IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v11y2024i1d10.1057_s41599-024-02790-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Human extreme heat protective behaviours: the effects of physical risks, psychological perception, and public measures

Author

Listed:
  • Jiayan Li

    (Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences)

  • Ranhao Sun

    (Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences)

  • Jialei Li

    (Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences)

  • Yongfu Ma

    (The First Medical Centre, Chinese PLA General Hospital)

  • Meng Zhang

    (The First Medical Centre, Chinese PLA General Hospital)

  • Liding Chen

    (Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences
    University of Chinese Academy of Sciences)

Abstract

Individual actions can mitigate the consequences of extreme heat. Therefore, understanding the mechanism of protective behaviours against extreme heat is critical. Although extreme heat protective behaviours have been widely mentioned, the roles of psychological risk perception and public restraint are poorly understood. In this study, we developed a physical-measure-psychosocial model (PMP) to reveal the intrinsic motivation for protective behaviours during extreme heat based on a nationwide survey in China (n = 1791). The results showed that (1) high levels of physical risk perception promote outdoor, indoor, and traffic protective behaviours. Psychological risk perception is positively associated with outdoor and indoor protective behaviours but is not significantly associated with traffic protective behaviour. (2) There are differences in the main paths from heat exposure to outdoor, indoor, and traffic protective behaviours. The indirect effect controlled by physical risk is the main path from exposure to outdoor and traffic protective behaviours, while the direct effect of heat exposure is the strongest pathway for indoor protective behaviour. (3) Enhanced facility conditions are linked to reduced physical risk and psychological risk perception. Subsidies have a significant effect on traffic protective behaviour, and warnings significantly affect outdoor protective behaviour. The direct effect of warning systems on outdoor protective behaviour is greater than the indirect effect mediated by psychological risk perception. (4) Multigroup analysis based on structural equation models revealed a certain degree of robustness among the different gender, age, education level, and income level groups. This study enables us to understand the underlying mechanisms of extreme heat behaviours and support policy-makers in effective mitigation practices.

Suggested Citation

  • Jiayan Li & Ranhao Sun & Jialei Li & Yongfu Ma & Meng Zhang & Liding Chen, 2024. "Human extreme heat protective behaviours: the effects of physical risks, psychological perception, and public measures," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-12, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-024-02790-3
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-024-02790-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-024-02790-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-024-02790-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mouratidis, Kostas, 2019. "Built environment and leisure satisfaction: The role of commute time, social interaction, and active travel," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    2. Zheng, Shan & Yu, Lianghong, 2022. "The government's subsidy strategy of carbon-sink fishery based on evolutionary game," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 254(PB).
    3. Lisa Zaval & Elizabeth A. Keenan & Eric J. Johnson & Elke U. Weber, 2014. "How warm days increase belief in global warming," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 4(2), pages 143-147, February.
    4. Kathryn L. Doherty & Thomas N. Webler, 2016. "Social norms and efficacy beliefs drive the Alarmed segment’s public-sphere climate actions," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 6(9), pages 879-884, September.
    5. Yanjun Wang & Anqian Wang & Jianqing Zhai & Hui Tao & Tong Jiang & Buda Su & Jun Yang & Guojie Wang & Qiyong Liu & Chao Gao & Zbigniew W. Kundzewicz & Mingjin Zhan & Zhiqiang Feng & Thomas Fischer, 2019. "Tens of thousands additional deaths annually in cities of China between 1.5 °C and 2.0 °C warming," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 10(1), pages 1-7, December.
    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. Guglielmo Zappalà, 2023. "Drought Exposure and Accuracy: Motivated Reasoning in Climate Change Beliefs," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 85(3), pages 649-672, August.
    2. Kaitlin T Raimi & Paul C Stern & Alexander Maki, 2017. "The Promise and Limitations of Using Analogies to Improve Decision-Relevant Understanding of Climate Change," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(1), pages 1-20, January.
    3. Marijn H. C. Meijers & Christin Scholz & Ragnheiður “Heather” Torfadóttir & Anke Wonneberger & Marko Markov, 2022. "Learning from the COVID-19 pandemic to combat climate change: comparing drivers of individual action in global crises," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 12(2), pages 272-282, June.
    4. Castro-Santa, Juana & Drews, Stefan & Bergh, Jeroen van den, 2023. "Nudging low-carbon consumption through advertising and social norms," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    5. O'Dell, Dallas & Contu, Davide & Shreedhar, Ganga, 2025. "Public support for degrowth policies and sufficiency behaviours in the United States: a discrete choice experiment," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 126084, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    6. Parrish Bergquist & Christopher Warshaw, 2023. "How climate policy commitments influence energy systems and the economies of US states," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-9, December.
    7. Hong Leng & Bingbing Han, 2022. "Effect of Environmental Planning on Elderly Individual Quality of Life in Severe Cold Regions: A Case Study in Northeastern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-17, March.
    8. Alistair Munro, 2020. "Using experimental manipulation of questionnaire design and a Kenyan panel to test for the reliability of reported perceptions of climate change and adaptation," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 162(3), pages 1081-1105, October.
    9. Antony Millner & Hélène Ollivier, 2016. "Beliefs, Politics, and Environmental Policy," Review of Environmental Economics and Policy, Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 10(2), pages 226-244.
    10. Ivana Rakonjac & Ana Zorić & Ivan Rakonjac & Jelena Milošević & Jelena Marić & Danilo Furundžić, 2022. "Increasing the Livability of Open Public Spaces during Nighttime: The Importance of Lighting in Waterfront Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-25, May.
    11. Donatella Baiardi, 2021. "What do you think about climate change?," Working Papers 477, University of Milano-Bicocca, Department of Economics, revised Aug 2021.
    12. Emily J. Kothe & Mathew Ling & Barbara A. Mullan & Joshua J. Rhee & Anna Klas, 2023. "Increasing intention to reduce fossil fuel use: a protection motivation theory-based experimental study," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 176(3), pages 1-20, March.
    13. Allison Joy Bailey & Caitlin M. Wills & Jamie Mitchem, 2022. "Attitudes towards climate change and scientific stories," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 12(4), pages 714-726, December.
    14. Meng, Fanchao & Zhang, Lei & Ren, Guoyu & Zhang, Ruixue, 2023. "Impacts of UHI on variations in cooling loads in buildings during heatwaves: A case study of Beijing and Tianjin, China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 273(C).
    15. Shuai Jin & Na Qiao & Muhamad Aamir Shafique Khan & Changchun Zhu, 2024. "Promoting the production and consumption of green products from the perspective of supply and demand: An evolutionary game-based analysis," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(9), pages 23193-23213, September.
    16. Corey Lang & John David Ryder, 2016. "The effect of tropical cyclones on climate change engagement," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 135(3), pages 625-638, April.
    17. Xu, Weidong & Gao, Xin & Xu, Hao & Li, Donghui, 2022. "Does global climate risk encourage companies to take more risks?," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    18. Trisha R. Shrum, 2021. "The salience of future impacts and the willingness to pay for climate change mitigation: an experiment in intergenerational framing," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 165(1), pages 1-20, March.
    19. Radha Yadav & Dharmendra Kumar & Anil Kumar & Sunil Luthra, 2023. "How does anticipatory trauma reaction and climate‐friendly behaviour make an affect at the individual level? The role of social norms and self‐efficacy," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(7), pages 4028-4045, November.
    20. Baiardi, Donatella & Morana, Claudio, 2021. "Climate change awareness: Empirical evidence for the European Union," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-024-02790-3. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.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.