A comparative study on Earthquake Preparedness of Japanese and International Students in a Nankai Trough Earthquake-threatened Area in Shikoku, Japan

May combine two claims.

Zhang et al. found that although China's Earthquake Early Warning system delivered a technically accurate alert within 10 seconds during the 2019 Changning earthquake, a substantial gap remained between alert delivery and appropriate public response.

“For example, Zhang et al. [22] found that although China's EEW system delivered a technically accurate alert within 10 seconds during the 2019 Changning earthquake, a substantial gap remained between alert delivery and appropriate public responseillustrating that awareness of EEW alone is insufficient without accompanying education on protective actions.”

• cites [22] Zhang, 2021, Brief communication: Effective earthquake early warning systems: appropriate messaging and public awareness roles, Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences sourcePartly supported

  Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Iizuka found that international students reported higher levels of several disaster-preparedness actions than Japanese students despite lower awareness of evacuation shelters and hazard maps.

“Notably, Iizuka found that this knowledge gap did not necessarily correspond to lower self-reported preparatory action: international students reported higher levels of several disaster-preparedness actions than Japanese students, despite lower awareness of evacuation shelters and hazard maps [34].”

• cites [34] Iizuka, 2022, Disaster perception and preparation among foreign versus local university students in Japan: A comparative study, Progress in Disaster Science sourceSupported

May combine two claims.

The effectiveness of Earthquake Early Warning depends not only on technical performance but also on public awareness, knowledge of system functionality and limitations, message comprehension, and preparedness education.

“However, the effectiveness of EEW depends not only on technical performance but also on public awareness, knowledge of system functionality and limitations, message comprehension, and preparedness education [22][23][24].”

• cites [22] Zhang, 2021, Brief communication: Effective earthquake early warning systems: appropriate messaging and public awareness roles, Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences sourceSupported
• cites [23] Rostami, 2026, From Warnings to Actions: Factors Influencing Response to Earthquake Early Warning—A Systematic Literature Review, Earthquake Spectra sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites [24] Tan, 2022, Understanding the social aspects of earthquake early warning: A literature review, Front Commun (Lausanne) sourceSupported

May combine two claims.

Language barriers and unequal access to official disaster information are important contributors to preparedness disparities among foreign residents in Japan.

“These findings align with broader research on foreign residents in Japan, which has identified language barriers and unequal access to official disaster information as important contributors to preparedness disparities [41,42].”

• cites [41] Bhandari, 2022, Knowledge, attitude, practice and perceived barriers of natural disaster preparedness among Nepalese immigrants residing in Japan, BMC Public Health sourcePartly supported

  The Results identify language barriers and information deficits among Nepalese immigrants, while the Background says official disaster information is seldom available in Nepali. These passages support the proposed barriers, but the study does not establish preparedness disparities across foreign residents generally; the Discussion cautions that its findings may not generalize even to all Nepalese immigrants in Japan. (LLM, conf=0.86)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites [42] Nishiyama, 2022, Disaster preparedness among foreign residents in a rural area of Japan: A qualitative pilot study. Health Emergency and Disaster Nursing [Internet], Disaster Nursing Global Leader Degree Program sourceSupported

May combine two claims.

More recent earthquake-focused research documents low uptake of basic safety measures, limited knowledge of evacuation sites and routes, and low participation in disaster drills among international students.

“More recent earthquake-focused research further documents low uptake of basic safety measures, limited knowledge of evacuation sites and routes, and low participation in disaster drills among international students, highlighting persistent gaps in informational and practical preparedness [35].”

• cites [35] Koike R., Sonoda N., Furuki H., Morimoto A. Individual Preparedness for Large-scale Earthquakes among International Students in Japan: A Cross-sectional Questionnaire Survey. JMA J [Internet]. 2024;7:496–505. https://doi.org/10.31662/jmaj.2024-0049 sourceSupported

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

Preparedness requires capacity building rather than reliance on information provision alone.

“consistent with Paton's argument that preparedness requires capacity building rather than reliance on information provision alone [26].”

• cites Paton [26] Paton D. Disaster risk reduction: Psychological perspectives on preparedness. Aust J Psychol. Wiley-Blackwell Publishing Ltd; 2019. p. 327–341. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajpy.12237 sourceSupported

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

In New Zealand, international students' disaster preparedness was shaped by factors such as language barriers, limited social support, awareness of disaster risk, and perceptions of safety and institutional support.

