Do knowledge, trust in source content, and magnitude of information influence COVID-19 risk perceptions? Comparing Ghanaian and US respondents

Abstract

Diverse outcomes from the COVID-19 pandemic from different countries raise questions about how information related factors influence judgements about the risks of the outbreak. Adopting a comparative survey approach, this study investigates whether and how, knowledge, content trust, and content magnitude are associated with COVID-19 risk perception among respondents in Ghana and the United States (n = 736) during the first phase of the pandemic (April -June 2020). Using snowball and convenience sampling strategies, the online comparative cross-sectional survey found that US respondents had higher risk perceptions, but in both countries, risk perceptions were moderate to low. The study found that those who trusted traditional media content (television, radio, and printed materials) and received high volumes of information from these sources had higher risk perceptions. Hierarchical linear regression (stepwise) indicated that income is a positive predictor of risk perceptions in both US and Ghana. However, while all three knowledge variables influenced risk perceptions in the US, only transmission knowledge influenced risk perceptions in Ghana. While trust in content from radio lowered risk perceptions, trust in content from television and printed materials increased risk perceptions in Ghana. For the US, trust in the content of printed materials led to higher risk perception. High volumes of information from printed materials increased risk perceptions in Ghana but lowered risk perceptions in the US. For pandemics that require stay-at-home orders, legacy media such as television and printed materials should be considered and utilized for information dissemination in both countries.

Keywords:

• Risk perception
• knowledge
• content trust
• COVID-19
• content magnitude

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to all the respondents who took time to participate in the study. The authors are grateful to God for the grace to complete this project. I am also indebted to the reviewers who provided thoughtful feedback to improve the paper.

Ethical approval

The larger project was approved by the Indiana University Human subjects and institutional review board (No. 2003762984A001).

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Data availability statement

Data is available from the author upon reasonable request.

Additional information

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors and development communication.