Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42729309›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in public health2026

The "Information Paradox" in crime prevention: how spatial context and age moderate the impact of safety advisories on residents' perception of safety.

Zengli Wang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in public health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

1 author.

Zengli WangDepartment of Remote Sensing, College of Geography and Remote Sensing, Hohai University, Nanjing, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Effective crime prevention communication is a cornerstone of urban public health and psychological well-being. However, the psychological impact of safety advisories on residents remains poorly understood. This study investigates the "Information Paradox," the phenomenon where crime prevention tips may inadvertently heighten fear rather than provide reassurance, and explores how spatial delivery channels and demographic factors moderate this relationship. Methods: Drawing on a survey of residents in Nanjing, China, this study employed ordinal logistic regression (OLR) models to analyze the influence of multi-channel information (e.g., Community Noticeboards, unit entrances, elevator lobbies, and digital platforms) on perceived safety. Interaction terms were introduced to examine the moderating role of age cohorts, shifting the focus from technological access to varying risk sensitivities and socio-economic responsibilities across life stages. Results: The results reveal a significant spatial divergence in information perception. Crime prevention tips at unit entrances significantly enhance safety perceptions ( Conclusion: The psychological efficacy of crime prevention information is highly context-dependent and spatially bounded. To foster a secure urban environment, city managers must transition from "one-size-fits-all" public broadcasting toward demographically tailored and spatially synchronized communication architectures. Prioritizing reassurance at territorial thresholds while boosting actionable self-efficacy for middle-aged caregiving cohorts can successfully mitigate unintended environmental anxiety and maximize the public health dividends of smart-community governance.

Indexed as

CrimeSafetyAdolescentAdultAgedAge FactorsChinaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedSurveys and QuestionnairesYoung Adultage interactioncrime preventionInformation Paradoxperception of safetyspatial contexturban public health

Identifiers

PMID42729309
PMCPMC13561916

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.