“In New Zealand, Thorup-Binger and Charania [20] found that international students' disaster preparedness was shaped by factors such as language barriers, limited social support, awareness of disaster risk, and perceptions of safety and institutional support.”

• cites Thorup-Binger and Charania [20] Thorup-Binger, 2019, Vulnerability and capacities of international students in the face of disasters in Auckland, New Zealand: A qualitative descriptive study, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction sourcePartly supported

  Section 5.2 identifies language barriers and weak social support as vulnerabilities that may amplify adversity during a disaster. Section 4.2.4 links students’ hazard awareness, sense of safety, and expectations of institutional support to their perceptions of preparedness. The paper does not establish that language barriers or weak social support shaped the students’ disaster preparedness specifically; it discusses those factors chiefly as vulnerabilities. (LLM, conf=0.83)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

May combine two claims.

Self-efficacy is positively associated with preparedness intentions and preparedness actions, often emerging as an important predictor alongside or beyond risk perception and knowledge-based factors.

“Studies across earthquake and disaster contexts show that self-efficacy is positively associated with preparedness intentions and preparedness actions, often emerging as an important predictor alongside or beyond risk perception and knowledge-based factors [43][44][45].”

• cites [43] Tang, 2018, Residents’ disaster preparedness after the Meinong Taiwan earthquake: A test of protection motivation theory, Int J Environ Res Public Health sourceSupported
• cites [44] Qiu, 2023, The role of response efficacy and self-efficacy in disaster preparedness actions for vulnerable households, Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences sourcePartly supported

  Section 4.1 reports that self-efficacy was positively associated with adequate preparedness in vulnerable households, while risk perception was not; the Discussion reports an association with both adequate and minimal preparedness. The cited passages support preparedness actions, but do not establish a positive association between self-efficacy and preparedness intentions. (LLM, conf=0.85)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites [45] Lim, 2022, Why People Adopt Climate Change Adaptation and Disaster Risk Reduction Behaviors Integrated Model of Risk Communication and Results from Hurricanes, Floods, and Wildfires, Bull Am Meteorol Soc. American Meteorological Society sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

May combine two claims.

Earthquake response self-efficacy is not fully explained by preparedness education; self-efficacy influences preparedness through pathways that are partly independent of formal education and risk knowledge.

“Previous research supports the broader argument that earthquake response self-efficacy is not fully explained by preparedness education, indicating that self-efficacy influences preparedness through pathways that are partly independent of formal education and risk knowledge.”

• cites [43] Tang, 2018, Residents’ disaster preparedness after the Meinong Taiwan earthquake: A test of protection motivation theory, Int J Environ Res Public Health sourcePartly supported

  The Results (§3.3; page not provided) report a direct association between self-efficacy and actual disaster preparedness, as well as an indirect association through behavioral intention. The paper discusses education and risk perception separately, but does not establish that self-efficacy is not fully explained by preparedness education or that its association with preparedness is independent of formal education and risk knowledge. (LLM, conf=0.85)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites [44] Qiu, 2023, The role of response efficacy and self-efficacy in disaster preparedness actions for vulnerable households, Natural Hazards and Earth System Sciences sourcePartly supported

  Section 4.1 reports that self-efficacy was associated with adequate household disaster preparedness while education level and risk perception were not significantly associated with it. Section 5 adds that education or training does not necessarily lead to preparation. The paper does not establish that self-efficacy causes preparedness through pathways independent of education or risk knowledge, and its findings concern disaster preparedness in vulnerable households rather than earthquake response specifically. (LLM, conf=0.86)

  Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
• cites [45] Lim, 2022, Why People Adopt Climate Change Adaptation and Disaster Risk Reduction Behaviors Integrated Model of Risk Communication and Results from Hurricanes, Floods, and Wildfires, Bull Am Meteorol Soc. American Meteorological Society sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

May combine two claims.

Student group remained a significant predictor of self-efficacy after accounting for preparedness education, with Japanese students reporting lower self-efficacy than international students.

“Student group also remained a significant predictor (B = -0.39,SE = 0.09, β = -.29,p < .001),indicating that Japanese students reported lower earthquake response self-efficacy than international students after accounting for preparedness education.”

May combine two claims.

