Perceived vulnerability to disease: Development and validation of a 15-item self-report instrument

Duncan, Lesley A.; Schaller, Mark; Park, Justin H.

doi:10.1016/j.paid.2009.05.001

Cited by 661 publications

(959 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

856

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As predictors we used demographic variables (age, gender, residential area, education, income, and number of children; see Table 1 for details). We also included variables concerning beliefs and perceptions about health issues: subjective health (1 item; 1 = very bad to 5 = very good), perceived vulnerability to disease (PVD) [15] (8 items; 1 = low to 5 = high; alpha = .75), perceived avian influenza threat (1 item; 1 = not a threat to 5 = a real threat), and knowledge about avian influenza [16] (5 items; 1 = poor to 5 = good). We measured trust in governments (3 items about the Swiss government, the European Union and governments of countries affected by influenza; 1 = low to 5 = high; alpha = .69), and trust in medical organizations (3 items about the World Health Organization, medical and pharmaceutical organizations; 1 = low to 5 = high; alpha = .75).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trust in medical organizations predicts pandemic (H1N1) 2009 vaccination behavior and perceived efficacy of protection measures in the Swiss public

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Following the recent avian influenza and pandemic (H1N1) 2009 outbreaks, public trust in medical and political authorities is emerging as a new predictor of compliance with officially recommended protection measures. In a two-wave longitudinal survey of adults in French-speaking Switzerland, trust in medical organizations longitudinally predicted actual vaccination status 6 months later, during the pandemic (H1N1) 2009 vaccination campaign. No other variables explained significant amounts of variance. Trust in medical organizations also predicted perceived efficacy of officially recommended protection measures (getting vaccinated, washing hands, wearing a mask, sneezing into the elbow), as did beliefs about health issues (perceived vulnerability to disease, threat perceptions). These findings show that in the case of emerging infectious diseases, actual behavior and perceived efficacy of protection measures may have different antecedents. Moreover, they suggest that public trust is a crucial determinant of vaccination behavior and underscore the practical importance of managing trust in disease prevention campaigns.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Trust in medical organizations predicts pandemic (H1N1) 2009 vaccination behavior and perceived efficacy of protection measures in the Swiss public

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At the group level, Schaller and Murray (2008) report that the correlations between national averages of parasite prevalence and national averages of extraversion and openness both equal −0.59. Using an individual differences approach, though, Duncan et al (2009) report that the correlations between individual differences in perceptions of infectability (e.g., self-reports of infection frequency and severity) and extraversion and openness are −0.06 and −0.03, respectively. Similarly, Tybur and colleagues (2011) report that individual differences in sensitivity to pathogen disgust correlate weakly with individual differences in extraversion and openness (−0.05 and −0.24, respectively; see also Tybur and De Vries 2013).…”

Section: Simpson's Paradoxmentioning

confidence: 99%

What Can Cross-Cultural Correlations Teach Us about Human Nature?

Pollet

Tybur

Frankenhuis

et al. 2014

Hum Nat

143

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many recent evolutionary psychology and human behavioral ecology studies have tested hypotheses by examining correlations between variables measured at a group level (e.g., state, country, continent). In such analyses, variables collected for each aggregation are often taken to be representative of the individuals present within them, and relationships between such variables are presumed to reflect individual-level processes. There are multiple reasons to exercise caution when doing so, including: (1) the ecological fallacy, whereby relationships observed at the aggregate level do not accurately represent individual-level processes; (2) non-independence of data points, which violates assumptions of the inferential techniques used in null hypothesis testing; and (3) cross-cultural non-equivalence of measurement (differences in construct validity between groups). We provide examples of how each of these gives rise to problems in the context of testing evolutionary hypotheses about human behavior, and we offer some suggestions for future research.Keywords Ecological fallacy . Cross-cultural research . Research methods . Simpson's paradox . Non-independence . Measurement equivalence Many hypothesis-testing techniques used by evolutionary behavioral scientists involve examining degrees of covariation between two or more variables and making inferences based on such relationships (e.g., analysis of variance, Pearson correlation). This approach may be applied to a number of different research designs that examine variation at different, hierarchically organized levels (e.g., individuals versus groups;

show abstract

“…Germ aversion may be defined as individuals' discomfort in situations that connote an increased likelihood for the transmission of pathogens (Duncan, Schaller, & Park, 2009). Recent findings suggest a link between germ aversion and biases in intergroup cognition (Makhanova, Miller, & Maner, 2015).…”

Section: Germ Aversionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To measure germ aversion, the perceived vulnerability to disease (PVD) was used (Duncan et al, 2009;Spanish version: Diaz, Soriano, & Beleña, 2016). The germ aversion subscale (α = 0.71) contains 8 items in a Likert scale from 1 (completely disagree) to 7 (completely agree).…”

Section: Instrumentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predictors of Social Distance Toward People with Obesity: The Role of Allophilia

Magallares

2017

rips

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Antifat attitudes refer to the prejudicial assumption of personality characteristics based on a visual assessment of a person with obesity. Allophilia may be defined as the positive attitudes toward different out-groups, including people with obesity. In this study, conducted with 448 participants, it is analyzed whether allophilia, germ aversion, physical disgust, social dominance orientation, perceived controllability of weight, and fear of gaining weight play a central role in explaining the individual differences that exist in social distance toward individuals with obesity. Results showed a negative correlation between the different subscales of allophilia (affection, comfort, kinship, engagement, and enthusiasm) and social distance. Furthermore, a positive relationship between social distance and germ aversion, social dominance orientation, perceived controllability of weight, and fear of gaining weight was found. Moreover, the regression analyses conducted showed that comfort was the best negative predictor of social distance toward individuals with obesity. Finally, the results are discussed in the frame of antifat attitudes literature, suggesting new ways to reduce this pervasive stigma.

show abstract

Perceived vulnerability to disease: Development and validation of a 15-item self-report instrument

Cited by 661 publications

References 23 publications

Trust in medical organizations predicts pandemic (H1N1) 2009 vaccination behavior and perceived efficacy of protection measures in the Swiss public

Trust in medical organizations predicts pandemic (H1N1) 2009 vaccination behavior and perceived efficacy of protection measures in the Swiss public

What Can Cross-Cultural Correlations Teach Us about Human Nature?

Predictors of Social Distance Toward People with Obesity: The Role of Allophilia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About