A longitudinal perspective on perceived vulnerability to disease during the COVID-19 pandemic in Belgium.

During the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, individuals relied heavily on media sources to stay informed about the disease and public health measures. However, differences exist in the type and frequency of news media consumption, which can be linked to their perceived vulnerability to disease. In this longitudinal study, 1000 Flemish (Belgium) individuals were followed from March 2020 until September 2020, focussing on the evolution in perceived vulnerability to disease (i.e. perceived infectability and germ aversion). Media consumption significantly impacts perceived germ aversion; heavy consumers of commercial media reported greater germ aversion than light consumers of these media. The evolution of germ aversion among individuals from March to August depends on their gender, living environment, age and possibility to work from home. Furthermore, the evolution of perceived infectability depends on the age and living environment of the respondent. These findings may interest policy makers and media professionals to anticipate how anxieties regarding contracting an infectious disease evolve over time and how individual characteristics affect this evolution.

Do optimism and moralization predict vaccination? A five-wave longitudinal study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine if personal and comparative optimism, perceived effectiveness, and moralization of vaccination predict people's decision to get vaccinated. METHODS: We measured self-reported vaccination decisions in a five-wave longitudinal study (N ≍ 5,000/wave) in Belgium over a six months period (December 2020-May 2021) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Among the predictors were demographic factors, personal and comparative optimism for three aspects of COVID-19 (infection, severe disease, good outcome), perceived effectiveness of vaccination, and the extent to which vaccination is being viewed in prosocial terms (altruism, civic spirit) versus as instrumental in one's self-interest (common sense, concern about one's health). RESULTS: The actual availability of vaccines changed people's outlook on vaccination. Marked differences emerged in vaccination decision between linguistic-cultural regions (Flemish Region, Walloon Region, Brussels Capital Region). Personal and comparative optimism predicted vaccination decisions to different extents depending on participants' age and on whether the optimism was for infection, severe disease, or a good outcome. In older participants, vaccination decision was mostly predicted by personal optimism; in younger participants, it was mostly predicted by comparative optimism. Moralizing vaccination predicted a lower likelihood of a positive vaccination decision, that is, higher vaccine hesitancy or refusal, particularly in older participants. CONCLUSIONS: Assessments of risk perception serving to inform vaccination campaigns should differentiate between expectations concerning the risk of infection and expectations concerning the outcome of an infection. Public health messages should address comparative optimism, particularly when targeting younger populations. Contrary to popular belief, moralizing vaccination may reduce the willingness to get vaccinated. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Self-uniqueness beliefs and adherence to recommended precautions. A 5-wave longitudinal COVID-19 study.

RATIONALE: Research on health-related self-uniqueness beliefs suggested that these beliefs might predict adherence to precautions against COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: We examined if comparative optimism (believing that one is less at less than others), self-superiority (believing that one already adheres better to precautions than others), and egocentric impact perception (believing that adverse events affect oneself more than others) predicted intended adherence to precautions. METHOD: We measured self-reported intentions, optimism for self and others, perceived past adherence by self and others, and perceived impact of the measures and the disease on self and others in a 5-wave longitudinal study in December 2020-May 2021 (N ≈ 5000/wave). The sample was in key respects representative for the Belgian population. We used joint models to examine the relationship between self-uniqueness beliefs and intended adherence to the precautions. RESULTS: Believing that COVID-19 would affect one's own life more than average (egocentric impact perception) was associated with higher intentions to adhere to precautions, as was believing that the precautions affected one's life less than average (allocentric impact perception). Self-superiority concerning past adherence to precautions and comparative optimism concerning infection with COVID-19 were associated with higher intended adherence, regardless of whether their non-comparative counterparts (descriptive norm, i.e., perceived adherence to precautions by others, and personal optimism, respectively) were controlled for. Comparative optimism for severe disease and for good outcome were associated with lower intended adherence if personal optimism was not controlled for, but with higher intended adherence if it was controlled for. CONCLUSION: Self-uniqueness beliefs predict intended adherence to precautions against COVID-19, but do so in different directions.

Self-uniqueness beliefs and adherence to recommended precautions. A 5-wave longitudinal COVID-19 study

Rationale. Research on health-related self-uniqueness beliefs suggested that these beliefs might predict adherence to precautions against COVID-19. Objective We examined if comparative optimism (believing that one is less at less than others), self-superiority (believing that one already adheres better to precautions than others), and egocentric impact perception (believing that adverse events affect oneself more than others) predicted intended adherence to precautions. Method We measured self-reported intentions, optimism for self and others, perceived past adherence by self and others, and perceived impact of the measures and the disease on self and others in a 5-wave longitudinal study in December 2020–May 2021 (N ≈ 5000/wave). The sample was in key respects representative for the Belgian population. We used joint models to examine the relationship between self-uniqueness beliefs and intended adherence to the precautions. Results Believing that COVID-19 would affect one's own life more than average (egocentric impact perception) was associated with higher intentions to adhere to precautions, as was believing that the precautions affected one's life less than average (allocentric impact perception). Self-superiority concerning past adherence to precautions and comparative optimism concerning infection with COVID-19 were associated with higher intended adherence, regardless of whether their non-comparative counterparts (descriptive norm, i.e., perceived adherence to precautions by others, and personal optimism, respectively) were controlled for. Comparative optimism for severe disease and for good outcome were associated with lower intended adherence if personal optimism was not controlled for, but with higher intended adherence if it was controlled for. Conclusion Self-uniqueness beliefs predict intended adherence to precautions against COVID-19, but do so in different directions.