Trial Outcomes & Findings for The Doctors for Coronavirus Prevention Project Thanksgiving / Christmas Messaging Campaign (NCT NCT04644328)

Last Updated: 2021-12-21

Results Overview

The change in movement metric is the percent change in distance covered in a day compared to the same day of the week in the benchmark period of February 2-29, 2020, by people who started the day in a particular location. We define holiday travel as travel during the three days preceding each holiday, since the available data does not allow us to compute the impact of the intervention on the return travel (after the holiday). The reason is that the mobility data describes the behavior throughout the day, for people who were in each county that morning. Since the campaign was targeted based on home location, we can only capture its impact on travel away from home, not back home.

Recruitment status

COMPLETED

Study phase

Target enrollment

820 participants

Primary outcome timeframe

November 26, 2020 (Thanksgiving); December 24-25, 2020 (Christmas); February 2-29, 2020 (Baseline benchmark)

Results posted on

2021-12-21

Participant Flow

The 13 states which centrally report COVID-19 cases at the ZCTA level contained 829 counties. At Thanksgiving, 9 counties were excluded due to data limitations; at Christmas, 62 counties were excluded due to data limitations and potential negative impacts of treatment in rural, conservative areas resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.

Unit of analysis: Counties

Participant milestones

Participant milestones
Measure	High-Intensity Counties Treatment: Individuals received approximately 3 Facebook ads over a 2-week period. Each ad contained a short video recorded by a physician using a script that discusses the importance of staying safe during Thanksgiving or Christmas by considering not traveling and using a mask when appropriate. Randomization to treatment: The investigators randomized exposure to the ad campaign as follows. The 13 states which centrally report COVID-19 cases at the ZCTA level contained 829 counties. At Thanksgiving, 9 counties were excluded due to data limitations; at Christmas, 62 counties were excluded due to data limitations and potential negative impacts of treatment in rural, conservative areas resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election. Approximately half of the counties were randomized to high-intensity treatment with the remaining randomized to low-intensity treatment. In high-intensity counties, 3/4 of ZCTAs were treated (i.e., Facebook users in those ZCTAs received ads) and 1/4 were not. In low-intensity counties, 1/4 of ZCTAs were treated and 3/4 were not.	Low-Intensity Counties Control: Individuals did not receive ads containing short physician-recorded videos. Randomization to treatment: The investigators randomized exposure to the ad campaign as follows. The 13 states which centrally report COVID-19 cases at the ZCTA level contained 829 counties. At Thanksgiving, 9 counties were excluded due to data limitations; at Christmas, 62 counties were excluded due to data limitations and potential negative impacts of treatment in rural, conservative areas resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election. Approximately half of the counties were randomized to high-intensity treatment with the remaining randomized to low-intensity treatment. In high-intensity counties, 3/4 of ZCTAs were treated (i.e., Facebook users in those ZCTAs received ads) and 1/4 were not. In low-intensity counties, 1/4 of ZCTAs were treated and 3/4 were not.
Thanksgiving Period STARTED	0 410	0 410
Thanksgiving Period COMPLETED	0 410	0 410
Thanksgiving Period NOT COMPLETED	0 0	0 0
Christmas Period STARTED	0 386	0 381
Christmas Period COMPLETED	0 386	0 381
Christmas Period NOT COMPLETED	0 0	0 0

Reasons for withdrawal

Withdrawal data not reported

Baseline Characteristics

Race/ethnicity data were not collected because no participants were enrolled.

Baseline characteristics by cohort

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: November 26, 2020 (Thanksgiving); December 24-25, 2020 (Christmas); February 2-29, 2020 (Baseline benchmark)

