Predicting and comparing COVID-19 risk perceptions across the Netherlands and Belgium: A cross-sectional survey among university students.

People's risk perception of COVID-19 is an important predictor for adopting protective behavior. Although risk perceptions, and factors influencing these, may vary between countries, less attention has been paid to differences between adjacent regions from neighboring countries. In the midst of the first wave of the corona outbreak (March-April-May 2020), we measured risk perceptions as perceived threat (consisting of perceived severity and susceptibility) among university students (N = 668) in two connected countries: the Netherlands and Belgium. Theory-based predictor variables included experiential, efficacy-related, socio-cultural, cognitive, and demographic factors. While demographic variables and country were not significant predictors of perceived threat level, all other constructs were. Personal and indirect experiences with COVID-19, as well as higher scores on personal (self) efficacy to carry out recommended preventive behaviors were all associated with higher perceived threat. However, low collective efficacy and lower levels of trust in government were both also significantly associated with higher perceived threat, as was a low level of "lack of COVID-19 knowledge". These results hold implications for suitable risk communication strategies for increasing students' COVID-19 risk perceptions.

Predictors of contact tracing app adoption: Integrating the UTAUT, HBM and contextual factors

Contact tracing apps (CTAs) have been introduced as a means to identify and isolate possible cases infected with COVID-19. Since the adoption rate determines the effectiveness of CTAs, it is important to examine what factors contribute to a higher CTA uptake. This study aimed to use an integrative approach to explain early CTA adoption, whereby three perspectives are distinguished: technology-related (derived from the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology [UTAUT]), health-related (derived from the Health Belief Model [HBM]), and context-related. A survey was administered among a representative sample of the Dutch population (N = 1865). A hierarchical logistic regression analysis was performed in which the models were compared. Results showed that an integrative model including all three perspectives (i.e., UTAUT, HBM, and context-related variables) resulted in better model fit than any of the other models. All UTAUT variables were associated with CTA adoption in the expected directions. Regarding the HBM, self-efficacy, perceived barriers and perceived benefits were associated with CTA adoption in the expected directions. Several context-related variables, such as fear, were associated with CTA adoption. Our findings demonstrate that extending the UTAUT with preventive health-behavioral factors and contextual factors contribute to better understanding of CTA adoption.

Social distancing during COVID-19: threat and efficacy among university students in seven nations.

COVID-19 has been spreading fast worldwide, and until effective and safe vaccines have been widely adopted, preventive measures such as social distancing are crucial to keep the pandemic under control. The study's research questions asked which psychosocial factors predict social distancing behavior and whether there are country-level differences in social distancing? Using the Extended Parallel Process Model (EPPM) as a theoretical lens, we examined the predictive effects of threat and efficacy and demographic variables on adherence to the COVID-19 preventive behavior of social distancing using a survey among an international sample of university students. Using path modeling and analysis of covariance, we confirmed the predictive effects of the EPPM on social distancing behavior. Our final model showed that perceived susceptibility to COVID-19 was both directly and indirectly (through response efficacy) associated with social distancing behavior; that perceived severity of COVID-19 yielded a significant indirect effect on social distancing behavior through both self-efficacy and response efficacy; that perceived susceptibility is indirectly and positively associated with social distancing behavior through response efficacy; and that self-efficacy and response efficacy were directly associated with social distancing behavior. Additionally, there were country-level differences in social distancing. Possible explanations for and implications of these findings are discussed.