1. Perceived Risk and Emergency Preparedness: The Role of Self-Efficacy Jennifer E. Marceron, Cynthia A. Rohrbeck Department of Psychology, The George Washington University 311 adults; 65% females, 35% males 54% Caucasian, 46% Ethnic minorities Mean age= 32 years, SD= 10.01 Participants responded to an announcement about the research study on Craigslist. They reviewed an online consent form and, after agreeing to participate, clicked on a link to the survey (Survey Monkey). Participants completed several measures including emergency preparedness self-efficacy (the EPSE), emergency preparedness behaviors, perception of disaster risk, anxiety, and distress. Methods Introduction Large-scale public health emergencies, including mass violence, disease outbreaks, and disasters have had profound effects on both individuals and society. In particular, natural and human-made disasters (e.g., hurricanes, 9/11) have resulted in significant loss of life and property damage. Both the threat of disasters and exposure to disasters have been linked to increases in negative psychological outcomes such as anxiety and depression (Lee, Lemyre & Krewski, 2010). Although exposure to disasters can result in negative outcomes, it can also motivate people to become prepared for future emergencies. Personal threat and fear caused by the potential for physical harm often leads to changes in behavior with the goal of minimizing exposure to risk (Huddy, Feldman, Capelos & Provost; 2002). Further, individuals who engage in emergency preparedness behaviors do so if they believe these responses will “mitigate potential damage and if they perceive that they are capable of adopting [these behaviors]” (Mishra & Suar, 2012, p. 1081). These findings are consistent with the Protection Motivation Theory (Maddux & Rogers, 1983). Individuals’ perception that they are capable of behaviors, or self-efficacy, has been shown to mediate post-traumatic recovery in the case of natural disasters and terrorist attacks (Benight & Bandura, 2004). Prior to disaster, or during ongoing threat of disaster, self-efficacy may also interact with perceived disaster threat when predicting positive behaviors, such as preparedness. The current study was designed to test that hypothesis. We used the Emergency preparedness self-efficacy scale (EPSE; Marceron, Rohrbeck & Burns, 2013), that was designed to assess emergency preparedness self- efficacy for both natural and human-made disasters. Prior research indicated that the EPSE moderated the relationship between perceived disaster risk and psychological symptoms (anxiety, distress) in an undergraduate sample (Burns, Rohrbeck, Moore & Peterson, 2014). Using a community sample, we hypothesized that individuals with high EPSE would also have a stronger relationship between perceived disaster risk and emergency preparedness behaviors and, conversely, individuals with low EPSE would show a weaker relationship between perceived disaster risk and emergency preparedness behaviors. Results Results con’t Conclusions Participants Procedure Measures Multivariate analysis of variance was used to test directional hypotheses (one-tailed tests) for interactions between emergency preparedness self- efficacy and perceived risk of human-made disasters when predicting emergency preparedness. Emergency preparedness self-efficacy significantly moderated the relationship between risk perception and emergency preparedness (F=3.07, p<.05). These interactions maintained significance when including a variety of demographic covariates (e.g., gender, age, race, etc.). Results supported the moderation hypothesis that individuals with high emergency preparedness self-efficacy would have a stronger relationship between perceived disaster risk and emergency preparedness behaviors and, conversely, individuals with low emergency preparedness self-efficacy would show a weaker relationship between perceived disaster risk and emergency preparedness behaviors. That result remained significant when controlling for potential confounds such as age, gender, and race. These results suggest that self-efficacy for preparedness may help increase preparedness behaviors in the population. Those who perceive risk and believe they have the ability to prepare are more likely to do so than those who are not as confident in their ability to prepare. Limitations of this study include a convenience sample of adults, self-report measures, and assessment at only one time point. Convenience sampling through an online advertisement listing may result in limited variability on some demographic characteristics such as geographical location, age, economic status, education, and ethnicity. These characteristics are important factors to research on perceived risk of disasters and may be associated with perceived risk, self-efficacy, and emergency preparedness. As a result of the cross-sectional nature of this study, the results do not suggest causality. Future research should assess the relationships between these variables with other samples (to show generalizability) and at multiple time points (to show reliability over time). Despite these limitations, the findings of this study have important implications for future interventions. Results suggest that those who have a strong self-efficacy in their ability to overcome a disaster event have engaged in increased preparedness behaviors than those who have lower self-efficacy. Emergency preparedness self-efficacy may be an important construct to target in interventions aimed at increasing preparedness for disasters. Poster presented at APS, May, 2014. For further information, contact Jennifer Marceron at jemarcer@gwu.edu. Emergency Preparedness Self-Efficacy (EPSE) (Burns et al., 2014). 7-item measure; Internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha =.89) and test- retest reliability (r =.83, p <.001) is strong. Directions on the EPSE: “For each of the following items, rate how confident you are that you are capable of successfully doing it at this time, from 1 (not at all capable) to 5 (totally capable).” Example: “I can maintain food and water supplies in an emergency.” Emergency Behaviors Checklist (Rohrbeck & Burns, 2011) 21-item measure; Internal consistency (Cronbach’s alpha=.85) Directions on the Emergency Preparedness Checklist: “If you have taken the action in the last year, please check ‘Yes;’ If you have not taken the action in the last year, please check ‘No’.” Examples: “Have stored 3- days worth of nonperishable food” and “Have a working flashlight and extra batteries.” Perception of Risk (Rohrbeck & Burns, 2011) 6-item measure on a 5 point scale; Three components of ongoing threat: an individual’s perception of the likelihood of the occurrence of events, concern about the negative consequences and degree of concern or worry about events. Example: “In your view, what is the likelihood of another terrorist attack (e.g., hijacking, bioterrorism, subway/train bombings, school/civilian hostage crisis) in the next 6 months?” Demographics Items include age, gender, race, etc. Hypothesized Model We examined the moderating effects of self-efficacy (EPSE) on the relationship between perception of disaster risk and emergency preparedness behaviors with the following hypotheses: 1.Individuals with high emergency preparedness self-efficacy would have a stronger relationship between perceived disaster risk and emergency preparedness behaviors and, conversely 2.Individuals with low emergency preparedness self-efficacy would show a weaker relationship between perceived disaster risk and emergency preparedness behaviors. Perceived Risk of Disasters Emergency Preparedness Self-Efficacy Table 1: Means, Standard Deviations, and Ranges for Variables of Interest VariableMeanStandard DeviationRange Perceived risk of disaster 18.935.126-30 Emergency preparedness self-efficacy 24.425.797-35 Emergency preparedness checklist 6.235.320-20 Table 2: Correlations Between Variables of Interest Perceived risk of disaster Emergency preparedness self-efficacy Emergency preparedness self-efficacy 0.09 Emergency preparedness checklist 0.13*0.31** Note: *p<.05, **p<.0001