Population: Rural, conservative counties were excluded during Christmas due to potential negative impacts of treatment resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election. The two periods have been entered as rows to avoid double-counting counties.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure	High-Intensity Counties n=356 Counties Treatment: Individuals received approximately 3 Facebook ads over a 2-week period. Each ad contained a short video recorded by a physician using a script that discusses the importance of staying safe during Thanksgiving or Christmas by considering not traveling and using a mask when appropriate. Randomization to treatment: The investigators randomized exposure to the ad campaign as follows. The 13 states which centrally report COVID-19 cases at the ZCTA level contained 829 counties. At Thanksgiving, 9 counties were excluded due to data limitations; at Christmas, 62 counties were excluded due to data limitations and potential negative impacts of treatment in rural, conservative areas resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election. Approximately half of the counties were randomized to high-intensity treatment with the remaining randomized to low-intensity treatment. In high-intensity counties, 3/4 of ZCTAs were treated (i.e., Facebook users in those ZCTAs received ads) and 1/4 were not. In low-intensity counties, 1/4 of ZCTAs were treated and 3/4 were not.	Low-Intensity Counties n=340 Counties Control: Individuals did not receive ads containing short physician-recorded videos. Randomization to treatment: The investigators randomized exposure to the ad campaign as follows. The 13 states which centrally report COVID-19 cases at the ZCTA level contained 829 counties. At Thanksgiving, 9 counties were excluded due to data limitations; at Christmas, 62 counties were excluded due to data limitations and potential negative impacts of treatment in rural, conservative areas resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election. Approximately half of the counties were randomized to high-intensity treatment with the remaining randomized to low-intensity treatment. In high-intensity counties, 3/4 of ZCTAs were treated (i.e., Facebook users in those ZCTAs received ads) and 1/4 were not. In low-intensity counties, 1/4 of ZCTAs were treated and 3/4 were not.
Facebook Movement Metric Thanksgiving (Period 1)	-6.082 Percent change relative to Feb 2020 Interval -6.822 to -5.341	-5.320 Percent change relative to Feb 2020 Interval -6.113 to -4.527
Facebook Movement Metric Christmas (Period 2)	-2.603 Percent change relative to Feb 2020 Interval -3.279 to -1.927	-1.823 Percent change relative to Feb 2020 Interval -2.588 to -1.057

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: November 26, 2020 (Thanksgiving); December 24-25, 2020 (Christmas)

The Facebook stay put metric is the percentage of people who stay within a small geographical area (a "tile" of 600m\*600m in which they started the day). We use it to compute the share of people leaving home on the day of the holiday (i.e. this variable = 1 - stay put on the day of the holiday).

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure	High-Intensity Counties n=356 Counties Treatment: Individuals received approximately 3 Facebook ads over a 2-week period. Each ad contained a short video recorded by a physician using a script that discusses the importance of staying safe during Thanksgiving or Christmas by considering not traveling and using a mask when appropriate. Randomization to treatment: The investigators randomized exposure to the ad campaign as follows. The 13 states which centrally report COVID-19 cases at the ZCTA level contained 829 counties. At Thanksgiving, 9 counties were excluded due to data limitations; at Christmas, 62 counties were excluded due to data limitations and potential negative impacts of treatment in rural, conservative areas resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election. Approximately half of the counties were randomized to high-intensity treatment with the remaining randomized to low-intensity treatment. In high-intensity counties, 3/4 of ZCTAs were treated (i.e., Facebook users in those ZCTAs received ads) and 1/4 were not. In low-intensity counties, 1/4 of ZCTAs were treated and 3/4 were not.	Low-Intensity Counties n=340 Counties Control: Individuals did not receive ads containing short physician-recorded videos. Randomization to treatment: The investigators randomized exposure to the ad campaign as follows. The 13 states which centrally report COVID-19 cases at the ZCTA level contained 829 counties. At Thanksgiving, 9 counties were excluded due to data limitations; at Christmas, 62 counties were excluded due to data limitations and potential negative impacts of treatment in rural, conservative areas resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election. Approximately half of the counties were randomized to high-intensity treatment with the remaining randomized to low-intensity treatment. In high-intensity counties, 3/4 of ZCTAs were treated (i.e., Facebook users in those ZCTAs received ads) and 1/4 were not. In low-intensity counties, 1/4 of ZCTAs were treated and 3/4 were not.
Percentage Leaving Home on Day of Holiday Thanksgiving (Period 1)	71.308 Percentage Interval 70.885 to 71.731	71.468 Percentage Interval 71.071 to 71.866
Percentage Leaving Home on Day of Holiday Christmas (Period 2)	72.859 Percentage Interval 72.507 to 73.21	72.852 Percentage Interval 72.52 to 73.185

