic Times, 2020).  The Government and its officials adopted various strategies to motivate Indian citizens to make the lockdown a success. The diversity in cultural practices, beliefs and ideologies of the Indian society made the lockdown a big challenge. Barring few exceptions, the lockdown in India has been successful and caused the stretching of COVID-19 phase II and delaying the spread in phase III. We believe that the success of a complete lockdown could become possible due to the collective-affirmation of Indian people in their cultural and religious values through a set of planned and well-thought-out strategies of the Indian Prime Minister. The outbreak of COVID-19 increased the dependency of people on media which repeatedly made them reminding about their strengths and identity with their great cultural heritage. The success of lockdown can be measured in terms of relatively a lesser number recorded either of confirmed or death cases (India: 14, 250 reported cases, 11, 848 active cases and 493 deaths) (The Hindu, 2020b) compared to the other countries. For example, a total of 7, 07, 121 confirmed and 30, 245 death cases have been reported in the American region by the World Health Organization (2020) on April 17, 2020.
            As a member of society, all human beings face threats in their day-to-day life ranging from their health, professional, interpersonal, academic and social dimensions to public relations. Self-affirmation is one way to cope up with these threats (Alexander, 2014; Steele, 1988). According to the self-affirmation theory, all human beings carry a universal and basic motivation to maintain their self-integrity and self-worth as well as perceive themselves as good, virtuous, and able to predict and control their significant life outcomes (Sherman & Cohen, 2006). Self-Affirmation theory assumes that the integrity of the self is maintained in the face of damage to its one aspect by affirming values from other non-threatened aspects of the self (Steele, 1988). The effectiveness of self-affirmation has extended its popularity in the major fields of psychology such as health, clinical and social psychology (G. L. Cohen et al., 2009; MCQueen & Klein, 2006; Sherman & Cohen, 2006). It has been argued that self-integrity and self-worth are socially shared conceptions and originate from socio-cultural and historical processes (Alexander, 2014). It has been suggested that self-affirmation helps individuals maintain their self-integrity in the face of perceived threats. The researchers have reported self-affirmation to be positively linked with cognitive flexibility (Geoffrey L. Cohen et al., 2007), positive social comparisons in times of failure (Pettit & Lount, 2010), collective identity (Binning et al., 2010), reduction of prejudice (Sherman & Kim, 2005) and positive health (Sherman et al., 2000) and negatively with stress and psychopathological symptoms of individuals (J. D. Creswell et al., 2005).
            The researchers have posited that self-affirmation and collective-affirmation may have some similarities and the later may help to deal with threats arising out of larger groups and maintain collective-integrity (Derks et al., 2009; Sherman et al., 2007). Collective-affirmation has been argued to be similar to self-affirmation that helps people to restore, guard and augment integrity and worth of a particular nation (Turner et al., 1994). Thus, the study of self-affirmation has presented a more robust reason behind the behaviour change of people. The benefits of self-affirmation, that is effective at an individual level, may be applied to understand the behaviour change at a collective level during the lockdown and quarantine after the outbreak of COVID-19 in India. Collective-affirmation has been less studied phenomenon despite the suggestion that affirming values at a collective level may have similar benefits (Spencer-Rodgers et al., 2016). Borrowing the arguments from self-affirmation, some researchers have argued that when one aspect of collective-self is threatened (life and existence in the present case), the affirming in the other aspects of collective identity or values may reduce the threat, maintain the collective-integrity, bolster psychological resources and reduce defensive responses of people (Derks et al., 2006; Sherman et al., 2007). The protective strengths of using alternative aspects of the collective-self have been studies in small groups such as gender stereotype (Derks et al., 2011), mixed-gender performance situation (Derks et al., 2006) and academic class (Rydell et al., 2009). Thus, the earlier studies have mostly demonstrated the protective and buffering effects of group-affirmation to the small groups like family, class, age and gender (Spencer-Rodgers et al., 2016).  It may be argued that the earlier studies have not addressed the nature and dynamics of collective-affirmation for a larger group like a nation. Conversely, some other researchers have argued that self-affirmation and collective-affirmation may differ significantly (Čehajić-Clancy et al., 2011; Ehrlich & Gramzow, 2015). Self-affirmation has been suggested to reduce bias in the face of threat whereas collective-affirmation may accentuate biases and may lead to attitudes, stereotypes and norm relevant cognitive, affective and behavioural response repertoires (Ehrlich, 2017). But, these findings have been carried out in small intergroup situations. Here in the case of COVID-19, the threat is non-social and uniformly harmful to the whole group that is a nation. So here, the collective affirmation may produce positive outcomes and induce mass change.
            Borrowing from self-affirmation theory (Steele, 1988), we argue that the adherence to the lockdown and quarantine by Indian people after the outbreak of the current pandemic may be guided by collective-affirmation in positive cultural values to face threat to life and very existence challenged by the outbreak of COVID-19. This will be the first study, as far as our knowledge is concerned, that attempted to understand behaviour change at a collective level (nation) through a collective-affirmation paradigm. This study is novel in the sense that previous studies have always manipulated threat and affirmation (self or group) artificially while the occurrence of threat and manipulation of collective-affirmation in the present study is natural and objective which are occurring at a national collective through government, society, and family. In the present case, the threat is strong, unknown and fatal to the life equally to all people and thus, it has created unparallel threat and uncertainty before the whole collective (nation) and has also challenged the identity, existence and affiliation of all the people simultaneously. Very little research has addressed the role of collective-affirmation in mass behaviour change in the epidemic situation like this which will hardly repeat itself.
            The outbreak of COVID-19 has caused a severe threat to the self-integrity of Indian people by posing a challenge before their existence, security, health and well-being. Thus, it may be argued that other positive cultural values relevant for catalyzing the collective-affirmation may be active. The Government of India in its announcements from time-to-time has adopted measures to induce and activate collective-affirmation of Indian people in the face of threat created by COVID-19. For example, Prime Minister in his speech to the Nation on March 24, 2020, expressed that “Indian people always win when truth wins……..Indian people are brave and they can fight with this menace………the restrictions of lockdown will also apply similarly to Narendra Modi (indicating himself)………you (Indian people) can face this pandemic as you have enough self-control, ability to sacrifice for the nation and society………our cultural heritage belongs to sacrifice…We have faced innumerable attack by foreign invaders..… (The Hindu, 2020a).” On April 14, 2020, Prime Minister Mr. Modi has announced the second lockdown of 19 days for Indian to prevent spreading of COVID-19 and has expected to observe Saptapadi (seven mantras). The Spatapadi provides for care for the older people and poor, observing Indian health practices (yoga, Ayurvedic medicines etc.), connecting and remain aware about people through Aarogya Setu (a mobile application), showing leniency to subordinates and respect to service providers (Jagran Josh, 2020). These steps and comments made by the supreme leader of the nation on whose leadership the people of the nation, by and large, have unquestionable faith may be argued to have enhanced collective-affirmation (a set of protective and strengthening values for the nation) of Indian people. It may have resulted in the unanimous support to the lockdown. Besides, the joint family system has also been reported to promote a collectivistic mindset that may have eased the observance of adopting restrictions and observing of preventive measures. Indian society promotes collective values and nurtures an interdependent self-construal which is motivated to resolve the threat through a collective process of self-identity (Markus & Kitayama, 2010; Triandis, 1989). Besides, social distancing has been a well-established norm in the Bhartiya way of lifestyle. For example, a person affected with measles is quarantined by the society for its entire duration. Likewise, the greeting is expressed by saying Namaste instead of handshaking or touching. 
            The present study employed a Narrative Thematic Research Design to explore the dynamics of collective-affirmation of Indian people during the lockdown and quarantine after the outbreak of COVID-19. Previous studies have suggested that qualitative methods are best suited when a concrete theory or guiding framework is lacking (J. W. Creswell, 2004, 2014). It was also difficult to collect face-to-face data amid the restrictions of lockdown for the quantitative study. In this backdrop, the study explored the dynamics of activation of collective-affirmation and its role in attracting mass support for the nationwide lockdown, and the adherence to the preventive measures and quarantine after the outbreak of COVID-19 in India.  

