http://dx.doi.org/10.24016/2020.v7.164
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Emotional perception of COVID-19 in Mexico: Comparative study between
phase 1, phase 2 and the communication media
Percepción emocional
del COVID-19 en México: Estudio comparación entre la fase 1, fase 2 y medios de
información
Isaías Vicente Lugo-González 1
*, Yuma Yoaly Pérez-Bautista 1, Ana
Leticia Becerra-Gálvez 2, Margarita Fernández-Vega 3, y
Leonardo Reynoso-Erazo 1
1 División
de Investigación y Posgrado, Residencia en Medicina Conductual, Facultad de
Estudios Superiores Iztacala, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México,
Tlalnepantla de Baz, Mexico.
2 Residencia
en Medicina Conductual, Facultad de Estudios Superiores Zaragoza, Universidad
Nacional Autónoma de México, Ciudad de México, Mexico.
3 Instituto
Nacional de Enfermedades Respiratorias, Tlalpan, Mexico.
* Correspondence to: isaiasvlg@comunidad.unam.mx.
Received: June 12, 2020 | Revised: October 04, 2020 | Accepted: November
10, 2020 | Published Online: January 18, 2021.
CITE IT AS:
Lugo-González, I. V., Pérez-Bautista, Y. Y., Becerra-Gálvez, A. L.,
Fernández-Vega, M., & Reynoso-Erazo, L. (2021). Emotional perception of COVID-19 in Mexico:
Comparative study between phase 1, phase 2 and the communication media. Interacciones, 7, e164. http://dx.doi.org/10.24016/2020.v7.164
ABSTRACT
Background: Since the first COVID-19 cases in
Mexico there have been a variety of emotional responses which have in common
fear and stress. The emotional impact of COVID-19 is builded
in some way because the information flooding parallel to the pandemic phases,
the transition between them and illness perception. The aim of the present work
was to compare the perception of COVID-19 between phase 1 and 2 of the pandemic
and between the information media used to inform themselves in the Mexican
population. Methods: Considering a
chain sampling, a comparative study was carried out in which an evaluation
battery was disseminated through email and social networks, which was answered
by 1560 participants. Results: The
concern about the consequences of COVID-19 and its emotional impact increased
when going from phase 1 to phase 2 of the pandemic. In addition, it was
identified that the emotional impact was greater in those who reported through
Facebook® and television. Conclusions: The
pandemic will have a progressive emotional impact as its phases progress and
the importance of informing oneself in adequate means to prevent emotional
consequences.
Key words: COVID-19; Illness perception; Emotional
perception; Common Sense Model.
RESUMEN
Introducción:
Desde el registro de los primeros casos de
COVID-19 en México, se han derivado una serie de respuestas emocionales
caracterizadas por miedo y estrés. Dicho impacto emocional se debe en gran
medida a la inundación de información paralela a las fases de la pandemia y la
transición entre ellas y la percepción que los individuos tienen de la
enfermedad. El objetivo del presente trabajo fue comparar la percepción del
COVID-19 entre la fase 1 y 2 de la pandemia y entre los medios de información
usados para informarse en población mexicana. Método: Considerando un muestreo en cadena, se realizó un estudio
comparativo en el que se diseminó por medio de correo electrónico y redes
sociales una batería de evaluación que respondieron 1560 participantes. Resultados: La preocupación por las
consecuencias del COVID-19 y su impacto emocional incrementaron al pasar de la
fase 1 a la fase 2 de la pandemia. Además, se identificó que el impacto
emocional fue mayor en quienes se informaron a través de Facebook® y
televisión. Conclusiones: La
pandemia tendrá un impacto emocional progresivo en medida en que avancen sus
fases y en la importancia de informarse en medios adecuados para prevenir
consecuencias emocionales.
Palabras clave: COVID-19; Percepción de enfermedad;
Percepción emocional; Modelo de Sentido Común.
In December 2019, an increase in the number of
pneumonia cases was reported in China, which spread locally to other parts of
the region and subsequently to other parts of the world (Dong et al., 2020;
Gandhi, Lynch, & del Rio, 2020; Veity et al.,
2020). A new coronavirus was identified from the analysis of patients
presenting with pneumonia, which was later named SARS-CoV-2 causing COVID-19
disease (World Health Organization [WHO], 2020). The main symptoms of this new
virus are fever, cough, dyspnea, loss of taste or smell and in some cases
muscle, head and throat pain, and more severely, hyperinflammation, cytosine
storm and elevated biomarkers of cardiac injury (Cascella,
Rajnik, Cuomo, Dulebohn,
& Di Napoli, 2020; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 2020a;
Dong et al., 2020; Veity et al., 2020).