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: December 1-14 (Thanksgiving arms) and January 1-14 (Christmas arms)

Population: ZCTAs in rural, conservative counties were excluded during Christmas due to potential negative impacts of treatment resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election. The two periods have been entered as rows to avoid double-counting ZCTAs. Note that there are more ZCTAs in the Christmas control than Thanksgiving control because the two periods were randomized separately and the number of ZCTAs varies by county.

Inverse hyperbolic sine of COVID-19 cases during a 14 day period starting 5 days after each holiday

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure	High-Intensity Counties n=3427 ZCTA Treatment: Individuals received approximately 3 Facebook ads over a 2-week period. Each ad contained a short video recorded by a physician using a script that discusses the importance of staying safe during Thanksgiving or Christmas by considering not traveling and using a mask when appropriate. Randomization to treatment: The investigators randomized exposure to the ad campaign as follows. The 13 states which centrally report COVID-19 cases at the ZCTA level contained 829 counties. At Thanksgiving, 9 counties were excluded due to data limitations; at Christmas, 62 counties were excluded due to data limitations and potential negative impacts of treatment in rural, conservative areas resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election. Approximately half of the counties were randomized to high-intensity treatment with the remaining randomized to low-intensity treatment. In high-intensity counties, 3/4 of ZCTAs were treated (i.e., Facebook users in those ZCTAs received ads) and 1/4 were not. In low-intensity counties, 1/4 of ZCTAs were treated and 3/4 were not.	Low-Intensity Counties n=3387 ZCTA Control: Individuals did not receive ads containing short physician-recorded videos. Randomization to treatment: The investigators randomized exposure to the ad campaign as follows. The 13 states which centrally report COVID-19 cases at the ZCTA level contained 829 counties. At Thanksgiving, 9 counties were excluded due to data limitations; at Christmas, 62 counties were excluded due to data limitations and potential negative impacts of treatment in rural, conservative areas resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election. Approximately half of the counties were randomized to high-intensity treatment with the remaining randomized to low-intensity treatment. In high-intensity counties, 3/4 of ZCTAs were treated (i.e., Facebook users in those ZCTAs received ads) and 1/4 were not. In low-intensity counties, 1/4 of ZCTAs were treated and 3/4 were not.
Inverse Hyperbolic Sine of COVID-19 Cases Thanksgiving (Period 1)	4.333 Inverse hyperbolic sine of individuals Interval 4.278 to 4.388	4.298 Inverse hyperbolic sine of individuals Interval 4.243 to 4.353
Inverse Hyperbolic Sine of COVID-19 Cases Christmas (Period 2)	4.368 Inverse hyperbolic sine of individuals Interval 4.31 to 4.425	4.442 Inverse hyperbolic sine of individuals Interval 4.385 to 4.499

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: up to one month

Facebook will ask a set of users in treated zip codes to answer four survey questions (each user answers only one question each). A small within-zip control group will be held from being treated, enabling comparisons between those who see the videos and those who don't. These questions will be asked a few days after the ad is shown on the User's feed and will include 1) recall of the ad; 2) intention of traveling over holiday; 3) intention of wearing a mask; and 4) beliefs about whether people should travel over holiday.

Outcome measures

Outcome data not reported

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: up to one month

this measures each day "how much people move around by counting the number of level-16 Bing tiles they are seen in within a day. People seen in more tiles are probably moving around more, while people seen in fewer are probably moving around less. Each day take eligible people in a given region and compute the number of distinct tiles they were seen in." This is aggregated to the county level.

Outcome measures

Outcome data not reported

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: up to one month

Facebook "Stay-put" data: this measures each day "the percentage of eligible people who are only observed in a single level-16 Bing tile (600m x 600m) during the course of a day" aggregated to they county level.

