AGE DIFFERENCES IN MILLING BEHAVIOR AND PERCEIVED STRESS DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC
Rattachement africain : us. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Abstract In a disaster, milling behavior refers to persistently seeking relevant information. It occurs most often when levels of emergency preparedness are low and the disaster is unexpected (Wood et al., 2012). Excessive milling can create a sense of vulnerability and lead to a decline in feelings of trust and readiness (Ejeta et al., 2015). One antidote to milling is effective communication and well-designed programs that increase levels of disaster preparedness. Unfortunately, such communication and programs are often ineffective for older adults (Brown & Haun, 2014). The current study examined age differences in knowledge and milling behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants included 425 individuals from Orange County, CA (18-87, mean age 47.02 years), who completed an online survey. Results from multiple regression analyses revealed that higher levels of milling were associated with higher levels of perceived stress, particularly among the older adults in the sample (B =.031, p =.026). Older adults also reported being less knowledgeable about what they can do to prepare for a pandemic (B = -.009, p =.044). Results remained significant after adjusting for education, race, and gender. Findings suggest that increasing older adults’ knowledge of a disaster through trusted sources may reduce milling behavior, which could decrease levels of stress in this population during a disaster.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- AGE DIFFERENCES IN MILLING BEHAVIOR AND PERCEIVED STRESS DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC
- Date Crossref
- 01/12/2024
- Éditeur
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.