IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i23p12422-d688154.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustained Effects of Government Response on the COVID-19 Infection Rate in China: A Multiple Mediation Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Taixiang Duan

    (Department of Sociology, Hohai University, Nanjing 211100, China)

  • Zhonggen Sun

    (School of Public Administration, Hohai University, Nanjing 211100, China)

  • Guoqing Shi

    (Asian Research Center, Hohai University, 8 Focheng West Road, Jinagning District, Nanjing 211100, China)

Abstract

Many scholars have considered the relationship between the government response to COVID-19, an important social intervention strategy, and the COVID-19 infection rate. However, few have examined the sustained impact of an early government response on the COVID-19 infection rate. The current paper fills this gap by investigating a national survey performed in February 2020 and infection data from Chinese cities surveyed 1.5 years after the outbreak of COVID-19. The results suggest that the Chinese government’s early response to COVID-19 significantly and sustainedly reduced China’s COVID-19 infection rate, and that this impact worked through risk perception, the adoption of protective action recommendations (PARs), and the chain-mediating effects of risk perception and the adoption of PARs, respectively. These findings have important practical value. In demonstrating how government response and infection rate at the macro level are connected to the behaviour of individuals at the micro level, they suggest feasible directions for curbing the spread of diseases such as COVID-19. When facing such public health emergencies, the focus should be on increasing the public’s risk perception and adoption of PARs.

