Table 3.
Repeated measures ANCOVA models of risk perception indicators (Case Study 1)a.
| Variable |
Perceived likelihood of infection |
Perceived potential harmfulness |
Level of anxiety |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | 1.893*** | 2.708*** | 2.151*** |
| Phase 2 (ref = Phase 1)b | 0.965*** | 0.630*** | 1.185*** |
| Phase 3 (ref = Phase 1)b | 0.886*** | 0.604*** | 1.052*** |
| Actions_P1 | 0.123*** | 0.103*** | 0.189*** |
| Phase 2 * Actions_P1 (ref = Phase 1 * Actions_P1)c | −0.054*** | −0.016 | −0.066*** |
| Phase 3 * Actions_P1 (ref = Phase 1 * Actions_P1)c | −0.044* | −0.021 | −0.079*** |
| Age | −0.003(*) | 0.011*** | −0.001 |
| Gender (ref = female) | −0.022 | −0.136* | −0.131* |
| Education | 0.017 | −0.031 | −0.007 |
| Political views | −0.080*** | −0.072*** | −0.124*** |
| Personal income | 0.026 | −0.030 | 0.013 |
| N | 720 | 720 | 720 |
| −2 Restricted Log Likelihood | 5643.222 | 5638.812 | 6077.846 |
(*)p < 0.10, *p < 0.05, **p < 0.01, ***p < 0.001.
a
Given as estimates of fixed effects. All three models had high goodness-of-fit statistics.
b
The estimates for Phase 2 and Phase 3 were not significantly different in the three models. The aggregate fixed effect of the Phase variable was significant at the 0.001 level in all three models.
c
The estimates for Phase 2 * Actions_P1 and Phase 3 * Actions_P1 were not significantly different in the three models. The aggregate fixed effect of the Phase * Actions_P1 interaction was significant at the 0.01 or higher level in the first and the third models.