COVID-19 disease, both in Mexico and in other
countries, has represented a challenge at different levels and dimensions, for
example; health, medical, educational, social, economic and of course emotional
(Douglas, Katikireddi, Taulbut,
McKee, & McCartney, 2020; Holmes et al., 2020; Lai et al., 2020; Lazcano-Ponce & Alpuche-Aranda,
2020; Mukhtar, 2020).
In relation to this last aspect, it is known
that the emotional impact of a pandemic such as COVID-19 will be determined by
the evaluation made of the event, in other words, it will be a function of the
way in which the threat faced is perceived (Leventhal, Meyer, & Nerenz, 1980; Taylor, 2019). Authors such as Rubin, Potts,
and Michie (2010) suggest that the perception of a pandemic varies over time,
mainly because of the concern generated by its consequences and evidently the
fear of contracting the disease. In addition, it is known that there are groups
with a higher risk of perceiving the pandemic as more threatening, among which
are: women, people who are responsible for the care of others (such as children
or older adults) and individuals with a lower level of education (Molero-Jurado, Herrera-Peco,
Pérez-Fuentes, & Gázquez-Linares, 2020).
Another element that favors an adverse
emotional impact and excessive concern about the consequences of the pandemic
is the exposure to various sources of information (Rubin et al., 2010; Taylor,
2019) that are often erroneous, uncorroborated and favor misinformation, as
well as a poorly functioning perception of the disease (Garfin,
Silver, & Holman, 2020; Taylor, 2019). An individual who is exposed to such
information on television and social networks can change their way of
perceiving the disease or the situation they are living (e.g., social
confinement) or orient them to perform risky or maladaptive behaviors and
consequently to experience negative emotions (Sweeny, Melnyk, Miller, &
Shepperd, 2010), hence the relevance of being in contact with reliable sources
of information.
Thus, considering that the illness perception,
the exposure to information and the experiences of individuals are paramount in
the process of adaptation to a pandemic, the Common Sense
Model of Illness Perception (CSM) (Leventhal et al., 1980) can explain how
COVID-19 is perceived, what it represents, and the emotional impact it is
having on people.
According to the CSM, an individual perceives
a health threat in two dimensions, cognitive and emotional perception
(Broadbent et al., 2006; Leventhal et al., 1980; Moss-Morris et al., 2002),
these are further divided into: 1) Identity: perceptual experience of the
illness, type, place and amount of symptoms or somatic sensations associated
with it; 2) Timeline: perceived duration of the illness (acute, chronic or
cyclical); 3) Causes: perceived reasons as to what caused the illness; 4)
Consequences: perceived and experienced repercussions in different areas of
life; 5) Personal control: perceived ability to control the illness; 6) Treatment
control: perceived impact that the treatment will have on the condition; 7)
Coherence: clarity with which the illness is understood; and 8) Emotional
perception: perception of emotional repercussions associated with the illness.
In order to evaluate each of the elements of
the perceptual stage of the CSM, in the context of COVID-19, measurement
instruments are available such as the Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire
(BIPQ, Broadbent et al., 2006), recently adapted in Spanish (Molero-Jurado et al., 2020; Pérez-Fuentes et al., 2020) and
the Illness Perception Questionnaire-Revised (IPQ-R, Moss-Morris et al., 2002),
used in Mexico, with reliability and validity data (Lugo-González,
Fernández-Vega, Reynoso-Erazo, Becerra-Gálvez, & Pérez-Bautista, 2020).
Given the psychosocial impact that the
COVID-19 pandemic is generating in Mexico and other parts of the world, as well
as its correlation with exposure to various media outlets (Brooks et al., 2020;
Douglas et al., 2020; Holmes et al., 2020; Lai et al., 2020; Pérez-Gay Juárez
et al., 2020), an assessment of the perception of COVID-19 and its emotional
impact is necessary; therefore, the aim of the present study was to compare the
perception of COVID-19 disease between phase 1 and 2 of the pandemic and
depending on the media outlets used by Mexican adolescents and adults.
METHOD
Design
In accordance with Méndez, Namihira,
Moreno and Sosa (2001), a descriptive and comparative study was carried out.
