Negotiating Mask-Wearing: Relational Dialectics Among University Students in the Post-COVID-19 Era

Wearing a mask, an enduring remnant of the COVID-19 era, characterized by imposed institutional mandates for prevention and protection, has emerged as a focal point for diverse and often opposing discourses in the post-pandemic period. This complexity remains underexplored in the literature. Informed by relational dialectics theory 2.0 (RDT 2.0), this study uncovered centripetal and centrifugal discourses surrounding mask-wearing after COVID-19. Using semi-structured interviews, data were collected from 14 university students aged 20-27. The contrapuntal analysis yielded two overarching discourses-individual autonomy versus collective responsibility and contextual conformity versus personal continuity. These were accompanied by six secondary discursive tensions comprising prioritizing self-protection versus feeling discomfort of mask-wearing; personal autonomy versus social judgments from others; collective safety mandate versus individual post-pandemic autonomy; care for others versus distrust of others; health-related protection during COVID-19 versus emotional and appearance-driven protection post-COVID-19; and situational demand for mask removal versus internalized habit of mask-wearing. These findings extend the fundamental assumptions of RDT 2.0 by demonstrating its relevance in uncovering the diverse, often competing interpretations individuals attribute to mask-wearing in the post-COVID-19 context, as well as the dialectical tensions that emerge along a continuum of meanings. The study's practical implications for health communication professionals and campaign developers are evident, as mask-wearing, once associated with health protection, has transformed in the post-pandemic context into a social mechanism for non-health-related purposes or an internalized personal practice, while still remaining vulnerable to situational demands.