Treating preparedness education as a categorical variable did not change the robustness of the primary analysis, and education coefficients increased monotonically across levels.

“The education coefficients increased monotonically across levels (B = .037,.290,.449,and .676for minimal, moderate, comprehensive, and extensive education, respectively), supporting the robustness of the primary analysis in which preparedness education was treated as a continuous predictor.”

May combine two claims.

International students reported slightly higher earthquake response self-efficacy than Japanese students, with a small effect size.

“International students reported slightly higher self-efficacy scores (M = 2.61, SD = 0.72, N = 113) than Japanese students (M = 2.46, SD = 0.61, N = 180).A Mann-Whitney U test indicated that this difference was statistically significant (U = 8,589.5,p = .025);however, the effect size was small in magnitude (r = .13),indicating that the difference in earthquake response self-efficacy between groups”

• Also stated in: § Abstract · boosted

  “Despite lower educational exposure, international students demonstrated marginally higher response self-efficacy, although the effect size was small.”

May combine two claims.

Japanese students reported substantially higher levels of preparedness education and greater awareness of key disaster preparedness systems.

“The findings indicate that Japanese students reported substantially higher levels of preparedness education and greater awareness of key disaster preparedness systems”

May combine two claims.

The baseline model explained 8.6% of the variance in earthquake response self-efficacy, and the full sensitivity model explained 11.6%.

“The baseline model explained 8.6% of the variance in earthquake response self-efficacy, and the full sensitivity model explained 11.6%”

May combine two claims.

International students reported lower educational exposure and lower familiarity with locally specific preparedness resources.

“In contrast, international students reported lower educational exposure and lower familiarity with locally specific preparedness resources.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The international student survey achieved a response rate of approximately 50.4% of the target population.

“Of these, 113 valid responses were obtained, corresponding to a response rate of approximately 50.4% of the target population.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

The findings highlight the importance of considering informational preparedness and perceived response capability as related but distinct dimensions in multicultural university disaster education.

“These findings highlight the importance of considering informational preparedness and perceived response capability as related but distinct dimensions in multicultural university disaster education.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Japan experiences approximately 10% of the world's earthquakes despite occupying less than 1% of the global land area.

“Despite occupying less than 1% of the global land area, Japan experiences approximately 10% of the world's earthquakes, underscoring its exceptionally high level of seismic exposure [1].”

• cites [1] Headquarters for Earthquake Research Promotion. Earthquake awareness [Internet]. 2022. https://www.jishin.go.jp/main/index-e.html. Accessed 2 February 2026Not checked yet

  Not checked in the free run.

May combine two claims.

Data were collected under stable, non-disaster conditions outside the immediate aftermath of any major earthquake, minimizing potential confounding from short-term post-disaster effects.

“Although the two student groups were surveyed during different periods, both were assessed under stable, non-disaster conditions and outside the J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f immediate aftermath of any major earthquake event, minimizing potential confounding from short-term post-disaster effects.”

May combine two claims.

Exploratory factor analysis supported a unidimensional structure of the six-item earthquake response self-efficacy measure, with one factor explaining 47.8% of common variance and loadings from 0.63 to 0.77.

“A single factor was extracted, explaining 47.8% of the total common variance.All six items loaded strongly on the factor, with standardized loadings ranging from 0.63 to 0.77, supporting a unidimensional structure of earthquake response self-efficacy.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

The Japanese questionnaire was produced through forward translation of the original English items, with identical response options and coding procedures across groups to support comparability.

“This version of the questionnaire was produced through forward translation of the original English items, with identical response options and coding procedures used across groups to support comparability.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The self-efficacy measure was not intended to capture broader psychological preparedness comprehensively.

“The measure J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f primarily focused on participants' perceived capability to manage earthquake situations effectively and was not intended to capture broader psychological preparedness comprehensively.”

May combine two claims.

Confirmatory factor analysis showed acceptable fit for the one-factor self-efficacy model, with CFI 0.99, TLI 0.98, SRMR 0.06, and an elevated RMSEA of 0.11 likely inflated by low degrees of freedom.

“The model demonstrated excellent incremental fit (CFI = 0.99, TLI = 0.98) and acceptable absolute fit (SRMR = 0.06).Although the RMSEA value was elevated (RMSEA = 0.11), this likely reflects the known tendency of RMSEA to over-reject correctly specified models with small degrees of freedom.”

