Psychological barriers in children: an exploratory study on Dengue transmission using an adapted DIPB scale.

IF 2.6 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Frontiers in Psychology Pub Date : 2024-10-30 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1412856
Pedro Schimmelpfeng, Luiz Gonzaga Lapa, Claudia Marcia Lyra Pato
{"title":"Psychological barriers in children: an exploratory study on Dengue transmission using an adapted DIPB scale.","authors":"Pedro Schimmelpfeng, Luiz Gonzaga Lapa, Claudia Marcia Lyra Pato","doi":"10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1412856","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Dengue is an arboviral infection found in tropical and subtropical regions transmitted by hematophagous mosquitoes from the genus <i>Aedes</i> spp. and responsible for millions of cases every year. Public campaigns and educational curriculum are designed to educate people, including children. However, what has been reported is that many decide not to follow these guidelines, even though they allegedly know what has to be done. To understand this phenomenon, this study aims to identify psychological barriers behind the adoption of pro-environmental behaviors that seek to reduce <i>Aedes aegypti</i>'s population. For that, middle school students participated on two studies responsible for (1) adapting the Dragons of Inaction Psychological Barrier (DIPB) scale to the target group (<i>n</i> = 150) and then (2) testing it on a larger group (<i>n</i> = 449). In the exploratory factor analysis, Bartlett correlation (<i>p</i> < 0.001), Cronbach's alpha (0.83), and KMO analysis (overall MSA = 0.84) showed that data was suited for factor analysis. Five factors were retained by Kaiser Criterion and scree test (i.e., Conflicting goals and unnecessary changes-<i>α</i> 0.76, Interpersonal relations-<i>α</i> 0.72, Conflicting goals and lacking knowledge-<i>α</i> 0.58, Tokenism-α 0.73, and Tokenism toward the government-<i>α</i> 0.66). After that, the scale was tested across 11 different schools, where students also answered a questionnaire about the mosquito. Results suggested that the factors Conflicting goals and lacking knowledge and Tokenism toward the government presented a higher level of agreement for all students (means: 2.6 and 2.12 out of five, respectively). Those who scored higher in the mosquito's questionnaire had factors Conflicting goals and unnecessary change and Interpersonal relations inhibited when compared to others (<i>p</i> < 0.05). These results suggests that future educational campaigns should build different actions that focuses on addressing both internal and external factors, creating a mosaic of projects, with different goals, each aiming different environmental challenges.</p>","PeriodicalId":12525,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Psychology","volume":"15 ","pages":"1412856"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11558178/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1412856","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Dengue is an arboviral infection found in tropical and subtropical regions transmitted by hematophagous mosquitoes from the genus Aedes spp. and responsible for millions of cases every year. Public campaigns and educational curriculum are designed to educate people, including children. However, what has been reported is that many decide not to follow these guidelines, even though they allegedly know what has to be done. To understand this phenomenon, this study aims to identify psychological barriers behind the adoption of pro-environmental behaviors that seek to reduce Aedes aegypti's population. For that, middle school students participated on two studies responsible for (1) adapting the Dragons of Inaction Psychological Barrier (DIPB) scale to the target group (n = 150) and then (2) testing it on a larger group (n = 449). In the exploratory factor analysis, Bartlett correlation (p < 0.001), Cronbach's alpha (0.83), and KMO analysis (overall MSA = 0.84) showed that data was suited for factor analysis. Five factors were retained by Kaiser Criterion and scree test (i.e., Conflicting goals and unnecessary changes-α 0.76, Interpersonal relations-α 0.72, Conflicting goals and lacking knowledge-α 0.58, Tokenism-α 0.73, and Tokenism toward the government-α 0.66). After that, the scale was tested across 11 different schools, where students also answered a questionnaire about the mosquito. Results suggested that the factors Conflicting goals and lacking knowledge and Tokenism toward the government presented a higher level of agreement for all students (means: 2.6 and 2.12 out of five, respectively). Those who scored higher in the mosquito's questionnaire had factors Conflicting goals and unnecessary change and Interpersonal relations inhibited when compared to others (p < 0.05). These results suggests that future educational campaigns should build different actions that focuses on addressing both internal and external factors, creating a mosaic of projects, with different goals, each aiming different environmental challenges.

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
儿童的心理障碍:使用改编的 DIPB 量表对登革热传播进行探索性研究。
登革热是热带和亚热带地区的一种虫媒病毒感染,由伊蚊属嗜血蚊子传播,每年造成数百万例病例。公共宣传和教育课程旨在教育人们,包括儿童。然而,据报道,许多人决定不遵守这些准则,尽管他们据称知道必须做什么。为了解这一现象,本研究旨在找出采取环保行为以减少埃及伊蚊数量背后的心理障碍。为此,中学生参与了两项研究,分别负责(1)根据目标群体(n = 150)调整 "不作为心理障碍龙 "量表(DIPB),然后(2)在更大的群体(n = 449)中进行测试。在探索性因素分析中,巴特利特相关(P α 0.76,人际关系-α 0.72,目标冲突和知识缺乏-α 0.58,令牌主义-α 0.73,对政府的令牌主义-α 0.66)。之后,该量表在 11 所不同的学校进行了测试,学生们还回答了有关蚊子的问卷。结果表明,所有学生对目标冲突、缺乏知识和对政府的宽容态度这两个因子的认同度较高(平均值分别为 2.6 和 2.12,满分为 5 分)。在蚊子问卷中得分较高的学生与其他学生相比,在目标冲突和不必要的改变以及人际关系受抑制这两个因素上得分较高(P<0.05)。
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
Frontiers in Psychology
Frontiers in Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
5.30
自引率
13.20%
发文量
7396
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: Frontiers in Psychology is the largest journal in its field, publishing rigorously peer-reviewed research across the psychological sciences, from clinical research to cognitive science, from perception to consciousness, from imaging studies to human factors, and from animal cognition to social psychology. Field Chief Editor Axel Cleeremans at the Free University of Brussels is supported by an outstanding Editorial Board of international researchers. This multidisciplinary open-access journal is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating scientific knowledge and impactful discoveries to researchers, academics, clinicians and the public worldwide. The journal publishes the best research across the entire field of psychology. Today, psychological science is becoming increasingly important at all levels of society, from the treatment of clinical disorders to our basic understanding of how the mind works. It is highly interdisciplinary, borrowing questions from philosophy, methods from neuroscience and insights from clinical practice - all in the goal of furthering our grasp of human nature and society, as well as our ability to develop new intervention methods.
期刊最新文献
Capturing spontaneous interactivity: a multi-measure approach to analyzing the dynamics of interpersonal coordination in dance improvisation. Editorial: Animacy in cognition: effects, mechanisms, and theories. Social and ethical impact of emotional AI advancement: the rise of pseudo-intimacy relationships and challenges in human interactions. The relationship between distress tolerance and life satisfaction among young adults in Saudi Arabia. The role of information and participation in overcoming users' initial reluctance: a case study of a decentralized wastewater treatment plant.
×
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