Methods

Research Design

            A qualitative research design was used that involved a telephonic semi-structured interview protocol to develop a deeper understanding of the experiences of COVID-19 and the role of government and collective values of the Indian society to catalyze collective-affirmation that facilitated the success of lockdown and quarantine after the outbreak of COVID-19. The constructivist approach of inquiry was used that refers to a dialogical exchange with the participants to arrive at the meanings held by them through an inductive and deductive process for interpreting and making inferences (Levitt et al., 2017, 2018). The qualitative design provides an opportunity to develop a deeper understanding and exploration of new constructs like collective-affirmation. 

Research Team

            The research team was diverse in their educational backgrounds and demographic features such as disciplines, experiences, age and roles which enriched the quality of the study. One was Vice-Chancellor with an in-depth knowledge of Indian society, culture and educational system with an engineering background and the other senior had a strong inclination in qualitative research in psychology. Two were young researchers with a good background in psychology, management and qualitative research. The last was a female doctoral student working on self-affirmation. All contributed to the conceptualization, data collection, analysis and writing the final manuscript. Except fourth, all authors were well-familiar with the qualitative research in psychology and the construct itself. The prior background of all the authors, however, in understanding the dynamics of Indian society, the construct and methodology made this work illuminating and trans-disciplinary. We discussed the basic construct, methods and the whole process of carrying out the study.

Participants

            A heterogeneous sample of 32 participants with age spanning between 36 to 61 years was chosen. The participants belong to Bhopal, Delhi, Prayagraj, Sagar and Varanasi cities of India. In the beginning, 54 individuals were consulted on their mobile phones. Out of these, only 32 (age range = 36-61 years, Mean = 46.88, SD = 8.61) came under inclusion criteria and given their consent. The sample comprised of 22 males (age range = 36-61 years, Mean = 46.82, SD = 8.36) and 10 females (age range = 36-60 years, Mean = 47.00, SD = 9.59). The detailed demographic information has been displayed in Table 1.