IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i7p3427-d524281.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perception of Risk, Self-Efficacy and Social Trust during the Diffusion of Covid-19 in Italy

Author

Listed:
  • Pierluigi Diotaiuti

    (Department of Human Sciences, Society and Health, University of Cassino and Southern Lazio, 03043 Cassino, Italy)

  • Giuseppe Valente

    (Department of Human Sciences, Society and Health, University of Cassino and Southern Lazio, 03043 Cassino, Italy)

  • Stefania Mancone

    (Department of Human Sciences, Society and Health, University of Cassino and Southern Lazio, 03043 Cassino, Italy)

  • Lavinia Falese

    (Department of Human Sciences, Society and Health, University of Cassino and Southern Lazio, 03043 Cassino, Italy)

  • Fernando Bellizzi

    (Department of Human Sciences, Society and Health, University of Cassino and Southern Lazio, 03043 Cassino, Italy)

  • Daniela Anastasi

    (Department of Human Sciences, Society and Health, University of Cassino and Southern Lazio, 03043 Cassino, Italy)

  • Elisa Langiano

    (Department of Human Sciences, Society and Health, University of Cassino and Southern Lazio, 03043 Cassino, Italy)

  • Fábio Hech Dominski

    (Department of Physical Education, Univille University, Joinville 89219-710, Brazil)

  • Alexandro Andrade

    (Health and Sports Science Center, Department of Physical Education, CEFID, Santa Catarina State University, Florianópolis 88035-901, Brazil)

Abstract

The Coronavirus pandemic has affected the lives of people all over the world. The perception of risk and people’s consequent behaviour during a pandemic are very complex and are affected by multiple cultural and psychological factors. The aim of this study was to investigate the change in risk perception, perceived self-efficacy and the perceived trust in the behaviour of others, the decisions of health authorities and government provisions, as well as the variation of self-restraint behaviours during the spread of the Covid-19 epidemic in Italy. We used a convenience sample of 707 university students (M age = 22.99; SD = 4.01) from a central area of Italy. Participants freely joined the research by answering an online questionnaire between February and March 2020. Three time intervals defined by the progressive containment measures implemented by the Italian Government were considered. Main outcome measures were the Generalized Self-Efficacy Scale, the Risk Perception Index, the Index of Self-restraint Behaviours, and Institutional and Interpersonal Trust Measures. Results confirmed that significant changes in the time progression have occurred in the perception of risk, in the perception of individual self-efficacy, in the value attributed to social responsibility, in interpersonal trust and in trust in health authorities. The study also identified the participants’ personality traits and locus of control as predictors (positive and negative) of perceived self-efficacy and tested a mediation model of trust on the effect of risk perception on self-restraint intentions.

Suggested Citation

  • Pierluigi Diotaiuti & Giuseppe Valente & Stefania Mancone & Lavinia Falese & Fernando Bellizzi & Daniela Anastasi & Elisa Langiano & Fábio Hech Dominski & Alexandro Andrade, 2021. "Perception of Risk, Self-Efficacy and Social Trust during the Diffusion of Covid-19 in Italy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(7), pages 1-17, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:7:p:3427-:d:524281
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/7/3427/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/7/3427/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Haisley, Emily C. & Weber, Roberto A., 2010. "Self-serving interpretations of ambiguity in other-regarding behavior," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 68(2), pages 614-625, March.
    2. Benabou, Roland & Falk, Armin & Tirole, Jean, 2018. "Narratives, Imperatives, and Moral Reasoning," IZA Discussion Papers 11665, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    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. Erin L. Krupka & Roberto A. Weber, 2013. "Identifying Social Norms Using Coordination Games: Why Does Dictator Game Sharing Vary?," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 11(3), pages 495-524, June.
    5. Avner Ahituv & V. Joseph Hotz & Tomas Philipson, 1996. "The Responsiveness of the Demand for Condoms to the Local Prevalence of AIDS," Journal of Human Resources, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 31(4), pages 869-897.
    6. Hakan Kallmen, 2000. "Manifest anxiety, general self-efficacy and locus of control as determinants of personal and general risk perception," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 3(2), pages 111-120.
    7. Jungwon Min, 2020. "Does social trust slow down or speed up the transmission of COVID-19?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(12), pages 1-19, December.
    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. Maria Ferrara & Elisa Langiano & Lavinia Falese & Pierluigi Diotaiuti & Cristina Cortis & Elisabetta De Vito, 2022. "Changes in Physical Activity Levels and Eating Behaviours during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Sociodemographic Analysis in University Students," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-17, May.
    2. Pierluigi Diotaiuti & Giuseppe Valente & Stefania Mancone & Stefano Corrado & Fernando Bellizzi & Lavinia Falese & Elisa Langiano & Guilherme Torres Vilarino & Alexandro Andrade, 2023. "Effects of Cognitive Appraisals on Perceived Self-Efficacy and Distress during the COVID-19 Lockdown: An Empirical Analysis Based on Structural Equation Modeling," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(7), pages 1-16, March.
    3. Berislav Andrlić & Kankanamge Gayan Priyashantha & Adambarage Chamaru De Alwis, 2023. "Employee Engagement Management in the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Systematic Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(2), pages 1-21, January.
    4. Antimo Natale & Carmen Concerto & Alessandro Rodolico & Andrea Birgillito & Marina Bonelli & Miriam Martinez & Maria Salvina Signorelli & Antonino Petralia & Carmenrita Infortuna & Fortunato Battaglia, 2022. "Risk Perception among Psychiatric Patients during the COVID-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(5), pages 1-12, February.
    5. Umer, Hamza, 2022. "Does pro-sociality or trust better predict staying home behavior during the Covid-19?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 100(C).

