Research and Evaluation of a Cyberchondria Severity Scale in a Chinese Context.

Purpose: Cyberchondria is a problematic or unhelpful behavior pattern that describes excessive or repetitive online health-related information searching related to an enhanced level of health anxiety. Such internet-derived medical anxiety can manifest itself in different ways across cultures. This study explores the unique nature of cyberchondria in the context of Chinese culture, identifying the risk factors for the condition and the possible negative outcomes. Methods: An exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was used to explore whether the structure of the Chinese version of the Cyberchondria Severity Scale (C-CSS) is different from that in western context. Subsequently, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used to verify the model fit of the C-CSS. Finally, a series of regression analysis were used to test the relationship between cyberchondria and its antecedent variables and consequence variables in Chinese context. Results: Retained 18 items and revised to 3 dimensions (Negative Effects, Excessiveness and Reassurance Seeking), the Chinese version of the Cyberchondria Severity Scale (C-CSS) was developed. In the context of China, the three antecedents were also effective predictors of cyberchondria, and C-CSS is also related to theoretically relevant outcomes. Conclusion: This study initially demonstrated the validity, reliability and applicability of C-CSS to assess the severity of cyberchondria among Chinese undergraduates.

Self-Other(s) Risk Decision Differences in Different Domains in the Chinese Context: A Social Value Theory Perspective.

Purpose: The core question explored in this study was whether social value theory, which can explain the domain specificity of self-other differences, still was applicable when choice recipients change. Methods: A pre-experiment and three formal experiments were conducted to explore the differences in self-other risk decision-making in different domains and different recipients from the perspective of social value theory. Experiment 1 involved 152 participants who were asked to make decisions for themselves and a single other in three risk domains. In Experiment 2, 178 participants were recruited, with money loss domain added and the "others" divided into "intimate others" to explore the effect of social distance on self-others risk decision-making in four domains. In Experiment 3, 233 participants were involved, and the number of "others" was expanded to explore the differences between "individual decision-making" and "group decision-making". Results: In the relationship domain, individuals were more risk-averse when making decisions for themselves, while in the money gain domain and personal safety domain, individuals' risk-taking tendencies when making decisions for themselves were significantly higher than that for new friends. In the money loss domain, no significant difference was found among the three decision-maker roles. When making decisions for a group (including the decision-maker), individuals exhibit a "compromise effect" in the non-monetary domain, where their risk appetite falls between making decisions for themselves and for the group. Conclusion: The domain differences in self-other risk decision-making can be explained by the social value theory.