ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Earthquake preparedness in higher education: institutional resilience, risk perception, and psychosocial mechanisms among academic staff.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Seismic hazards generate psychosocial and organizational consequences, while effective preparedness depends on the translation of institutional resources, risk perception, and resilience mechanisms into functional procedural knowledge. Objectives and hypotheses: This study tested an integrative model of earthquake preparedness among academic staff, examining institution-related perceptions, seismic risk perception, cognitive resilience, psychological resilience, adaptive resilience, preparedness engagement, and knowledge of intervention procedures. Hypotheses addressed direct associations, mediation, moderated mediation, and serial mediation. Methodology: The sample included 235 academic staff members employed in higher education institutions. Data were collected through an online multidimensional questionnaire assessing institutional, cognitive, psychological, and adaptive resilience, risk perception, preparedness engagement, and procedural knowledge. Exploratory factor analysis, internal consistency coefficients, inter-construct correlations, and multicollinearity diagnostics were used to examine the instrument's psychometric properties and the empirical overlap among the resilience dimensions. Statistical analyses included linear regression, mediation, moderated mediation, and serial mediation using the PROCESS macro for SPSS, with 5,000 bootstrap resamples. Results: Institutional resilience was significantly associated with engagement in preparedness activities. Cognitive resilience statistically explained the association between seismic risk perception and procedural knowledge, indicating that perceived risk becomes more functionally relevant when supported by cognitive processing capacities. Psychological resilience moderated this mechanism, showing that the indirect association varied according to emotional regulation capacity. Serial mediation did not support a fully sequential cognitive-adaptive pathway; instead, adaptive resilience accounted for a significant indirect association between institutional functioning and procedural knowledge. Conclusions: Earthquake preparedness in higher education emerges as an integrative psychosocial and organizational process shaped by institutional mechanisms and individual cognitive, psychological, and adaptive resources. The findings support evidence-based preparedness programs that strengthen institutional communication, cognitive processing of risk information, psychological resilience, and adaptive capacities for emergency response.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.