Perceived Risk for Influenza in Veterans With Spinal Cord Injuries and Disorders

Sherri L. LaVela*, Bridget Smith, Frances M. Weaver

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

6 Scopus citations

Abstract

Objective: Guided by the extended parallel process model (EPPM), the objective was to assess control processes dominant in influenza behavior decisions. Design: Cross-sectional survey. Results: Response rate was 31% (n = 968). Regarding influenza risk, 59% were in danger control. Those in fear control were more likely to report influenza infection (p = .000). In the nonvaccinated, those in fear control were more likely to indicate not knowing where to get the vaccine (p = .016) and that it was unavailable (p = .027), and those in danger control believed they did not need it (p = .023). Zero critical values were more likely to indicate that no health provider recommended the shot (p = .002). Conclusions: Most perceived efficacy to be stronger than threat related to influenza; according to the EPPM, they are aware of their risk but recognize their ability to avert it. For those in danger control, messages should focus on increasing perceptions of severity and susceptibility to positively affect behavior change. For those in fear control, messages should focus on efficacy only. With a critical value of zero, no threat is induced, and a high-threat/high-efficacy approach should be taken.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)458-462
Number of pages5
JournalRehabilitation Psychology
Volume52
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2007

Keywords

  • efficacy
  • extended parallel process model (EPPM)
  • perceived risk
  • threat
  • vaccination

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation
  • Rehabilitation
  • Clinical Psychology
  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Perceived Risk for Influenza in Veterans With Spinal Cord Injuries and Disorders'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this