IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i3p1982-d1043226.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Tao Xu

    (School of International Culture and Social Development, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua 321000, China
    These authors contributed equally to this work and should be considered co-first authors.)

  • Mengyuan Shao

    (School of International Culture and Social Development, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua 321000, China
    These authors contributed equally to this work and should be considered co-first authors.)

  • Ruiquan Liu

    (School of International Culture and Social Development, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua 321000, China)

  • Xiaoqin Wu

    (School of International Culture and Social Development, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua 321000, China)

  • Kai Zheng

    (Department of Economics and International Trade, School of Economics, Management & Law, Hubei Normal University, Huangshi 435002, 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.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:3:p:1982-:d:1043226
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/3/1982/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/3/1982/
    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. 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.
    3. Liliana Cori & Fabrizio Bianchi & Ennio Cadum & Carmen Anthonj, 2020. "Risk Perception and COVID-19," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(9), pages 1-6, April.
    4. Kenneth Lee & Harshil Sahai & Patrick Baylis & Michael Greenstone, 2020. "Job Loss and Behavioral Change: The Unprecedented Effects of the India Lockdown in Delhi," Working Papers 2020-65, Becker Friedman Institute for Research In Economics.
    5. Wenhuan Yu & Lin He & Xianhao Lin & Thomas Freudenreich & Tao Liu, 2022. "Irrational Consumption during the COVID-19 Period," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-13, April.
    6. Elisha Starick & Vanessa Montemarano & Stephanie E. Cassin, 2021. "Coping during COVID-19: The Impact of Cognitive Appraisal on Problem Orientation, Coping Behaviors, Body Image, and Perceptions of Eating Behaviors and Physical Activity during the Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-11, October.
    7. Dang, Hai-Anh H. & Viet Nguyen, Cuong, 2021. "Gender inequality during the COVID-19 pandemic: Income, expenditure, savings, and job loss," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    8. Chengzhe Fu & Liao Liao & Weijun Huang, 2021. "Behavioral Implementation and Compliance of Anti-Epidemic Policy in the COVID-19 Crisis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-18, April.
    9. Cho, Jinsook & Lee, Jinkook, 2006. "An integrated model of risk and risk-reducing strategies," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 112-120, January.
    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)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Zehra Batu & Mikail Batu & Akan Yanık & Hülya Oğur & Simge Kavcar & Serhat Bolat, 2023. "Lifestyle Changes and COVID-19 Related Perceptions of Turkish Healthcare Workers," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, December.

    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 & 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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).
    4. 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.
    5. 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.
    6. 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).
    7. Shin KINOSHITA & Masayuki SATO & Takanori IDA, 2022. "Bayesian Probability Revision and Infection Prevention Behavior in Japan : A Quantitative Analysis of the First Wave of COVID-19," Discussion papers e-22-004, Graduate School of Economics , Kyoto University.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Liliana Cori & Olivia Curzio & Fulvio Adorni & Federica Prinelli & Marianna Noale & Caterina Trevisan & Loredana Fortunato & Andrea Giacomelli & Fabrizio Bianchi, 2021. "Fear of COVID-19 for Individuals and Family Members: Indications from the National Cross-Sectional Study of the EPICOVID19 Web-Based Survey," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-20, March.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. Georgia Treneman-Evans & Becky Ali & James Denison-Day & Tara Clegg & Lucy Yardley & Sarah Denford & Rosie Essery, 2022. "The Rapid Adaptation and Optimisation of a Digital Behaviour-Change Intervention to Reduce the Spread of COVID-19 in Schools," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-22, May.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. Zhaoxie Zeng & Yi Ding & Yue Zhang & Yongyu Guo, 2022. "What Breeds Conspiracy Theories in COVID-19? The Role of Risk Perception in the Belief in COVID-19 Conspiracy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-11, April.
    17. 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.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. Yunjun Hu & Lingling Shu & Huilin Zhang & Chen Wang & Chengfu Yu & Guanyu Cui, 2022. "Perceived Epidemic Risk and Depression Symptoms during the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Mediating Role of Security and the Moderation Role of Perceived Discrimination," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(12), pages 1-14, June.

    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:20:y:2023:i:3:p:1982-:d:1043226. 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.