Southwestern College Students  Attitudes and Behaviors towards Face Mask wearing on Campus. 

Southwestern College Students Attitudes and Behaviors towards Face Mask wearing on Campus. | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Southwestern College Students Attitudes and Behaviors towards Face Mask wearing on Campus. Sandra Freda Wood, Ebenezer Ato Kwamena Aidoo, Kweku Ewusie Orleans Lindsay, and 1 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-5306087/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract The emergence of respiratory viral infections has necessitated the use of face masks worldwide. Although several studies have examined the uses of the face and attested to its efficacy in preventing airborne diseases. In the United States, wearing face masks is a divisive and politicized topic. College students on campus have their own reservations on mask wearing and are influenced by a myriad of factors that determine compliance to mask mandate. The aim of this study is to examine the perception, attitudes, and behavior of college students toward facemask wearing on campus. To achieve that, we recruited 217 participants. 117 (53.9%) participants identified as females, 97 (44.7%) identified as males while the remaining three (1.4%) participants identified as non-binary, with an average age of 19.89. Participants were recruited using convenience sampling through the distribution of flyers both in class and online course pages or website. With an online survey, we measured participants’ attitude, behavior, perceived benefit, and perceived risk of wearing facemasks. We conducted, one-way ANOVA, correlation, and regression analysis. The result indicated that there is no relationship between perceived benefit and attitude towards wearing face masks among US college students. From the analysis, as perceived benefit increases, students' attitude also decreases moderately. This means that perceived benefits do not necessarily correlate with the attitude of students in wearing face masks. Therefore, it might be due to other factors such as the mandatory rule instituted for all to wear face mask on campus. Additionally, there is a positive low relationship between students’ perceived risk of face mask wearing and their face mask wearing behavior, the relationship, therefore, is not significant. This suggests that college students who are at a high perceived risk of COVID-19 are less likely to engage in high face mask wearing behavior. Implications and future directions are discussed. Introduction Until recently, face masks were typically worn in clinical settings by medical professionals (1). However, the outbreak of respiratory viral infections (RVIs) that predates the COVID-19 pandemic such as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), the H1N1 influenza (bird flu), the Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), and Ebola introduced the use of face mask in the affected areas. The declaration of the life-threatening COVID-19 outbreaks worldwide, broadened the use of face masks as a prophylactic tactic against the deadly airborne infection. Several studies have examined the uses of the face mask and their efficacy in preventing airborne diseases (2) (3), (4), (5) (6). Evidently, wearing a face mask helps prevent some infections from spreading through droplets(5). In a study by Cheng et al., (7) public mask-wearing is effective in reducing COVID-19 transmission in the community, thus curbing the spread of the pandemic. The protocol of wearing face masks has been controversial and politicized in many countries including the U.S.(8, 9, 10). Mask wearing is hardly seen as a norm in the US (11, 12). Despite media claims that more people are donning masks in public places, many people disagree over whether this behavior is healthy and effective (13, 14). The motivation of individuals to adhere to these preventative measures is crucial for the effectiveness of preventive behaviors (15, 16). Positive attitudes towards COVID-19 preventive measures such as using masks can improve mask-wearing behavior, though, concerns about mask impact on health may influence negative attitudes and behaviors. Zhang et al. (17) examined four major constructs viz perceived usefulness, perceived risk, social pressure, and social image as motivations for mask use when they investigated mask-wearing behavior among Chinese urban and rural residents. Results on perceived usefulness indicated a significant relationship between attitude and behavioral intention to wear a mask, meaning that individuals with positive attitudes towards mask use or who perceived that wearing a mask will benefit them, were more likely to wear one. Meanwhile, the hypothesis testing on the variables perceived risk, social image, and social pressure did not indicate any association with mask use behavioral intention, the test yielded significant relationships with attitudes. An indication of that attitude was a predictor of intentions to use a mask. The study further observed that social image and social pressure also had a strong influence on attitudes but not on the behavioral intention to wear masks. In other words, individuals develop positive attitudes towards mask-wearing when they perceive that the behavior could improve their social status. Similarly, Aboagye et al., (18) found that the perceived usefulness of masks improved students’ attitudes towards wearing one because they believe that wearing masks would protect them against COVID-19. However, the health challenges of wearing masks — especially for students with respiratory problems including asthma— and for an extended period impacted attitudes towards mask use on campus. Instead, alternative prevention strategies such as physical distancing and remote learning were put forward to limit the use of masks for students while on campus. Both studies demonstrate the influence of perceptions of mask use on attitudes which by extension, determines the behavioral action or intention toward using it. Also, they reiterate the need to sustain positive attitudes to inform mask-wearing behaviors and considerations for alternative measures to prevent COVID-19. Risk perceptions are very necessary for taking preventive measures, but they are frequently biased(19). Brug and Richardus (15) also asserted that most health behavior theories include risk perception as a critical component. The pandemic risk perceptions significantly influence individuals’ intention to wear face masks (20, 21, 22).The perceived benefits of face masks refer to people's understanding and awareness of the benefits that face masks provide in controlling and preventing the transmission of infectious viral diseases (23). The perceived benefits of face masks have a significant influence on individuals’ intention to wear face masks (24, 25, 26). Apart from levels of perceived benefits and risk, other studies have shown that demographic factors such as age, gender, marital status, and living situation influenced preventative health behaviors (27).When Rawlings et al.(27), explore students’ perceptions of COVID-19 risks and preventive measures in Uganda, they found that many students obeyed the face mask guidelines, students believed that COVID-19 is a health risk, and this perspective favorably influenced their attitudes and behaviors regarding the intention to wear the face masks, their intentions differ by their age, gender and level or year. This adds to the argument that age, gender, and academic level of students determine people or students’ attitudes which influences their behavior to follow preventive measures or guidelines towards face mask wearing. Situating this to gender, prior studies have suggested generally that women are more likely to have positive attitudes and behavior towards face mask wearing than men since men are more likely to perceive face mask wearing negatively with reasons such as being a weakness sign, shameful, a threat to their independence and masculine identity. (28, 29, 30, 31).This was clearly demonstrated in research conducted by Dattel et al., (32)that examined divergent attitudes regarding the benefits of face masks in aviation colleges and universities. Females reported greater benefits to wearing a face mask and fewer inconveniences. A similar finding was reported by Soltan et al. (33), female senior students have higher percentages regarding related knowledge and practicing preventive behaviors as well among their population. In relation to age, older people are more susceptible to covid 19 infection than younger ones in terms of immune system defense, morbidity, and mortality rates. This explains the reason older students and even females wear face masks more than younger males. Additionally, it was observed that younger people feel they are invincible to the coronavirus which, helps explain their lower perceptions of the benefits of face masks. These attitudes may also have arisen from reports of fewer COVID-19 infections among youth(34, 35). However, this reasoning is flawed because many younger people who become exposed to or ill with COVID-19 are like the rest of the population indisposed or must quarantine for a considerable period (32). Limna et al. (19) investigated the main factors affecting the general public’s intention to wear a face mask during the COVID-19 pandemic in Thailand. The work indicated that the predictors of intention to wear face masks included attitude, face mask cost, pandemic risk perceptions, perceived benefits, and face mask availability. The findings revealed that attitude had the most significant influence on the intention to wear a face mask, and then the perceived benefit of a face mask, the next was pandemic risk perceptions, followed by the availability of face masks, and face mask cost. It was indicated that the respondents’ pandemic risk perceptions greatly influenced attitudes. Also, their attitude significantly influenced their pandemic risk perceptions and their intention to wear face masks. Furthermore, Soltan et al. (33) in their evaluation of knowledge, risk perception, and preventive behaviors among undergraduate medical students disclosed that about 