↓ Skip to main content

Factors Influencing Public Panic During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, February 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Factors Influencing Public Panic During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, February 2021
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.576301
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiangtian Nie, Kai Feng, Shengnan Wang, Yongxin Li

Abstract

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has been regarded as a public health emergency that caused a considerable degree of public panic (such as anxiety and insomnia) during its early stage. Some irrational behaviors (such as excessive search for information related to the pandemic and excessive hoarding of supplies) were also triggered as a result of such panic. Although there has been plenty of news coverage on public panic due to the outbreak, research on this phenomenon has been limited. Since panic is the main psychological reaction in the early stage of the pandemic, which largely determines the level of psychological adaptation, time of psychological recovery, and the incidence of PTSD, there exists a demand to conduct investigation on it. From a public governance perspective, the government's assessment of public panic may affect the efficiency and effectiveness of pandemic prevention and control. Therefore, it is of obvious practical significance to investigate public panic during the COVID-19 pandemic and analyze its influential factors. The self-compiled COVID-19 Social Mentality Questionnaire was used to collect data from a total of 16,616 participants online, and 13,511 valid responses were received. The results from the chi-square test showed that there were differences in gender, educational level, age, pandemic-related knowledge, self-efficacy, risk level, and objective social support. Furthermore, multiple linear regression analysis results showed that self-efficacy, gender, educational level, age, risk level, pandemic-related knowledge, and objective social support were significant predictors of public panic. Among the research variables, self-efficacy, gender, educational level, and age were negative predictors of panic while risk level, pandemic-related knowledge, and objective social support were positive predictors of panic.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 64 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 10 16%
Researcher 6 9%
Lecturer 5 8%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Student > Master 5 8%
Other 10 16%
Unknown 23 36%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 9 14%
Social Sciences 8 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 11%
Psychology 7 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 24 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 May 2024.
All research outputs
#16,395,670
of 25,884,216 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#17,337
of 34,860 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#310,290
of 551,126 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#625
of 981 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,884,216 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,860 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.5. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 551,126 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 981 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.