• cites [38] Kenny, 2015, The Performance of RMSEA in Models With Small Degrees of Freedom, Sociol Methods Res sourceNot checked — no full text of the source
• cites [39] Shi, 2022, Evaluating SEM Model Fit with Small Degrees of Freedom, Multivariate Behav Res sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

May combine two claims.

Disaster education has been continuously implemented in Japanese schools since the post-war period, evolving in content and pedagogical focus.

“Disaster education has been continuously implemented in Japanese schools since the post-war period while evolving in both content and pedagogical focus over time [3].”

• cites [3] Kitagawa, 2015, Continuity and change in disaster education in Japan, Hist Educ. Routledge sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

In a study in a highly disaster-prone setting, there was a marked discrepancy between students' perceived and actual preparedness.

“Similarly, Hasan et al. [12] found a marked discrepancy between students' perceived and actual preparedness in a highly disaster-prone setting.”

• cites Hasan et al. [12] Hasan, 2022, Exploring disaster preparedness of students at university in Bangladesh, Natural Hazards sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

May combine two claims.

EEW awareness is locally specific: students may have general disaster experience or prior preparedness education but still be unfamiliar with how alerts function in Japan.

“This finding is important because EEW awareness is locally specific: students may have general disaster experience or prior preparedness education but still be unfamiliar with how alerts function in Japan.”

May combine two claims.

Differences in preparedness education and awareness between Japanese and international students reflect not only variation in prior educational exposure but also structural challenges in navigating Japan's disaster preparedness systems.

“Taken together, the results suggest that differences in preparedness education and awareness between Japanese and international students reflect not only variation in prior educational exposure but also structural challenges in navigating Japan's disaster preparedness systems.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

All questionnaire items were mandatory, preventing incomplete responses, and all submitted questionnaires were included in the analysis.

“All questionnaire items were set as mandatory in the online survey platform, preventing incomplete responses.Consequently, all submitted questionnaires were included in the analysis.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

In a study of university students in China, most had received some disaster education, but over 85% still expressed a desire for a systematic disaster course, with rescue-skills content most in demand.

“For example, although Tan et al. [11] found that most university students in China had received some disaster education, over 85% still expressed a desire for a systematic disaster course, with rescue-skills content most in demand”

• cites Tan et al. [11] Tan, 2017, Disaster Preparedness among University Students in Guangzhou, China: Assessment of Status and Demand for Disaster Education, Disaster Med Public Health Prep sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

May combine two claims.

Data were collected during different periods, so subtle temporal influences cannot be entirely ruled out, despite both surveys being conducted under stable, non-disaster conditions.

“Because data were collected during different periods, subtle temporal influences, such as media attention, institutional communication, or broader contextual factors, cannot be entirely ruled out, despite both surveys being conducted under stable, non-disaster conditions.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The specific mechanisms underlying the self-efficacy pattern, such as exposure to Japan's preparedness infrastructure, trust in institutional support, or differences in risk perception, were not directly assessed in this study.

“although the specific mechanisms underlying this pattern, such as exposure to Japan's preparedness infrastructure, trust in institutional support, or differences in risk perception, were not directly assessed in this study.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

This study followed standard ethical principles for anonymous, minimal-risk survey research involving human participants.

“This study followed standard ethical principles for anonymous, minimal-risk survey research involving human participants.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

The study did not directly assess several psychological, linguistic, and contextual mechanisms that may shape preparedness-related responses.

“Finally, the study did not directly assess several psychological, linguistic, and contextual mechanisms that may shape preparedness-related responses.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

The study was conducted with attention to voluntary participation, informed consent, minimization of risk, and protection of participant confidentiality.

“The study was conducted with attention to voluntary participation, informed consent, minimization of risk, and protection of participant confidentiality.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

No personally identifiable information was collected.

“No personally identifiable information was collected.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Participation was voluntary and anonymous, and informed consent was obtained electronically before completion of the online questionnaire.

“Participation was voluntary and anonymous, and informed consent was obtained electronically before completion of the online questionnaire.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

For international students, earthquake response self-efficacy may reflect contextual or psychological factors operating within the Japanese risk environment.

“For international students, earthquake response self-efficacy may therefore reflect contextual or psychological factors operating within the Japanese risk environment”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Because the study involved an anonymous, minimal-risk online survey and did not collect sensitive personal information, formal institutional ethics approval was not obtained.

