Cited by 164Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesCOVID-19 and Mental HealthRisk Perception and Management

Tracing “Fearbola”: Psychological Predictors of Anxious Responding to the Threat of Ebola

Open access
Blakey, Shannon M., Reuman, Lillian, Jacoby, Ryan J., Abramowitz, Jonathan S.·2015·Cognitive Therapy and Research

Abstract

Serious illnesses such as Ebola are often highly publicized in the mass media and can be associated with varying levels of anxiety and compensatory safety behavior (e.g., avoidance of air travel). The present study investigated psychological processes associated with Ebola-related anxiety and safety behaviors during the outbreak in late 2014. Between October 30 and December 3, 2014, which encompassed the peak of concerns and of the media's attention to this particular outbreak, 107 university students completed a battery of measures assessing fear of Ebola, performance of safety behaviors, factual knowledge of the virus, and psychological variables hypothesized to predict Ebola-related fear. We found that while our sample was generally not very fearful of contracting Ebola, the fear of this disease was correlated with general distress, contamination cognitions, disgust sensitivity, body vigilance, and anxiety sensitivity-related physical concerns. Regression analyses further indicated that anxiety sensitivity related to physical concerns and the tendency to overestimate the severity of contamination were unique predictors of both Ebola fear and associated safety behaviors. Implications for how concerns over serious illness outbreaks can be conceptualized and clinically managed are discussed.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s10608-015-9701-9

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The COVID-19 Fear Index was created for the study to assess participants' fear concerning COVID-19.

    “the CFI was constructed for the current study to assess participants’ level of fear concerning COVID-19.”

    From Anxiety Sensitivity Mediates Relations Between Mental Distress Symptoms and Medical Care Utilization During COVID-19 Pandemic. (2021) · cites this paper as Blakey et al., 2015

    The Method > Measures section describes an Ebola Fear Inventory created for that paper’s study to assess fear of Ebola. It does not describe a COVID-19 Fear Index; the instrument and disease named in the claim differ from those in the cited paper. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Higher levels of anxiety sensitivity-physical concerns and intolerance of uncertainty were observed in the present sample compared with previous pandemic studies.

    “As compared to previous pandemic studies, levels of AS-physical concerns in the present sample (M = 7.30, SD = 5.88) were significantly higher than those found by Wheaton et al. (2012): M = 3.63 (4.14), t(770) = 9.56, 95% CI [2.92, 4.42], p < .000; Blakey and Abramowitz (2017): M = 4.42 (4.52), t(671) = 6.36, 95% CI [1.99, 3.77], p < .000; and Blakey et al. (2015): M = 4.34 (4.29), t(562) = 4.91, 95% CI [1.78, 4.14], p < .001.”
  • Safety behaviours as measured by the CSBC were significantly higher in the present sample than in Blakey et al. (2015), though direct comparison is limited by different instruments.

    “Levels of safety behaviours in the current sample as measured by the CSBC (M = 41.09, SD = 5.65) were significantly higher than those measured with the Ebola Safety Behaviors Checklist (ESBC) in Blakey et al.’s (2015) study”
  • In the present sample, anxiety sensitivity physical concerns were significantly higher than in three prior pandemic studies (Wheaton et al., 2012; Blakey and Abramowitz, 2017; Blakey et al., 2015).

    “levels of AS-physical concerns in the present sample (M = 7.30, SD = 5.88) were significantly higher than those found by Wheaton et al. (2012)”
  • Existing literature suggests that obsessive-compulsive contamination and/or health anxiety symptoms are associated with greater anxiety about prior public health concerns among university-affiliated samples.

    “existing literature suggests that obsessive-compulsive contamination and/or health anxiety symptoms are associated with greater anxiety about prior public health concerns among university-affiliated samples (Wheaton et al., 2012; Blakey et al., 2015; Blakey and Abramowitz, 2017).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Blakey, S. M., Reuman, L., Jacoby, R. J., & Abramowitz, J. S.
Affiliations
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Corresponding author
Abramowitz, Jonathan S.
Venue
Cognitive Therapy and Research
Published
2015-06-19
Volume
39
Issue
6
Pages
816-825
ISSN
  • 0147-5916 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-2819
OpenAlex
W1891769293
Cited by
164
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 54 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1
FWCI
3.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cognitive Therapy and Research (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Risk Perception and Management
Keywords
Ebola, safety behavior, anxiety sensitivity, disgust sensitivity, body vigilance, health anxiety, media coverage of epidemics, university students

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review