Percezione del rischio e adozione di misure di protezione: un’indagine esplorativa al tempo del primo lockdown da Covid-19 in Italia

Journal title SALUTE E SOCIETÀ
Author/s Linda Lombi, Marco Terraneo
Publishing Year 2022 Issue 2022/3 Language Italian
Pages 16 P. 154-169 File size 239 KB
DOI 10.3280/SES2022-003011
DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation click here

Below, you can see the article first page

If you want to buy this article in PDF format, you can do it, following the instructions to buy download credits

Article preview

FrancoAngeli is member of Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA), a not-for-profit association which run the CrossRef service enabling links to and from online scholarly content.

This article discusses the results of a study that collected information on a sample of 2,183 individuals through a web survey, conducted in Italy during the period of the first lockdown linked to COVID-19 and aimed at exploring the theme of risk perception at the time of the pandemic. Specifically, the paper will examine two aspects: (a) the socio-demographic charac-teristics of the respondents about risk; (b) the relationship between risk perception and the likelihood of adopting behaviours aimed at averting contagion.As regards the first point, the results show that those with a lower perception of risk are males, older, unmarried. The level of education only affects the fear of not surviving in the event of contagion (those with higher qualifications are less afraid). Concerning the second aspect, data show that those who per-ceive a greater risk tend to adopt individual protection measures with greater probability. The results of the study are useful for providing suggestions to improve the risk communication, that is a priority for public health agendas, and suggest to target it according to the specific profiles of the individuals to whom it is addressed.

Keywords: Covid-19; risk perception; protection measures; lockdown; exploratory study; Italy.

  1. Balog-Way D.H.P., McComas K.A. (2020). Covid-19: Reflections on trust, tradeoffs, and preparedness. Journal of Risk Research, 23(7-8): 838-848. DOI: 10.1080/13669877.2020.175819
  2. Bish A., Michie S. (2010). Demographic and attitudinal determinants of protective behaviours during a pandemic: a review. Br J Health Psychology, 15(4): 797-824. DOI: 10.1348/135910710X48582
  3. Brickman Bhutta C. (2012). Not by the book: Facebook as a sampling frame. Sociological Methods & Research 41(1): 57-88. DOI: 10.1177/004912411244079
  4. Cori L., Bianchi F., Cadum E., Anthonj C. (2020). Risk Perception and Covid-19. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 17, 3114.
  5. Douglas M. (1996). Rischio e colpa, Bologna: il Mulino [Ed. orig.: (1992), Risk and Blame. Essays in Cultural Theory, London, Routledge].
  6. Gerhold L. (2020). Covid-19: Risk perception and Coping strategies, PsyArXiv.- Testo disponibile al sito: (14/05/2021).
  7. Giarelli G. (2020). The Governance of Resilience. How the Health Systems Have Coped with The Covid-19 Pandemic. Culture e Studi del Sociale, 5(1): 245-257, Special issue.
  8. Harper C.A., Satchell L.P., Fido D., Latzman R.D. (2020). Functional Fear Predicts Public Health Compliance in the Covid-19 Pandemic. International journal of mental health and addiction, 1-14.
  9. Kohler U. (2019). Possible Uses of Nonprobability Sampling for the Social Sciences. Survey Methods: Insights from the Field, 1-12. DOI: 10.13094/SMIF-2019-0001
  10. Laires P.A., Dias S., Gama A., Moniz M., Pedro A.R., Soares P., Aguiar P., Nunes C. (2021). The Association Between Chronic Disease and Serious Covid-19 Outcomes and Its Influence on Risk Perception: Survey Study and Database Analysis, JMIR Public Health Surveill, 7(1): e22794. DOI: 10.2196/2279
  11. Lovari A. (2020). Spreading (dis)trust. Covid-19 misinformation and government intervention in Italy. Media and Communication, 8(2): 458-461.
  12. Lovari A., D'Ambrosi L., Bowen S.A. (2020). Re-connecting voices. The (new) strategic role of public sector communication after the Covid-19 crisis. Partecipazione e Conflitto, 13(2): 970-989.
  13. Lupton D. (2013). Risk and emotion: towards an alternative theoretical perspective. Health, Risk & Society, 15(8): 634-647. DOI: 10.1080/13698575.2013.84884
  14. Malecki K.M., Keating J.A., Safdar N. (2021). Crisis communication and public perception of Covid-19 risk in the era of social media. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 72(4): 697-702.
  15. Mauss M. (2002). Saggio sul dono. Torino: Einaudi.
  16. Plohl N., Musil B. (2020). Modeling compliance with Covid-19 prevention guidelines: The critical role of trust in science. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 26(1): 1-12. DOI: 10.1080/13548506.2020.177298
  17. Rana I.A., Bhatti S.S., Aslam A.B., Jamshed A., Ahmad J., Shah A.A. (2021). Covid-19 risk perception and coping mechanisms: Does gender make a difference? International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 55: 102096.
  18. Rodriguez-Besteiro S., Tornero-Aguilera J.F., Fernández-Lucas J., Clemente-Suárez V.J. (2021). Gender Differences in the Covid-19 Pandemic Risk Perception, Psychology and Behaviors of Spanish University Students. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(8): 3908.
  19. Wise T., Zbozinek T.D., Michelini G., Hagan C.C., Mobbs D. (2020). Changes in risk perception and self-reported protective behaviour during the first week of the Covid-19 pandemic in the United States. Royal Society open science, 7(9): 200742.

Linda Lombi, Marco Terraneo, Percezione del rischio e adozione di misure di protezione: un’indagine esplorativa al tempo del primo lockdown da Covid-19 in Italia in "SALUTE E SOCIETÀ" 3/2022, pp 154-169, DOI: 10.3280/SES2022-003011