Participants
Considering a chain or network sampling
(Hernández-Sampieri, Fernández-Collado,
& Baptista-Lucio, 2014), 1,560 adolescents and adults from different states
of the Mexican Republic with an average age of 31.88 years (SD=11.045, Range=
15-77 years) were invited to participate on a voluntary basis. Most of the
participants were from Mexico City, 597 (38.3%) and from the State of Mexico,
553 (35.4%), with 410 (26.3%) from different states of central, southern and
northern Mexico. Of the total, 885 (37.5%) were single, 340 (31.1%) were
married, 239 (15.3%) lived in free union, the rest 96 (16.1%) in different
forms of cohabitation. Regarding educational level, 1106 (70.9%) had a
bachelor's degree, 207 (13.3%) a high school, 156 (10%) a postgraduate degree
and the rest, 91 (5.8%), a technical, secondary or elementary school career.
Regarding their occupation, 535 (34.3%) reported being professionals, 382 (24.5%)
students, 359 (23%) employed, 93 (6%) unemployed, 70 (4.5%) traders, 69 (4.4%)
working at home and 52 (3.3%) engaged in another activity.
Regarding other characteristics, 728 (46.7%)
reported being informed about COVID-19 via Facebook® and television, 317
(20.3%) only via television, 306 (19.6%) only via Facebook® and 209 (13.4%) via
other media such as Twitter®, WhatsApp®, YouTube® or newspaper.
Instruments
Sociodemographic data
questionnaire: Set
of items to gather information on residence, family, educational, occupational
and media use data, among others.
Illness Perception
Questionnaire Revised-COVID-19 (IPQ-R; Lugo-González et al., 2020): instrument to
assess the cognitive and emotional perception of COVID-19 in Mexico, which
consists of an identity assessment with a list of 12 symptoms associated with
COVID-19, as well as 16 items corresponding to the subdimensions of
consequences (seven items), personal control (three items) and emotional
perception (six items). The scale has a four-point Likert-type response format
ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree, and has a Cronbach's alpha
reliability of 0.88.
Procedure
The assessment instrument was developed in
Google-Forms Online® and was disseminated via email and social networks such as
Facebook® and WhatsApp® from March 22 through April 4, one day prior to the
official start of the National Healthy Distance Day determined by the Mexican
Ministry of Health (SSa). This evaluation was active
during the last week of phase 1 and the first week of phase 2 of the COVID-19
pandemic decreed by the SSa in Mexico.
The statistical program SPSS version 24 for
Windows was used and normality analyses of the data were performed to determine
the type of statistic to be used for comparison of the variables. Given the
sample size and the analysis program, the Shapiro-Wilk (W) test was used in
accordance with the recommendations of Pedrosa, Juarros,
Robles, Basteiro and García (2015). Subsequently,
descriptive analyses (measures of dispersion and central tendency) were
performed for the sociodemographic and COVID-19 perception variables.
The comparative analysis was carried out by
grouping the participants who responded to the evaluation in phase 1 and those
who responded in phase 2, in addition, variables were constructed according to
the media through which the participants reported being informed, being:
Facebook®, Television, Facebook® and Television and other media (Twitter®,
WhatsApp®, YouTube® or newspaper). The Mann-Whitney U test was used for the
first contrast and the Kruskal-Wallis analysis of
variance test with post hoc analysis for the second, considering a p<.05 for
significant differences between groups. In addition, the effect size
(Rosenthal's r) was calculated with the following cut-off points: small effect
(0.1 to < 0.3); moderate effect (0.3 to < 0.5); and large effect (≥ 0.5)
(Cohen, 1988), carrying out the following equation: (r= 
) (Field, 2009).
Ethical aspects
Participants could answer the form after
accepting the information under their consent and due to the global problem of
the COVID-19 pandemic, no elements of inclusion or exclusion were considered.
The project was evaluated and accepted by the research ethics committee of the
National Institute of Respiratory Diseases (INER) in Mexico City, under the
following registration number assigned by the committee: S02-20.
RESULTS
Descriptive analysis
The data in the normality tests showed that
the subdimensions of illness perception did not behave normally (W= 0.860 and
0.976, gl= 1560; p < 0.01). Regarding the
perception of illness, it was observed that participants identified on average
7 out of 12 main symptoms associated with COVID-19, which were: fever, dyspnea,
dry cough, headache, sore throat, tiredness, and muscle and joint pain.
