The influence of environmental cues on behavioral response: An assessment of the Protective Action Decision Model in the context of COVID‐19

IF 1.9 Q3 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy Pub Date : 2024-05-07 DOI:10.1002/rhc3.12305
Amber Silver, Nadia Koratty, Samantha Penta, Lauren Clay
{"title":"The influence of environmental cues on behavioral response: An assessment of the Protective Action Decision Model in the context of COVID‐19","authors":"Amber Silver, Nadia Koratty, Samantha Penta, Lauren Clay","doi":"10.1002/rhc3.12305","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Protective Action Decision Model has emerged within the literature as a theoretical model with promising predictive ability, particularly in the context of short‐term behavioral response and longer‐term hazard adjustments. However, the applicability of the model in the context of public health hazards is less certain. Accordingly, this research utilizes an online questionnaire instrument disseminated via Qualtrics to residents of New York State at three points in the COVID‐19 pandemic (October 2020, January 2021, and May–June 2021) to examine whether changes to the built environment (i.e., signs requiring masking, signs requiring social distancing, and presence of hand sanitizing stations) influenced threat perceptions (i.e., perception of severity and likelihood of infection), and in turn, behavioral responses (i.e., masking, social distancing, and hand sanitizing) at different points in time. The results demonstrate that changes in the built environment were positively associated with behavioral responses at different points in the pandemic, rather than being mediated through threat perception, as predicted by the Protective Action Decision Model (PADM). The paper concludes with a brief discussion of how these findings may guide future research on environmental cues, threat perceptions, and behavioral response to better understand protective action decision‐making in the context of an ongoing public health hazard.","PeriodicalId":21362,"journal":{"name":"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/rhc3.12305","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The Protective Action Decision Model has emerged within the literature as a theoretical model with promising predictive ability, particularly in the context of short‐term behavioral response and longer‐term hazard adjustments. However, the applicability of the model in the context of public health hazards is less certain. Accordingly, this research utilizes an online questionnaire instrument disseminated via Qualtrics to residents of New York State at three points in the COVID‐19 pandemic (October 2020, January 2021, and May–June 2021) to examine whether changes to the built environment (i.e., signs requiring masking, signs requiring social distancing, and presence of hand sanitizing stations) influenced threat perceptions (i.e., perception of severity and likelihood of infection), and in turn, behavioral responses (i.e., masking, social distancing, and hand sanitizing) at different points in time. The results demonstrate that changes in the built environment were positively associated with behavioral responses at different points in the pandemic, rather than being mediated through threat perception, as predicted by the Protective Action Decision Model (PADM). The paper concludes with a brief discussion of how these findings may guide future research on environmental cues, threat perceptions, and behavioral response to better understand protective action decision‐making in the context of an ongoing public health hazard.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
环境线索对行为反应的影响:结合 COVID-19 评估保护行动决策模型
保护行动决策模型是文献中出现的一种理论模型,具有良好的预测能力,特别是在短期行为反应和长期危害调整方面。然而,该模型在公共健康危害方面的适用性还不太确定。因此,本研究在 COVID-19 大流行的三个时间点(2020 年 10 月、2021 年 1 月和 2021 年 5-6 月)通过 Qualtrics 向纽约州居民发放在线问卷调查工具,以研究建筑环境的变化(即、在不同的时间点,建筑环境的变化(即要求戴口罩的标志、要求拉开社交距离的标志和手消毒站的存在)是否会影响对威胁的感知(即对感染严重性和可能性的感知),进而影响行为反应(即戴口罩、拉开社交距离和手消毒)。结果表明,建筑环境的变化与大流行期间不同时间点的行为反应呈正相关,而不是像保护行动决策模型(PADM)所预测的那样,通过威胁感知来调节。本文最后简要讨论了这些发现如何指导未来有关环境线索、威胁感知和行为反应的研究,以更好地理解在持续的公共卫生危害背景下的保护行动决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
8.60%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Scholarship on risk, hazards, and crises (emergencies, disasters, or public policy/organizational crises) has developed into mature and distinct fields of inquiry. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy (RHCPP) addresses the governance implications of the important questions raised for the respective fields. The relationships between risk, hazards, and crisis raise fundamental questions with broad social science and policy implications. During unstable situations of acute or chronic danger and substantial uncertainty (i.e. a crisis), important and deeply rooted societal institutions, norms, and values come into play. The purpose of RHCPP is to provide a forum for research and commentary that examines societies’ understanding of and measures to address risk,hazards, and crises, how public policies do and should address these concerns, and to what effect. The journal is explicitly designed to encourage a broad range of perspectives by integrating work from a variety of disciplines. The journal will look at social science theory and policy design across the spectrum of risks and crises — including natural and technological hazards, public health crises, terrorism, and societal and environmental disasters. Papers will analyze the ways societies deal with both unpredictable and predictable events as public policy questions, which include topics such as crisis governance, loss and liability, emergency response, agenda setting, and the social and cultural contexts in which hazards, risks and crises are perceived and defined. Risk, Hazards & Crisis in Public Policy invites dialogue and is open to new approaches. We seek scholarly work that combines academic quality with practical relevance. We especially welcome authors writing on the governance of risk and crises to submit their manuscripts.
期刊最新文献
“Fight or flight”—A study of frontline emergency response workforce's perceived knowledge, and motivation to work during hazards Unequal burials: Medicolegal death investigation system variation as a determinant of FEMA's disaster funeral assistance allocation Translating global norms into national action. Insights from the implementation of societal security norms in Sweden Innovation and adaption in local governments in the face of COVID‐19: Determinants of effective crisis management Explaining regulatory change in the European Union: The role of the financial crisis in ratcheting up of risk regulation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1