    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. Gneezy, Uri & Saccardo, Silvia & Serra-Garcia, Marta & van Veldhuizen, Roel, 2020. "Bribing the Self," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 120, pages 311-324.
    2. Adrian Hillenbrand & Eugenio Verrina, 2018. "The differential effect of narratives prosocial behavior," Discussion Paper Series of the Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods 2018_16, Max Planck Institute for Research on Collective Goods, revised Jun 2020.
    3. Marie Claire Villeval, 2019. "Comportements (non) éthiques et stratégies morales," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 70(6), pages 1021-1046.
    4. Ingar Haaland & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2023. "Designing Information Provision Experiments," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 61(1), pages 3-40, March.
    5. Shaul Shalvi & Ivan Soraperra & Joël van der Weele & Marie Claire Villeval, 2019. "Shooting the Messenger? Supply and Demand in Markets for Willful Ignorance," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 19-071/I, Tinbergen Institute.
    6. Simon Gächter & Daniele Nosenzo & Martin Sefton, 2013. "Peer Effects In Pro-Social Behavior: Social Norms Or Social Preferences?," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 11(3), pages 548-573, June.
    7. Ahrens, Steffen & Bosch-Rosa, Ciril, 2023. "Motivated beliefs, social preferences, and limited liability in financial decision-Making," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    8. Heinicke, Franziska & König-Kersting, Christian & Schmidt, Robert, 2022. "Injunctive vs. descriptive social norms and reference group dependence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 199-218.
    9. Eugen Dimant, 2020. "Hate Trumps Love: The Impact of Political Polarization on Social Preferences," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 029, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    10. Apffelstaedt, Arno & Freundt, Jana & Oslislo, Christoph, 2022. "Social norms and elections: How elected rules can make behavior (in)appropriate," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 196(C), pages 148-177.
    11. Schmidt, Klaus & Herweg, Fabian, 2021. "Prices versus Quantities with Morally Concerned Consumers," VfS Annual Conference 2021 (Virtual Conference): Climate Economics 242371, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    12. Feiler, Lauren, 2014. "Testing models of information avoidance with binary choice dictator games," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 253-267.
    13. Rustichini, Aldo & Villeval, Marie Claire, 2014. "Moral hypocrisy, power and social preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 107(PA), pages 10-24.
    14. Bellemare, Charles & Deversi, Marvin & Englmaier, Florian, 2019. "Complexity and Distributive Fairness Interact in Affecting Compliance Behavior," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 190, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    15. Bartling, Björn & Özdemir, Yagiz, 2023. "The limits to moral erosion in markets: Social norms and the replacement excuse," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 143-160.
    16. Katherine B. Coffman & Christine L. Exley & Muriel Niederle, 2021. "The Role of Beliefs in Driving Gender Discrimination," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(6), pages 3551-3569, June.
    17. Silvia Saccardo & Marta Serra-Garcia, 2020. "Cognitive Flexibility or Moral Commitment? Evidence of Anticipated Belief Distortion," CESifo Working Paper Series 8529, CESifo.
    18. Francesca Gino & Michael I. Norton & Roberto A. Weber, 2016. "Motivated Bayesians: Feeling Moral While Acting Egoistically," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 30(3), pages 189-212, Summer.
    19. Ahrens, Steffen & Bosch-Rosa, Ciril, 2022. "Motivated beliefs, social preferences, and limited liability in financial decision-making," Discussion Papers 2022/8, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    20. Eriksen, Kristoffer W. & Fest, Sebastian & Kvaløy, Ola & Dijk, Oege, 2022. "Fair advice," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).

    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:7:p:3427-:d:524281. 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.