Conditional risk perception and protection behavior: Testing the behavior motivation hypothesis and the risk reappraisal hypothesis

There exist two distinctive hypotheses on the relationship between perceived risk and protection behavior: the behavioral motivation hypothesis (i.e., a higher risk perception motivates protection behaviors) and the risk reappraisal hypothesis (i.e., protection behaviors reduce perceived risk). To test these competing hypotheses, we examined how risk perception, behavioral intention, and behavior are affected by conditional risk information. In a two-wave panel experiment conducted online in South Korea (Time 1 N = 450; Time 2 N = 276), we manipulated the risk level (high vs. low) of gum disease in a health message both for the inaction of the recommended preventive behavior (flossing) and for the action of the behavior. The results showed that information about high (vs. low) inaction conditional risk indirectly led to greater flossing intention via changing inaction risk perception. In contrast, information about high (vs. low) action conditional risk increased action risk perception, which was negatively linked to flossing intention. Greater inaction risk perception at Time 1 significantly increased actual flossing behavior at Time 2. The decrease in risk perception between Time 1 (inaction conditional) and Time 2 (unconditional) was greater with increasing intentions at Time 1 and with actual behavioral engagement between Time 1 and Time 2. The findings of this study supported both the behavioral motivation hypothesis and the risk reappraisal hypothesis.

Automated summary

This study examined the relationship between perceived risk and protection behavior, and found support for both the behavioral motivation hypothesis and the risk reappraisal hypothesis. Higher risk perception motivates protection behaviors, while protection behaviors reduce perceived risk.