Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Table 1.

Items used in the structural models and factor loadings.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Fig 1.

Hypothesized direct relations between perceived vulnerability, perceived illness, threat-related emotions, social comparison, affiliation, intentions, and self-reported behavior regarding compliance with the lockdown and protective measures.

Note. The bold black lines represent expected direct relations (regressions and correlations). P.Vuln = perceived vulnerability; P. Illness = perceived illness; Threat Emo = threat-related emotions; Affil = affiliation; SCO = social comparison; Abi = SCO ability dimension; Opi = SCO opinion dimension; # = original item numbers of the SCO scale; L. Beha = behavioral self-reported compliance with the lockdown; L. Inten = Intentions to comply with the lockdown; PM. Inten = intentions to comply with the use of protective measures; PM. Beha = behavioral self-reported compliance with the use of protective measures.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

The four hypothesized indirect relations.

Note. The bold pink lines and indices represent expected indirect relations (mediation effects). P.Vuln = perceived vulnerability; P. Illness = perceived illness; Threat Emo = threat-related emotions; Affil = affiliation; SCO = social comparison; Abi = SCO ability dimension; Opi = SCO opinion dimension; # = original item numbers of the SCO scale; L. Beha = behavioral self-reported compliance with the lockdown; L. Inten = Intentions to comply with the lockdown; PM. Inten = intentions to comply with the use of protective measures; PM. Beha = behavioral self-reported compliance with the use of protective measures. βab1 = Threat-related emotions’ indirect effect on the prediction of affiliation by perceived vulnerability. βab2 = Threat-related emotions’ indirect effect on the prediction of affiliation by perceived illness; βab3 = the indirect effect of intentions on the prediction of behavioral compliance with the lockdown by affiliation. βab4 = the indirect effect of intentions on the prediction of behavioral compliance with the protective measures by affiliation.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Structural mediation model in women (Sample 1W, N = 827) between perceived vulnerability, perceived illness, threat-related emotions, social comparison, affiliation, intentions, and self-reported behavior regarding compliance with the lockdown and protective measures.

Note. Dotted lines represent non-significant effects at p < .05. Values in bold black and bold black lines represent significant direct effects or correlations. P.Vuln = perceived vulnerability; P. Illness = perceived illness; Threat Emo = threat-related emotions; Affil = affiliation; SCO = social comparison; Abi = SCO ability dimension; Opi = SCO opinion dimension; L. Beha = self-reported behavioral compliance with the lockdown; L. Inten = Intentions to comply with the lockdown; PM. Inten = intentions to comply with the use of protective measures; PM. Beha = behavioral self-reported compliance with the use of protective measures. βab1 = Threat-related emotions’ indirect effect on the prediction of affiliation by perceived vulnerability. βab2 = Threat-related emotions’ indirect effect on the prediction of affiliation by perceived illness; βab3 = the indirect effect of intentions on the prediction of behavioral compliance with the lockdown by affiliation. βab4 = the indirect effect of intentions on the prediction of behavioral compliance with the protective measures by affiliation.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 2.

Measurement invariance analyses as a function of gender in Sample 2.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Fig 4.

Structural mediation model in women and men (Sample 2, N = 1038) between perceived vulnerability, perceived illness, threat-related emotions, social comparison, affiliation, intentions, and self-reported behavior regarding compliance with the lockdown and protective measures.

Note. Dotted lines represent non-significant effects at p < .05. Values in bold black and bold black lines represent significant direct effects or correlations. Blue lines and values highlight significant indirect (mediation) effects. P.Vuln = perceived vulnerability; P. Illness = perceived illness; Threat Emo = threat-related emotions; Affil = affiliation; SCO = social comparison; Abi = SCO ability dimension; Opi = SCO opinion dimension; L. Beha = behavioral self-reported compliance with the lockdown; L. Inten = Intentions to comply with the lockdown; PM. Inten = intentions to comply with the use of protective measures; PM. Beha = behavioral self-reported compliance with the use of protective measures. βab1 = Threat-related emotions’ indirect effect on the prediction of affiliation by perceived vulnerability. βab2 = Threat-related emotions’ indirect effect on the prediction of affiliation by perceived illness; βab3 = the indirect effect of intentions on the prediction of behavioral compliance with the lockdown by affiliation. βab4 = the indirect effect of intentions on the prediction of behavioral compliance with the protective measures by affiliation.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Fig 5.

Structural mediation model in men (Sample 2M, N = 512) between perceived vulnerability, perceived illness, threat-related emotions, social comparison, affiliation, intentions, and self-reported behavior regarding compliance with the lockdown and protective measures.

Note. Dotted lines represent non-significant effects at p < .05. Values in bold black and bold black lines represent significant direct effects or correlations. Blue lines and values highlight significant indirect (mediation) effects. P.Vuln = perceived vulnerability; P. Illness = perceived illness; Threat Emo = threat-related emotions; Affil = affiliation; SCO = social comparison; Abi = SCO ability dimension; Opi = SCO opinion dimension; L. Beha = behavioral self-reported compliance with the lockdown; L. Inten = Intentions to comply with the lockdown; PM. Inten = intentions to comply with the use of protective measures; PM. Beha = behavioral self-reported compliance with the use of protective measures. βab1 = Threat-related emotions’ indirect effect on the prediction of affiliation by perceived vulnerability. βab2 = Threat-related emotions’ indirect effect on the prediction of affiliation by perceived illness; βab3 = the indirect effect of intentions on the prediction of behavioral compliance with the lockdown by affiliation. βab4 = the indirect effect of intentions on the prediction of behavioral compliance with the protective measures by affiliation.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Fig 6.

Structural mediation model in women (Sample 2W, N = 526) between perceived vulnerability, perceived illness, threat-related emotions, social comparison, affiliation, intentions, and self-reported behavior regarding compliance with the lockdown and the protective measures.

Note. Dotted lines represent non-significant effects at p < .05. Values in bold black and bold black lines represent significant direct effects or correlations. Blue lines and values highlight significant indirect (mediation) effects. P.Vuln = perceived vulnerability; P. Illness = perceived illness; Threat Emo = threat-related emotions; Affil = affiliation; SCO = social comparison; Abi = SCO ability dimension; Opi = SCO opinion dimension; L. Beha = behavioral self-reported compliance with the lockdown; L. Inten = Intentions to comply with the lockdown; PM. Inten = intentions to comply with the use of protective measures; PM. Beha = behavioral self-reported compliance with the use of protective measures. βab1 = Threat-related emotions’ indirect effect on the prediction of affiliation by perceived vulnerability. βab2 = Threat-related emotions’ indirect effect on the prediction of affiliation by perceived illness; βab3 = the indirect effect of intentions on the prediction of behavioral compliance with the lockdown by affiliation. βab4 = the indirect effect of intentions on the prediction of behavioral compliance with the protective measures by affiliation.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Table 3.

Standardized latent mean comparisons between Sample 2W and Sample 2M (gender effects).

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Regressions and correlation comparisons between Samples 2W and 2M.

More »

Table 4 Expand