86.9% of the students perceived a COVID-19-infected person as a serious threat to society and as a result, about 92% of the students were practicing the COVID-19 preventive behaviors. Several studies have supported the claim of students' positive attitude and adherence to the wearing of face masks (36). Conversely, few of the studies have accounted that some students resisted wearing face masks despite the growing trends in the COVID-19 pandemic (37, 38). Dattel et al, (32), revealed polarized opinions on the advantages of face masks and described that those who even disagreed with the benefit of face masks claimed that they complied with it when on their college campuses. It is well-established that many factors influence the correlation between attitudes and behaviors, but it is generally accepted that specific attitudes will predict specific behaviors (39). Age, gender, and academic level of student’s factors may explain attitudes and behaviors regarding wearing face masks. Overall, practicing preventive behaviors of mask-wearing is dependent on the assessment of risk perception by college students on COVID-19 disease as a serious threat to the academic environment. Even though many students experience face mask wearing as discomforting, and sometimes inconvenient as a result of difficulty in breathing. Studies show that risk perception assessment done by college students on COVID-19 infection on the benefits of wearing face masks outweigh the discomforts and see wearing face masks as potentially lifesaving(40) Research Question and Hypotheses RQ1 : What is the level of perceived risk of wearing face mask among US college students? RQ2 : What is the level of perceived benefit of wearing face masks among US college students? Hypotheses H1 : There is no statistically significant difference in perceived risk of wearing face masks due to gender and undergraduate student classification level among US college students. H2: There is no statistically significant difference in the perceived benefit of wearing face masks due to gender and undergraduate student classification level among US college students. H3: There is no relationship between perceived benefit and attitude towards wearing face masks among US college students. H4: There is no relationship between perceived risk and attitude towards wearing face masks among US college students. H5: There is a positive relationship between perceived risk and behavior toward wearing face masks among US college students. H6: There is a positive relationship between perceived benefit and behavior towards wearing face masks among US college students. H7: Perceived benefit and perceived risk will significantly predict the attitude of students towards face mask wearing. H8: Perceived benefit and perceived risk will significantly predict the behavior of students towards face mask wearing. Materials and Methods Procedures for Data Collection Participants were recruited using convenience sampling through the distribution of flyers both in class and online course pages or websites. Both recruitment methods directed participants to scan a QR code on the flyer posted on their course pages to be directed to the online survey on Qualtrics. The flyer's advertisement was done by the researcher and course instructors. Participants were offered a small amount of extra course credit for participation. The inclusion criteria for participation were that respondents must be enrolled in the university where the study was conducted. Again, students taking various undergraduate courses must be 18 years old or above. To protect participation identities and to get the extra credit, a unique code was generated on the last page of the survey and students were instructed to take a picture of the code and upload it onto canvas. The study began with a consent form that detailed the study procedures and a review of the rights, anonymous nature of participation and potential risks of participation. Contact information for both the IRB (Institutional Review Board) and the study’s primary investigator was provided to participants. Socio-Demographic Characteristics Demographic questions such as age, gender, year of school, living condition, COVID-19 status as well as COVID-19 vaccination status. Measures We measured participants’ attitudes, behavior, perceived benefits and perceived risks, the researcher used an adapted version of the scale by different researchers as described below: Attitudes variable . Attitudes of student scale (41)originally used to assess attitudes towards mask use in preventing and controlling the COVID-19 outbreak was used in the present study. Cronbach’s alpha was good at 0.78. Participants s indicated on a scale from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree to measure the extent to which they agree with a 10 - item question on attitude, for example, “Wearing facemasks cause outer ear pain”. The attitude items were further summed (SD and Mean), and reverse coded such that higher scores indicated more positive attitudes towards face mask-wearing”. Behavior variable . In the current study, the behavior of students toward face mask wearing was s to assess the behavior students exhibit toward how they use and dispose of their face masks on campus. Larebo et al. (42) developed the original version of the scale with a reliability coefficient of 0.84 to evaluate the practices of face mask utilization and associated factors during the COVID-19 pandemic among Wachemo University Students. Participants completed a 14-item behavior scale which was measured on varied levels such as 1= Yes , 2 = Maybe to 3 = No , 1 = never to 4 = always . For instance, there were questions such as “Did you keep a used facemask in your pocket/ bag for later use?” Perceived benefits variable . This scale was developed by Davis (43) for predicting user acceptance of computers but has been adapted by several researchers (e.g.,) in different contexts. A 7-item perceived benefits scale with a reliability coefficient of 0.90 was used to measure whether students’ attitudes and behavior are predicted by knowing and perceiving that using face masks is useful. Participants indicated on a Likert scale from 1 = strongly disagree to 5 = strongly agree . Perceived risks variable . The current study adapted the COVID-19 perceived risks scale (CPRS) (44, 45) to assess the responses to COVID-19. The researcher mainly added the phrase “while wearing face masks” to each of the statements to situate it in the present context of face mask wearing. Participants responded using a 5-point Likert scale with a reliability coefficient of 0.88, ranging from 1 = very unlikely to 5 = very likely to measure whether the effects of COVID-19 while wearing a face mask are likely to predict the attitudes and behavior of students or not. To do this, a 5-item scale was used. All items were reverse-recoded so that higher scores indicate higher perceived risks of COVID-19. Data Analysis After the survey was closed, the first author checked and cleaned the data so participants exhibiting large amounts of missing data were excluded. For instance, those who provided only demographic information and failed to answer items related to study aims were deleted. We utilized SPSS version 27 to conduct the data analysis and a p-value of less than 0.05 was considered significant. Frequencies, mean, and standard deviation were used to analyze the demographic data. We used a variety of statistical techniques, such as one-way ANOVA, correlation, and regression to help us address the research questions and hypotheses. Results The total sample size comprised of ( N = 217) participants. The data showed that 117 representing 53.9% of the students were females, 97 representing 44.7% were males and the remaining three representing 1.4% were non-binary with the age being ( M age = 19.89 SD = 1.53). Additionally, demographics such as year of school, living conditions as well as COVID-19 vaccination status were also provided. For the information on year of school, Freshmen (first-year students) formed the majority (41.5%), followed by juniors (26.3%), sophomores (22.1%), seniors (6.9%) and super seniors (3.2%). In describing their living condition, those who lived with friends/roommates was the highest (68.2), then those living with family (21.2%), those staying alone (8.8%) and the other options apart from the ones provided (1.8%). In addition, the large number of participants have been fully vaccinated (46.5%), not vaccinated (25.3%), vaccinated and boosted (22.1%) and others who have received only one shot (6.0%). Participants were asked whether they have ever tested positive for COVID-19 before, those who responded Yes (54.4%) while the No (45.6%). All results are shown in Table I Table I: Participants’ characteristics (N=271) Characteristic n % M SD Age (range 18-25) 217 19.89 1.53 Gender Female 117 53.9 Male 97 44.7 Nonbinary 3 1.4 Year in College Freshmen 90 41.5 Sophomore 48 22.1 Junior 57 26.3 Senior 15 6.9 Super senior (5+ years) 7 3.2 Living Condition Alone 19 8.8 Family 46 21.2 Friends/Roommates 148 68.2 Others 4 1.8 COVID-19 Vaccination Status Fully vaccinated. 101 46.5 Vaccinated and boosted. 13 6.0 One shot 48 22.1 Not vaccinated 55 25.3 Previous COVID-19 diagnosis Yes 118 54.4 No 99 45.6 Level of perceived risk The purpose of the research question was to find out the perceived risk of students wearing a face mask. The cut-off points on the five-point Likert scale for the set of data are 1.00-1.60 = low, 1.61-2.20 = weak, 2.21-2.80 = moderate, 2.81-3.40 = strong and 3.41-4.00 = perfect. The results of the descriptive statistics for the perceived risk of face mask wearing as expressed by the students is presented in Table II. Table II - Descriptive statistics of students’ perceived risk of face mask wearing. Statements N Mean Std. Dev Skewness Kurtosis How likely is it that you might become infected with COVID-19 when wearing a face mask? 217 2.89 .906 .191 -.167 How likely is it that people in your family and friends might become infected with COVID-19 when wearing a face mask? 217 2.89 .899 -.021 -.099 How likely are you from dying of COVID-19 when wearing face mask? 217 2.38 1.003 .202 -.450 Do I worry about myself contracting COVID-19 while wearing a face mask? 217 2.49 1.137 .424 -.632 Do I worry about a family member contracting COVID-19 while wearing a face mask? 217 2.71 1.128 .162 -.799 Do I worry about COVID-19 becoming severe in the school because of our attitude and behavior toward face mask wearing? 