4.6 Article

A risk perception scale for travel to a crisis epicentre: visiting Wuhan after COVID-19

Journal

CURRENT ISSUES IN TOURISM
Volume 25, Issue 1, Pages 150-167

Publisher

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/13683500.2020.1857712

Keywords

Risk perceptions; tourism crises; COVID-19; crisis management; Wuhan

Funding

  1. Hubei Social Science Fund [2020040]
  2. Hubei University of Economics Research Fund [XJ19BS30]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This research measured risk perceptions among Chinese residents related to travelling to Wuhan after the outbreak of COVID-19. The results show that factors such as occupation, place of residence, involvement in disease prevention and control, losses suffered during the pandemic, and previous experiences of visiting Wuhan significantly affect risk perceptions.
Although the significance of tourist risk perceptions is well documented, perspectives on risk associated with major pandemics such as COVID-19 remain poorly understood, especially from the viewpoint of destination crisis management. This research measured risk perceptions among Chinese residents related to travelling to Wuhan after the outbreak of COVID-19. Based on the concept and dimensions of tourist risk perceptions, a risk perception scale with 13 items on four dimensions (health, financial, social. performance) was developed and validated using exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Risk perception differences among visitor groups were identified based on 1818 survey responses collected during the COVID-19 outbreak in China. The results show that occupations and place of residence had significant effects on all 13 items, while gender, age, educational attainment, and income independently affected some items. Similarly, respondent involvement in disease prevention and control, losses suffered during the pandemic, and previous experiences of visiting Wuhan were found to produce significant differences.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available