Positive Information of COVID-19 and Anxiety: A Moderated Mediation Model of Risk Perception and Intolerance of Uncertainty

Although COVID-19 information has been shown to play an important role in anxiety, little is known about the mediating and moderating mechanisms underlying this relationship. In the present study, we examined whether risk perception mediated the relationship between positive information of COVID-19 and anxiety and whether this mediating process was moderated by intolerance of uncertainty. A sample of 3,341 college students participated in this study and completed questionnaires regarding positive information of COVID-19, risk perception, intolerance of uncertainty, and anxiety. The results indicated that positive information of COVID-19 was significantly and negatively associated with anxiety and that risk perception partially mediated this relationship. Intolerance of uncertainty further moderated the relationship between positive information of COVID-19 and risk perception. Specifically, the relationship between positive information of COVID-19 and risk perception was significant for college students with low intolerance of uncertainty, while it became weaker for those with high intolerance of uncertainty.

Highlights

- Positive information of COVID-19 was associated with anxiety.

- Risk perception mediated between positive information of COVID-19 and anxiety.

- Intolerance of uncertainty moderated the relationship between positive information of COVID-19 and risk perception.

Introduction

Since 2020, the ongoing outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-2019) has swept the world. COVID-19 is an infectious disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus 2 (SARS-COV-2) with droplets and contact as the main modes of transmission (1). As a global case spike, the WHO has declared that COVID-19 is currently a global public health emergency (2). COVID-19 is characterized by high infectivity and high mortality. As of midnight on May 28, 2021, 169,172,262 cases had been confirmed, and 3,420,774 deaths resulted from COVID-19 globally. The widespread and rapid spread of COVID-19 has raised intense public attention and mental health stress, such as anxiety (3). Serious anxiety not only damages individuals' psychological function but also reduces individuals' immunity (4, 5). Immunity plays an important role in the prevention and treatment of COVID-19. Therefore, how to reduce the level of public anxiety during COVID-19 has become a question worthy of attention.

Positive Information of COVID-19 and Anxiety

With the advent of the Internet 2.0 era, social media systems, dominated by Facebook, Twitter, and MicroBlog, have expanded rapidly, which makes it more convenient for people to access information. Since the COVID-19 outbreak, social media has become an important channel for people to know about COVID-19, and information about COVID-19 has been widely spread on social media. COVID-19, as a sudden risk event, will lead to the synchronous transmission of emotions with information as the carrier (6). The outbreak of Covid-19 has seriously threatened individuals' lives and life, so they need to obtain effective information. Wang (7) shows that the improvement of information effectiveness can relieve information anxiety. Shi et al. (8) found that positive SARS information, including recovery information with SARS and measures government took to prevent the spread of SARS, can improve individuals' mental health. Individuals will feel relieved after collecting and selecting valuable information from the massive epidemic information, which buffers the discomfort caused by traumatic events. Individuals having higher confidence in authority are associated with lower anxiety and individual having sufficient information about control measures beliefs in the ability to protect oneself and others are strongly associated with lower anxiety during COVID-19 epidemic (9). Trust in governmental actions to face COVID-19 and the subjective level of information regarding COVID- 19 are negatively associated with anxiety (10). The more positive information about the epidemic situation (such as the number of people cured, measures that are taken by the government) is obtained, the more certain they are about the safety of their environment, and they have more clear plans for their own lives, which may alleviate their anxiety. No study, to the best of our knowledge, has examined the relation between positive information of COVID-19 (such as the number of people cured, measures taken by the government) and anxiety among Chinese college students. Thus, the aim of the present study is to investigate whether positive information of COVID-19 (such as the number of people cured, measures taken by the government) is significantly associated with anxiety and examine the potential mediating and moderating mechanisms in this association.

Risk Perception as a Mediator

Risk perception, defined as the subjective feeling and understanding of risk events, reflects the values and ideology of the individual (11, 12). When risk events (such as COVID-19) occur, the individual is affected by the information on risk events, and the individual will have subjective feelings and judgments on risk events and then produce a corresponding emotional experience and preparation behavior (13). Drawing from the Risk Information Seeking and Processing model (RISP) (14), we propose risk perception as a mediator between positive information of COVID-19 and anxiety. According to the RISP, after individuals acquire information on risk events, they will use the information to assess the severity of risk events and then generate corresponding emotional experiences. The model predicts that greater risk perception leads to increased negative emotion and decreased positive emotion (14). Anxiety is one of the most important emotional responses to risk perception (15). Although not yet tested, it is reasonable to expect that risk perception acts as a mediator between positive information of COVID-19 and anxiety. In the following section, previous research findings are reviewed to support this argument.