217 2.88 1.277 .070 -1.034 Do I worry about COVID-19 causing a shutdown in schools because of our attitude and behavior toward face mask wearing? 217 2.99 1.253 .069 -.970 Mean of Means Mean of Std. Dev. Overall skewness Overall kurtosis 2.75 1.086 .000 .349 The result shows that the distribution of students’ perceived risk of wearing mask is normal (Sk = 0.000) and platykurtic (kp <3). The results show that, the students expressed that they have moderate level of risk of face mask wearing. This is because the means of means (2.75) lies within the range of moderate level of risk in wearing face mask. Perceived benefit The purpose of the research question was to find out the perceived benefit of students in wearing face mask. The cut-off points on the five-point Likert scale for the set of data are 1.00-1.60 = low, 1.61-2.20 = weak, 2.21-2.80 = moderate, 2.81-3.40 = strong and 3.41-4.00 = perfect. The results of the descriptive statistics for perceived of benefit face mask wearing as expressed by the students are presented in Table III. Table III: Descriptive statistics of students’ perceived benefit of face mask wearing. Statement N Mean Std. Dev Skewness Kurtosis I believe that wearing a face mask is an effective precautionary measure 217 3.55 1.306 -.638 -.702 I believe that wearing a face mask will protect my health 217 3.36 1.313 -.364 -1.027 I believe that wearing a face mask reduces the chances of getting infected 217 3.55 1.294 -.545 -.816 I believe that wearing a face mask reduces the chances of inhaling unhealthy air 217 3.57 1.223 -.608 -.544 I believe that wearing a face mask will reduce my exposure to novel SARS-CoV-2 virus 217 3.46 1.305 -.427 -.969 I do not fear going out after wearing a face mask 217 3.76 1.087 -.504 -.366 I believe that society will get protected from viral diseases if people wear face masks 217 3.14 1.327 -.169 -1.124 Mean of Means Mean of std. dev Overall skewness Overall kurtosis 3.49 1.27 -.391 -.68 The result shows the distribution of students on the perceived benefit is negatively skewed (overall Sk = -.391) and platykurtic (overall kp <3). The results show that, the students expressed perfect level of benefit of face mask wearing. This is because the means of means (3.49) lies within the range of perfect level of benefit in wearing face mask. There is no significant difference in perceived risk due to gender and level. The purpose of the hypothesis was to find if students have different risk level in wearing face mask as result of their gender and undergraduate student classification level. The result of the descriptive statistics is presented in Table IV. Table IV: Descriptive statistics of students perceived risk of face mask wearing by gender and level Gender Levels Mean Std. Deviation N Female Freshmen 19.58 5.08 53 Sophomore 19.88 3.80 25 Juniors 20.19 4.54 32 Seniors 19.57 3.26 7 Male Freshmen 19.41 5.38 37 Sophomore 18.09 5.35 23 Juniors 17.28 4.74 25 Seniors 19.00 4.69 7 Super seniors (5 + years) 18.00 3.00 5 Nonbinary Seniors 18.00 . 1 Super seniors (5 + years) 24.50 3.54 2 The results showed that among females, the juniors (M = 20.19; SD = 4.54; N = 32) have the highest risks of wearing face masks. The seniors (M = 19.57; SD = 3.26; N = 7) however, have the least risks in wearing face masks. The result also shows that among males, the freshmen (M = 19.41; SD = 5.38; N = 37) have the highest risks in wearing face mask. Conversely, the juniors (M = 17.28; SD = 4.74; N = 25) have the least risks in wearing face masks. Within the Non-binary, it was found that the super seniors (M = 24.50; SD = 3.54; N = 2) have higher risks in wearing face masks than the seniors (M = 18.00; N = 1). To find out whether the differences in the means are significant, a two-way ANOVA was used to test the hypothesis. The result of the two-way ANOVA is presented in Table V. Table V: Results of the two-way ANOVA on perceived risk due to gender and level Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Gender 114.502 2 57.251 2.466 .087 Level 38.837 4 9.709 .418 .795 Gender * Level 96.898 4 24.224 1.043 .386 Error 4782.382 206 23.215 Total 85308.000 217 The results show that there is no statistically significant gender difference in the perceived risk of the students in wearing face masks, (F 2,206 = 2.466, p= 0.087, p >0.05). This means male and female students have the same level of risk in wearing face masks. Also, the result shows that there is no statistically significant level difference in the perceived risk of the students wearing face masks (F 4,206 = 0.418, p= 0.795, p >0.05). This means that students irrespective of their level have the same risks in wearing face masks. Finally, the result shows that there is no significant difference in students’ risk of wearing face by the interaction of gender and level (F 4,206 = 1.043, p= 0.386, p >0.05). This means that female and male students of a particular level have the same risks in wearing face masks. There is no significant difference in perceived benefit due to gender and level. The purpose of the hypothesis was to find if students have perceived benefits in wearing face mask as result of their gender and level. The result of the descriptive statistics is presented in Table VI. Table VI: Descriptive statistics of students’ perceived benefit of face mask wearing by gender and level Gender Levels Mean Std. Deviation N Female Freshmen 24.19 7.16 53 Sophomore 25.44 6.65 25 Juniors 24.41 7.09 32 Seniors 29.00 4.73 7 Male Freshmen 25.05 7.31 37 Sophomore 24.57 6.24 23 Juniors 22.88 6.98 25 Seniors 23.29 9.69 7 Super seniors (5 + years) 24.00 6.40 5 Nonbinary Seniors 22.00 . 1 Super seniors (5 + years) 13.00 8.49 2 The results showed that among females, the seniors (M = 29.00; SD = 4.73; N = 7) have the highest risks of wearing face masks. The freshmen (M = 24.19; SD = 7.16; N = 53) have the least benefit from wearing face masks. The result also shows that among the males, the freshmen (M = 25.05; SD = 7.31; N = 37) have the highest benefit in wearing face masks. The juniors (M = 22.88; SD = 6.98; N = 25) have the least benefit from wearing face masks. Among the non-binary, it was found that the seniors (M = 22.00; N = 1) have higher benefits in wearing face masks than the super seniors (M = 13.00; SD = 8.49; N = 2). To find out whether the differences in the means are significant, a two-way ANOVA was used to test the hypothesis. The result of the two-way ANOVA is presented in Table VII. Table VII: Results of the two-way ANOVA on the perceived benefit due to gender and level Source Type III Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig. Gender 130.481 2 65.241 1.322 .269 Level 145.906 4 36.477 .739 .566 Gender * Level 180.195 4 45.049 .913 .458 Error 10169.605 206 49.367 Total 139997.000 217 The results indicate that there is no statistically significant gender difference in perceived benefit of the students in wearing face masks, (F 2,206 = 1.322, p= 0.269, p >0.05). This means male and female students have the same perceived benefit in wearing face masks. Also, the result shows that there is no statistically significant level difference in the perceived benefit of the students in wearing face masks (F 4,206 = 0.739, p= 0.566, p >0.05). This means that students irrespective of their level have the same perceived benefit in wearing face masks. Finally, the result shows that there is no significant difference in students’ benefit of wearing face masks by the interaction of gender and level (F 4,206 = .913, p= 0.458, p >0.05). This means that female and male students of a particular level have the same benefit in wearing face masks. There is no positive relationship between perceived benefit and attitude. The purpose of the hypothesis is to find out if there is a positive relationship between students’ perceived benefit of face mask wearing and their attitude towards face mask wearing. The Pearson Moment Correlation Coefficient was used to test the hypothesis. The result of the Pearson Moment Correlation Coefficient is presented in Table VIII. Table VIII: Pearson Moment Correlation Coefficient of the relationship between students’ perceived benefit and attitude Variable N R R 2 p Attitude 217 -.502 .252 0.000 Perceived benefit 217 The result as indicated in table IX shows that there is a significant negative moderate relationship between students’ perceived benefit of face mask wearing and their attitude towards face mask wearing (r p = -.502; p = 0.000, p <0.05). This indicates that students with high perceived benefits have moderately low attitudes toward face mask wearing. All things being equal, students with high attitudes have a 25.2% chance of exhibiting low attitudes toward mask wearing. There is no positive relationship between perceived risk and attitude. The purpose of the hypothesis is to find out if there is a positive relationship between students’ perceived risk of face mask wearing and their attitude towards face mask wearing. The Pearson Moment Correlation Coefficient was used to test the hypothesis. The result is presented in Table IX. Table IX: Pearson Moment Correlation Coefficient of the relationship between students’ perceived benefit and attitude Variable N r R 2 p Attitude 217 -.053 0.003 0.433 Perceived risk 217 The result showed that there is a negative low relationship between students’ perceived risk of face mask wearing and their attitude towards face mask wearing (r p = -.053; p = 0.433, p >0.05). The relationship is not significant. This indicates that students with high perceived risk have a low attitude toward face mask wearing. All things being equal, students with high attitudes have a 0.3% chance of exhibiting low attitudes toward mask wearing. That is students’ perceived risk of wearing face does not significantly explain their attitude towards face mask wearing. Students’ attitudes towards face wearing are explained by other factors other than their perceived risk of wearing face masks. There is a positive relationship between perceived risk and behavior. The purpose of the hypothesis is to find out if there is a positive relationship between students’ perceived risk of face mask wearing and their face mask wearing behavior. The Pearson Moment Correlation Coefficient was used to test the hypothesis. The result is presented in Table X. Table X: Pearson Moment Correlation Coefficient of the relationship between students’ perceived risk and behavior Variables N r R 2 p Perceived risk 217 .087 .008 0.243 Behavior 217 The result shows that there is a positive low relationship between students’ perceived risk of face mask wearing and their face mask wearing behaviour (r p = .087; p = 0.243, p >0.05). The relationship is not significant. The relationship is due to chance. This indicates that students with high risk have low chance of exhibiting a high face mask wearing behaviour. All things considered, students with high risk have 0.8% chance of exhibiting high face mask wearing behaviour. This means that students’ risk of wearing face does not significantly explain their behaviour of face mask wearing. Rather students’ behaviour of face mask wearing is explained by other factors other than their risk of wearing face mask. There is a significant relationship between perceived benefits and behavior The purpose of the hypothesis is to find out if there is a significant positive relationship between students’ perceived benefit and behavior of wearing face masks. The Pearson Moment Correlation Coefficient was used to test the hypothesis. The result of the Pearson Moment Correlation Coefficient is presented in Table XI. Table XI: Pearson Moment Correlation Coefficient of the relationship between students’ perceived benefit and behavior Variable N r R 2 p Behavior 217 .233 .054 0.002 Perceived benefit 217 The result shows a significant positive relationship between students’ perceived benefit of face mask wearing and their face mask wearing behaviour (r p = .233; p = 0.002, p <0.05). This indicates that students with high benefit have slim chance of exhibiting a high face mask wearing behaviour. All things being equal, students who expressed high benefit have 5.4% chance of exhibiting high face mask wearing behaviour. That is even though students’ benefits of wearing face significantly explain their behaviour of face mask wearing, it explains a small portion of their behaviour. Students’ behaviour of face mask wearing is explained by other factors other than their benefit of wearing face mask. Data on hypothesis seven was analysed with regression. The hypothesis seeks to check the effect of perceived benefits and perceived risks on attitude towards face mask wearing. The regression would be used because all variables of interest were recoded into continuous variables. are continuous in nature. The analysis shows a significant fit of the model, F ( 2 , 214) = 41.12, p = <0.001 with an R 2 of 0.278. The result shows that only perceived benefit had a significant effect on students’ attitude towards face mask wearing, t (216) = 9.04, r = 0.06, p = <0.001; perceived risk did not make any significant effect to students’ attitude towards face mask wearing, t (216) = -0.12, r = -0.001, p = 0.91. This is because only students’ perceived benefit of wearing face mask predicts students’ attitude towards face mask wearing, which accounts for 52.8% of students’ attitude toward face mask wearing. However, perceived risk is 0.7% of students' attitude towards face mask wearing. Hence, the regression model can be defined by the equation: ATFW i = 1.419 + 0.058PB i – 0.001PR i The regression result demonstrated a significant fit of the model, F ( 2 , 178) = 5.570, p = 0.005 with an R 2 of 0.059. The result also shows that only perceived benefit had a significant effect on students’ behavior towards face mask wearing, t (180) = 3.12, r = 0.11, p = 0.002; but the perceived risk did not make any significant effect on students’ behavior towards face mask wearing, t (180) = 0.917, r = 0.05, p = 0.36. This means only students’ perceived benefit of wearing face mask predicts students’ behavior towards face mask wearing, which accounts for 22.7% of students’ behavior face mask wearing. However, perceived risk accounts for 6.7% of students’ behavior towards face mask wearing. Hence, the regression model can be defined by the equation: BTFW i = 26.972 + 0.110PB i + 0.048PR i Discussion This study aims to examine the perception, attitudes, and behavior of college students towards facemask wearing on campus. Perceived risk is conceptualized as the sense of the seriousness of a specific public health risk and the probability that the threat will lead to harm. Specifically, in this study perceived risk is defined as the student's perception of the severity and probability of contracting COVID-19. The perceived risk will however compel students to engage in self-protective behaviors (i.e., wearing of mask) to fight the disease. Several research findings indicated that perceived risk positively and significantly influenced the use of self-protective measures (17, 46, 47). This led us to hypothesize that there will be a positive relationship between perceived risk and behavior toward wearing face masks among US college students. This is consistent with the health belief model (HBM) which posits that peoples’ perceived risk is positively and directly related to protective behavior (48). However, the results from this study indicated that there is a positive low relationship between students’ perceived risk of face mask wearing and their face mask wearing behavior, the relationship therefore is not significant. This suggests that college students who are at a high perceived risk of COVID-19 are less likely to engage in high face mask wearing behavior. This could be due to myriad of factors, it could be lack of education of the potential benefit of mask wearing (36). It could also be that the efficacy of vaccines is making vaccination a better option than mask wearing (49). The result also shows that there is a positive weak relationship between the perceived benefit of mask wearing and their face mask wearing behavior. This indicates that students with high benefits have a slim chance of exhibiting a high face mask wearing behavior. Therefore, their perceived benefits of wearing face mask predicted their behavior towards face masks wearing. This finding is consistent with Li et al. (50)’s study which examined predictors of adopting preventive health behavior of handwashing, facemask wearing and maintaining social distance among student pharmacists. Their finding also disclosed that perceived benefit is one of the determinants of facemask wearing and supported the negative association we had on perceived risk. Results further indicated that there was no significant difference in perceived risk and perceived benefit towards face mask wearing by gender and level among US college students respectively. This means male and female students have the same perceived risk and perceived benefit in wearing face masks. This result is inconsistent with a study done in Uganda by Rawlings et al.(51) to explore students’ perceptions of COVID-19 risks and preventive measures. Their findings showed that students agreed on COVID-19 as a health risk, and their preventive behaviors were influenced by age, gender, marital status, and living situation. These studies results are inconsistent with this study. Their findings show a significant difference in perceived risk and perceived benefit towards face mask wearing by gender. It was observed that younger people feel they are invincible to the coronavirus which, helps explain their lower perceptions of the benefits of facemask. These attitudes may also have arisen from reports of fewer COVID-19 infections among youth (34, 35). However, this assertion is defective because many younger people who become exposed to or ill with COVID-19 are the same as the rest of the population who are indisposed or quarantined for a certain period (52). Shifting to the level of students in college, Interestingly, only one of the studies captured the year of school the same way it was used in the present study but did not include it in the analysis (36). Most of the other studies categorized it as educational level. As a result, they used labels such as undergraduates/graduate or bachelors/masters for their university participants (27, 53) while the others focused on participants in grade level (10th grade, 11th grade, 12th grade etc.) or primary / elementary / secondary school (54). Thus, analysing this variable is unique to this study. Therefore, for this study, the result showed that seniors had the highest behavior towards facemask wearing than the freshmen. This may be due to the notion that seniors will be more knowledgeable about the policies in the school as well as the consequences so do not want to bear the punishment if any. Also, seniors are known to be preparing for graduation so would not leave anything to chance to get COVID-19 due to negligence which can affect their academic performance and graduation plans. This is supported by studies and reports that analyzed undergraduates’ and graduates’ students’ behavior towards certain health prevention measures and disclosed that graduate students are more likely to have positive attitudes and behavior than undergraduates, given the reasons of age, being knowledgeable and responsibility (55). Therefore, since the seniors can be compared to the status of graduate students the same can be said about them. We found a relationship between perceived benefits and attitudes towards wearing face masks among US college students. The result shows that there is a negative moderate relationship between students’ perceived benefit of face mask wearing and their attitude towards face mask wearing. From the analysis, as perceived benefit increases students' attitude decreases moderately. This means that perceived benefits do not necessarily correlate with the attitude of students in wearing face