PDF

Published

2023-12-07

Issue

Vol. 9 No. 1 (2024)

Section

Research Articles

License

The journal adopts the Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0), which means that anyone can reuse and redistribute the materials for non-commercial purposes as long as you follow the license terms and the original source is properly cited.

Author(s) shall retain the copyright of their work and grant the Journal/Publisher rights for the first publication with the work concurrently licensed since 2023 Vol.8 No.2.

Under this license, author(s) will allow third parties to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute and/or copy the content under the condition that the authors are given credit. No permission is required from the authors or the publisher.

This broad license intends to facilitate free access, as well as the unrestricted use of original works of all types. This ensures that the published work is freely and openly available in perpetuity.

By providing open access, the following benefits are brought about:

  • Higher Visibility, Availability and Citations-free and unlimited accessibility of the publication over the internet without any restrictions increases citation of the article.
  • Ease of search-publications are easily searchable in search engines and indexing databases.
  • Rapid Publication – accepted papers are immediately published online.
  • Available for free download immediately after publication at https://esp.as-pub.com/index.php/ESP

 

Copyright Statement

1.The authors certify that the submitted manuscripts are original works, do not infringe the rights of others, are free from academic misconduct and confidentiality issues, and that there are no disputes over the authorship scheme of the collaborative articles. In case of infringement, academic misconduct and confidentiality issues, as well as disputes over the authorship scheme, all responsibilities will be borne by the authors.

2. The author agrees to grant the Editorial Office of Environment and Social Psychology a licence to use the reproduction right, distribution right, information network dissemination right, performance right, translation right, and compilation right of the submitted manuscript, including the work as a whole, as well as the diagrams, tables, abstracts, and any other parts that can be extracted from the work and used in accordance with the characteristics of the journal. The Editorial Board of Environment and Social Psychology has the right to use and sub-licence the above mentioned works for wide dissemination in print, electronic and online versions, and, in accordance with the characteristics of the periodical, for the period of legal protection of the property right of the copyright in the work, and for the territorial scope of the work throughout the world.

3. The authors are entitled to the copyright of their works under the relevant laws of Singapore, provided that they do not exercise their rights in a manner prejudicial to the interests of the Journal.

About Licence

Environment and Social Psychology is an open access journal and all published work is available under the Creative Commons Licence, Authors shall retain copyright of their work and grant the journal/publisher the right of first publication, and their work shall be licensed under the Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0).

Under this licence, the author grants permission to third parties to download, reuse, reprint, modify, distribute and/or copy the content with attribution to the author. No permission from the author or publisher is required.

This broad licence is intended to facilitate free access to and unrestricted use of original works of all kinds. This ensures that published works remain free and accessible in perpetuity. Submitted manuscripts, once accepted, are immediately available to the public and permanently accessible free of charge on the journal’s official website (https://esp.as-pub.com/index.php/ESP). Allowing users to read, download, copy, print, search for or link to the full text of the article, or use it for other legal purposes. However, the use of the work must retain the author's signature, be limited to non-commercial purposes, and not be interpretative.

Click to download <Agreement on the Licence for the Use of Copyright on Environmental and Social Psychology>.

How to Cite

Faraz, F., Abraham, J., Nashori, F., Wijaya, H. E., Sofia, N., Rabbani, M. D. R., … Wulandari, A. P. J. (2023). Which predicts worker’s health behavior more strongly in the COVID-19 pandemic, anticipated regret or risk perception?. Environment and Social Psychology, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.54517/esp.v9i1.1899

Which predicts worker’s health behavior more strongly in the COVID-19 pandemic, anticipated regret or risk perception?