First, according to the cognitive model, information on risk events (such as COVID-19) will be associated with individuals' risk perception (16). A previous study showed that the more positive information an individual obtains about epidemic, the lower the risk perception (8). Second, high risk perception is more likely to develop high level of anxiety. The cognitive expectation theory of anxiety holds that anxiety is largely induced by the uncertainty of events and the severity of consequences (17). Individuals with a high level of risk perception generally believe that risk events are highly uncertain and uncontrollable and will bring serious consequences, which leads to anxiety (18).

Intolerance of Uncertainly as a Moderator

Although positive information of COVID-19 may be significantly associated with anxiety through the mediating role of risk perception, not all individuals who are exposed to COVID-19 homogeneously experience a higher level of risk perception and show anxiety. Therefore, it is important to explore potential moderating variables that may influence the relationship between positive information of COVID-19 and anxiety.

The COVID-19 pandemic has created a high degree of uncertainty worldwide, and uncertainty distress is an understandable reaction. If uncertainty persist, it could become mental problem (19). Intolerance of uncertainty affects how individuals perceive, interpret, and respond to future uncertain situations (20) which is related to a variety of mental health problems (such as anxiety) (21) and plays a central role in the formation of generalized anxiety disorder (22, 23). Intolerance of uncertainty is a good indicator for clinical intervention (24) and is positively correlated with risk perception (25). The ecological theory proposes that individual development is the interaction between individuals and the environment, and individuals in the same environment will develop differently due to different individual characteristics (26). According to ecological theory, not all individuals who receive the same information about COVID-19 have the same level of risk perception, and the relationship between environmental factors (such as positive information of COVID-19) and development outcomes (such as risk perception) may be moderated by individual characteristics (such as intolerance of uncertainty). Tolerance of uncertainty refers to the set of negative and positive psychological response-cognitive, emotional, and behavioral-provoked by the conscious awareness of ignorance about particular aspects of the world, which is associate with health behavior and health outcomes (27). Intolerance of uncertainty (IU) refers to a dispositional negative orientation toward uncertainty and its consequences and is correlated with a tendency to react negatively on emotional, cognitive, and behavioral levels to uncertain and unpredictable situations (28). Intolerance of uncertainty is correlated with a failure to employ effective emotion regulation strategies, negative thoughts, and emotions about problems, and a perceived inability to cope effectively with aversive responses to uncertainty (29, 30).

Positive information of COVID-19 can help individuals more clearly understand COVID-19, which helps to reduce the uncertainty about COVID-19 and reduce risk perception. Positive information of COVID-19 is a protective factor for risk perception. The protective-limiting hypothesis (杯水薪) proposes that the environmental protective factor may lose its ability to counteract risk once the individual risk factor reaches a certain level (the protective effects of environmental factors are dampened in the face of high individual risk factors) (31). In this case, the beneficial effects of environmental factors will be stronger for individuals who have lower levels of risk factors. Hence, compared to college students with high intolerance of uncertainty, for college students with low intolerance of uncertainty, the relationship between positive information of COVID-19 and risk perception is stronger. Intolerance of uncertainty moderate the relationship between positive information of COVID-19 and risk perception such that high intolerance of uncertainty may weaken the association between positive information of COVID-19 and risk perception. To our knowledge, however, no previous studies have examined whether intolerance of uncertainty is a risk factor that moderates the relationship between positive information of COVID-19 and risk perception. Then, we examined whether the relationship between positive information of COVID-19 and risk perception would be moderated by intolerance of uncertainty.

The Present Study

Taken together, the aims of the current study were 2-fold. First, the current study tested whether risk perception would mediate the relationship between positive information of COVID-19 and anxiety. Second, we tested whether intolerance of uncertainty would moderate the association between positive information of COVID-19 and risk perception (Figure 1). Based on the literature review, we proposed the following hypotheses:

FIGURE 1

Figure 1. The proposed theoreticalmodel.

Hypothesis 1. Positive information of COVID-19 would be positively correlated with anxiety.

Hypotheses 2. Risk perception would mediate the relationship between positive information of COVID-19 and anxiety.

Hypotheses 3. Intolerance of uncertainty would moderate the association between positive information of COVID-19 and risk perception.

