Page 79 - IJPS-9-3

International Journal of
Population Studies Social contact and coronavirus anxiety

to predict CA. To determine which variables would the regression was significant (p < 0.001) with R = 0.28
2
make a significant contribution in predicting CA, gender (Table 2).
(1 = Male, 2 = Female, 3 = Others), age group (1 = 25 years
or younger, 2 = 26 – 40 years, 3 = 41 years or older), risk 3.3. Full factorial analysis of variance
perception, and SCC19 (1 = Yes, 2 = No) were entered A between-subjects analysis of variance was conducted to
simultaneously as predictors. The descriptive statistics assess the impact of gender, age, and SCC19 on CA. No
of CA outcome on demographics of age and gender are serious violations were noted in the preliminary assumption
given in Table 1. Younger males less than 25 years of testing for normality, linearity, univariate and multivariate
age (M = 0.62, SD = 0.78) exhibited higher level of CA outliers, homogeneity of variance, covariance matrices, and
compared to older males. Males of age group 26 – 40 years multicollinearity. The impact of SCC19 across different age
exhibited higher level CA (M = 0.55, SD = 0.76) than males groups and genders is depicted in Table 1.
of age group 41 years and older (M = 0.37, SD = 0.64). In the main effect analysis, a statistically significant
A reverse trend was, however, manifested in the female difference in CA was observed (F [1,764] = 83.80, p < 0.001,
group, with females of age 25 years or younger exhibiting 2
lower level of CA (M = 0.75, SD = 0.95) than those in the partial η = 0.10) between males and females. An inspection
age group 26 – 40 years (M = 1.89, SD = 1.62). However, of the mean scores indicated that females reported higher
older females aged 41 years and above showed slightly levels of CA (M = 1.32, SD = 1.46) than males (M =.49,
lower level of CA (M = 1.27, SD = 1.55) compared to the SD = 0.72) (Table 1). A statistically significant difference in
middle age group but higher level of CA than the younger the prediction of CA (F [2,764] = 10.54, p < 0.001, partial
2
ones. η = 0.03) across different age groups was observed. The
analyses demonstrated that SCC19 was associated with
For the multiple-regression analyses, the variables high level of CA (F [1,764] = 92.89, p < 0.001, partial
were entered into the model in two steps: Demographic η = 0.11). For a detailed between-subjects analysis of
2

factors were entered first followed by COVID-19-related variance please, refer to Table 3.
risk perception in the second step. Demographic factors,
namely, being female and being older, are major predictors Two-way interactions analysis of gender with age,
of high level of CA. High level of CA was reported among gender with SCC19, and age with SCC19 indicated all
people who knew someone they were close with had been observations as statistically significant (p < 0.001). No
infected with COVID-19 and who reported higher risk statistically significant gender difference in CA was found
perception compared to others. Table 2 provides the details in young people (25 years or younger), but a large gender
of the regression results and it can be seen that all the four difference in CA was observed in the middle-aged and older
variables significantly impacted the prediction of CA in people (over 25 years of age), F [2,764] = 14.59, p < 0.001,
2
the sample population. In the first step of the multiple- partial η = 0.04 (Table 3 and Figure 1). Analyses showed

regression analysis, gender (β = 0.31, p < 0.001) emerged that SCC19 served to slightly increase CA in males, but to
as a significant predictor of CA where females exhibited substantially increase CA in females (F [1,764] = 70.62,
2
higher level of CA (M = 1.32, SD = 1.46) as compared to p < 0.001, partial η = 0.09) (Table 3 and Figure 1).

males (M = 0.49, SD = 0.72). Older age (β = 0.07, p < 0.05) The interplay between the age of study participants
was found to be slightly predictive of higher level of CA, and the levels of CA was greatly enhanced by the SCC19;
and SCC19 (β = 0.22, p < 0.001) was found to be associated for instance, older people reported high level of CA if
with higher level of CA. Finally, risk perception (β = 0.27, they knew someone who reported having infected with
p < 0.001) was positively related to CA. The model fit of COVID-19 (F [2,764] = 13.51, p < 0.001, partial η = 0.03)
2

(Table 3 and Figure 2). A full factorial three-way interaction
Table 2. Results of multiple‑regression analyses predicting analysis among gender, age, and SCC19 indicated a
the level of corona anxiety statistically significant interaction (p < 0.001). For men, the
impact of SCC19 on CA was seen mostly among the oldest
Predictors Corona anxiety age group (41 years or older); for women, the escalating
Beta (β) t p impact of SCC19 on CA was discernible throughout all
Gender 0.31 9.54 < 0.001 age groups (F [2,264] = 12.17, p < 0.001, partial η = 0.03)
2

Age 0.07 2.26 0.024 (Table 3 and Figure 2).
Social contact with COVID-19 0.22 6.69 < 0.001 4. Discussion
Risk perception 0.27 8.11 < 0.001
Notes: β: Standardized regression coefficients, t: t-test statistics, In this study, we set out to examine the difference in the
p: p value COVID-19 risk perception between the general public and

Volume 9 Issue 3 (2023) 73 https://doi.org/10.36922/ijps.1211