IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v14y2024i2p21582440241252548.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Factors Associated With Support for COVID-19 Travel Bans: The Role of Health Beliefs and Multilevel Institutional Trust

Author

Listed:
  • Nien-Tsu Nancy Chen

Abstract

This study examined whether the Health Belief Model and the heuristic of multilevel institutional trust would help explain U.S. residents’ support for travel bans on foreigners during the COVID-19 pandemic. Analysis of data collected from two nationwide online surveys conducted in 2020 ( n  = 511 fielded between March 19 and March 27; n  = 472 fielded between April 30 and May 13) suggested that support for this policy was associated with individual differences in risk and benefit perceptions, the presence of interpersonal cues, and trust in domestic and foreign institutions. Efforts to promote or resist international travel restrictions during a pandemic may benefit from accounting for these differences.

Suggested Citation

  • Nien-Tsu Nancy Chen, 2024. "Factors Associated With Support for COVID-19 Travel Bans: The Role of Health Beliefs and Multilevel Institutional Trust," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(2), pages 21582440241, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:14:y:2024:i:2:p:21582440241252548
    DOI: 10.1177/21582440241252548
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440241252548
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/21582440241252548?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Catherine Z. Worsnop, 2017. "Domestic politics and the WHO’s International Health Regulations: Explaining the use of trade and travel barriers during disease outbreaks," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 365-395, September.
    2. Michael Siegrist & George Cvetkovich & Claudia Roth, 2000. "Salient Value Similarity, Social Trust, and Risk/Benefit Perception," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(3), pages 353-362, June.
    3. Sunhee Kim & Seoyong Kim, 2020. "Analysis of the Impact of Health Beliefs and Resource Factors on Preventive Behaviors against the COVID-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(22), pages 1-21, November.
    4. A. Burcu Bayram & Todd Shields, 2021. "Who Trusts the WHO? Heuristics and Americans’ Trust in the World Health Organization During the COVID‐19 Pandemic," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(5), pages 2312-2330, September.
    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. Angela Bearth & Marie‐Eve Cousin & Michael Siegrist, 2016. "“The Dose Makes the Poison”: Informing Consumers About the Scientific Risk Assessment of Food Additives," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 36(1), pages 130-144, January.
    2. Sunhee Park & Beomsoo Kim & Kyoung A. Kim, 2021. "Preventive Behavioral Insights for Emerging Adults: A Survey during the COVID-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(5), pages 1-10, March.
    3. Timothy C. Earle, 2004. "Thinking Aloud about Trust: A Protocol Analysis of Trust in Risk Management," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(1), pages 169-183, February.
    4. Johanna Pfeiffer & Andreas Gabriel & Markus Gandorfer, 2021. "Understanding the public attitudinal acceptance of digital farming technologies: a nationwide survey in Germany," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 38(1), pages 107-128, February.
    5. Wouter Poortinga & Nick F. Pidgeon, 2003. "Exploring the Dimensionality of Trust in Risk Regulation," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(5), pages 961-972, October.
    6. Barbara A. Knuth & Nancy A. Connelly & Judy Sheeshka & Jacqueline Patterson, 2003. "Weighing Health Benefit and Health Risk Information when Consuming Sport‐Caught Fish," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(6), pages 1185-1197, December.
    7. Gianluca Stefani & Alessio Cavicchi & Donato Romano & Alexandra E. Lobb, 2008. "Determinants of intention to purchase chicken in Italy: the role of consumer risk perception and trust in different information sources," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(4), pages 523-537.
    8. 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).
    9. Rui Poínhos & Ivo A van der Lans & Audrey Rankin & Arnout R H Fischer & Brendan Bunting & Sharron Kuznesof & Barbara Stewart-Knox & Lynn J Frewer, 2014. "Psychological Determinants of Consumer Acceptance of Personalised Nutrition in 9 European Countries," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(10), pages 1-13, October.
    10. Geunsik Kim & Seoyong Kim & Eunjung Hwang, 2021. "Searching for Evidence-Based Public Policy and Practice: Analysis of the Determinants of Personal/Public Adaptation and Mitigation Behavior against Particulate Matter by Focusing on the Roles of Risk ," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(2), pages 1-22, January.
    11. Connor, Melanie & de Guia, Annalyn H. & Quilloy, Reianne & Van Nguyen, Hung & Gummert, Martin & Sander, Bjoern Ole, 2020. "When climate change is not psychologically distant – Factors influencing the acceptance of sustainable farming practices in the Mekong river Delta of Vietnam," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 18(C).
    12. Angela Bearth & Gulbanu Kaptan & Sabrina Heike Kessler, 2022. "Genome-edited versus genetically-modified tomatoes: an experiment on people’s perceptions and acceptance of food biotechnology in the UK and Switzerland," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 39(3), pages 1117-1131, September.
    13. Xia, Dongqin & Li, Yazhou & He, Yanling & Zhang, Tingting & Wang, Yongliang & Gu, Jibao, 2019. "Exploring the role of cultural individualism and collectivism on public acceptance of nuclear energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 208-215.
    14. Eugene Song & Jae-Eun Lee & Seola Kwon, 2021. "Effect of Public Empathy with Infection-Control Guidelines on Infection-Prevention Attitudes and Behaviors: Based on the Case of COVID-19," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(24), pages 1-18, December.
    15. Shay-Wei Choon & Hway-Boon Ong & Siow-Hooi Tan, 2019. "Does risk perception limit the climate change mitigation behaviors?," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 21(4), pages 1891-1917, August.
    16. Seoyong Kim & Sunhee Kim, 2015. "The role of value in the social acceptance of science-technology," International Review of Public Administration, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(3), pages 305-322, July.
    17. Timothy C. Earle, 2009. "Trust, Confidence, and the 2008 Global Financial Crisis," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(6), pages 785-792, June.
    18. Nelson, Jake & Gorichanaz, Tim, 2019. "Trust as an ethical value in emerging technology governance: The case of drone regulation," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    19. Han, Y. & Lam, J. & Guo, P. & Gou, Z., 2019. "What Predicts Government Trustworthiness in Cross-border HK-Guangdong Nuclear Safety Emergency Governance?," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1989, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    20. Gabriella Y. Meltzer & Virginia W. Chang & Sarah A. Lieff & Margaux M. Grivel & Lawrence H. Yang & Don C. Des Jarlais, 2021. "Behavioral Correlates of COVID-19 Worry: Stigma, Knowledge, and News Source," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-15, October.

    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:sae:sagope:v:14:y:2024:i:2:p:21582440241252548. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.