Methods and Materials

Participants

After obtaining colleges and participants' consent, the research team distributed anonymous questionnaires to 3,341 college students (1,128 males and 2,213 females) in China: 1,765 (52.83%) freshmen, 1,138 (34.07%) sophomores, 306 (9.15%) juniors, and 132 (3.95%) seniors. The mean age of the participants was 19.57 years (SD = 1.38).

Instruments

Positive Information of COVID-19 Questionnaire

Positive information of COVID-19 was assessed using positive information of COVID-19 questionnaire. This questionnaire was developed for individuals in the Chinese population. Based on the previous research (8), the questionnaire included two dimensions: (1) positive information of COVID-19 and (2) information on preventive measures of COVID-19. We compiled the COVID-19 questionnaire comprising 14 items (e.g., “I will get COVID-19 information through official channels”). Participants rated the items on a five-point scale (1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree), with higher scores representing that individual get more positive information about COVID-19. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of this questionnaire suggested that the two-factors model fit the data well: CFI = 0.91, TLI = 0.90, RMSEA = 0.04, 90% CI = [0.03, 0.06], SRMR = 0.03. In the present study, Cronbach's alpha for this questionnaire was 0.96.

Risk Perception Scale

Risk perception was assessed using the Risk Perception Scale. This scale was developed for individuals in the Chinese population. We compiled the Risk Perception Scale, comprised of 10 items. The scale included two dimensions: (1) familiarity (6 items; e.g., “I understand the cause of COVID-19”) and (2) controllability (4 items; e.g., “The government has taken appropriate measures to deal with COVID-19”). The response scale ranges from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Responses to all items were averaged, with higher scores indicating that the individual believes that COVID-19 is more uncontrollable. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of risk perception scale suggested that the two-factors model fit the data well: CFI = 0.90, TLI = 0.90, RMSEA = 0.07, 90% CI = [0.06, 0.09], SRMR = 0.06. In the present study, Cronbach's alpha for this scale was 0.72.

Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale (IUS-12)

The Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale is a 12-item scale that was developed by Carleton et al. (32). We used Chinese translation of the scale (33). Individuals rated each item (e.g., “Unforeseen events upset me greatly”) on a five-point scale ranging from 1 (not at all characteristic of me) to 5 (entirely characteristic of me). Higher total scores indicated higher levels of intolerance of uncertainty. The Chinese version of the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale has been demonstrated to be reliable and valid (34, 35). In the present study, Cronbach's alpha for this scale was 0.92.

Self-Rating Anxiety Scale

Anxiety was measured using Chinese version of the Self-rating Anxiety Scale (36). The scale contains 20 self-reported items (e.g., “I feel more nervous and anxious than usual”). It is a 4-point scale ranging from 1 (none or a little of the time) to 4 (most or all of the time). Higher scores indicated higher levels of anxiety. The Chinese version of the Self-rating Anxiety Scale has been demonstrated to be reliable and valid (37). In the present study, Cronbach's alpha for this scale was 0.75.

Procedure

This investigation was approved by the first author's University Ethics Committee. We obtained consent from all participants. Students were invited to participate in the survey anonymously and free to withdraw from the study at any time. Since this study was conducted during the COVID-19 pandemic, data collection was conducted via the Internet from February 9 to March 1, 2020. As an incentive for the participants, they received a small gift after the surveys were completed.

Statistical Analysis

First, data screening revealed that there were no outliers in our data, and responses with missing data were excluded from data processing. Second, the study presented descriptive statistics and Pearson correlations for variables of interest. Mplus 7.4 was applied to examine the hypothesized moderated mediation model, and we evaluated the following goodness of fit indices to assess the adequacy of the model: the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), the comparative fit index (CFI), the Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), and the standardized root mean square residual (SRMR). Values >0.95 for the CFI and TLI, values <0.08 for the RMSEA, and SRMR are all considered an acceptable fit of the model to the data (38, 39). All study variables were standardized before structural equation modeling (SEM).

Results

Preliminary Analyses

Table 1 shows the means, standard deviations, and correlations of the variables. Positive information of COVID-19 was found to be negatively correlated with anxiety (r = −0.14, p < 0.001), which supported our first research hypothesis (Hypothesis 1). Risk perception was positively correlated with positive information of COVID-19 (r = −0.50, p < 0.001), intolerance of uncertainly (r = 0.16, p < 0.001), and anxiety (r = 0.28, p < 0.001). Intolerance of uncertainty was positively correlated with anxiety (r = 0.20, p < 0.01). Gender was correlated with anxiety. Age was correlated with positive information of COVID-19, risk perception, intolerance of uncertainty and anxiety. This result suggested that gender and age should be regarded as covariates in the next stage of analyses.

