IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i5p4041-d1079001.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding Information Processing and Protective Behaviors during the Pandemic: A Three-Wave Longitudinal Study

Author

Listed:
  • Weidan Cao

    (Department of Strategic Communication, Edward R. Murrow College of Communication, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164, USA)

  • Qinghua Yang

    (College of Communication, Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, TX 76129, USA)

  • Xinyao Zhang

    (School of Public Health, Jilin University, Changchun 130012, China)

Abstract

Background: Few existing studies have examined information processing as an independent variable to predict subsequent information behaviors in a pandemic context, and the mechanism of subsequent information behavior processing following the initial or prior information behavior is unclear. Objective: Our study aims to apply the risk information seeking and processing model to explain the mechanism of subsequent systematic information processing in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: A three-wave longitudinal online national survey was administered during the period of July 2020 to September 2020. Path analysis was conducted to test the relationships between prior and subsequent systematic information processing and protective behaviors. Results: One important finding was the key role of prior systematic information processing, as indirect hazard experience was found to be a direct predictor of risk perception ( β = 0.15, p = 0.004) and an indirect predictor of protective behaviors. Another important finding was the central role of information insufficiency as a mediator/driving force in subsequent systematic information processing and protective behavior. Conclusions: The study has made important contributions in that it extends the scholarship on health information behaviors by (a) highlighting that relevant hazard experience in risk information seeking and processing model should be expanded to include indirect experience, and (b) providing the mechanism of subsequent systematic information processing following prior information processing. Our study also provides practical implications on health/risk communication and protective behaviors’ promotion in the pandemic context.

