J. Waterschoot, S. Morbée, O. Van den Bergh, M. Vansteenkiste
{"title":"圣诞快乐,新年健康","authors":"J. Waterschoot, S. Morbée, O. Van den Bergh, M. Vansteenkiste","doi":"10.1027/2512-8442/a000114","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. Background: In November 2020, many European governments imposed severe limitations on social contacts and festive gatherings to avoid a further outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Aims: At the moment when it was still unclear whether Christmas gatherings would be allowed, the present vignette study was conducted to evaluate four hypothetical scenarios varying in restrictiveness (i.e., 1, 2, 4, or an unlimited number of visitors). Method: In total, 5,756 Belgian participants (65.7% female; Mage = 45.6, range: 18–89) evaluated each scenario in terms of the perceived strictness, probability of adherence, and expected psychological advantages (i.e., autonomy, relatedness, pleasure) and disadvantages (i.e., concerns). Results: Evidence for a curvilinear pattern was found, such that the expected psychological benefits increased with an increasing number of allowed visitors till 4, with this effect being reversed in case of an unlimited gathering. Yet, these main effects were qualified: Older adults, those living together, and those scoring high on risk perception and autonomous motivation to adhere to the corona measures expected the more restrictive scenarios to be equally beneficial compared to the more relaxed scenarios. Limitations: Limitations are self-selection of the sample, no counterbalancing of the scenario’s and the vignette-based methodology. Conclusion: The present findings suggest that people’s risk perception and autonomous motivation are key to secure and stimulate the acceptance of life-restricting measures.","PeriodicalId":51983,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Health Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Merry Christmas and a “Healthy” New Year\",\"authors\":\"J. Waterschoot, S. Morbée, O. Van den Bergh, M. Vansteenkiste\",\"doi\":\"10.1027/2512-8442/a000114\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract. Background: In November 2020, many European governments imposed severe limitations on social contacts and festive gatherings to avoid a further outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Aims: At the moment when it was still unclear whether Christmas gatherings would be allowed, the present vignette study was conducted to evaluate four hypothetical scenarios varying in restrictiveness (i.e., 1, 2, 4, or an unlimited number of visitors). Method: In total, 5,756 Belgian participants (65.7% female; Mage = 45.6, range: 18–89) evaluated each scenario in terms of the perceived strictness, probability of adherence, and expected psychological advantages (i.e., autonomy, relatedness, pleasure) and disadvantages (i.e., concerns). Results: Evidence for a curvilinear pattern was found, such that the expected psychological benefits increased with an increasing number of allowed visitors till 4, with this effect being reversed in case of an unlimited gathering. Yet, these main effects were qualified: Older adults, those living together, and those scoring high on risk perception and autonomous motivation to adhere to the corona measures expected the more restrictive scenarios to be equally beneficial compared to the more relaxed scenarios. Limitations: Limitations are self-selection of the sample, no counterbalancing of the scenario’s and the vignette-based methodology. Conclusion: The present findings suggest that people’s risk perception and autonomous motivation are key to secure and stimulate the acceptance of life-restricting measures.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51983,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Health Psychology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Health Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1027/2512-8442/a000114\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Health Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/2512-8442/a000114","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract. Background: In November 2020, many European governments imposed severe limitations on social contacts and festive gatherings to avoid a further outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic. Aims: At the moment when it was still unclear whether Christmas gatherings would be allowed, the present vignette study was conducted to evaluate four hypothetical scenarios varying in restrictiveness (i.e., 1, 2, 4, or an unlimited number of visitors). Method: In total, 5,756 Belgian participants (65.7% female; Mage = 45.6, range: 18–89) evaluated each scenario in terms of the perceived strictness, probability of adherence, and expected psychological advantages (i.e., autonomy, relatedness, pleasure) and disadvantages (i.e., concerns). Results: Evidence for a curvilinear pattern was found, such that the expected psychological benefits increased with an increasing number of allowed visitors till 4, with this effect being reversed in case of an unlimited gathering. Yet, these main effects were qualified: Older adults, those living together, and those scoring high on risk perception and autonomous motivation to adhere to the corona measures expected the more restrictive scenarios to be equally beneficial compared to the more relaxed scenarios. Limitations: Limitations are self-selection of the sample, no counterbalancing of the scenario’s and the vignette-based methodology. Conclusion: The present findings suggest that people’s risk perception and autonomous motivation are key to secure and stimulate the acceptance of life-restricting measures.
期刊介绍:
Die "Zeitschrift für Gesundheitspsychologie" wurde gegründet, um dem raschen Anwachsen gesundheitspsychologischer Forschung sowie deren Relevanz für verschiedene Anwendungsfelder gerecht zu werden. Gesundheitspsychologie versteht sich als wissenschaftlicher Beitrag der Psychologie zur Förderung und Erhaltung von Gesundheit, zur Verhütung und Behandlung von Krankheiten, zur Bestimmung von Risikoverhaltensweisen, zur Diagnose und Ursachenbestimmung von gesundheitlichen Störungen sowie zur Verbessung des Systems gesundheitlicher Vorsorge.