Perceived consequences is
one of the areas where most discomfort is being generated, since the evaluation
focuses on the perceived impact that the disease will have in terms of time,
problems in understanding and controlling COVID-19, as well as the effects on
the life of the individuals in general (family, economy and emotional
stability); regarding this last aspect, the impact is linked to experiences of
worry, anxiety, anger and changes in mood (depression) (see Table 1). However,
despite the emotional impact and perceived consequences of COVID-19,
participants consider that they have a high degree of personal control to avoid
becoming infected with the disease.
Table 1. Descriptive results on
perception of COVID-19.
|
Instrument |
CSM subdimensions |
Avrg |
Mdn |
IR |
Minimum |
Máximum |
|
IPQ-R-COVID19 |
Identity |
7.08 |
7 |
3 |
0 |
12 |
|
Consequences |
19.14 |
20 |
5 |
7 |
28 |
|
|
Personal control |
9.08 |
9 |
3 |
3 |
12 |
|
|
Emotional perception |
14.38 |
14 |
7 |
6 |
24 |
Note: Avrg:
Average, Mdn: Median. IR: Interquartile range.
Comparative analysis
Once the participants who responded during
each phase were grouped together, 972 participants who responded during the
first phase and 580 during the second phase were identified (see Table 2).
Table 2. Comparison of COVID-19 perception between
pandemic phase 1 and 2.
|
Instrument |
CSM subdimensions |
Phase 1 (n= 972) |
Phase 2 (n= 588) |
Z |
p |
r |
||
|
Mdn |
IR |
Mdn |
IR |
|||||
|
IPQ-R-COVID19 |
Identity |
7 |
2 |
7 |
3 |
-0.282 |
0.778 |
0.02 |
|
Consequences |
19 |
5 |
20 |
6 |
-2.709 |
0.007 |
0.06 |
|
|
Personal control |
9 |
3 |
9 |
3 |
-0.41 |
0.682 |
0.24 |
|
|
Emotional perception |
14 |
6 |
15 |
7 |
-2.056 |
0.04 |
0.05 |
|
Note: Mdn:
Median. IR: Interquartile range. r: Rosenthal r effect size
When contrasts were made between the phase of
the pandemic and the subdimensions of perception of the COVID-19, it was
identified that the persons who responded to the evaluation during phase 2
(first week) scored higher in the subscales of perceived consequences and
emotional perception, finding statistically significant differences, although
with a fairly small effect size.
Regarding the emotional impact derived from
exposure to different media (see Table 3), it was identified that in each of
the media categories there is a variation in the emotional perception, but not
in the other subdimensions of the CSM. However, statistically significant
differences are only found between participants who reported being informed via
Facebook ® and television and other media (Twitter ®, WhatsApp ®, YouTube ® or
newspaper). Despite this, the effect of the medium of information on emotional
perception is very small.
Table 3. Comparison of the
perception of COVID-19 and media outlets.
|
Variable |
Media outlets |
Mdn |
IR |
X2 |
gl |
p |
Post hoc |
Z |
r |
|
Emotional perception |
1. Facebook ® |
14.5 |
7 |
8.009 |
3 |
.046* |
3 > 4** |
-2.8 |
0.09 |
|
2. Television |
14 |
6 |
|||||||
|
3. Facebook ® and television |
15 |
7 |
|||||||
|
4. Others |
13 |
7 |
Note: Mdn:
Median. IR: Interquartile range. r: Rosenthal r effect size. ** additional significance: .029
DISCUSSION
It was corroborated that the perception of
consequences, of various kinds, associated with COVID-19 and the emotional
impact tend to increase progressively and in function of the pandemic's
progress. In addition, the effect of exposure to media and social networks upon
the experience of worry, anxiety, sadness and anger was evidenced.
In the case of the perception of consequences,
it is known that this is one of the elements that has the greatest impact on
people's concerns, since the greater the social distancing, the greater the
emotional impact and the greater the concerns, and prevention measures will
tend not to be applied as the pandemic continues to advance (Cava, Fay,
Beanlands, McCay, & Wignall,
2005; Day, Park, Madras, Gumel, & Wu, 2006; Sandín, Valiente, García-Escalera, & Chorot, 2020). In
this context, it should be mentioned that in Mexico the recommendations of
social distancing were advanced in order to favor a gradual transmission, which
resulted in an increase in the number of days determined for quarantine.