mask. Therefore, it might be due to other factors such as the mandatory rule instituted for all to wear face mask on campus which support a study conducted by Dattel et al (32) examining divergent attitudes regarding the benefits of face masks in aviation colleges and universities. Their findings indicated that aviation colleges and universities located in states which had face mask mandates, exhibited a higher likelihood of community compliance, lower rates of COVID-19 in their state, and reports of less inconvenience predicted attitudes of greater benefits of wearing face masks. Additional comments were provided by 28% of the respondents, showing strongly polarized attitudes about the benefits of face masks. Respondents who had negative attitudes about the benefits of wearing face masks, nevertheless reported compliance on a college campus. However, Aboagye et al. (18), findings were not consistent. They reported that perceived usefulness of masks similarly improved students’ attitudes towards wearing face mask because they believe that wearing masks would protect them against COVID-19. However, the health challenges of wearing masks — especially, for students with respiratory problems including asthma and for an extended period impacted attitudes towards mask use on campus. Instead, alternative prevention strategies such as physical distancing and remote learning were put forward to limit the use of masks for students while on campus. The perceived benefits of face masks have even been found to have a significant influence on individuals’ intention to wear face masks (24, 25, 26). There is also a negative low relationship between students’ perceived risk of face mask wearing and their attitude towards face mask wearing. This therefore means that the relationship found here is quite weak although some relationship exists. Moreover, as perceived risk increases students’ attitude toward face mask wearing decreases. Thus, the students were not afraid of the virus as they might have been when it began where lots of people were dying almost every day in different countries. It is understandable for the earlier studies to have revealed that the pandemic risk perceptions significantly influence individuals’ attitudes or intention to wear face masks (20, 21, 22) during the period when the pandemic was at its peak. No wonder Limna et al., (19) found that attitude had the most significant impact on the intention to wear a face mask, followed by the perceived benefit of a face mask and pandemic risk perception. Nonetheless, it was indicated that the respondents’ pandemic risk perceptions greatly influenced attitudes. On the other hand, in a longitudinal study conducted by Isch et al. (56) on potential predictors of attitudes about mask wearing during COVID-19 pandemic, perceived risk (local incident rate of COVID-19 and stress about COVID-19) predicted the attitude among their respondents. This is likely because currently, the rate of infection and death has not been as rapid as it was in 2021 when their study was conducted. Again, the introduction of the COVID-19 vaccine might have also played a role in the present finding since people now have some hope of protection. We also found that the perceived benefit of wearing a face mask influenced students’ attitudes and behaviors toward face mask use which was also consistent with Limna et al., (19). However, against our expectations, perceived risk of COVID-19 infection did not significantly impact students’ attitudes or behaviors toward face mask wearing in this study. This result has not been described elsewhere but is similar to Isch et al. (56) where perceived risk of COVID-19 infection was weakly associated with the length of time people were willing to wear a face mask. Our report is also closely related to that of Wismans et al. (57) who found that only risk perception of COVID-19 for self- predicted face mask use among students, while perceived risk of COVID-19 for family and friends was not associated with face mask use. In contrast to our findings, previous research (19, 58) reported that risk perceptions of COVID-19 transmission highly influenced attitudes and face mask wearing behaviours. A possible explanation for our findings could be the underestimation of COVID-19 prevalence and its negative impact on younger people, as older people have demonstrated to be more susceptible to the negative effects of the virus (59). Moreover, studies e.g.,(60) suggest that sociodemographic factors such as age (i.e., being older) and other factors including the prevalence of the COVID-19 pandemic were important predictors of COVID-19 risk perception. For example, when compared to older students (ages), younger college students were seen to demonstrate lower risk perceptions of COVID-19 (61, 62). Consequently, young people may perceive they are less likely to be infected by COVID-19 which, may manifest in poorer attitudes toward preventive measures and in high-risk behaviors including non-compliance with wearing face masks. Limitations and Future Directions This present study has limitations, and it is noteworthy. One of these is that the results might not be generalizable because they draw conclusions from a single undergraduate institution and again due to the small sample size used for the analysis. Further studies will be needed to expand the scope and the sample size to provide a broader perspective that can represent most students and make it more generalizable. With the sample, it is recommended that more studies could recruit all stakeholders in the institutions such as students, professors, and non-teaching staff to add up to the diversity of the sample which can provide richer data. Moreover, the perception of benefits and risks, as the attitudes and behaviors towards facemask wearing vary from a different person, gender, level of education, and culture, so might have influenced the quality of the responses for data analysis. A step further can be for future longitudinal research to investigate the association among variables such as COVID-19 status, COVID-19 vaccine status, race, and the status of a student as to whether domestic or international to attitude and behavior as well as adding adherence to the variable because attitude and behavior could predict adherence. Another research conducted to qualitatively explore the experiences of attitude and behavior of students towards facemask wearing using semi-structured interviews will be beneficial since it will afford the researchers the opportunity to investigate experiences unique to participants in wearing a face mask. Declarations Ethics approval and consent to participate This study was reviewed and deemed exempt by Arizona State University Institutional Review Board (IRB) with the approval number STUDY00015710 . This study complies with all regulations. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study Availability of data and materials The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. Competing interests The authors declare that they have no competing interests. References Liao M, Liu H, Wang X, Hu X, Huang Y, Liu X, et al. A technical review of face mask wearing in preventing respiratory COVID-19 transmission. Current Opinion in Colloid & Interface Science. 2021;52:101417. Tang JW, Liebner TJ, Craven BA, Settles GS. A schlieren optical study of the human cough with and without wearing masks for aerosol infection control. Journal of the Royal Society Interface. 2009;6(suppl_6):S727-S36. Liu X, Zhang S. COVID‐19: Face masks and human‐to‐human transmission. Influenza and other respiratory viruses. 2020;14(4):472. Chan KH, Yuen K-Y. COVID-19 epidemic: disentangling the re-emerging controversy about medical facemasks from an epidemiological perspective. International journal of epidemiology. 2020;49(4):1063-6. Humphreys J. The importance of wearing masks in curtailing the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care. 2020;9(6):2606. Guan L, Zhou L, Zhang J, Peng W, Chen R. More awareness is needed for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2019 transmission through exhaled air during non-invasive respiratory support: experience from China. European Respiratory Journal. 2020;55(3). Cheng VC-C, Wong S-C, Chuang VW-M, So SY-C, Chen JH-K, Sridhar S, et al. The role of community-wide wearing of face mask for control of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic due to SARS-CoV-2. Journal of Infection. 2020;81(1):107-14. Duong HT, Nguyen HT, McFarlane SJ, Nguyen LTV. Risk perception and COVID-19 preventive behaviors: Application of the integrative model of behavioral prediction. The Social Science Journal. 2021:1-14. Saey T. Why scientists say wearing masks shouldn’t be controversial. Science News. 2020;7. Syal K. COVID‐19: herd immunity and convalescent plasma transfer therapy. Journal of Medical Virology. 2020;92(9):1380. Andrew S. The psychology behind why some people won’t wear masks. CNN Health. 2020. Eikenberry SE, Mancuso M, Iboi E, Phan T, Eikenberry K, Kuang Y, et al. To mask or not to mask: Modeling the potential for face mask use by the general public to curtail the COVID-19 pandemic. Infectious disease modelling. 2020;5:293-308. Capatides C. Coronavirus cannot be cured by drinking bleach or snorting cocaine, despite social media rumors. CBS News March. 2020;9:2020. Gatter R, Mohapatra S. COVID-19 and the Conundrum of Mask Requirements. Wash & Lee L Rev Online. 2020;77:17. Brug J, Aro AR, Richardus JH. Risk perceptions and behaviour: towards pandemic control of emerging infectious diseases: international research on risk perception in the control of emerging infectious diseases. Springer; 2009. p. 3-6. Leppin A, Aro AR. Risk perceptions related to SARS and avian influenza: theoretical foundations of current empirical research. International journal of behavioral medicine. 2009;16:7-29. Zhang B, Li Z, Jiang L. The intentions to wear face masks and the differences in preventive behaviors between urban and rural areas during COVID-19: An analysis based on the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021;18(19):9988. Aboagye E, Opoku IO, Adu N. Senior High School Students' Perception on the Use of Masks to Prevent COVID-19 in Ghana. Social Education Research. 