Faraz Faraz

Department of Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Socio-cultural Sciences, Universitas Islam Indonesia

Juneman Abraham

Department of Psychology, Faculty of Humanities, Bina Nusantara University

Fuad Nashori

Department of Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Socio-cultural Sciences, Universitas Islam Indonesia

Hariz Enggar Wijaya

Department of Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Socio-cultural Sciences, Universitas Islam Indonesia

Nanum Sofia

Department of Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Socio-cultural Sciences, Universitas Islam Indonesia

Muhammad Dhia Rafid Rabbani

Department of Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Socio-cultural Sciences, Universitas Islam Indonesia

Angela Dyah Ari Pramastyaningtyas

Department of Psychology, Faculty of Humanities, Bina Nusantara University

Antonina Pantja Juni Wulandari

Department of Psychology, Faculty of Humanities, Bina Nusantara University


DOI: https://doi.org/10.54517/esp.v9i1.1899


Keywords: anticipated emotion, health psychology, perceived risk, pandemic, Indonesian

Abstract

This study aims to determine the predictive power of risk perception and anticipated regret on health behavior under uncertainty in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. The research was conducted utilizing a predictive-correlational design and survey method to 224 Indonesian (156 women, 68 men; Mage = 37 years old). Multiple linear regression analysis demonstrated that risk perception has greater weight than anticipated regret in predicting health behavior. Additionally, mediation analysis showed that risk perception can partially mediate the prediction relationship between anticipated regret and health behavior.

References

[1]. Blake H, Bermingham F, Johnson G, et al. Mitigating the Psychological Impact of COVID-19 on Healthcare Workers: A Digital Learning Package. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 2020; 17(9): 2997. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17092997

[2]. Fillaili R, Tamyis AR. Maintain Public Risk Perception through Effective Risk Communication during The COVID-19 Pandemic (Indonesian). Available online: https://smeru.or.id/id/file/4756/download?token=4_v7wckq (accessed on 30 November 2023).

[3]. Pedrosa AL, Bitencourt L, Fróes AC, et al. Emotional, Behavioral, and Psychological Impact of The COVID-19 Pandemic. Frontiers in Psychology 2020; 11: 566212. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.566212

[4]. Gabillon E. When Choosing is Painful: Anticipated Regret and Psychological Opportunity Cost. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 2020; 178: 644-659. doi: 10.1016/j.jebo.2020.08.010

[5]. Zeelenberg M, Van Dijk WW, Manstead ASR, et al. The Experience of Regret and Disappointment. Cognition & Emotion 1998; 12(2): 221-230. doi: 10.1080/026999398379727

[6]. Wu Y, van Dijk E, Li H. Acute Stress Amplifies Experienced and Anticipated Regret in Counterfactual Decision-Making. Stress 2021; 24(4): 359-369. doi: 10.1080/10253890.2020.1813275

[7]. Zeelenberg M. Anticipated Regret, Expected Feedback and Behavioral Decision Making. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 1999; 12(2): 93-106. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0771(199906)12:2%3C93::AID-BDM311%3E3.0.CO;2-S

[8]. Zeelenberg M, Pieters R. Feeling Is for Doing: A Pragmatic Approach to the Study of Emotions in Economic Behavior. In: De Cremer D, Zeelenberg M, Murnighan JK (editors). Social Psychology and Economics. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2006. pp. 117-137.

[9]. Coricelli G, Critchley HD, Joffily M, et al. Regret and Its Avoidance: A Neuroimaging Study of Choice Behavior. Nature Neuroscience 2005; 8(9): 1255-1262. doi: 10.1038/nn1514

[10]. Zeelenberg M, Pieters R. A Theory of Regret Regulation 1.0. Journal of Consumer Psychology. 2007; 17(1): 3-18. doi: 10.1207/s15327663jcp1701_3

[11]. Bavel JJ, Baicker K, Boggio PS, et al. Using Social and Behavioural Science to Support COVID-19 Pandemic Response. Nature Human Behaviour 2020; 4(5): 460-471. doi: 10.1038/s41562-020-0884-z

[12]. Koch EJ. How Does Anticipated Regret Influence Health and Safety Decisions? A Literature Review. Basic and Applied Social Psychology 2014; 36(5): 397-412. doi: 10.1080/01973533.2014.935379

[13]. Bavolar J, Kacmar P, Hricova M, Schrötter J, et al. Intolerance of Uncertainty and Reactions to the COVID-19 Pandemic. The Journal of General Psychology 2023; 150(2): 143-170. doi: 10.1080/00221309.2021.1922346

[14]. Davies B, Grimes A. COVID-19, Lockdown and Two-sided Uncertainty. New Zealand Economic Papers 2022; 56(1): 49-54. doi: 10.1080/00779954.2020.1806340

[15]. Ferrer RA, Klein WM. Risk Perceptions and Health Behavior. Current Opinion in Psychology 2015; 5: 85-89. doi: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.03.012

