OBJECTIVES: The public’s stated preference for public health and social measures (PHSMs), and levels of pandemic fatigue are insufficiently fixed. We aim to quantify the public’s preferences for varied PHSMs, and measure population’s pandemic fatigue.

METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, nationwide sampling, survey-based experiment to assess public preference for and attitudes towards PHSMs. A set of psychometric scales, specifically, the COVID-19 pandemic fatigue scale (CPFS), was used to screen fatigue levels in the respondents. The multinomial logit model (MNL) and latent class model (LCM) were utilized for choice tasks analysis, and Mann-Whitney tests were used for CPFS statistical analysis.

RESULTS: There were 689 respondents, who completed the survey, and were included in the study after quality control. The discrete choice experiments revealed that respondents attached the greatest importance to the risk of COVID-19 infection within three months (45.53%), followed by loss of income within three months (30.69%). Vulnerable populations (lower-income and older respondents) are more sensitive to the risk of infection, and younger respondents are more sensitive to income loss and prefer non-suspension of socialization and transportation. Migrants, and respondents with a higher level of fatigue, have less acceptance of the mandatory booster vaccination and suspension of transportation. Additionally, a higher fatigue level was observed in females, younger respondents, migrants, and relatively lower-income respondents.

CONCLUSIONS: Fatigue and fear of COVID-19 infection contributed to the public's mental health problem. Hence, at the late-stage pandemic, policymakers should consider reducing people’s mental burden via relieving people's fear of infection when PHSMs are being relaxed. And this also provides insights for the outbreaks' PHSMs implementation in the future.