Advertisement

Flu, Risks, and Videotape: Escalating Fear and Avoidance

Authors

  • Heather Rosoff,

    Corresponding author
    1. Sol Price School of Public Policy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
      Heather Rosoff, University of Southern California, National Center for Risk and Economic Analysis of Terrorism Events, 3710 McClintock, RTH 322, Los Angeles, CA 90089-2902, USA; rosoff@usc.edu.
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Richard S. John,

    1. Department of Psychology, Dornsife College of Letters, Arts, and Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Fynnwin Prager

    1. Sol Price School of Public Policy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
    Search for more papers by this author

Heather Rosoff, University of Southern California, National Center for Risk and Economic Analysis of Terrorism Events, 3710 McClintock, RTH 322, Los Angeles, CA 90089-2902, USA; rosoff@usc.edu.

Abstract

While extensive risk perception research has focused on emotions, cognitions, and behavior at static points in time, less attention has been paid to how these variables might change over time. This study assesses how negative affect, threat beliefs, perceived risk, and intended avoidance behavior change over the course of an escalating biological disaster. A scenario simulation methodology was used that presents respondents with a video simulation of a 15-day series of local news reports to immerse respondents in the developing details of the disaster. Systemic manipulation of the virus's causal origin (terrorist attack, medical lab accident, unknown) and the respondent's proximity to the virus (local vs. opposite coast) allowed us to investigate the dynamics of public response. The unfolding scenario was presented in discrete episodes, allowing responses to be tracked over the episodes. The sample includes 600 respondents equally split by sex and by location, with half in the Washington, DC area, and half in the Los Angeles area. The results showed respondents’ reactions to the flu epidemic increased as the disaster escalated. More importantly, there was considerable consistency across respondents’ emotional, cognitive, and behavioral responses to the epidemic over the episodes. In addition, the reactions of respondents proximally closer to the epidemic increased more rapidly and with greater intensity than their distant counterparts. Finally, as the flu epidemic escalated, both terrorist and accidental flu releases were perceived as being less risky and were less likely to lead to avoidance behavior compared to the unknown flu release.

Ancillary