| Literature DB >> 32466581 |
Mehrab Nazir1, Iftikhar Hussain2, Jian Tian1, Sabahat Akram3, Sidney Mangenda Tshiaba1, Shahrukh Mushtaq4, Muhammad Afzal Shad5.
Abstract
COVID-19 is appearing as one of the most fetal disease of the world's history and has caused a global health emergency. Therefore, this study was designed with the aim to address the issue of public response against COVID-19. The literature lacks studies on social aspects of COVID-19. Therefore, the current study is an attempt to investigate its social aspects and suggest a theoretical structural equation model to examine the associations between social media exposure, awareness, and information exchange and preventive behavior and to determine the indirect as well as direct impact of social media exposure on preventive behavior from the viewpoints of awareness and information exchange. The current empirical investigation was held in Pakistan, and the collected survey data from 500 respondents through social media tools were utilized to examine the associations between studied variables as stated in the anticipated study model. The findings of the study indicate that social media exposure has no significant and direct effect on preventive behavior. Social media exposure influences preventive behavior indirectly through awareness and information exchange. In addition, awareness and information exchange have significant and direct effects on preventive behavior. Findings are valuable for health administrators, governments, policymakers, and social scientists, specifically for individuals whose situations are like those in Pakistan. This research validates how social media exposure indirectly effects preventive behavior concerning COVID-19 and explains the paths of effect through awareness or information exchange. To the best of our knowledge, there is no work at present that covers this gap, for this reason the authors propose a new model. The conceptual model offers valuable information for policymakers and practitioners to enhance preventive behavior through the adoption of appropriate awareness strategies and information exchange and social media strategies.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; pandemic; preventive behavior; social actors; social media
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32466581 PMCID: PMC7312600 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17113780
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Demographic Analysis.
| Variable | Category | Frequency | Percentage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male | 361 | 72.2 |
| Female | 139 | 27.8 | |
| Age (Years) | 20–30 | 79 | 15.8 |
| 31–40 | 150 | 30.0 | |
| 41–50 | 100 | 20.0 | |
| 51–60 | 80 | 16.0 | |
| 61 and above | 91 | 18.2 | |
| Qualification | Bachelors | 114 | 22.8 |
| Masters | 192 | 38.4 | |
| Postgraduates | 132 | 26.4 | |
| Diplomas | 51 | 10.2 | |
| Others | 11 | 2.2 | |
| Income | 1–10,000 | 48 | 9.6 |
| 10,000–20,000 | 99 | 19.8 | |
| 20,000–30,000 | 165 | 33.0 | |
| 30,000–40,000 | 113 | 22.6 | |
| 40,000–above | 75 | 15.0 |
Figure 1Conceptual Framework.
SEM Analysis.
| Contract | Item | Loading | Mean | SD | AVE | CR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| SC1 | 0.65 | 3.57 | 0.76 | 0.55 | 0.82 |
| SC2 | 0.73 | |||||
| SC3 | 0.69 | |||||
| SC4 | 0.75 | |||||
|
| AW1 | 0.74 | 3.54 | 0.79 | 0.62 | 0.89 |
| AW2 | 0.66 | |||||
| AW3 | 0.75 | |||||
|
| IF1 | 0.72 | 3.40 | 0.84 | 0.63 | 0.83 |
| IF2 | 0.74 | |||||
| IF3 | 0.68 | |||||
| IF4 | 0.71 | |||||
|
| PB1 | 0.79 | 3.55 | 0.86 | 0.79 | 0.92 |
| PB2 | 0.78 | |||||
| PB3 | 0.61 | |||||
Overall fit index of the CFA model.
| Fit Index | Score | Recommended Threshold Value |
|---|---|---|
| Absolute fit measures | ||
| CMIN/df | 1.787 | ≤2 a; ≤ 5 b |
| GFI | 0.952 | ≥0.90 a; ≥0.80 b |
| RMSEA | 0.040 | ≤0.8 a; ≤0.10 b |
| Incremental fit measures | ||
| NFI | 0.828 | ≥0.90 a |
| AGFI | 0.936 | ≥0.90 a; ≥0.80 b |
| CFI | 0.914 | ≥0.90 a |
| Parsimonious fit measures | ||
| PGFI | 0.071 | The higher the better |
a: Acceptability: Yes, acceptable; b: Acceptability: Marginal; Chi-square minimum/df (CMIN/df); goodness-of-fit index (GFI); root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA); normed-fit-index (NFI); adjusted-goodness-of-fit index (AGFI); comparative fit index (CFI); value and the parsimony-goodness-of-fit-index (PGFI)
Regression weights (group number 1—Default model).
| Hypothesis | Estimate | S.E. | C.R. | P | Effect | Results | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Information Exchange | <-- | Social exposure | 0.377 | 0.093 | 5.306 | *** |
| Supported |
| Awareness Knowledge | <-- | Social exposure | 0.389 | 0.094 | 5.090 | *** |
| Supported |
| Preventive Behavior | <-- | Social exposure | −0.097 | 0.118 | −1.181 | 0.238 |
| Not Supported |
| Preventive Behavior | <-- | Information Exchange | 0.199 | 0.079 | 2.781 | 0.005 |
| Supported |
| Preventive Behavior | <-- | Awareness Knowledge | 0.454 | 0.108 | 4.956 | *** |
| Supported |
| Preventive Behavior | <-- | Income | 0.023 | 0.037 | 0.433 | 0.665 |
| Supported |
| Preventive Behavior | <-- | Education | 0.106 | 0.042 | 2.028 | 0.043 |
| Supported |
| Preventive Behavior | <-- | Age | −0.052 | 0.032 | −0.986 | 0.324 |
| Supported |
| Preventive Behavior | <-- | Gender | 0.041 | 0.098 | 0.790 | 0.429 |
| Supported |
*** means relationships are significant at p-value 0.000; + means positive effect and – means negative effect
Figure 2Mediating relationships.
Direct/indirect and total effects (group number 1—default model).
| Predictor | Education | Age | Income | Gender | Social Exposure | Knowledge | Information Exchange |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||||
| Awareness Knowledge | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.476 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Information Exchange | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.492 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Preventive Behavior | 0.085 | −0.032 | 0.016 | 0.077 | −0.140 | 0.535 | 0.220 |
|
| |||||||
| Preventive Behavior | 0.363 | ||||||
|
| |||||||
| 0.085 | −0.32 | 0.016 | 0.077 | 0.363 + (−0.140) = 0.223 | 0.535 | 0.220 |