As mentioned in the description of the
procedure, the present evaluation was conducted during the initial stages of
the pandemic in Mexico (one week for each phase of the pandemic) and despite
this, the evaluation was able to identify changes in the perceived consequences
and emotional impact of COVID-19 (emotional perception). Data consistent with
the present results are provided by Wang et al. (2020) who identified that in
the initial phase of COVID-19 in China, a significant number of people
considered the psychological impact of the pandemic to have been moderate to
severe, in addition to reporting significant symptoms of anxiety and worry
about the consequences of COVID-19.
Similarly, a negative evolution (after
pandemic and social distancing time phases) of worries and emotional impact had
already been identified during the SARS virus outbreak in 2003 (Cava et al.,
2005; Day et al., 2006) and the 2009 H1N1 influenza outbreak (Rubin et al.,
2010) in studies of emotional appraisal and COVID-19 (Alyami,
Henning, Krägeloh, & Alyami,
2020; Lee, 2020; Pérez-Fuentes et al., 2020; Pérez-Gay Juárez et al., 2020; Sandín et al., 2020) and is reported in the various reviews
currently conducted on the psychological effects of COVID-19 and other
infectious diseases (Brooks et al., 2020; Mukhtar, 2020; Taylor, 2019).
Another element to discuss is the influence of
the mass media and social networks on the emotional impact of the disease. In
the present investigation it was identified that exposure to Facebook® and
television had effects on the emotional perception of COVID-19 and given that the
effect was very small, it can be hypothesized that as the pandemic progresses,
the impact will be greater, not only because of the fear of what may happen but
also because as the pandemic progresses, its after-effects are gradually
experienced. Similarly, during the H1N1 influenza outbreak of 2009 (Rubin et
al., 2010), the Ebola outbreak of 2014 and other traumatic events experienced
in the United States (Garfin et al., 2020) have shown
that the report of concerns and emotional impact was increasing as people were
more exposed to the media and the news had adverse content (pandemic
declaration and resurgence). More recently, it was found that in the Spanish
population, mass media exposure is one of the most important predictors of
experiencing a negative emotional impact, in addition to concern about getting
sick and dying from COVID-19, lack of basic commodities, social distancing, as
well as work and economic stability (Sandín et al.,
2020).
As mentioned above, excessive exposure to mass
media can encourage people to come into contact with misinformation, which
negatively impacts people's attitudes and perceptions towards the disease,
decreases the perception of vulnerability of contracting the disease, favors
non-functional behaviors such as excessive purchase of commodities, practice of
exposure behaviors, among others (Brooks et al., 2020; Garfi
et al., 2020; Holmes et al., 2020; Mukhtar, 2020; Sweeny et al., 2010; Zarocostas, 2020); hence the importance of information
fasting and the practice of behaviors incompatible with excessive exposure to
mass media and social networks.
The results also found that the participants
had a high perception of self-control to prevent the spread of COVID-19, a
variable that may also function as a protective element at the time of the
pandemic. In fact, current evidence suggests that variables of this type are
linked to positive emotional effects and the strengthening of these perceptual
aspects is central to the psychological and psychiatric treatments proposed
during the COVID-19 pandemic (Douglas et al., 2020; Duan & Zhu, 2020;
Holmes et al., 2020; Mukhtar, 2020; Sandín et al.,
2020; Wang et al., 2020).
Finally,
it is clear that the interphase transition processes in a pandemic, by its
simple domination, due to the lack of information or the use of erroneous
information will favor its perception as serious and will have repercussions at
an emotional level. It is important to remember that not everything is negative
regarding exposure to social networks and television. In the context of Mexico,
educational and outreach activities were programmed; in fact, specialized
information and recommendations for dealing with the pandemic in a functional
manner were disseminated through social networks. Therefore, the problem is not
the information channel but the use given to the channel and, of course, the
type of information consulted.
In
addition, since phase 1 of the pandemic, the SSa of
Mexico gave daily informative conferences at seven o'clock at night, where
decision-makers reported on the progress of the disease, number of infected,
number of deaths, and various socio-demographic and clinical risk
characteristics of the people who became ill and died. In this context, it will
be important to have evidence of the effect of this type of communications, of
the role of health experts as models offering information and of the preference
of information sources by people (official or unofficial).
