English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Numerous health behavior models have emphasized absolute risk perceptions as prominent predictors of future behavior and intentions, but more recent research has shown that people also attend to  comparative  risk information. While most research highlights  external  (social) comparisons as the primary way people contextualize risk, it is also possible that people use  internal  comparisons, such as comparing their current risk to their past risk (temporal comparisons) or comparing their risk for one health threat to their risk for another health threat (dimensional comparisons). Objective:  The current research sought to examine differences in absolute, external, and internal comparative risk perceptions across a variety of health threats. Design:  This study utilized a cross-sectional design wherein participants completed all study materials online.  Main outcome measures:  MTurk workers ( N  = 654) responded to questions about absolute and comparative risk perceptions, concern, and precautionary intentions. Results:  Hierarchical regression analyses revealed that although absolute risk perceptions were positively associated with concern and precautionary intentions for all health threats, comparative risk perceptions also accounted for unique variance in all models. Internal comparisons were uniquely associated with concern and intentions even when accounting for absolute and external comparative risk perceptions in nearly all models. Conclusion:  These findings provide the first systematic evidence for the utility of incorporating internal comparisons into models of risk perception.

Absolute and comparative risk assessments: evidence for the utility of incorporating internal comparisons into models of risk perception