[16]. Brewer NT, Weinstein ND, Cuite CL, et al. Risk Perceptions and Their Relation to Risk Behavior. Annals of Behavioral Medicine 2004; 27: 125-130. doi: 10.1207/s15324796abm2702_7

[17]. Reyna VF, Nelson WL, Han PK, et al. How Numeracy Influences Risk Comprehension And Medical Decision Making. Psychological Bulletin 2009; 135(6): 943-973. doi: 10.1037/a0017327

[18]. Conner M. Health Behaviors. In Wright JD (editor). International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed. Elsevier; 2015. pp. 582–587.

[19]. Prayoga T, Abraham J. Social-psychological-health Predictors of Fondness of Arkenstone among Indonesians. Abnormal and Behavioural Psychology 2016; 2(2): 1000116.

[20]. Wusana SW, Hidayat R. Perception of Natural Disaster Risk in View of the Centrality of the Disaster Information Network (Indonesian). Jurnal Ilmu Perilaku 2017; 1(2): 68-80. doi: 10.25077/jip.1.2.68-80.2017

[21]. DeJoy DM. Theoretical Models of Health Behavior and Workplace Self-protective Behavior. Journal of Safety Research 1996; 27(2): 61-72. doi: 10.1016/0022-4375(96)00007-2

[22]. Abraham C, Sheeran P. The health belief model. In: Cornner M, Norman P (editors). Predicting Health Behavior: Research and Practice with Social Cognition Model, 2nd ed. Open University Press; 2005. pp. 28-80.

[23]. Somasundaram J, Diecidue E. Regret Theory and Risk Attitudes. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 2017; 55: 147-175. doi: 10.1007/s11166-017-9268-9

[24]. Chapman GB, Coups EJ. Emotions and Preventive Health Behavior: Worry, Regret, and Influenza Vaccination. Health Psychology. 2006; 25(1): 82-90. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.25.1.82

[25]. Janz NK, Becker MH. The Health Belief Model: A Decade Later. Health Education Quarterly 1984; 11(1): 1-47. doi: 10.1177/109019818401100101

[26]. Brewer NT, Chapman GB, Gibbons FX, et al. Meta-analysis of The Relationship between Risk Perception and Health Behavior: The Example of Vaccination. Health Psychology 2007; 26(2): 136-145. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.26.2.136

[27]. Harrison JA, Mullen PD, Green LW. A Meta-Analysis of Studies of The Health Belief Model with Adults. Health Education Research 1992; 7: 107–116. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.26.2.136

[28]. Li S, Zhou K, Sun Y, Rao LL, Zheng R, Liang ZY. Anticipated Regret, Risk Perception, or Both: Which is Most Likely Responsible for Our Intention to Gamble?. Journal of Gambling Studies 2010; 26: 105-116. doi: 10.1007/s10899-009-9149-5

[29]. Kurniawati M. Anticipated Regret in the Purchase of Secondhand and Counterfeit Product. JDM (Jurnal Dinamika Manajemen) 2019; 10(2): 197-204. doi: 10.15294/jdm.v10i2.18537

[30]. Ritov I, Baron J. Outcome Knowledge, Regret, and Omission Bias. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 1995; 64(2): 119-127. doi: 10.1006/obhd.1995.1094

[31]. Wahyuni, D. Upaya Pemulihan Pariwisata Yogyakarta pada Masa Pandemi Covid-19. Aspirasi: Jurnal Masalah-Masalah Sosial 2021; 12(2): 121-137. doi: 10.46807/aspirasi.v12i2.2502

[32]. Frech A. Healthy Behavior Trajectories Between Adolescence and Young Adulthood. Advances in Life Course Research 2012; 17(2): 59-68. doi: 10.1016/j.alcr.2012.01.003

[33]. Roseman IJ, Wiest C, Swartz TS. Phenomenology, Behaviors, and Goals Differentiate Discrete Emotions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1994; 67(2): 206-221. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.67.2.206

[34]. Roberts, HV, King, B. F. Statistical Techniques for Manager. College of Business, Florida Atlantic University; 2004.