On
the other hand, the relevance and usefulness of the MSCPE as a theoretical
constitution to describe and explain the perception that people have about
COVID-19 is taken up again. It is important to remember that the way of
perceiving the threat will be different for each person and not necessarily
linked to the criteria of specialists (Diefenbach
& Leventhal, 1996; Leventhal et al., 1980). From the MSCPE it is considered
that each person is in a continuous process of adaptation since each individual
will understand the disease based on his or her perception, this perception
will be modified over time, so it will influence in a constant and changing way
the emotional repercussions experienced (Diefenbach
& Leventhal, 1996).
The
main limitations of the study would be linked, on one side, with the evaluation
by digital means since they can be considered inaccurate or methods where the
self-report of the evaluated variables is overestimated, despite this, there is
also evidence about their usefulness, functionality and equivalence with
traditional forms of evaluation (Stirratt et al. 2015; Pérez-Bautista &
Lugo-González, 2017; Weigold, Weigold,
& Russell, 2013).
Another
important issue is the type of sampling, given the distribution of the sample,
where the majority of the participants were women, with a high level of
education. However, these data correspond with several studies worldwide
regarding COVID-19, where women participating in the studies correspond to the
largest proportion (Dai, Hu, Xiong, Qiu, & Yuan., 2020; Molero-Jurado
et al., 2020; Shacham et al., 2020).
Finally,
it is suggested for future research to account for the transition between phase
two, three and the possibility of a resurgence, regarding the impact at the
emotional level, incorporating what the information implies in the process of
adaptation to the new normality.
ORCID
Isaías Vicente Lugo-González. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2024-2598
Yuma Yoaly
Pérez-Bautista. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1032-1126
Ana Leticia Becerra-Gálvez. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5075-6098
Margarita Fernández-Vega. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6479-7889
Leonardo Reynoso-Erazo. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9793-1431
AUTHORS' CONTRIBUTION
Isaías Vicente Lugo-González: Research, Formal
analysis, Draft-original writing and Project management.
Yuma Yoaly
Pérez-Bautista: Conceptualization, Research, Formal analysis and Draft-original
writing.
Ana Leticia Becerra-Gálvez:
Research, Revision-editing writing.
Margarita Fernández-Vega: Research and
Resources.
Leonardo Reynoso-Erazo:
Research, Revision-Editing Writing.
FUNDING
The study was self-financed.
CONFLICT OF INTERESTS
The authors declare that there is no conflict
of interest.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Not
applicable.
REVIEW PROCESS
This
study has been peer-reviewed and double-blinded.
DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
The
database is attached to the article as a supplementary material 1.
DISCLAIMER
The authors are responsible for all statements
made in this article.
REFERENCES
Alyami, M., Henning, M., Krägeloh, C. U., & Alyami, H.
(2020). Psychometric evaluation of the Arabic version of the fear of COVID-19
scale. International Journal of Mental
Health and Addiction, 1. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00316-x
Broadbent, E., Petrie, K., Main, J., & Weinman, J. (2006). The brief
illness perception questionnaire. Journal
of Psychosomatic Research. 60, 631-637. DOI:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2005.10.020
Brooks, S. K., Webster, R. K., Smith, L. E., Woodland, L., Wessely, S., Greenberg, N., & Rubin, G. J. (2020). The
psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the
evidence. The Lancet, 395(10227), 912–920. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30460-8
Cascella, M., Rajnik, M.,
Cuomo, A., Dulebohn, S. C., & Di Napoli, R.
(2020). Features, evaluation and treatment coronavirus (COVID-19). In Statpearls [internet]. StatPearls
Publishing.
Cava, M. A., Fay, K. E., Beanlands, H. J., McCay, E. A., & Wignall, R.
(2005). Risk perception and compliance with quarantine during the SARS
outbreak. Journal of Nursing Scholarship,
37(4), 343-347. DOI: 10.1111/j.1547-5069.2005.00059.x
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
(CDC, 2020a). Symptoms of Coronavirus. Recuperado de https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/symptoms-testing/symptoms.html
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. EUA:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Dai, Y., Hu, G., Xiong,
H., Qiu, H., & Yuan, X. (2020). Psychological
impact of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak on healthcare
workers in China. MedRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.03.03.20030874
Day, T., Park, A., Madras, N., Gumel, A., & Wu, J. (2006). When is quarantine a useful
control strategy for emerging infectious diseases? American Journal of Epidemiology, 163(5), 479-485. DOI: 10.1093/aje/kwj056
Diefenbach, M. A., & Leventhal, H. (1996). The
common-sense model of illness representation: Theoretical and practical
considerations. Journal of Social
Distress and the Homeless, 5(1), 11-38.
