Risk Perception, Perceived Government Coping Validity, and Individual Response in the Early Stage of the COVID-19 Pandemic in China

Abstract

As a major crisis event, the COVID-19 pandemic has affected the global economy, threatened the lives of the public, and caused varying degrees of impact on the public. Previous studies have shown that risk perception and government response had different impacts on the public, but they revealed more about the independent impact of risk perception and government response on the public. This study will comprehensively consider the impacts of these two factors on the behavior of the public in the early stage of the epidemic. We analyzed data from an online survey in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic in China and categorized individual behaviors into three dimensions: entertainment and travel, work, and the stockpile of supplies. In addition, we defined the risk perception variables by two dimensions: knowledge of the epidemic itself and knowledge of the consequences of the epidemic. At the same time, we used an exploratory factor analysis to construct the variable of perceived government coping validity and then adopted the ordinal logit model for analysis. The results showed that in terms of entertainment and travel, people would not be affected even if they fully understood the epidemic itself; once they were aware of the negative social consequences of the epidemic, people would suspend entertainment and travel to prevent the spread of the virus. As for work or employment, people would not stop working or employment even if they realized the infectivity and harmfulness of the disease and its social consequences. Furthermore, fear of COVID-19 and the perception of uncontrolled COVID-19 significantly positively affected people’s material stockpiling behavior. These results indicate that different risk perceptions had different effects on individual responses, and individual behaviors reflected different coping logics. In addition, the government’s effective response to the epidemic would significantly reduce the negative impacts of the epidemic on the three dimensions of people’s responses. These conclusions have certain policy implications for preventing and responding to outbreaks in other countries.

Risk Perception, Perceived Government Coping Validity, and Individual Sleep Problems in the Early Stage of the COVID-19 Pandemic in China: Mediation Analysis Based on Negative Emotions

“…Furthermore, this study also found a significant association between government response behavior and sleep quality and nightmares. Although previous research found that people’s trust in the government and evaluation of government response behavior significantly affected the efficiency and consequences of combating COVID-19 [ 53 , 62 ], the relationship between government response behavior and sleep quality has not been studied. This study revealed that a positive evaluation of government response behavior significantly improved sleep quality and reduced the probability of nightmares, but the mechanisms of action were different.…”

The Relationship Between Risk Perception, Physical Activity, and Adolescent Mental Health: A Cross-Lagged Analysis

“…A reappraisal of novel cognitions will then occur, thus shifting the focus of attention on the negative event, which is effective in improving anxiety and depression in students. Secondly the social interaction theory for emotion regulation found that the inherent social relationships prevalent in physical activity, 23 as well as the mutual support between individuals involved in exercise, play an important role in the effects of exercise on mental health. There is a positive effect of social support on mental health.…”

Lifestyle Changes and COVID-19 Related Perceptions of Turkish Healthcare Workers

“…In a global pandemic where there are difficulties in the fight against COVID-19, the pandemic perceptions and approaches of healthcare workers can be considered as an important study target group to be examined (Galbraith et al, 2021; T. Xu et al, 2023; M.…”