TABLE 1

Table 1. Means, standard deviations, and correlations of the main study variables.

Testing for Mediation Effect and Moderated Mediation Effect

The random algorithm was used to parcel the items in each scale as indicators for each latent variable and each scale was packaged into 3 indicators in the present study. In the present study, age and gender were used as covariates in the structural equation model analysis. We used maximum likelihood to test the mediation model and moderated mediation model. The theoretical mediation model and moderated mediation model were examined with Mplus 7.4 (40). The results of the structural equation model analyzing the model showed that the mediation model (CFI = 0.95, TLI = 0.94, RMSEA = 0.06, 90% CI = [0.04, 0.07], SRMR = 0.05) and moderated mediation model (CFI = 0.95, TLI = 0.93, RMSEA = 0.07, 90% CI = [0.05, 0.08], SRMR = 0.06) fit the data well. The results showed that the values for the fit indices were excellent (38, 39).

According to this mediation model, positive information of COVID-19 was negatively related to college students' risk perception (γ = −0.69, t = −33.12, p < 0.001). Moreover, risk perception was positively related to college students' anxiety (γ = 0.12, t = 5.10, p < 0.001). This result indicated that risk perception mediated the relationship between positive information of COVID-19 and college students' anxiety. This model indicated that positive information of COVID-19 was directly related to college students' anxiety (γ = −0.07, t = −2.70, p < 0.01); therefore, risk perception partially mediated the relationship between positive information of COVID-19 and anxiety, which supported our second research hypothesis (Hypothesis 2). The effect size of the mediation effect was 0.53.

According to this moderated mediation model presented in Figure 2, positive information of COVID-19 was negatively related to college students' risk perception (γ = −0.59, t = −34.11, p < 0.001). Moreover, risk perception was positively related to college students' anxiety (γ = 0.16, t = 5.40, p < 0.001). This result indicated that risk perception mediated the relationship between positive information of COVID-19 and college students' anxiety. Moreover, this model indicated that positive information of COVID-19 was directly related to college students' anxiety (γ = −0.06, t = −2.14, p < 0.05); therefore, risk perception partially mediated the relationship between positive information of COVID-19 and anxiety. Moreover, the interaction of positive information of COVID-19 and intolerance of uncertainty was significantly related to risk perception (γ = 0.11, t = 5.55, p < 0.001). Consistent with our third hypothesis (Hypothesis 3), intolerance of uncertainty moderated the relationship between positive information of COVID-19 and risk perception.

FIGURE 2

Figure 2. Moderated mediation result. *p < 0.05, ***p < 0.001.

To further portray the interaction, we conducted simple slope plots and calculated beta coefficients at −1 SD and +1 SD from the mean of risk perception. As depicted in Figure 3, for college students with a higher level of intolerance of uncertainty, the influence of positive information on risk perception was negative and statistically significant (β = −0.48, t = −22.14, p < 0.001). For college students with a lower level of intolerance of uncertainty, the influence of positive information on risk perception had a steeper slope, meaning it was more statistically significant (β = −0.70, t = −42.82, p < 0.001). This finding indicated that the negative relationship between positive information of COVID-19 and risk perception was greater for college students who had lower levels of intolerance of uncertainty compared to those with higher levels of intolerance of uncertainty, but these relationships remained negative overall.

FIGURE 3

Figure 3. Association between positive information of COVID-19 and risk perception at higher and lower levels of intolerance of uncertainty.

Discussion

The current study investigated the relationship between positive information of COVID-19 and individuals' anxiety. Our findings showed that positive information of COVID-19 was negatively related to anxiety. The access to more positive information of COVID-19 can increase individuals' confidence in overcoming the virus and can more positively look at the difficulties they are facing, and even make it possible for them to make a clear life and study plan (41, 42). One study suggests that more exposure to information was positively associated with anxiety throughout the EU during H5N1 (43). The reason may be as follows. First, the measurements of the epidemic information and anxiety were different. Van den Bulck and Custers (43) used TV viewing to measure exposure risk information. In their study, they used data from the European Audiovisual Observatory Yearbook 15 to obtain national estimates of average TV viewing per person per day, but anxiety was measured using self-report. Second, they assumed that those who watched a lot of TV also watch a lot of news, and the longer individuals watched TV, the more information they got about epidemic. As they said, TV viewing behavior showed that heavy TV viewers watched a lot of everything. As we all know, not all TV shows are about the epidemic such as TV play. In our study, we used positive information of COVID-19 questionnaire to measure positive information of COVID-19. The more information about the epidemic situation during the COVID-19 pandemic (such as the number of people cured, measures that are taken by the government, etc.) is obtained, the more certain individuals are about the safety of their environment, which can help people recognize the crisis and reduce their panic and anxiety.