2021:268-77. Limna P, Siripipatthanakul S, Siripipattanakul S. Factors Affecting Intention to Wear Face Masks among Thai People. International Journal of Public Health and Health Sciences. 2022;4(1):1-10. Ahmad AR, Murad HR. The impact of social media on panic during the COVID-19 pandemic in Iraqi Kurdistan: online questionnaire study. Journal of medical Internet research. 2020;22(5):e19556. MacIntyre CR, Chughtai AA. A rapid systematic review of the efficacy of face masks and respirators against coronaviruses and other respiratory transmissible viruses for the community, healthcare workers and sick patients. International journal of nursing studies. 2020;108:103629. Irfan M, Akhtar N, Ahmad M, Shahzad F, Elavarasan RM, Wu H, et al. Assessing public willingness to wear face masks during the COVID-19 pandemic: fresh insights from the theory of planned behavior. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021;18(9):4577. MacIntyre CR, Cauchemez S, Dwyer DE, Seale H, Cheung P, Browne G, et al. Face mask use and control of respiratory virus transmission in households. Emerging infectious diseases. 2009;15(2):233. Burnett ML, Sergi CM. Face masks are beneficial regardless of the level of infection in the fight against COVID-19. Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness. 2020;14(5):e47-e50. Feng S, Shen C, Xia N, Song W, Fan M, Cowling B. Rational use of face masks in the COVID-19 pandemic, Lancet Respiratory Medicine. Accessed on; 2020. Shukman D. Coronavirus: expert panel to assess face mask use by public. London: BBC News. 2020. Niba Rawlings N, Akwah EA, Musisi J, Awanchiri K, Babirye R, Emalieu D, et al. Perceived risks of COVID-19, attitudes towards preventive guidelines and impact of the lockdown on students in Uganda: A cross-sectional study. Plos one. 2022;17(4):e0266249. Howard MC. Gender, face mask perceptions, and face mask wearing: Are men being dangerous during the COVID-19 pandemic? Personality and individual differences. 2021;170:110417. Looi KH. Explicating gender disparity in wearing face masks during the COVID-19 pandemic. BMC Public Health. 2022;22(1):1-9. Palmer CL, Peterson RD. Toxic Mask-ulinity: The link between masculine toughness and affective reactions to mask wearing in the COVID-19 era. Politics & Gender. 2020;16(4):1044-51. Tang CS-k, Wong C-y. Factors influencing the wearing of facemasks to prevent the severe acute respiratory syndrome among adult Chinese in Hong Kong. Preventive medicine. 2004;39(6):1187-93. Dattel A, Lubner M, Gao P, Xie H. Divergent attitudes regarding the benefits of face masks in aviation colleges and universities. 2022. Soltan EM, El-Zoghby SM, Salama HM. Knowledge, risk perception, and preventive behaviors related to COVID-19 pandemic among undergraduate medical students in Egypt. SN comprehensive clinical medicine. 2020;2(12):2568-75. Barone E. US COVID-19 cases are skyrocketing, but deaths are flat—so far: These 5 Charts Explain Why; 2020. Barone E. Young adults are less likely to wear masks, take other measures against covid-19, CDC survey finds. Time. 2020. Davis RE, Sharma M, Simon KE, Wilkerson AH. Conceptualization of college students’ COVID-19 related mask-wearing behaviors using the Multi-Theory Model of health behavior change. Health promotion perspectives. 2021;11(2):194. Mwesige D, Nalugya A, Bulafu D, Tigaiza A, Nagawa BT, Balinda E, et al. Face mask use and associated factors among students in rural Eastern Uganda amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. medRxiv. 2021:2021.06. 27.21259131. Taylor S, Asmundson GJ. Negative attitudes about facemasks during the COVID-19 pandemic: The dual importance of perceived ineffectiveness and psychological reactance. Plos one. 2021;16(2):e0246317. Frymier AB, Nadler M. The relationship between attitudes and behaviors. Persuasion: Integrating Theory, Research, and Practice, A Bainbridge Frymier and MK Nadler, Eds Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall Hunt Publishing Company. 2017:41-58. Scheid JL, Lupien SP, Ford GS, West SL. Commentary: physiological and psychological impact of face mask usage during the COVID-19 pandemic. International journal of environmental research and public health. 2020;17(18):6655. Tajvar A, Aghamolaei T, Mohseni S, Fakherpour A, Damiri Z, Jahangiri M, et al. Knowledge, performance, and attitude towards mask use to prevent and control COVID-19 outbreak among a group of iranian people: a cross-sectional study. Shiraz E-Medical Journal. 2021;22(11). Larebo YM, Abame DE. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of face mask utilization and associated factors in COVID-19 pandemic among Wachemo University Students, Southern Ethiopia: A cross-sectional study. PloS one. 2021;16(9):e0257609. Davis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly. 1989:319-40. Hamid S, Bano N. Behavioral intention of traveling in the period of COVID-19: an application of the theory of planned behavior (TPB) and perceived risk. International Journal of Tourism Cities. 2021. Yıldırım M, Güler A. Factor analysis of the COVID-19 perceived risk scale: A preliminary study. Death studies. 2022;46(5):1065-72. de Bruin WB, Bennett D. Relationships between initial COVID-19 risk perceptions and protective health behaviors: a national survey. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2020;59(2):157-67. Gong Z, Veuthey J, Han Z. What makes people intend to take protective measures against influenza? Perceived risk, efficacy, or trust in authorities. American Journal of Infection Control. 2020;48(11):1298-304. Champion VL, Skinner CS. The health belief model. Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice. 2008;4:45-65. Shen M, Zu J, Fairley CK, Pagán JA, An L, Du Z, et al. Projected COVID-19 epidemic in the United States in the context of the effectiveness of a potential vaccine and implications for social distancing and face mask use. Vaccine. 2021;39(16):2295-302. Li M, Lv G, Hsieh S, Shao R, Yuan J. Pandemic worry and preventive health behaviors during the COVID-19 outbreak. Frontiers in Medicine. 2021;8:700072. Abramowitz S, McKune SL, Fallah M, Monger J, Tehoungue K, Omidian PA. The Opposite of Denial: Social Learning at the Onset of the Ebola Emergency in Liberia. Journal of Health Communication. 2017;22:59-65. COVID C, Team R, Food, Administration D. Allergic reactions including anaphylaxis after receipt of the first dose of Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine—United States, December 21, 2020–January 10, 2021. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2021;70(4):125. Zhang M, Li Q, Du X, Zuo D, Ding Y, Tan X, et al. Health behavior toward COVID-19: the role of demographic factors, knowledge, and attitude among Chinese college students during the quarantine period. Asia Pacific Journal of Public Health. 2020;32(8):533-5. Mickells GE, Figueroa J, West KW, Wood A, McElhanon BO. Adherence to masking requirement during the COVID‐19 pandemic by early elementary school children. Journal of School Health. 2021;91(7):555-61. Duperly J, Lobelo F, Segura C, Sarmiento F, Herrera D, Sarmiento OL, et al. The association between Colombian medical students' healthy personal habits and a positive attitude toward preventive counseling: cross-sectional analyses. BMC public Health. 2009;9:1-7. Isch C, Beltran DG, Ayers JD, Alcock J, Cronk L, Tidball KG, et al. What predicts attitudes about mask wearing? 2021. Wismans A, van der Zwan P, Wennberg K, Franken I, Mukerjee J, Baptista R, et al. Face mask use during the COVID-19 pandemic: how risk perception, experience with COVID-19, and attitude towards government interact with country-wide policy stringency. BMC public health. 2022;22(1):1-14. Zhao X, Knobel P. Face mask wearing during the COVID-19 pandemic: comparing perceptions in China and three European countries. Translational behavioral medicine. 2021;11(6):1199-204. Cipolletta S, Andreghetti GR, Mioni G. Risk perception towards COVID-19: A systematic review and qualitative synthesis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022;19(8):4649. Beltran DG, Isch C, Ayers JD, Alcock J, Brinkworth JF, Cronk L, et al. Mask wearing is associated with COVID-19 Prevalence, Risk, Stress, and Future Orientation. Ding Y, Du X, Li Q, Zhang M, Zhang Q, Tan X, et al. Risk perception of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and its related factors among college students in China during quarantine. PloS one. 2020;15(8):e0237626. Quansah F, Anin SK, Hagan Jr JE, Agormedah EK, Oduro P, Srem-Sai M, et al. Analysis of COVID-19 Risk Perception and Its Correlates among University Students in Ghana. COVID. 2022;2(8):1125-38. Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-5306087","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":372261697,"identity":"37e184f7-3716-4cf9-9245-4b7736faadb8","order_by":0,"name":"Sandra Freda Wood","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Arizona","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Sandra","middleName":"Freda","lastName":"Wood","suffix":""},{"id":372261698,"identity":"26bfe48d-c43e-4797-a7c5-fcd82fc0b038","order_by":1,"name":"Ebenezer Ato Kwamena Aidoo","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Iowa","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Ebenezer","middleName":"Ato Kwamena","lastName":"Aidoo","suffix":""},{"id":372261699,"identity":"8bbb664e-6a0b-4620-aecd-5472bca68ff1","order_by":2,"name":"Kweku Ewusie Orleans Lindsay","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Cape Coast","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Kweku","middleName":"Ewusie Orleans","lastName":"Lindsay","suffix":""},{"id":372261700,"identity":"bf6113e9-7c59-42a9-aa69-014254e219b6","order_by":3,"name":"Obianuju Aliche","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Florida","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Obianuju","middleName":"","lastName":"Aliche","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2024-10-21 16:53:08","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5306087/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5306087/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":81703554,"identity":"28743db2-2dfb-4b88-8974-3cf73e1eb21a","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2025-04-30 13:11:29","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":1144826,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-5306087/v1/d21e0a38-7caa-4899-8e2a-2fe0c86caee5.