The role of risk perception and affective response in the COVID-19 preventive behaviours of young adults: a mixed methods study of university students in the Netherlands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Due to an increased infection rate among young adults, they need to adhere to the preventive guidelines to stop the spread of COVID-19 and protect vulnerable others. The purpose of this mixed methods study was to explore the role of risk perception and affective response in the preventive behaviours of young adults during the COVID-19 outbreak. SETTING: This study followed a convergent mixed methods design, in which a quantitative online survey (n=1081) and 10 qualitative in-depth semistructured video interviews were conducted separately in the Netherlands during April-August 2020. PARTICIPANTS: 1081 participants filled in the online survey, and 10 participants participated in the interviews. Eligibility criteria included being a university student. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Data on risk perception, affective response, that is, worry, and adherence to preventive guidelines were combined and analysed during this study. There were no secondary outcome measures. RESULTS: The results showed that young adults perceived their risk as low. Their affective response for their own well-being was also low; however, their affective response was high with regards to vulnerable others in their surroundings. Due to their high impersonal risk perception (ie, perceived risk to others) and high affective response, young adults adhered to most preventive guidelines relatively frequently. However, young adults sometimes neglected social distancing due to the negative effects on mental health and the uncertainty of the duration of the situation. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, high impersonal risk perception and high affective response regarding others are key motivators in young adults' preventive behaviour. To maximise adherence to the preventive guidelines, risk communication should put emphasis on the benefits to vulnerable others' health when young adults adhere to the preventive guidelines.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".