Although the relationship between positive information of COVID-19 and anxiety is well-understood, the underlying mediation and moderation mechanisms are less clear. Our findings indicated that the beneficial effect of positive information of COVID-19 on anxiety was partially explained by risk perception. Furthermore, the relationship between positive information of COVID-19 and risk perception was moderated by the intolerance of uncertainty. The following sections discuss each of the research hypotheses in light of this mediation and moderation model of positive information of COVID-19 and anxiety.

The Mediating Role of Risk Perception

The present study is the first to demonstrate the mediating role of risk perception in the association between positive information of COVID-19 and anxiety. That is, positive information of COVID-19 weakens risk perception about COVID-19, which in turn reduces anxiety among college students. Therefore, risk perception is not only an outcome of COVID-19 but also a protective factor against individuals' anxiety. Furthermore, it is worth noting that risk perception only partially mediated the relationship between positive information of COVID-19 and anxiety. The remaining direct and negative relationship between positive information of COVID-19 and anxiety may suggest that positive information of COVID-19 may function as a direct factor that can significantly reduce college students' anxiety.

In addition to the overall mediation result, each of the separate links in our mediation model is noteworthy. For the first stage of the mediation process (i.e., positive information of COVID-19 → risk perception), the present study found that positive information of COVID-19 was related to lower risk perception. This finding is consistent with the social amplification of the risk framework (44). That is, both the information source and nature of the information have an impact on risk perception. First, the more reliable the source of information, the more positive the individual perception of risk (45, 46). Second, positive information about an outbreak has a positive association with an individual's risk perception (8). The greater the impact of healing information and government preventive measures of COVID-19, the lower the level of individuals' risk perception. Throughout COVID-19, experts and government organizations have released authoritative and accurate information about COVID-19, which enables individuals to rationally assess risk events and generate positive risk perceptions.

For the second stage of the mediation model (i.e., risk perception → anxiety), the present study found that risk perception was associated with less anxiety. The reason may be as follows. First, individuals with low risk perception tend to believe that COVID-19 is controllable, which reduces the uncertainty of risk events and thus reduces individuals' anxiety (47). Second, the death reminder hypothesis holds that anxiety arises from the fear of death (48). During COVID-19, individuals' anxiety has primarily come from the risk of infection. When individuals have a positive risk perception of the epidemic, they tend to believe that the epidemic is controllable and preventive measures are effective, which reduces individuals' fear of infection with COVID-19 and thus reduces individuals' anxiety.

The Moderating Role of Intolerance of Uncertainty

Our results also showed that intolerance of uncertainty moderated the relationship between positive information of COVID-19 and risk perception. This pattern is consistent with the protective-limiting model (31) and suggests that the effect of positive information of COVID-19 on risk perception is weaker for college students with a high rather than low intolerance of uncertainty. This result indicates that the protective effect of positive information of COVID-19 on individual development/risk perception is relatively sensitive, and the risk/negative effect of intolerance of uncertainty is relatively strong, which not only lead to an increase in risk perception but also to a weakening of the protective effect of epidemic information. There is a possible explanation for this finding. As individuals acquire more positive information about COVID-19, they perceive less uncertainty about COVID-19. However, not all individuals who receive the same positive information about COVID-19 have the same level of risk perception. For college students with a low intolerance of uncertainty, their tolerance of uncertainty for risk events is high. When they receive positive information of COVID-19, they tend to view the epidemic in a positive cognitive way and believe that COVID-19 is controllable, which leads to a stronger protective effect of epidemic information on risk perception. The reduction of uncertainty caused by epidemic information is more likely to reduce their risk perception. In contrast, college students with a high intolerance of uncertainty are more sensitive and negative to the uncertainty of COVID-19. When they receive positive information of COVID-19, they tend to view epidemic information in a negative cognitive way, which leads to the weakening of the protective effect of epidemic information. In other words, college students with a high intolerance of uncertainty benefit less from positive information of COVID-19 compared to those who have a low intolerance of uncertainty. To our knowledge, the present study is the first to confirm that intolerance of uncertainty as a moderator moderated the relationship between positive information of COVID-19 and risk perception. Therefore, our results filled this gap in understanding the relationship between epidemic information and risk perception.