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Southwestern College Students Attitudes and Behaviors towards Face Mask wearing on Campus. ","fulltext":[{"header":"Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eUntil recently, face masks were typically worn in clinical settings by medical professionals\u0026nbsp;(1). However, the outbreak of respiratory viral infections (RVIs) that predates the COVID-19 pandemic such as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), the H1N1 influenza (bird flu), the Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), and Ebola introduced the use of face mask in the affected areas. The declaration of the life-threatening COVID-19 outbreaks worldwide, broadened the use of face masks as a prophylactic tactic against the deadly airborne infection. Several studies have examined the uses of the face mask and their efficacy in preventing airborne diseases\u0026nbsp;(2)\u0026nbsp;(3), \u0026nbsp;(4), \u0026nbsp;(5)\u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;(6). Evidently, wearing a face mask helps prevent some infections from spreading through droplets(5). In a study by Cheng et al.,\u0026nbsp;(7)\u0026nbsp; public mask-wearing is effective in reducing COVID-19 transmission in the community, thus curbing the spread of the pandemic.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe protocol of wearing face masks has been controversial and politicized in many countries including the U.S.(8, 9, 10). Mask wearing is hardly seen as a norm in the US\u0026nbsp;(11, 12). Despite media claims that more people are donning masks in public places, many people disagree over whether this behavior is healthy and effective\u0026nbsp;(13, 14). The motivation of individuals to adhere to these preventative measures is crucial for the effectiveness of preventive behaviors\u0026nbsp;(15, 16). Positive attitudes towards COVID-19 preventive measures such as using masks can improve mask-wearing behavior, though, concerns about mask impact on health may influence negative attitudes and behaviors.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;Zhang et al.\u0026nbsp;(17)\u0026nbsp;examined four major constructs viz perceived usefulness, perceived risk, social pressure, and social image as motivations for mask use when they investigated mask-wearing behavior among Chinese urban and rural residents. Results on perceived usefulness indicated a significant relationship between attitude and behavioral intention to wear a mask, meaning that individuals with positive attitudes towards mask use or who perceived that wearing a mask will benefit them, were more likely to wear one. Meanwhile, the hypothesis testing on the variables perceived risk, social image, and social pressure did not indicate any association with mask use behavioral intention, the test yielded significant relationships with attitudes. An indication of that attitude was a predictor of intentions to use a mask. The study further observed that social image and social pressure also had a strong influence on attitudes but not on the behavioral intention to wear masks. In other words, individuals develop positive attitudes towards mask-wearing when they perceive that the behavior could improve their social status.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eSimilarly, Aboagye et al.,\u0026nbsp;(18)\u0026nbsp;found that the perceived usefulness of masks improved students\u0026rsquo; attitudes towards wearing one because they believe that wearing masks would protect them against COVID-19. However, the health challenges of wearing masks \u0026mdash; especially for students with respiratory problems including asthma\u0026mdash; and for an extended period impacted attitudes towards mask use on campus. Instead, alternative prevention strategies such as physical distancing and remote learning were put forward to limit the use of masks for students while on campus. Both studies demonstrate the influence of perceptions of mask use on attitudes which by extension, determines the behavioral action or intention toward using it. Also, they reiterate the need to sustain positive attitudes to inform mask-wearing behaviors and considerations for alternative measures to prevent COVID-19. Risk perceptions are very necessary for taking preventive measures, but they are frequently biased(19). Brug and Richardus\u0026nbsp;(15)\u0026nbsp;also asserted that most health behavior theories include risk perception as a critical component. The pandemic risk perceptions significantly influence individuals\u0026rsquo; intention to wear face masks\u0026nbsp;(20, 21, 22).The perceived benefits of face masks refer to people\u0026apos;s understanding and awareness of the benefits that face masks provide in controlling and preventing the transmission of infectious viral diseases\u0026nbsp;(23). The perceived benefits of face masks have a significant influence on individuals\u0026rsquo; intention to wear face masks\u0026nbsp;(24, 25, 26).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eApart from levels of perceived benefits and risk, other studies have shown that demographic factors such as age, gender, marital status, and living situation influenced preventative health behaviors\u0026nbsp;(27).When Rawlings et al.(27), explore students\u0026rsquo; perceptions of COVID-19 risks and preventive measures in Uganda, they found that many students obeyed the face mask guidelines, students believed that COVID-19 is a health risk, and this perspective favorably influenced their attitudes and behaviors regarding the intention to wear the face masks, their intentions differ by their age, gender and level or year. This adds to the argument that age, gender, and academic level of students determine people or students\u0026rsquo; attitudes which influences their behavior to follow preventive measures or guidelines towards face mask wearing. Situating this to gender, prior studies have suggested generally that women are more likely to have positive attitudes and behavior towards face mask wearing than men since men are more likely to perceive face mask wearing negatively with reasons such as being a weakness sign, shameful, a threat to their independence and masculine identity.\u0026nbsp;(28, 29, 30, 31).This was clearly demonstrated in research conducted by Dattel et al.,\u0026nbsp;(32)that examined\u0026nbsp;divergent attitudes regarding the benefits of face masks in aviation colleges and universities. Females reported greater benefits to wearing a face mask and fewer inconveniences. A similar finding was reported by Soltan et al.\u0026nbsp;(33), female senior students have higher percentages regarding related knowledge and practicing preventive behaviors as well among their population. In relation to age, older people are more susceptible to covid 19 infection than younger ones in terms of immune system defense, morbidity, and mortality rates. This explains the reason older students and even females wear face masks more than younger males. Additionally, it was observed that younger people feel they are invincible to the coronavirus which, helps explain their lower perceptions of the benefits of face masks. These attitudes may also have arisen from reports of fewer COVID-19 infections among youth(34, 35). However, this reasoning is flawed because many younger people who become exposed to or ill with COVID-19 are like the rest of the population indisposed or must quarantine for a considerable period\u0026nbsp;(32).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eLimna et al. (19) investigated the main factors affecting the general public\u0026rsquo;s intention to wear a face mask during the COVID-19 pandemic in Thailand. The work indicated that the predictors of intention to wear face masks included attitude, face mask cost, pandemic risk perceptions, perceived benefits, and face mask availability. The findings revealed that attitude had the most significant influence on the intention to wear a face mask, and then the perceived benefit of a face mask, the next was pandemic risk perceptions, followed by the availability of face masks, and face mask cost. \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;It was indicated that the respondents\u0026rsquo; pandemic risk perceptions greatly influenced attitudes. Also, their attitude significantly influenced their pandemic risk perceptions and their intention to wear face masks. Furthermore, Soltan et al. (33) in their evaluation of knowledge, risk perception, and preventive behaviors among undergraduate medical students disclosed that about 86.9% of the students perceived a COVID-19-infected person as a serious threat to society and as a result, about 92% of the students were practicing the COVID-19 preventive behaviors. Several studies have supported the claim of students\u0026apos; positive attitude and adherence to the wearing of face masks (36). Conversely, few of the studies have accounted that some students resisted wearing face masks despite the growing trends in the COVID-19 pandemic (37, 38). Dattel et al, (32), revealed polarized opinions on the advantages of face masks and described that those who even disagreed with the benefit of face masks claimed that they complied with it when on their college campuses.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eIt is well-established that many factors influence the correlation between attitudes and behaviors, but it is generally accepted that specific attitudes will predict specific behaviors\u0026nbsp;(39). Age, gender, and academic level of student\u0026rsquo;s factors may explain attitudes and behaviors regarding wearing face masks.