Helweg-Larsen Marie, Peterson Laurel M, DiMuccio Sarah H
Department of Psychology, Dickinson College, Carlisle, PA, USA.
Bryn Mawr College, Bryn Mawr, PA, USA.
Psychol Health. 2022 Dec;37(12):1565-1583. doi: 10.1080/08870446.2022.2060979. Epub 2022 Apr 7.
Cognitive risk figures prominently in models predicting health behaviors, but affective risk is also important. We examined the interplay between cognitive risk (personal likelihood of COVID-19 infection or death) and affective risk (worry about COVID-19) in predicting COVID-19 precautionary behaviors. We also examined how outbreak severity bias (overestimation of the severity of COVID-19 in one's community) predicted these outcomes.
In a representative sample of U.S. adults (N = 738; M = 46.8; 52% women; 78% white), participants who had not had COVID-19 took two online surveys two weeks apart in April 2020.
We assessed cognitive risk, affective risk, and outbreak severity bias at baseline and at follow-up two precaution variables: prevention behaviors (e.g. social distancing) and behavioral willingness (e.g. vaccinations).
Overall, affective risk better predicted precautions than cognitive risk. Moreover, overestimating the severity of the outbreak predicted more affective risk (but not cognitive risk) and in turn more precautions. Additional analyses showed that when affective risk was lower (as opposed to higher) greater cognitive risk and outbreak severity bias both predicted more precautions.
These findings illustrate the importance of affective risk and outbreak severity bias in understanding COVID-19 precautionary behavior.
认知风险在预测健康行为的模型中显著突出，但情感风险也很重要。我们研究了认知风险（感染或死于新冠病毒的个人可能性）和情感风险（对新冠病毒的担忧）在预测新冠病毒预防行为中的相互作用。我们还研究了疫情严重程度偏差（高估自己所在社区新冠病毒的严重程度）如何预测这些结果。
在美国成年人的代表性样本（N = 738；平均年龄46.8岁；52%为女性；78%为白人）中，未感染新冠病毒的参与者于2020年4月间隔两周进行了两次在线调查。
我们在基线和随访时评估了认知风险、情感风险和疫情严重程度偏差，以及两个预防变量：预防行为（如社交距离）和行为意愿（如接种疫苗）。
总体而言，情感风险比认知风险更能预测预防措施。此外，高估疫情的严重程度会预测出更多的情感风险（而非认知风险），进而导致更多的预防措施。进一步分析表明，当情感风险较低（而非较高）时，更高的认知风险和疫情严重程度偏差都能预测出更多的预防措施。
这些发现说明了情感风险和疫情严重程度偏差在理解新冠病毒预防行为中的重要性。