Outcome measures

Outcome data not reported

Adverse Events

High-Intensity Counties

Serious events: 0 serious events

Other events: 0 other events

Deaths: 0 deaths

Low-Intensity Counties

Serious events: 0 serious events

Other events: 0 other events

Deaths: 0 deaths

Serious adverse events

Adverse event data not reported

Other adverse events

Adverse event data not reported

Additional Information

Esther Duflo

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

Phone: 617-258-7013

Email: [email protected]

Results disclosure agreements

Principal investigator is a sponsor employee
Publication restrictions are in place

Measure	High-Intensity Counties n=410 Counties Treatment: Individuals received approximately 3 Facebook ads over a 2-week period. Each ad contained a short video recorded by a physician using a script that discusses the importance of staying safe during Thanksgiving or Christmas by considering not traveling and using a mask when appropriate. Randomization to treatment: The investigators randomized exposure to the ad campaign as follows. The 13 states which centrally report COVID-19 cases at the ZCTA level contained 829 counties. At Thanksgiving, 9 counties were excluded due to data limitations; at Christmas, 62 counties were excluded due to data limitations and potential negative impacts of treatment in rural, conservative areas resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election. Approximately half of the counties were randomized to high-intensity treatment with the remaining randomized to low-intensity treatment. In high-intensity counties, 3/4 of ZCTAs were treated (i.e., Facebook users in those ZCTAs received ads) and 1/4 were not. In low-intensity counties, 1/4 of ZCTAs were treated and 3/4 were not.	Low-Intensity Counties n=410 Counties Control: Individuals did not receive ads containing short physician-recorded videos. Randomization to treatment: The investigators randomized exposure to the ad campaign as follows. The 13 states which centrally report COVID-19 cases at the ZCTA level contained 829 counties. At Thanksgiving, 9 counties were excluded due to data limitations; at Christmas, 62 counties were excluded due to data limitations and potential negative impacts of treatment in rural, conservative areas resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election. Approximately half of the counties were randomized to high-intensity treatment with the remaining randomized to low-intensity treatment. In high-intensity counties, 3/4 of ZCTAs were treated (i.e., Facebook users in those ZCTAs received ads) and 1/4 were not. In low-intensity counties, 1/4 of ZCTAs were treated and 3/4 were not.	Total n=820 Counties Total of all reporting groups
Race/Ethnicity, Customized Thanksgiving (Period 1)	NA Proportion STANDARD_DEVIATION NA • n=410 Counties • Race/ethnicity data were not collected because no participants were enrolled.	NA Proportion STANDARD_DEVIATION NA • n=410 Counties • Race/ethnicity data were not collected because no participants were enrolled.	NA Proportion STANDARD_DEVIATION NA • n=820 Counties • Race/ethnicity data were not collected because no participants were enrolled.
Race/Ethnicity, Customized Christmas (Period 2)	NA Proportion STANDARD_DEVIATION NA • n=386 Counties • Race/ethnicity data were not collected because no participants were enrolled.	NA Proportion STANDARD_DEVIATION NA • n=381 Counties • Race/ethnicity data were not collected because no participants were enrolled.	NA Proportion STANDARD_DEVIATION NA • n=767 Counties • Race/ethnicity data were not collected because no participants were enrolled.
Baseline movement metric Thanksgiving (Period 1)	-8.58 Percent change relative to Feb 2020 STANDARD_DEVIATION 7.10 • n=410 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	-8.88 Percent change relative to Feb 2020 STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.42 • n=410 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	-8.73 Percent change relative to Feb 2020 STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.77 • n=820 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.
Baseline movement metric Christmas (Period 2)	-8.69 Percent change relative to Feb 2020 STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.88 • n=386 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	-9.09 Percent change relative to Feb 2020 STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.56 • n=381 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	-8.89 Percent change relative to Feb 2020 STANDARD_DEVIATION 6.72 • n=767 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.
Baseline leave home Thanksgiving (Period 1)	82.33 Percentage STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.42 • n=410 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	82.49 Percentage STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.53 • n=410 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	82.41 Percentage STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.47 • n=820 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.
Baseline leave home Christmas (Period 2)	82.40 Percentage STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.43 • n=386 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	82.44 Percentage STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.40 • n=381 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	82.42 Percentage STANDARD_DEVIATION 2.41 • n=767 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.
Missing baseline Facebook outcomes Thanksgiving (Period 1)	0.13 Proportion of counties STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.34 • n=410 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	0.17 Proportion of counties STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.38 • n=410 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	0.15 Proportion of counties STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.36 • n=820 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.