“Because the study involved an anonymous, minimal-risk online survey and did not collect sensitive personal information, formal institutional ethics approval was not obtained.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Regression analyses were used to examine associations while accounting for key variables.

“Although regression analyses were used to examine associations while accounting for key variables”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Native languages and more detailed within-country regional backgrounds were not systematically collected, limiting the ability to examine how linguistic and regional differences shaped preparedness awareness and earthquake response self-efficacy.

“Native languages and more detailed within-country regional backgrounds were not systematically collected, limiting the ability to examine how linguistic and regional differences shaped preparedness awareness and earthquake response self-efficacy.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

Unmeasured psychological or contextual influences, cultural differences in self-assessment, or overconfidence rather than greater actual capability remain possible interpretations, none of which the present data can confirm or rule out.

“reinforces that unmeasured psychological or contextual influences, cultural differences in self-assessment, or overconfidence rather than greater actual capability remain possible interpretations, none of which the present data can confirm or rule out.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

Self-efficacy measures should not be interpreted as direct proxies for objective preparedness or knowledge levels, but rather as indicators of individuals' perceived capability to respond within a specific hazard context.

“Self-efficacy measures should not be interpreted as direct proxies for objective preparedness or knowledge levels, but rather as indicators of individuals' perceived capability to respond within a specific hazard context [29].”

• cites [29] Bandura, 1977, Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change, Psychol Rev [Internet] sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Because the groups were not matched on these characteristics, the findings should be interpreted as exploratory comparative evidence rather than as causal evidence of group differences.

“Because the groups were not matched on these characteristics, the findings should be interpreted as exploratory comparative evidence rather than as causal evidence of group differences.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

Perceived capability may also be shaped by situational appraisals, institutional support, and environmental cues.

“While preparedness education may contribute to self-efficacy, these frameworks suggest that perceived capability may also be shaped by situational appraisals, institutional support, and environmental cues.”

Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

Preparedness education as an informational dimension of preparedness should be distinguished from earthquake response self-efficacy as a psychological dimension related to perceived capacity to act effectively during earthquake situations.

“These findings highlight the importance of distinguishing preparedness education as an informational dimension of preparedness from earthquake response self-efficacy as a psychological dimension related to perceived capacity to act effectively during earthquake situations.”

May combine two claims.

Self-efficacy was self-reported and was not validated against actual response performance.

“Because self-efficacy was self-reported and was not validated against actual response performance”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

Participants were informed about the purpose of the study and could stop completing the questionnaire before submission.

“Participants were informed about the purpose of the study and could stop completing the questionnaire before submission.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

Because Japan has highly institutionalized disaster education, public warning systems, evacuation infrastructure, and risk communication practices, the findings may not transfer directly to countries or universities with different levels of disaster governance capacity, warning-system coverage, or preparedness education.

“Because Japan has highly institutionalized disaster education, public warning systems, evacuation infrastructure, and risk communication practices, the findings may not transfer directly to countries or universities with different levels of disaster governance capacity, warning-system coverage, or preparedness education.”

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: Japan has a highly institutionalized disaster education and risk communication environment.

May combine two claims.

The Japanese and international student samples differed substantially in demographic and experiential composition: most international respondents were graduate students, whereas most Japanese respondents were undergraduates, and prior earthquake experience was more common among Japanese students.

“The Japanese and international student samples also differed substantially in demographic and experiential composition: most international respondents were graduate students, whereas most Japanese respondents were undergraduates, and prior earthquake experience was more common among Japanese students.”

Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

In the United States, institutional challenges, risk perception, and preparedness gaps played a role among international students exposed to hurricane risk.

“In the United States, Abukhalaf et al. [19] similarly highlighted the role of institutional challenges, risk perception, and preparedness gaps among international students exposed to hurricane risk.”

• cites Abukhalaf et al. [19] Abukhalaf, 2022, Assessing international students’ vulnerability to hurricanes: University of Florida case study, International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction sourceNot checked — no full text of the source

May combine two claims.

No formal pilot testing of the questionnaire was conducted prior to data collection, and the Japanese version was produced through forward translation only, without independent back-translation.

“No formal pilot testing of the questionnaire was conducted prior to data collection, and the Japanese version was produced through forward translation only, without independent back-translation”