Suggested Citation

  • Taixiang Duan & Zhonggen Sun & Guoqing Shi, 2021. "Sustained Effects of Government Response on the COVID-19 Infection Rate in China: A Multiple Mediation Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-16, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:23:p:12422-:d:688154
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/23/12422/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/23/12422/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sarah Dryhurst & Claudia R. Schneider & John Kerr & Alexandra L. J. Freeman & Gabriel Recchia & Anne Marthe van der Bles & David Spiegelhalter & Sander van der Linden, 2020. "Risk perceptions of COVID-19 around the world," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(7-8), pages 994-1006, August.
    2. World Bank, 2020. "COVID 19 in Brazil," World Bank Publications - Reports 34223, The World Bank Group.
    3. Zhonggen Sun & Bingqing Yang & Ruilian Zhang & Xin Cheng, 2020. "Influencing Factors of Understanding COVID-19 Risks and Coping Behaviors among the Elderly Population," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(16), pages 1-16, August.
    4. Roger E. Kasperson & Ortwin Renn & Paul Slovic & Halina S. Brown & Jacque Emel & Robert Goble & Jeanne X. Kasperson & Samuel Ratick, 1988. "The Social Amplification of Risk: A Conceptual Framework," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 8(2), pages 177-187, June.
    5. Lei Zheng & Miao Miao & JiYoon Lim & Maorui Li & Shu Nie & Xiaojun Zhang, 2020. "Is Lockdown Bad for Social Anxiety in COVID-19 Regions?: A National Study in The SOR Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-12, June.
    6. Jinling Hua & Rajib Shaw, 2020. "Corona Virus (COVID-19) “Infodemic” and Emerging Issues through a Data Lens: The Case of China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-12, March.
    7. Vaughan, E. & Tinker, T., 2009. "Effective health risk communication about pandemic influenza for vulnerable populations," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 99(S2), pages 324-332.
    8. Jin‐Tan Liu & James K. Hammitt & Jung‐Der Wang & Meng‐Wen Tsou, 2005. "Valuation of the risk of SARS in Taiwan," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 14(1), pages 83-91, January.
    9. Taixiang Duan & Hechao Jiang & Xiangshu Deng & Qiongwen Zhang & Fang Wang, 2020. "Government Intervention, Risk Perception, and the Adoption of Protective Action Recommendations: Evidence from the COVID-19 Prevention and Control Experience of China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-17, May.
    10. Michael K. Lindell & Ronald W. Perry, 2012. "The Protective Action Decision Model: Theoretical Modifications and Additional Evidence," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(4), pages 616-632, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Taixiang Duan & Hechao Jiang & Xiangshu Deng & Qiongwen Zhang & Fang Wang, 2020. "Government Intervention, Risk Perception, and the Adoption of Protective Action Recommendations: Evidence from the COVID-19 Prevention and Control Experience of China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-17, May.
    2. Sunhee Kim & Seoyong Kim, 2020. "Analysis of the Impact of Health Beliefs and Resource Factors on Preventive Behaviors against the COVID-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-21, November.
    3. Tao Xu & Mengyuan Shao & Ruiquan Liu & Xiaoqin Wu & Kai Zheng, 2023. "Risk Perception, Perceived Government Coping Validity, and Individual Response in the Early Stage of the COVID-19 Pandemic in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(3), pages 1-19, January.
    4. Sabrina Cipolletta & Gabriela Rios Andreghetti & Giovanna Mioni, 2022. "Risk Perception towards COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Qualitative Synthesis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(8), pages 1-25, April.
    5. Jina Choo & Sooyeon Park & Songwhi Noh, 2021. "Associations of COVID-19 Knowledge and Risk Perception with the Full Adoption of Preventive Behaviors in Seoul," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(22), pages 1-14, November.
    6. Wang, Fei & Zhang, Zhentai & Lin, Shoufu, 2023. "Purchase intention of Autonomous vehicles and industrial Policies: Evidence from a national survey in China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    7. Yi Yang & Ru-De Liu & Yi Ding & Jia Wang & Wei Hong & Ying Wu, 2021. "The Influence of Communication on College Students’ Self–Other Risk Perceptions of COVID-19: A Comparative Study of China and the United States," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(23), pages 1-16, November.
    8. Ye, Maoxin & Lyu, Zeyu, 2020. "Trust, risk perception, and COVID-19 infections: Evidence from multilevel analyses of combined original dataset in China," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 265(C).
    9. Hernando Santamaría-García & Miguel Burgaleta & Agustina Legaz & Daniel Flichtentrei & Mateo Córdoba-Delgado & Juliana Molina-Paredes & Juliana Linares-Puerta & Juan Montealegre-Gómez & Sandra Castelb, 2022. "The price of prosociality in pandemic times," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-12, December.
    10. Karina Fernanda Gonzalez & Maria Teresa Bull & Sebastian Muñoz-Herrera & Luis Felipe Robledo, 2021. "Determinant Factors in Personal Decision-Making to Adopt COVID-19 Prevention Measures in Chile," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(15), pages 1-18, July.
    11. Adloff, Susann, 2021. "Adapting to Climate Change: Threat Experience, Cognition and Protection Motivation," VfS Annual Conference 2021 (Virtual Conference): Climate Economics 242400, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    12. Floris Goerlandt & Jie Li & Genserik Reniers, 2021. "The Landscape of Risk Perception Research: A Scientometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-26, November.
    13. Anna C. M. Queiroz & Géraldine Fauville & Adina T. Abeles & Aaron Levett & Jeremy N. Bailenson, 2023. "The Efficacy of Virtual Reality in Climate Change Education Increases with Amount of Body Movement and Message Specificity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-24, March.
    14. Gisela Wachinger & Ortwin Renn & Chloe Begg & Christian Kuhlicke, 2013. "The Risk Perception Paradox—Implications for Governance and Communication of Natural Hazards," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(6), pages 1049-1065, June.
    15. Dominic Balog‐Way & Katherine McComas & John Besley, 2020. "The Evolving Field of Risk Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(S1), pages 2240-2262, November.
    16. Branden B. Johnson, 2018. "Residential Location and Psychological Distance in Americans’ Risk Views and Behavioral Intentions Regarding Zika Virus," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(12), pages 2561-2579, December.
    17. Tara Kirk Sell & Crystal Watson & Diane Meyer & Marissa Kronk & Sanjana Ravi & Laura E. Pechta & Keri M. Lubell & Dale A. Rose, 2018. "Frequency of Risk‐Related News Media Messages in 2016 Coverage of Zika Virus," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(12), pages 2514-2524, December.
    18. Eric Shook & Andrew Curtis & Jacqueline Curtis & Gregory Gibson & Anthony Vander Horst & Virginia Little & Christopher Woolverton, 2019. "Assessing the Geographic Context of Risk Perception and Behavioral Response to Potential Ebola Exposure," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(5), pages 1-6, March.
    19. Yaodong Yang & Huaqing Ren & Han Zhang, 2022. "Understanding Consumer Panic Buying Behaviors during the Strict Lockdown on Omicron Variant: A Risk Perception View," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(24), pages 1-19, December.
    20. Mengtian Zhao & Heather Rosoff & Richard S. John, 2019. "Media Disaster Reporting Effects on Public Risk Perception and Response to Escalating Tornado Warnings: A Natural Experiment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(3), pages 535-552, March.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:23:p:12422-:d:688154. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.