Author: Jang, Won Mo; Kim, Un-Na; Jang, Deok Hyun; Jung, Hyemin; Cho, Sanghyun; Eun, Sang Jun; Lee, Jin Yong
Title: Influence of trust on two different risk perceptions as an affective and cognitive dimension during Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) outbreak in South Korea: serial cross-sectional surveys Document date: 2020_3_4
ID: xpwox6of_72
Snippet: This study, which used a serial cross-sectional study design had some limitations. First, the study used a cross-sectional study design. Thus, causal relations between personal characteristics and risk perceptions could not be determined-rather, it could only suggest their relevance. Second, this study could not evaluate the intensity of risk perception, because it only included questions focusing on whether or not participants recognized the ris.....
Document: This study, which used a serial cross-sectional study design had some limitations. First, the study used a cross-sectional study design. Thus, causal relations between personal characteristics and risk perceptions could not be determined-rather, it could only suggest their relevance. Second, this study could not evaluate the intensity of risk perception, because it only included questions focusing on whether or not participants recognized the risk at the different levels. It would be useful to evaluate risk perceptions of respondents qualitatively if questions about the circumstances and characteristics of risk perception were surveyed in future studies.
Search related documents:
Co phrase search for related documents- cross sectional study design and future study: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
- cross sectional study design and relevance suggest: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21
- cross sectional study design and risk perception: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18
- cross sectional study design and risk perception intensity: 1, 2
- cross sectional study design and risk perception intensity evaluate: 1, 2
- cross sectional study design and second study risk perception intensity evaluate: 1, 2
- different level and future study: 1, 2
- different level and risk perception: 1, 2, 3, 4
- different level risk and risk perception: 1
- future study and risk perception: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13
- relevance suggest and risk perception: 1, 2
- relevance suggest and risk perception intensity: 1, 2
- relevance suggest and risk perception intensity evaluate: 1, 2
- relevance suggest and second study risk perception intensity evaluate: 1, 2
- respondent risk perception and risk perception: 1, 2, 3
- risk perception and second study risk perception intensity evaluate: 1, 2
Co phrase search for related documents, hyperlinks ordered by date