Limitations

There are also some limitations in the present investigation that need to be noted. First, the present study employed a cross-sectional design that does not allow for causal inferences. Future research should employ experimental and longitudinal designs to better explain the causal direction. Second, like any study based solely on self-report for data collection, there may have been response biases and social desirability effects. The results should be replicated with other, more comprehensive or even representative samples to achieve even more generalizable conclusions. Third, the present study was conducted in a sample of Chinese college students, which potentially limits the generalizability and indicates that similar research should be conducted in other types of samples.

Despite these limitations, the current study has several theoretical and practical contributions. From a theoretical perspective, this study further extended the previous research by confirming the mediating role of risk perception and the moderating role of intolerance of uncertainty. This would contribute to a better understanding of the relationship between positive information of COVID-19 and anxiety. From a practical perspective, with increasing positive information, college students maybe reasonably assess risk, and their anxiety maybe decrease. Government departments can conduct effective risk communication by releasing timely information about COVID-19, such as vaccine research progress and the infection rate, to help individuals establish risk perception rationally and reduce their anxiety. Moreover, college students with low level of intolerance of uncertainty may reduce their risk perception by disseminating more effective information. Compared to college students with low level of intolerance of uncertainty, for college students with high level of intolerance of uncertainty, they not only should get more positive information about the COVID-19 pandemic, but also reduce the level of intolerance of uncertainty in order to reduce risk perception.

Data Availability Statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Author Contributions

JZ and TM wrote the manuscript. All authors contributed to the article, approved the submitted version, carried out the concepts, design, data acquisition, analysis, and manuscript editing.

Funding

This work was supported by the Colleges Humanities and Social Science Foundation of Jiangxi Province (No. SZZX1902), Principal Investigat, funds received: ¥10000.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher's Note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Acknowledgments

Thanks to all the participants and volunteers who provided support for this study.

References

1. Lin L, Lu LF, Cao W, Li TS. Hypothesis for potential pathogenesis of SARA- COV-2 infection- a review of immune changes in patients with viral pneumonia. Emerg Microbes Infect. (2020) 9:727–32. doi: 10.1080/22221751.2020.1746199

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

2. Xiong Y, Liu Y, Cao L, Wang D, Guo M, Guo D, et al. Transcriptomic characteristics of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid and peripheral blood mononuclear cells in COVID-19 patients. Emerg Microbes Infect. (2020) 9:761–70. doi: 10.1080/22221751.2020.1747363

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

3. Li SF, Wu YL, Zhang FM, Xu QY, Zhou AB. A randomized controlled trial of self-affirmation buffering the public anxiety in the face of COVID-19 epidemic. Acta Psychol Sin. (2020) 52:886–94. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2020.00886

CrossRef Full Text

4. Koh KB, Lee Y. Reduced anxiety level by therapeutic interventions and cell-mediated immunity in panic disorder patients. Psychother Psychosom. (2004) 73:286–92. doi: 10.1159/000078845

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

5. Yang NX, Xiao H, Wang W, Li SY, Yan H, Wang YF. Effects of doctors' empathy abilities on the cellular immunity of patients with advanced prostate cancer treated by orchiectomy: the mediating role of patients' stigma, self-efficacy, and anxiety. Patient Prefer Adher. (2018) 12:1305–14. doi: 10.2147/PPA.S166460

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

6. Bauch CT, Ferrara E, Yang Z. Measuring emotional contagion in social media. PLoS ONE. (2015) 10:e0142390. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0142390

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

7. Wang X. Analysis of influencing factors of internet information anxiety of university students. J Xi'an Univ Posts Telecommun. (2017) 22:122–6. doi: 10.13682/j.issn.2095-6533.2017.01.023

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

8. Shi K, Fan HX, Jia JM, Li WD, Song ZL, Gao J, et al. The risk perceptions of SARS and social psychological behaviors of urban people in China. Acta Psychol Sin. (2003) 35:546–54.