Suggested Citation

  • Weidan Cao & Qinghua Yang & Xinyao Zhang, 2023. "Understanding Information Processing and Protective Behaviors during the Pandemic: A Three-Wave Longitudinal Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(5), pages 1-15, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:5:p:4041-:d:1079001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/5/4041/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/5/4041/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ellen Ter Huurne & Jan Gutteling, 2008. "Information needs and risk perception as predictors of risk information seeking," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(7), pages 847-862, October.
    2. V. Tortosa-Edo & M.A. López-Navarro & J. Llorens-Monzonís & R.M. Rodríguez-Artola, 2014. "The antecedent role of personal environmental values in the relationships among trust in companies, information processing and risk perception," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(8), pages 1019-1035, September.
    3. LeeAnn Kahlor & Sharon Dunwoody & Robert J. Griffin & Kurt Neuwirth & James Giese, 2003. "Studying Heuristic‐Systematic Processing of Risk Communication," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(2), pages 355-368, April.
    4. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    5. Michael Siegrist & Heinz Gutscher & Timothy C. Earle, 2005. "Perception of risk: the influence of general trust, and general confidence," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 145-156, March.
    6. Bach Xuan Tran & Anh Kim Dang & Phong Khanh Thai & Huong Thi Le & Xuan Thanh Thi Le & Toan Thanh Thi Do & Tu Huu Nguyen & Hai Quang Pham & Hai Thanh Phan & Giang Thu Vu & Dung Tri Phung & Son Hong Ngh, 2020. "Coverage of Health Information by Different Sources in Communities: Implication for COVID-19 Epidemic Response," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(10), pages 1-12, May.
    7. Yi‐Wen Kung & Sue‐Huei Chen, 2012. "Perception of Earthquake Risk in Taiwan: Effects of Gender and Past Earthquake Experience," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 32(9), pages 1535-1546, September.
    8. Dominic H. P. Balog-Way & Katherine A. McComas, 2020. "COVID-19: Reflections on trust, tradeoffs, and preparedness," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(7-8), pages 838-848, August.
    9. Austin Y. Hubner & Shelly R. Hovick, 2020. "Understanding Risk Information Seeking and Processing during an Infectious Disease Outbreak: The Case of Zika Virus," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(6), pages 1212-1225, June.
    10. Z. Janet Yang, 2016. "Altruism During Ebola: Risk Perception, Issue Salience, Cultural Cognition, and Information Processing," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(6), pages 1079-1089, June.
    11. Ronald L. Schumann & Kevin D. Ash & Gregg C. Bowser, 2018. "Tornado Warning Perception and Response: Integrating the Roles of Visual Design, Demographics, and Hazard Experience," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(2), pages 311-332, February.
    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. Wang, Fei & Zhang, Zhentai & Lin, Shoufu, 2023. "Purchase intention of Autonomous vehicles and industrial Policies: Evidence from a national survey in China," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    2. Shu-Chu Sarrina Li & Shih-Yu Lo & Tai-Yee Wu & Te-Lin Chen, 2022. "Information Seeking and Processing during the Outbreak of COVID-19 in Taiwan: Examining the Effects of Emotions and Informational Subjective Norms," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-13, August.
    3. Lu, Hang & Song, Hwanseok & McComas, Katherine, 2021. "Seeking information about enhanced geothermal systems: The role of fairness, uncertainty, systematic processing, and information engagement intentions," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 855-864.
    4. Jiuchang Wei & Ming Zhao & Fei Wang & Peng Cheng & Dingtao Zhao, 2016. "An Empirical Study of the Volkswagen Crisis in China: Customers’ Information Processing and Behavioral Intentions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(1), pages 114-129, January.
    5. Janet Z. Yang, 2019. "Whose Risk? Why Did the U.S. Public Ignore Information About the Ebola Outbreak?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(8), pages 1708-1722, August.
    6. Ling Jia & Queena K. Qian & Frits Meijer & Henk Visscher, 2020. "Stakeholders’ Risk Perception: A Perspective for Proactive Risk Management in Residential Building Energy Retrofits in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(7), pages 1-25, April.
    7. Femke Hilverda & Margôt Kuttschreuter, 2018. "Online Information Sharing About Risks: The Case of Organic Food," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(9), pages 1904-1920, September.
    8. Hang Lu & APPC 2018–2019 ASK Group & Kenneth Winneg & Kathleen Hall Jamieson & Dolores Albarracín, 2020. "Intentions to Seek Information About the Influenza Vaccine: The Role of Informational Subjective Norms, Anticipated and Experienced Affect, and Information Insufficiency Among Vaccinated and Unvaccina," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 40(10), pages 2040-2056, October.
    9. Hoti, Ferdiana & Perko, Tanja & Thijssen, Peter & Renn, Ortwin, 2021. "Who is willing to participate? Examining public participation intention concerning decommissioning of nuclear power plants in Belgium," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 157(C).
    10. Zhu, Weiwei & Wei, Jiuchang & Zhao, Dingtao, 2016. "Anti-nuclear behavioral intentions: The role of perceived knowledge, information processing, and risk perception," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 168-177.
    11. Vladimir M. Cvetković & Giulia Roder & Adem Öcal & Paolo Tarolli & Slavoljub Dragićević, 2018. "The Role of Gender in Preparedness and Response Behaviors towards Flood Risk in Serbia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(12), pages 1-21, December.
    12. Kolotylo-Kulkarni, Malgorzata & Marakas, George M. & Xia, Weidong, 2024. "Understanding protective behavior and vaccination adoption among US individuals during the COVID-19 pandemic: A four-wave longitudinal study," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    13. Melanie De Vocht & An-Sofie Claeys & Verolien Cauberghe & Mieke Uyttendaele & Benedikt Sas, 2016. "Won’t we scare them? The impact of communicating uncontrollable risks on the public’s perception," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(3), pages 316-330, March.
    14. Sjöberg, Lennart, 2004. "Gene Technology in the eyes of the public and experts. Moral opinions, attitudes and risk perception," SSE/EFI Working Paper Series in Business Administration 2004:7, Stockholm School of Economics, revised 11 May 2005.
    15. Chuanhui Liao & Xiaomei Zhou & Dingtao Zhao, 2018. "An Augmented Risk Information Seeking Model: Perceived Food Safety Risk Related to Food Recalls," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-17, August.
    16. Zhaohui Yang & Krishna P. Paudel & Xiaowei Wen & Sangluo Sun & Yong Wang, 2020. "Food Safety Risk Information-Seeking Intention of WeChat Users in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-15, March.
    17. Jing Zeng & Jiuchang Wei & Dingtao Zhao & Weiwei Zhu & Jibao Gu, 2017. "Information-seeking intentions of residents regarding the risks of nuclear power plant: an empirical study in China," 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. 87(2), pages 739-755, June.
    18. Jia Shi & Xiangnan Hu & Xuesong Guo & Cuihong Lian, 2020. "Risk Information Seeking Behavior in Disaster Resettlement: A Case Study of Ankang City, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(19), pages 1-19, October.
    19. Rui He & Yungeng Li, 2021. "Media Exposure, Cancer Beliefs, and Cancer-Related Information-Seeking or Avoidance Behavior Patterns in China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(6), pages 1-22, March.
    20. T. Terpstra & R. Zaalberg & J. de Boer & W. J. W. Botzen, 2014. "You Have Been Framed! How Antecedents of Information Need Mediate the Effects of Risk Communication Messages," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(8), pages 1506-1520, August.

    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:20:y:2023:i:5:p:4041-:d:1079001. 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.