Factors Influencing Iranians' Risk Perception of Covid-19

Document Type : Original Research

Authors

1 Sabzevar University of Medical Sciences,

2 Non-Communicable Diseases Research Center, School Paramedical, Sabzevar University of Medical Sciences, Khorasan Razavi, Iran

Abstract

Background and Aim: Today, risk perception goes beyond the individual subject and has a social, cultural and ideological significance. Since the only way to reduce risk in the community is to increase the risk perception of the majority of the population in the community, this study aimed to investigate the factors influencing Iranians' risk perception of COVID-19 disease.
Methods: This cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted using an online questionnaire among Iranian users of social networks. After convenience sampling, data were analyzed by SPSS and Amos software.
Results: Out of 1265 observations, 364 people from 20 provinces have completed the questionnaire during the period February 25 to March 2, 2020. The most participants were in the 20-39 age group and 162 (44.5%) were men. The second-order confirmatory factor analysis test indicated that religious-cultural, political, cognitive, social, and emotional factors influence Iranians' risk perception of Covid-19 disease. Tests also showed that religious and cultural factors had the highest positive correlation and emotional factors had the most negative correlation with Iranians' risk perception of Covid-19 disease.

Conclusion: Considering the importance of the role of socio-political and religious factors, it is suggested that the executive and cultural authorities of the country should strive to improve the Iranian risk perception of Covid-19.

Keywords


1. Rosa EA. White, black, and gray: critical dialogue with the International Risk Governance Council's Framework for Risk Governance. Global risk governance: Springer; 2008. p. 101-18. 2. Samadipour E, SEYedin H, Ravaghi H. Roles, responsibilities, and strategies for enhancing disaster risk perception: A quantitative study. Journal of Education and Health Promotion. 2018. 3. Reduction GARoDR. Global Facility for Disaster Reduction and Recovery (GFDRR). 2014. 4. Smith RD. Responding to global infectious disease outbreaks: lessons from SARS on the role of risk perception, communication and management. Social science & medicine. 2006;63(12):3113-23. 5. Sohrabi C, Alsafi Z, O’Neill N, Khan M, Kerwan A, Al-Jabir A, et al. World Health Organization declares Global Emergency: A review of the 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19). International Journal of Surgery. 2020. 6. Fragouli E, Theodoulou P. The way people and societies perceive the nature and context of risk is different, due to psychological and cultural issues. Journal of Economics and Business. 2015;18 (1). 7. Parsizadeh F, Ibrion M, Mokhtari M, Lein H, Nadim F. Bam 2003 earthquake disaster: On the earthquake risk perception, resilience and earthquake culture - Cultural beliefs and cultural landscape of Qanats, gardens of Khorma trees and Argh-e Bam. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction. 2015; 14:457-69. 8. Qian M, Wu Q, Wu P, Hou Z, Liang Y, Cowling BJ, et al. Psychological responses, behavioral changes and public perceptions during the early phase of the COVID-19 outbreak in China: a population based cross-sectional survey. medRxiv. 2020. 9. Yeung NC, Lau JT, Choi KC, Griffiths S. Population responses during the pandemic phase of the influenza A (H1N1) pdm09 Epidemic, Hong Kong, China. Emerging infectious diseases. 2017;23 (5):813. 10. Vartti A-M, Oenema A, Schreck M, Uutela A, de Zwart O, Brug J, et al. SARS knowledge, perceptions, and behaviors: a comparison between Finns and the Dutch during the SARS Outbreak in 2003. International journal of behavioral medicine. 2009;16(1):41. 11. Farnoosh G, Alishiri G, Hosseini Zijoud S R, Dorostkar R, Jalali Farahani A. Understanding the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19) Based on Available Evidence - A Narrative Review. J Mil Med. 2020; 22 (1) :1-11. 12. Ejeta LT, Ardalan A, Paton D. Application of Behavioral Theories to Disaster and Emergency Health Preparedness: A Systematic Review. PLoS currents. 2014;7. 13. Maddux JE, Rogers RW. Protection motivation and self-efficacy: A revised theory of fear appeals and attitude change. Journal of experimental social psychology. 1983;19(5):469-79. 14. De Zwart O, Veldhuijzen IK, Elam G, Aro AR, Abraham T, Bishop GD, et al. Avian influenza risk perception, Europe and Asia. Emerging Infectious Diseases. 2007;13(2):290. 15. Brug J, Aro AR, Richardus JH. Risk perceptions and behaviour: towards pandemic control of emerging infectious diseases. Springer; 2009. 16. Samadipour E, Seyedin H, Ravaghi. Disater risk perception: designing a model for Iran. Iran University of medical sciences: Iran University of medical sciences, Tehran, Iran, 2019. 17. Birkmann J. Measuring vulnerability to natural hazards: towards disaster resilient societies2006. 18. https://www.unisdr.org/we/inform/terminology. Available from: https://www.unisdr.org/we/inform/terminology. 19. JCJH A, J M. Novel Multi-Sector-Partnerships in Disaster Risk Management. Brussels Belgium: EU FP7 project ENHANCE, 2017. 20. Jahangiri K, Azin SA, Mohammad K, Rahimiforoshan A. Analysis of Some Factors Affecting Tehran's Preparedness Against Earthquake: in 2006. Hakim Research Journal. 2009;13(3):155-65. 21. Machlis GE, Rosa EA. Desired risk: Broadening the social amplification of risk framework. Risk Analysis. 1990;10(1):161-8. 22. Chester DK, Duncan AM, Dibben CJ. The importance of religion in shaping volcanic risk perception in Italy, with special reference to Vesuvius and Etna. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research. 2008;172(3):216-28. 23. Slovic P, Finucane ML, Peters E, MacGregor DG. Risk as analysis and risk as feelings: Some thoughts about affect, reason, risk, and rationality. Risk analysis. 2004;24(2):311-22. 24. Kellens W, Terpstra T, De Maeyer P. Perception and communication of flood risks: a systematic review of empirical research. Risk Analysis: An International Journal. 2013;33(1):24-49. 25. Rafieian M PA. The Assessment of Risk Perception Spatial Pattern Segregated Neighborhoods in Yazd City. Crisis Managment [In Persian]. 2015(8):37-46. 26. Mañez M CM, Haro D, Hanger S. Risk perception. Austria: International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis (IIASA); 2016. 27. Keyvanara M, Heidari K, Samouei R. Identifying the Position of Social Determinants of Health in Higher Medical Sciences Education System. J Isfahan Med Sch 2020; 37(558): 1407-14. 28. Motamedi N, Shafiei-Darabi SM, Amini Z. Social and Emotional Loneliness among the Elderly, and its Association with Social Factors Affecting Health in Isfahan City, Iran, in Years 2017-2018. J Isfahan Med Sch 2018; 36(486): 750-6. 29. Huang L, Han Y, Zhou Y, Gutscher H, Bi J. How do the Chinese perceive ecological risk in freshwater lakes? PloS one. 2013;8(5):e62486. 30. Hashemian M, Ghardashi F, Izadi AR, Akbarzadeh R. Prioritizing the health education needs based on community participation: AHP method. J Edu Health Promot 2019;8:127. 31. Seyedin H, Samadipour E, Salmani I. Intervention strategies for improvement of disasters risk perception: Family-centered approach. Journal of education and health promotion. 2019;8.