[35]. Chavarría E, Diba F, Marcus ME, et al. Knowing versus Doing: Protective Health Behaviour against COVID-19 in Aceh, Indonesia. The Journal of Development Studies 2021; 57(8): 1245-1266. doi: 10.1080/00220388.2021.1898594

[36]. Landman J. Regret: A Theoretical and Conceptual Analysis. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 1987; 17(2): 135-160. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-5914.1987.tb00092.x

[37]. Gaube S, Lermer E, Fischer P. The Concept of Risk Perception in Health-related Behavior Theory and Behavior Change. In: Raue M, Streicher B, Lermer E (editors). Perceived Safety: Risk Engineering. Springer; 2019. pp. 101-118.

[38]. Statman M. Culture in Risk, Regret, Maximization, Social Trust, and Life Satisfaction. Journal of Investment Consulting 2015; 16(1): 20-30.

[39]. Bontempo RN, Bottom WP, Weber EU. Cross-cultural Differences in Risk Perception: A Model-based Approach. Risk Analysis 1997; 17(4): 479-488. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.1997.tb00888.x

[40]. Chen KY, Yeh CF. Preventing Tire Blowout Accidents: A Perspective on Factors Affecting Drivers’ Intention to Adopt Tire Pressure Monitoring System. Safety 2018; 4(2): 16. doi: 10.3390/safety4020016

[41]. Klein WM, Stefanek ME. Cancer Risk Elicitation and Communication: Lessons from The Psychology of Risk Perception. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians 2007; 57(3): 147-167. doi: 10.3322/canjclin.57.3.147

[42]. Cox D, Sturm L, Cox AD. Effectiveness of Asking Anticipated Regret in Increasing HPV Vaccination Intention in Mothers. Health Psychology 2014; 33(9): 1074-1083. doi: 10.1037/hea0000071

[43]. Nordgren LF, Van Der Pligt J, Van Harreveld F. Unpacking Perceived Control In Risk Perception: The Mediating Role Of Anticipated Regret. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 2007; 20(5): 533-544. doi: 10.1002/bdm.565

[44]. Guo Z, Wang Z, Li D, et al. Linking Personal Norms and Descriptive Norms to Pedestrians’ Intention to Jaywalk: The Mediating Role of Anticipated Regret and Risk Perception. Proceedings of 2021 6th International Conference on Transportation Information and Safety (ICTIS); 22-24 October 2021; Piscataway, New Jersey: IEEE Xplore; 2021. pp. 348-353.

[45]. Lagerkvist CJ, Okello J, Karanja N. Consumers’ Evaluation of Volition, Control, Anticipated Regret, and Perceived Food Health Risk. Evidence from a Field Experiment in a Traditional Vegetable Market in Kenya. Food Control 2015; 47: 359-368. doi: 10.1016/j.foodcont.2014.07.026

[46]. Peters GJ, Ruiter RA, Kok G. Threatening Communication: A Critical Re-Analysis and A Revised Meta-Analytic Test of Fear Appeal Theory. Health Psychology Review 2013; 7(sup1): S8-S31. doi: 10.1080/17437199.2012.703527

[47]. Siswati T, Benita S, Paramita I, et al. Risk Perception of Behavioural Adaptation Recommendations towards COVID-19 and Its Related Factors in Indonesia. International Journal of Community Medicine and Public Health 2021; 8(11): 5157-5162. doi: 10.18203/2394-6040.ijcmph20214243

[48]. Tejamaya M, Widanarko B, Erwandi D, et al. Risk Perception of COVID-19 in Indonesia During The First Stage of The Pandemic. Frontiers in Public Health 2021; 9: 731459. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2021.731459

[49]. Permatasari P, Herbawani CK, Karima UQ, et al. (2020, November). A Descriptive Study of Covid-19: Risk Perception and Preventive Behavior in West Java, Banten and Jakarta. Proceedings of International Conference of Health Development. Covid-19 and the Role of Healthcare Workers in the Industrial Era (ICHD 2020); 25 November 2020; Amsterdam, Netherlands. Atlantis Press. 2002. pp. 478-483.

[50]. There’s No Room for COVID Complacency in 2023. Nature 2022; 613: 7. doi: 10.1038/d41586-022-04476-9



21 Woodlands Close #02-10 Primz Bizhub Singapore 737854

Email:editorial_office@as-pub.com