Risk Perceptions of COVID-19 around the World

"...[A] better understanding of not only the knowledge that people have, but also the experiential, social, and cultural factors that drive COVID-19 risk perceptions around the world (and their role in motivating preventative health behaviors) could help policy-makers design evidenced-based risk communication strategies..."

Threat appraisal and risk perception have been identified as key determinants of the public's willingness to cooperate and adopt health-protective behaviours during pandemics. Previous research has shown that risk perception is a subjective psychological construct that is influenced by cognitive, emotional, social, cultural, and individual variation - both between individuals and between different countries. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, this paper adopts a theory-based approach to the study of risk perception in asking: (i) how concerned are people around the world about COVID-19? and (ii) what psychological factors determine their level of concern? Responses to these questions are based on an international analysis amongst 6,991 individuals surveyed across 10 different countries between mid-March and mid-April 2020.

The research is grounded in van der Linden's (2015, 2017) risk perception model, which recommends the inclusion of clusters of variables that correspond to the cognitive tradition (e.g., people's knowledge and understanding about risks), the emotional and experiential tradition (e.g., personal experience), the social-cultural paradigm (e.g., the social amplification of risk, cultural theory, trust, and values), and relevant individual differences (e.g., gender, education, political ideology).

Using a web-based survey, the researchers assessed the COVID-10 risk perception of approximately 700 people in each of 10 different countries around the world (United Kingdom (UK), United States (US), Australia, Germany, Spain, Italy, Sweden, Mexico, Japan, and South Korea). These countries were chosen for their cultural and geographic diversity and to represent countries at different stages of the pandemic, with different government policies. Covering the cognitive (likelihood), emotional (worry), and temporal-spatial dimensions of risk, the index included items capturing participants' perceived seriousness of the COVID-19 pandemic, perceived likelihood of contracting the virus themselves over the next 6 months, perceived likelihood of their family and friends catching the virus, and their present level of worry about the virus.

Risk perception scores across the 10 sampled countries varied between 4.78 and 5.45 on a 7-point scale, and were thus fairly high. Risk perception was highest in the UK (mean (M)=5.45, standard deviation (SD)=0.98), followed by Spain (M=5.19, SD=0.87, p < 0.001).

The study found that risk perceptions of COVID-19 consistently correlate strongly with a number of experiential and socio-cultural factors across countries, as well as several psychological factors. Pooled across countries, significant predictors of risk perception included: personal experience with the virus; hearing about the virus from friends and family; individualistic and prosocial values; trust in government, science, and medical professionals; personal knowledge of government strategy; and personal and collective efficacy.

Specifically, people who have had direct personal experience with the virus perceive more risk compared to those who have not, and people who have received information on the virus from family and friends perceive more risk compared to those who have not. The more people think that it is important to do things for the benefit of others and society even if this entails some costs to them personally, the more risk they perceive. Conversely, the more individualistic worldviews people hold, the less risk they perceive. Efficacy results show a positive correlation of personal efficacy with risk perception, but a negative correlation for collective efficacy (higher collective efficacy beliefs reduced risk perceptions about COVID-19 in Spain, Japan, Mexico, the UK, and the US). Trust in science, medical practitioners, and personal knowledge were all positively correlated with risk perception, while trust in government was negatively correlated (i.e., people tend to have lower risk perceptions when they have higher trust in government. The only significant demographic was gender, such that males generally displayed lower risk perceptions than females.

Although there was substantial variability across cultures, experience with the virus stands out across all countries, such that people who have had personal and direct experience perceive significantly higher risk. Other determinants found to be significant in more than half of the countries examined include: individualistic worldviews, prosocial values, and social amplification through friends and family.

In all 10 countries, risk perception correlated significantly with reported adoption of preventative health behaviours, such as washing hands, wearing a face mask, and physical distancing. The researchers stress that "both downplayed and exaggerated perceptions of risk can potentially undermine the adoption of protective health behaviors." Furthermore, "[c]ausality can also run both ways so that higher risk perceptions lead to more protective behaviors but that taking effective action can, in turn, also reduce risk perceptions..." Therefore, they stress the importance of evaluating accuracy in public risk perceptions.

The paper concludes with a discussion of implications for effective risk communication. For instance, the findings suggest that health risk communication messages tend to be most effective when they include information about the effectiveness of measures designed to protect people from the disease at both a personal and societal level.