IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i16p9992-d887381.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

From Health Campaign to Interpersonal Communication: Does Traditional Diet Culture Hinder the Communication of the Chinese Gongkuai Campaign?

Author

Listed:
  • Jing Yan

    (School of Health Service Management, Anhui Medical University, No. 81, Meishan Road, Hefei 230032, China)

  • Jing Ji

    (School of Health Service Management, Anhui Medical University, No. 81, Meishan Road, Hefei 230032, China)

  • Lan Gao

    (School of Management, University of Science and Technology of China, No. 96, Jinzhai Road, Hefei 230026, China)

Abstract

Interpersonal communication is beneficial in promoting individuals’ tendency to accept health-campaign-targeted behavior. Based on the protective action decision model, this study investigated the key factors underlying individual’s interpersonal communication on the Gongkuai campaign, which was carried out during Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The main goal of the Gongkuai campaign was to change traditional communal eating habits and reduce public health risks. An online questionnaire survey involving 618 respondents was conducted in China after the 2020 Gongkuai campaign propagated, and the data were analyzed by using the structural equation modeling technique. The results indicated that health campaign exposure is a critical determinant of perceived campaign-related knowledge and health risk perception, which are significant predictors of interpersonal communication. Meanwhile, campaign-related knowledge can elicit risk perception. Furthermore, campaign exposure influenced interpersonal communication in ways that traditional diet culture did not predict. Risk perception was also unaffected by traditional diet culture. It is worth noting that individuals’ agreement with traditional diet culture does not hinder health campaign-generated interpersonal communication in the context of public health crisis. Based on the findings, theoretical and policy implications for motivating interpersonal communication were discussed, and research limitations were pointed out.

Suggested Citation

  • Jing Yan & Jing Ji & Lan Gao, 2022. "From Health Campaign to Interpersonal Communication: Does Traditional Diet Culture Hinder the Communication of the Chinese Gongkuai Campaign?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(16), pages 1-15, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:16:p:9992-:d:887381
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/16/9992/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/16/9992/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. William L. James & Kenneth J. Hatten, 1995. "Further evidence on the validity of the self typing paragraph approach: Miles and snow strategic archetypes in banking," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(2), pages 161-168.
    2. Michael K. Lindell & Seong Nam Hwang, 2008. "Households' Perceived Personal Risk and Responses in a Multihazard Environment," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(2), pages 539-556, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Kwak, Hyokjin & Anderson, Rolph E. & Leigh, Thomas W. & Bonifield, Scott D., 2019. "Impact of salesperson macro-adaptive selling strategy on job performance and satisfaction," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 42-55.
    2. Hashida, Yukiko & Dundas, Steven J., 2023. "The effects of a voluntary property buyout and acquisition program on coastal housing markets: Evidence from New York," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    3. Jantsje M. Mol & W. J. Wouter Botzen & Julia E. Blasch & Hans de Moel, 2020. "Insights into Flood Risk Misperceptions of Homeowners in the Dutch River Delta," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(7), pages 1450-1468, July.
    4. Laura K. Siebeneck & Thomas J. Cova, 2012. "Spatial and Temporal Variation in Evacuee Risk Perception Throughout the Evacuation and Return‐Entry Process," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(9), pages 1468-1480, September.
    5. Jiuchang Wei & Weiwei Zhu & Dora Marinova & Fei Wang, 2017. "Household adoption of smog protective behavior: a comparison between two Chinese cities," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(7), pages 846-867, July.
    6. Jia He & Linmei Zhuang & Xin Deng & Dingde Xu, 2023. "Peer effects in disaster preparedness: whether opinion leaders make a difference," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 115(1), pages 187-213, January.
    7. Manqing Wu & Guochun Wu, 2020. "An Analysis of Rural Households’ Earthquake-Resistant Construction Behavior: Evidence from Pingliang and Yuxi, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-14, December.
    8. Khalid Oubennaceur & Karem Chokmani & Florence Lessard & Yves Gauthier & Catherine Baltazar & Jean-Patrick Toussaint, 2022. "Understanding Flood Risk Perception: A Case Study from Canada," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-24, March.
    9. Dingde Xu & Chen Qing & Xin Deng & Zhuolin Yong & Wenfeng Zhou & Zhixing Ma, 2020. "Disaster Risk Perception, Sense of Pace, Evacuation Willingness, and Relocation Willingness of Rural Households in Earthquake-Stricken Areas: Evidence from Sichuan Province, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(2), pages 1-19, January.
    10. Wim Kellens & Ruud Zaalberg & Philippe De Maeyer, 2012. "The Informed Society: An Analysis of the Public's Information‐Seeking Behavior Regarding Coastal Flood Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(8), pages 1369-1381, August.
    11. Qihui Xie & Yanan Xue, 2022. "The Prediction of Public Risk Perception by Internal Characteristics and External Environment: Machine Learning on Big Data," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-20, August.
    12. Andrea Cerase & Lorenzo Cugliari, 2023. "Something Still Remains: Factors Affecting Tsunami Risk Perception on the Coasts Hit by the Reggio Calabria-Messina 1908 Event (Italy)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-26, February.
    13. Joop de Boer & W. J. Wouter Botzen & Teun Terpstra, 2014. "Improving Flood Risk Communication by Focusing on Prevention‐Focused Motivation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(2), pages 309-322, February.
    14. Osberghaus, Daniel, 2015. "The determinants of private flood mitigation measures in Germany — Evidence from a nationwide survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 36-50.
    15. Wim Kellens & Ruud Zaalberg & Tijs Neutens & Wouter Vanneuville & Philippe De Maeyer, 2011. "An Analysis of the Public Perception of Flood Risk on the Belgian Coast," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(7), pages 1055-1068, July.
    16. Patricia A Champ & Hannah Brenkert‐Smith, 2016. "Is Seeing Believing? Perceptions of Wildfire Risk Over Time," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(4), pages 816-830, April.
    17. Jing-Shia Tang & Jui-Ying Feng, 2018. "Residents’ Disaster Preparedness after the Meinong Taiwan Earthquake: A Test of Protection Motivation Theory," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-12, July.
    18. Jayajit Chakraborty & Timothy W. Collins & Sara E. Grineski & Alejandra Maldonado, 2017. "Racial Differences in Perceptions of Air Pollution Health Risk: Does Environmental Exposure Matter?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(2), pages 1-16, January.
    19. Derick A. Akompab & Peng Bi & Susan Williams & Janet Grant & Iain A. Walker & Martha Augoustinos, 2013. "Heat Waves and Climate Change: Applying the Health Belief Model to Identify Predictors of Risk Perception and Adaptive Behaviours in Adelaide, Australia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-21, May.
    20. Junji Urata & Adam J. Pel, 2018. "People's Risk Recognition Preceding Evacuation and Its Role in Demand Modeling and Planning," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(5), pages 889-905, May.

    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:19:y:2022:i:16:p:9992-:d:887381. 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.