DOI: 10.1007/BF02090456
Duan, L., & Zhu, G. (2020). Psychological
interventions for people affected by the COVID-19 epidemic. The Lancet Psychiatry, 7(4), 300-302.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(20)30073-0
Dong, Y., Mo, X., Hu, Y., Qi, X., Jiang, F.,
Jiang, Z., & Tong, S. (2020). Epidemiological Characteristics of 2143
Pediatric Patients With 2019 Coronavirus Disease in China. Pediatrics, e20200702–30. http://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2020-0702
Douglas, M., Katikireddi,
S. V., Taulbut, M., McKee, M., & McCartney, G.
(2020). Mitigating the wider health effects of covid-19 pandemic response. BMJ, 369.
1-6. doi: 10.1136/bmj.m1557
Field, A. (2009). Discovering
statistics using SPSS: and sex, drugs and rock'n'roll. London: SAGE
Publications, Ltd.
Gandhi, R., Lynch, J., & del Río, C.
(2020). Mild or Moderate Covid-19. The
New England Journal of Medicine. 1-9.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMcp2009249
Garfin, D. R., Silver, R. C., & Holman, E. A.
(2020). The novel coronavirus (COVID-2019) outbreak: Amplification of public
health consequences by media exposure. Health Psychology.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/hea0000875
Hernández-Sampieri, R.,
Fernández-Collado, C., & Baptista-Lucio, P. (2014). Metodología de la investigación. México: Mc Graw-Hill.
Holmes, E.
A., O'Connor, R. C., Perry, V. H., Tracey, I., Wessely, S., Arseneault, L.,
Ballard, C., Christensen, C., Cohen-Silver, R., Everall,
I., Ford, T., John, A., Kabir, T., King, K., Madan,
I., Michie, S., Przybylski,
P., Shafran, R., Sweeney,
A., Worthman, C., Yardley,
L., Cowan, K., Cope, C., Hotopf,
M., & Bullmore, E. (2020). Multidisciplinary research
priorities for the COVID-19 pandemic: a call for action for mental health
science. The Lancet Psychiatry. 1-14.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(20)30168-1
Lai, J., Ma, S., Wang, Y., Cai, Z., Hu, J.,
Wei, N., Wu, J., Du, H., Chen, T., Li, R., Tan, H., Kang, H., Yao, L., Huang,
M., Wang, H., Wang, G., Liu, Z., & Hu, Z. (2020). Factors associated with
mental health outcomes among health care workers exposed to coronavirus disease
2019. JAMA Network Open, 3(3), e204006–12. http://doi.org/doi:10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.3976
Lazcano-Ponce, E., & Alpuche-Aranda, C.
(2020). Alfabetización en salud pública ante la emergencia de la pandemia por
Covid-19. Salud Pública De México,
1–10. http://doi.org/10.21149/11408
Leventhal,
H., Meyer, D., & Nerenz, D. (1980). The common sense
representation of illness danger. En: S. Rachman (Ed). Contributions
to Medical Psychology Volume II (pp. 9-33). U.K: Pergamon Press Ltd.
Lee, S. A. (2020). Measuring coronaphobia: the psychological basis of the Coronavirus
Anxiety Scale. Neurological Sciences, 33, 0-0. DOI: 10.14744/DAJPNS.2020.00069
Lugo-González, I. V., Fernández-Vega, M., Reynoso-Erazo, L.,
Becerra-Gálvez, A. L., & Pérez-Bautista, Y. Y. (2020). COVID-19 perception and preventive behaviors:
A descriptive, comparative study by severity and perceived risk. Salud Mental,
43(6), 285-292. https://doi.org/10.17711/SM.0185-3325.2020.039
Méndez, I., Namihira, D., Moreno, L., y
Sosa, C. (2001), El protocolo de
investigación. Lineamientos para su elaboración y análisis. México: Trillas.