Google Scholar

9. Lim JM, Tun ZM, Kumar V, Quaye SED, Offeddu V, Cook AR, et al. Population anxiety and positive behaviour change during the COVID-19 epidemic: cross-sectional surveys in Singapore, China and Italy. Influenza Other Respi Viruses. (2021) 15:45–55. doi: 10.1111/irv.12785

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

10. Bäuerle A, Teufel M, Musche V, Weismüller B, Kohler H, Hetkamp M, et al. Increased generalized anxiety, depression and distress during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study in Germany. J Public Health. (2020) 42:672–8. doi: 10.1093/pubmed/fdaa106

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

11. Slovic P. Perception of risk. Science. (1987) 236:280–5. doi: 10.1126/science.3563507

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

12. Wildavsky A, Dake K. Theories of risk perception: who fears what and why? Daedalus. (1990) 119:1–21.

Google Scholar

13. Yang SY, Zhao XJ, Bao XH, You XQ. The role of risk perception and hazardous attitudes in the effects of risk tolerance on safety operation behaviors among airline pilots. Acta Psychol Sin. (2011) 43:1308–19. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2011.01308

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

14. Griffin RJ, Dunwoody S, Neuwirth K. Proposed model of the relationship of risk information seeking and processing to the development of prevention behaviors. Environ Res. (1999) 80:230–45. doi: 10.1006/enrs.1998.3940

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

15. Liu J, Wu L. From risk information to self-identity: the paradigm evolution of RISP model. Psychol Techn Appl. (2016) 4:434–43. doi: 10.16842/j.cnki.issn2095-5588.2016.07.009

CrossRef Full Text

16. Langford IH, Georgious S, Bateman IJ, Day RJ, Turner RK. Public perceptions of health risks from polluted coastal bathing waters: a mixed methodological analysis using cultural theory. Risk Anal. (2000) 20:691–704. doi: 10.1111/0272-4332.205062

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

17. Onwuegbuzie AJ, Jiao QG. Information search performance and research achievement: an empirical test of the anxiety-expectation mediation model of library anxiety. J Am Soc Information Sci Technol. (2004) 55:41–54. doi: 10.1002/asi.10342

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

18. Li PP. A study on factor influencing user's express anxiety under B2C electronic commerce environment [Unpublished master's thesis]. Hefei University of Technology, Hefei, China (2019).

19. Valle MV, Andrés ML, Urquijo S, Yerro-Avincetto M, López-Morales H, Canet-Juric L. Intolerance of uncertainty over covid-19 pandemic and its effect on anxiety and depressive symptoms. Interamerican J Psychol. (2020) 54:e1335. doi: 10.30849/ripijp.v54i2.1335

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

20. Li ZY, Wu ZM, Tao L, He XL. Relationships between self-esteem, intolerance of uncertainty, career decision-making difficulties and job anxieties. Chin J Clin Psychol. (2012) 20:564–6. doi: 10.16128/j.cnki.1005-3611.2012.04.01810

CrossRef Full Text

21. Gillett CB, Bilek EL, Hanna GL, Fitzgerald KD. Intolerance of uncertainty in youth with obsessive-compulsive disorder and generalized anxiety disorder: a transdiagnostic construct with implications for phenomenology and treatment. Clin Psychol Rev. (2018) 60:100–8. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2018.01.007

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

22. Dugas MJ, Freeston MH, Ladouceur R. Intolerance of uncertainty and problem orientation in worry. Cognit Ther Res. (1997) 21:593–606. doi: 10.1023/A:1021890322153

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

23. Dugas MJ, Gosselin P, Ladouceur R. Intolerance of uncertainty and worry: investigating specificity in a nonclinical sample. Cognit Ther Res. (2001) 25:551–8. doi: 10.1023/A:1005553414688

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

24. Dugas MJ, Robichaud M. Cognitive-behavioral treatment for generalized anxiety disorder: from science to practice. J Contemp Psychother. (2007) 30:149–61.

Google Scholar

25. Carleton RN, Mulvogue MK, Thibodeau MA, McCabe RE, Antony MM, Asmundson GJ. Increasingly certain about uncertainty: intolerance of uncertainty across anxiety and depression. J Anxiety Disord. (2012) 26:468–79. doi: 10.1016/j.janxdis.2012.01.011

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

26. Bronfenbrenner U, Morris PA. The bioecological model of human development. In Lerner RM, Stattin H, editors. Theoretical Models of Human Development: Vol. 1. Handbook of Child Psychology. 6th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley (2006). p. 793–828.