Missing baseline Facebook outcomes Christmas (Period 2)	0.11 Proportion of counties STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.32 • n=386 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	0.13 Proportion of counties STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.33 • n=381 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	0.12 Proportion of counties STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.32 • n=767 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.
Baseline fortnightly cases Thanksgiving (Period 1)	683.90 Individuals STANDARD_DEVIATION 3,032.94 • n=410 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	496.70 Individuals STANDARD_DEVIATION 1,165.17 • n=410 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	590.30 Individuals STANDARD_DEVIATION 2,297.94 • n=820 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.
Baseline fortnightly cases Christmas (Period 2)	654.77 Individuals STANDARD_DEVIATION 3,067.53 • n=386 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	598.54 Individuals STANDARD_DEVIATION 1,343.02 • n=381 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	626.84 Individuals STANDARD_DEVIATION 2,371.71 • n=767 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.
Baseline fortnightly deaths Thanksgiving (Period 1)	5.51 Individuals STANDARD_DEVIATION 22.35 • n=410 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	4.64 Individuals STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.08 • n=410 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	5.07 Individuals STANDARD_DEVIATION 17.63 • n=820 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.
Baseline fortnightly deaths Christmas (Period 2)	5.70 Individuals STANDARD_DEVIATION 23.07 • n=386 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	5.07 Individuals STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.29 • n=381 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	5.38 Individuals STANDARD_DEVIATION 18.19 • n=767 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.
Share urban Thanksgiving (Period 1)	0.47 Proportion of county ZCTAs STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.34 • n=410 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	0.44 Proportion of county ZCTAs STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.34 • n=410 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	0.46 Proportion of county ZCTAs STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.34 • n=820 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.
Share urban Christmas (Period 2)	0.48 Proportion of county ZCTAs STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.33 • n=386 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	0.50 Proportion of county ZCTAs STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.33 • n=381 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	0.49 Proportion of county ZCTAs STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.33 • n=767 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.
Share Democrats Thanksgiving (Period 1)	0.36 Proportion of county voters STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.15 • n=410 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	0.35 Proportion of county voters STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.15 • n=410 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	0.36 Proportion of county voters STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.15 • n=820 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.
Share Democrats Christmas (Period 2)	0.37 Proportion of county voters STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.15 • n=386 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	0.37 Proportion of county voters STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.15 • n=381 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	0.37 Proportion of county voters STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.15 • n=767 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.
Share Republicans Thanksgiving (Period 1)	0.62 Proportion of county voters STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.16 • n=410 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	0.63 Proportion of county voters STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.15 • n=410 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	0.62 Proportion of county voters STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.15 • n=820 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.
Share Republicans Christmas (Period 2)	0.61 Proportion of county voters STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.15 • n=386 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	0.61 Proportion of county voters STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.15 • n=381 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	0.61 Proportion of county voters STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.15 • n=767 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.
Population in 2019 Thanksgiving (Period 1)	122,491 individuals STANDARD_DEVIATION 349,501 • n=410 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	102,818 individuals STANDARD_DEVIATION 282,369 • n=410 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	112,654 individuals STANDARD_DEVIATION 317,672 • n=820 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.
Population in 2019 Christmas (Period 2)	116,787 individuals STANDARD_DEVIATION 344,511 • n=386 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	122,875 individuals STANDARD_DEVIATION 309,239 • n=381 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.	119,811 individuals STANDARD_DEVIATION 327,266 • n=767 Counties • Fewer counties were analyzed at Christmas because counties in rural, conservative areas from the study were removed from the study due to potential negative impacts resulting from polarization in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.