Molero-Jurado,
M. M., Herrera-Peco, I., Pérez-Fuentes, M. D. C, & Gázquez-Linares,
J. J. (2020). Análisis de la amenaza percibida por la COVID-19 en población
española. Atención Primaria.
https://doi.org/doi:10.1016/j.aprim.2020.05.001
Moss-Morris,
R., Weinman, J., Petrie,
K., Horne, R., Cameron, L., & Buick, D. (2002). The Revised Illness Perception
Questionnaire (IPQ-R). Psychology &
Health. 17(1), 1–16. DOI: 10.1080/08870440290001494
Mukhtar, S. (2020). Psychological health
during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic outbreak. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 1-5. DOI:
10.1177/0020764020925835
Pedrosa, I., Juarros,
J., Robles, A., Basteiro, J., & García, E.
(2015). Pruebas de bondad de ajuste en distribuciones
simétricas ¿qué estadístico utilizar? Universitas Psychologica, 14(1),
245. doi:10.11144/Javeriana.upsy14-1.pbad
Pérez-Bautista,
Y. Y., & Lugo-González, I. V. (2017). Aplicación de un instrumento de
conducta sexual a través de dos métodos de recolección de datos. Trabajo presentado en el Sexto Seminario
Internacional sobre Comportamiento y Aplicaciones (SINCA). Tlaxcala,
México.
Pérez-Fuentes,
M. D. C., Molero-Jurado, M. D. M., Oropesa-Ruiz, N. F., Martos-Martínez, Á.,
Simón Márquez, M. D. M., Herrera-Peco, I., & Gázquez
Linares, J. J. (2020). Questionnaire on Perception of Threat from COVID-19. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 9(4), 1196-1207. doi:10.3390/jcm9041196
Pérez-Gay
Juárez, F., Reynoso-Alcántara, V., Flores González. R., Contreras-Ibáñez, C.,
Castro-López, C., Martínez, L. & The COVID-Stress
International Collaboration (2020). Evaluación del
Estrés frente a la Pandemia del COVID-19 en población mexicana. Reporte de los
resultados de la encuesta global COVIDISTRESS.
Rubin, G. J., Potts, H. W. W., & Michie S. (2010). The impact of communications about swine flu
(influenza A H1N1v) on public responses to the outbreak: results from 36
national telephone surveys in the UK. Health
Technology Assessment. 14(34):183–266. DOI: 10.3310/hta14340-03
Shacham, M., Hamama-Raz,
Y., Kolerman, R., Mijiritsky,
O., Ben-Ezra, M., & Mijiritsky, E. (2020).
COVID-19 factors and psychological factors associated with elevated
psychological distress among dentists and dental hygienists in Israel. International
Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(8). doi:10.3390/ijerph17082900
Sandín, B., Valiente, R. M., García-Escalera, J., & Chorot, P. Impacto psicológico de la pandemia de COVID-19:
Efectos negativos y positivos en población española asociados al periodo de
confinamiento nacional. Revista de
Psicopatología y Psicología Clínica, 1(1),
1-22. doi: 10.5944/rppc.27569
Stirratt, M. J., Dunbar-Jacob, J., Crane, H. M., Simoni,
J. M., Czajkowski, S., Hilliard,
M. E., Aikens, J. E., Hunter, C. M., Velligan, D. I., Huntley, K., Ogedegbe,
G., Rand, C., Schron, E., & Nilsen, W. J. (2015).
Self-report measures
of medication adherence behavior: recommendations on optimal use. Translational Behavioral Medicine, 5(4),
470-482. DOI: 10.1007/s13142-015-0315-2
Sweeny, K., Melnyk, D., Miller, W., &
Shepperd, J. A. (2010). Information avoidance: Who, what, when, and why. Review of General Psychology, 14(4), 340-353. DOI: 10.1037/a0021288
Taylor, S. (2019). The Psychology of Pandemics: Preparing for the Next Global Outbreak of
Infectious Disease. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Wang, C., Pan, R., Wan, X., Tan, Y., Xu, L.,
Ho, C. S., & Ho, R. C. (2020). Immediate psychological responses and
associated factors during the initial stage of the 2019 coronavirus disease
(COVID-19) epidemic among the general population in China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(5), 1729. doi:10.3390/ijerph17051729
Weigold, A., Weigold, I.
K., & Russell, E. J. (2013). Examination of the equivalence of self-report
survey-based paper-and-pencil and internet data collection methods. Psychological Methods, 18(1), 53. DOI:10.1037/a0031607
Zarocostas, J. (2020). How to fight an infodemic. The Lancet,
395(10225), 676. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30461-X