27. Hillen MA, Gutheil CM, Strout TD, Smets EM, Han PK. Tolerance of uncertainty: conceptual analysis, integrative model, and implications for healthcare. Soc Sci Med. (2017) 180:62–75. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.03.024

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

28. Cornacchino D, Sanchez AL, Coxe S, Roy A, Pincus DB, Read KL, et al. Factor structure of the intolerance of uncertainty scale for children. J Anxiety Disord. (2017) 53:100–7. doi: 10.1016/j.janxdis.2017.07.003

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

29. Buhr K, Dugas MJ. The Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale: psychometric properties of the English version. Behav Res Ther. (2002) 40:931–46. doi: 10.1016/S0005-7967(01)00092-4

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

30. Sbrilli MD, Haigler K, Laurent HK. The indirect effect of parental intolerance of uncertainty on perinatal mental health via mindfulness during COVID-19. Mindfulness. (2021) 12:1–10. doi: 10.1007/s12671-021-01657-x

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

31. Li DP. Multiple ecological risk factors and adolescents' social adaptation: How risks should be modeled and what are their mechani SMS (Unpublished master's thesis). South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China (2012).

32. Carleton RN, Norton MAPJ, Asmundson GJG. Fearing the unknown: a short version of the intolerance of uncertainty scale. J Anxiety Disord. (2007) 21:105–17. doi: 10.1016/j.janxdis.2006.03.014

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

33. Wu LJ, Wang JN, Qi XD. Validity and reliability of the intolerance of uncertainty scale-12 in middle school students. Chin Mental Health J. (2016) 30:700–5.

34. Jia YR. The relationship among college school students' attachment anxiety, intolerance of uncertainty, perceived partner responsiveness and dating conflict [Unpublished master's thesis]. Harbin Normal University, Harbin, China (2019).

35. Jia YR, Zhang SC, Jin TL, Zhang L, Zhao SQ, Li Q. Effect of attachment anxiety of hoarding behaviour of college students: mediating role of intolerance of uncertainty and experiential avoidance. Psychol Dev Educ. (2019) 35:393–400. doi: 10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2019.04.02

CrossRef Full Text

36. Zung WW. A rating instrument for anxiety disorders. Psychosomatics. (1971) 12:371–9. doi: 10.1016/S0033-3182(71)71479-0

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

37. Wang WS, Zi F. Moderation effects of self-evaluation on negative perfectionism and anxiety. China J Health Psychol. (2020) 28:608–12. doi: 10.13342/j.cnki.cjhp.2020.04.027

CrossRef Full Text

38. Hoyle RH. Handbook of Structural Equation Modeling. New York, NY: Guilford Press (2012).

Google Scholar

39. Kline RB. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. New York, NY: Guilford (2011).

Google Scholar

40. Muthén LK, Muthén BO. Mplus Statistical Analysis With Latent Variables (Version 7.4) [Statistical Software]. Los Angeles, CA: Author (2015).

41. Tran BX, Dang AK, Thai PK, Le HT, Le XTT, Do TTT, et al. Coverage of health information by different sources in communities: implication for COVID-19 epidemic response. Int J Environ Res Public Health. (2020) 17:3577. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17103577

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

42. Valizadeh-Haghi S, Khazaal Y, Rahmatizadeh S. Health websites on covid-19: are they readable and credible enough to help public self-care? J Med Library Assoc. (2021) 109:75. doi: 10.5195/jmla.2021.1020

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

43. Van den Bulck J, Custers K. Television exposure is related to fear of avian flu, an ecological study across 23 member states of the European Union. Euro J Public Health. (2009) 19:370–4. doi: 10.1093/eurpub/ckp061

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

44. Kasperson RE, Golding D, Tuler S. Social distrust as a factor in siting hazardous facilities and communicating risks. J Soc Issues. (1992) 48:161–87. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4560.1992.tb01950.x

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

45. Njome MS, Suh CE, Chuyong G, de Wit MJ. Volcanic risk perception in rural communities along the slopes of mount cameroon, west-central Africa. J Afr Earth Sci. (2010) 58:608–22. doi: 10.1016/j.jafrearsci.2010.08.007

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

46. Liu TZ, Zhang HY, Li XW, Zhang HB. Individual factors influencing risk perception of hazardous chemicals in China. Environ Res. (2020) 186:109523. doi: 10.1016/j.envres.2020.109523

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

47. Guo L. Relationship between undergraduates' risk cognition and self-esteem and anxiety (Unpublished master's thesis). Fujian Normal University, Fuzhou, China (2018).

48. Greenberg J, Solomon S, Pyszczynski T, Rosenblatt A, Burling J, Lyon D, et al. Why do people need self-esteem? Converging evidence that self-esteem serves an anxiety-buffering function. J Pers Soc Psychol. (1992) 63:913–22. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.63.6.913

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar