How Does Psychological Distance Influence Public Risky Behavior During Public Health Emergencies

Abstract

Background

Public health emergencies not only threaten the physical and mental health of the public but also trigger a series of risky behaviors of the public, which in turn lead to the emergence or intensification of risk events, disrupting existing economic and social order.

Purpose

Based on construal level theory, cognitive appraisal theory of emotions and mood maintenance hypothesis, the study aims to investigate the collectively effect of risk perception and psychological insecurity in the connection between psychological distance and public risky behavior.

Participants and Methods

Cross-sectional data was derived from 257 China urban residents. All participants finished the psychological distance scale, risk perception scale, psychological insecurity scale, and risky behavior scale. The research hypothesis was tested using the PROCESS macro.

Results

The direct impact of psychological distance on risky behavior was not significant (β=−0.018, p>0.05). The indirect impact of psychological distance on risky behavior was significant. In other words, the impact of psychological distance on risky behavior was serially mediated via risk perception and psychological insecurity (β=0.011, 95% CI= [0.0013, 0.025]).

Conclusion

Risk perception and psychological insecurity play serial mediating roles in the relationship between psychological distance and public risky behavior. We conclude that during public health emergencies, public health managers should pay extra attention to the risk perception and psychological insecurity level of the public with closer psychological distance, take measures to reduce their risk perception, enhance their psychological security, and reduce their risky behavior, thereby ensuring the physical and mental health of the public and maintaining the stability of economic and social order.

Keywords:

• public health emergencies
• psychological distance
• risk perception
• psychological insecurity
• risky behavior

Data Sharing Statement

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Ethic Statement

The study was reviewed and approved by the ethical committee of School of Economics and Management, China University of Geosciences (Beijing). The study process was in accordance with the guidelines outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. Informed consent was obtained from all study participants.

Acknowledgments

The author thanks the study participants, and the Professor Haiyan Liu from China University of Geosciences (Beijing) for her constructive suggestions on this paper.

Disclosure

The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

Additional information

Funding

There is no sponsor(s) support in this paper.