Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33198699›Full record

ArticleBMC public health2020

How fear and collectivism influence public's preventive intention towards COVID-19 infection: a study based on big data from the social media.

Feng Huang, Huimin Ding, Zeyu Liu, Peijing Wu, Meng Zhu, Ang Li, Tingshao Zhu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC public health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

44 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. When Infodemic Meets Epidemic: Systematic Literature Review.JMIR public health and surveillance · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Feng HuangInstitute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100101, China.
Huimin DingGraduate School, Xinyang Normal University, Xinyang, 464000, China.
Zeyu LiuInstitute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100101, China.
Peijing WuInstitute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100101, China.
Meng ZhuInstitute for Advanced Studies in Finance and Economics, Hubei University of Economics, Wuhan, 430205, China.
Ang LiInstitute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100101, China. angli@bjfu.edu.cn.
Tingshao ZhuInstitute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100101, China. tszhu@psych.ac.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0020-3812

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite worldwide calls for precautionary measures to combat COVID-19, the public's preventive intention still varies significantly among different regions. Exploring the influencing factors of the public's preventive intention is very important to curtail the spread of COVID-19. Previous studies have found that fear can effectively improve the public's preventive intention, but they ignore the impact of differences in cultural values. The present study examines the combined effect of fear and collectivism on the public's preventive intention towards COVID-19 through the analysis of social media big data.

methodsThe Sina microblog posts of 108,914 active users from Chinese mainland 31 provinces were downloaded. The data was retrieved from January 11 to February 21, 2020. Afterwards, we conducted a province-level analysis of the contents of downloaded posts. Three lexicons were applied to automatically recognise the scores of fear, collectivism, and preventive intention of 31 provinces. After that, a multiple regression model was established to examine the combined effect of fear and collectivism on the public's preventive intention towards COVID-19. The simple slope test and the Johnson-Neyman technique were used to test the interaction of fear and collectivism on preventive intention.

resultsThe study reveals that: (a) both fear and collectivism can positively predict people's preventive intention and (b) there is an interaction of fear and collectivism on people's preventive intention, where fear and collectivism reduce each other's positive influence on people's preventive intention.

conclusionThe promotion of fear on people's preventive intention may be limited and conditional, and values of collectivism can well compensate for the promotion of fear on preventive intention. These results provide scientific inspiration on how to enhance the public's preventive intention towards COVID-19 effectively.

Indexed as

IntentionSocial ValuesBig DataChinaCoronavirus InfectionsCOVID-19FearHumansPandemicsPneumonia, ViralSocial MediaBig data analysisCOVID-19Cultural characteristicsFearPrevention and controlSocial media

Identifiers

PMID33198699
PMCPMC7667474

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.