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eOverall, practicing preventive behaviors of mask-wearing is dependent on the assessment of risk perception by college students on COVID-19 disease as a serious threat to the academic environment. Even though many students experience face mask wearing as discomforting, and sometimes inconvenient as a result of difficulty in breathing. Studies show that risk perception assessment done by college students on COVID-19 infection on the benefits of wearing face masks outweigh the discomforts and see wearing face masks as potentially lifesaving(40)\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eResearch Question and Hypotheses \u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRQ1\u003c/strong\u003e: What is the level of perceived risk of wearing face mask among US college students?\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRQ2\u003c/strong\u003e: What is the level of perceived benefit of wearing face masks among US college students?\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHypotheses\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eH1\u003c/strong\u003e: There is no statistically significant difference in perceived risk of wearing face masks due to gender and undergraduate student classification level among US college students.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eH2:\u003c/strong\u003e There is no statistically significant difference in the perceived benefit of wearing face masks due to gender and undergraduate student classification level among US college students.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eH3:\u003c/strong\u003e There is no relationship between perceived benefit and attitude towards wearing face masks among US college students.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eH4:\u003c/strong\u003e There is no relationship between perceived risk and attitude towards wearing face masks among US college students.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eH5:\u003c/strong\u003e There is a positive relationship between perceived risk and behavior toward wearing face masks among US college students. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eH6:\u003c/strong\u003e There is a positive relationship between perceived benefit and behavior towards wearing face masks among US college students. \u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eH7:\u003c/strong\u003e Perceived benefit and perceived risk will significantly predict the attitude of students towards face mask wearing.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eH8:\u003c/strong\u003e Perceived benefit and perceived risk will significantly predict the behavior of students towards face mask wearing.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Materials and Methods","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eProcedures for Data Collection\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eParticipants were recruited using convenience sampling through the distribution of flyers both in class and online course pages or websites. Both recruitment methods directed participants to scan a QR code on the flyer posted on their course pages to be directed to the online survey on Qualtrics. The flyer\u0026apos;s advertisement was done by the researcher and course instructors. Participants were offered a small amount of extra course credit for participation. The inclusion criteria for participation were that respondents must be enrolled in the university where the study was conducted. Again, students taking various undergraduate courses must be 18 years old or above. To protect participation identities and to get the extra credit, a unique code was generated on the last page of the survey and students were instructed to take a picture of the code and upload it onto canvas. The study began with a consent form that detailed the study procedures and a review of the rights, anonymous nature of participation and potential risks of participation. Contact information for both the IRB (Institutional Review Board) and the study\u0026rsquo;s primary investigator was provided to participants.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eSocio-Demographic Characteristics\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; Demographic questions such as age, gender, year of school, living condition, COVID-19 status as well as COVID-19 vaccination status.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eMeasures\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe measured participants\u0026rsquo; attitudes, behavior, perceived benefits and perceived risks, the researcher used an adapted version of the scale by different researchers\u0026nbsp;as described below:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAttitudes variable\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003eAttitudes of student scale\u0026nbsp;(41)originally used to assess attitudes towards mask use in preventing and controlling the COVID-19 outbreak was used in the present study. Cronbach\u0026rsquo;s alpha was good at 0.78. Participants s indicated on a scale from 1 = \u003cem\u003estrongly disagree\u003c/em\u003e to 5 = \u003cem\u003estrongly agree\u003c/em\u003e to measure the extent to which they agree with a 10 - item question on attitude, for example, \u0026ldquo;Wearing facemasks cause outer ear pain\u0026rdquo;. \u0026nbsp;The attitude items were further summed (SD and Mean), and reverse coded such that higher scores indicated more positive attitudes towards face mask-wearing\u0026rdquo;. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eBehavior variable\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003e.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eIn the current study,\u0026nbsp;the behavior of students toward face mask wearing was s to assess the behavior students exhibit toward how they use and dispose of their face masks on campus. Larebo et al.\u0026nbsp;(42)\u0026nbsp;developed the original version of the scale with a reliability coefficient of 0.84 to evaluate the practices of face mask utilization and associated factors during the COVID-19 pandemic among Wachemo University Students. Participants completed a 14-item behavior scale which was measured on varied levels such as 1= \u003cem\u003eYes\u003c/em\u003e, 2 = \u003cem\u003eMaybe\u003c/em\u003e to 3 = \u003cem\u003eNo\u003c/em\u003e, 1 = \u003cem\u003enever\u003c/em\u003e to 4 = \u003cem\u003ealways\u003c/em\u003e. For instance, there were questions such as \u0026ldquo;Did you keep a used facemask in your pocket/ bag for later use?\u0026rdquo;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ePerceived benefits variable\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003e.\u003c/em\u003e This scale was developed by Davis\u0026nbsp;(43)\u0026nbsp;for predicting user acceptance of computers but has been adapted by several researchers (e.g.,) in different contexts. A 7-item perceived benefits scale with a reliability coefficient of 0.90 was used to measure whether students\u0026rsquo; attitudes and behavior are predicted by knowing and perceiving that using face masks is useful. Participants indicated on a Likert scale from 1 = \u003cem\u003estrongly disagree\u003c/em\u003e to 5 = \u003cem\u003estrongly agree\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003ePerceived risks variable\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003e.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003eThe current study adapted the COVID-19 perceived risks scale (CPRS)\u0026nbsp;(44, 45)\u0026nbsp;to assess the responses to COVID-19. \u0026nbsp;The researcher mainly added the phrase \u0026ldquo;while wearing face masks\u0026rdquo; to each of the statements to situate it in the present context of face mask wearing. Participants responded using a 5-point Likert scale with a reliability coefficient of 0.88, ranging from 1 =\u003cem\u003every unlikely\u003c/em\u003e to 5 = \u003cem\u003every likely\u003c/em\u003e to measure whether the effects of COVID-19 while wearing a face mask are likely to predict the attitudes and behavior of students or not. To do this, a 5-item scale was used. All items were reverse-recoded so that higher scores indicate higher perceived risks of COVID-19. \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eData Analysis\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eAfter the survey was closed, the first author checked and cleaned the data so participants exhibiting large amounts of missing data were excluded. For instance, those who provided only demographic information and failed to answer items related to study aims were deleted. We utilized SPSS version 27 to conduct the data analysis and a p-value of less than 0.05 was considered significant. Frequencies, mean, and standard deviation were used to analyze the demographic data. We used a variety of statistical techniques, such as one-way ANOVA, correlation, and regression to help us address the research questions and hypotheses.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Results","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe total sample size comprised of (\u003cem\u003eN\u003c/em\u003e = 217) participants. The data showed that 117 representing 53.9% of the students were females, 97 representing 44.7% were males and the remaining three representing 1.4% were non-binary with the age being (\u003cem\u003eM\u003csub\u003eage\u003c/sub\u003e\u003c/em\u003e = 19.89 \u003cem\u003eSD\u003c/em\u003e = 1.53). Additionally, demographics such as year of school, living conditions as well as COVID-19 vaccination status were also provided. For the information on year of school, Freshmen (first-year students) formed the majority (41.5%), followed by juniors (26.3%), sophomores (22.1%), seniors (6.9%) and super seniors (3.2%). \u0026nbsp;In describing their living condition, those who lived with friends/roommates was the highest (68.2), then those living with family (21.2%), those staying alone (8.8%) and the other options apart from the ones provided (1.8%). In addition, the large number of participants have been fully vaccinated (46.5%), not vaccinated (25.3%), vaccinated and boosted (22.1%) and others who have received only one shot (6.0%). Participants were asked whether they have ever tested positive for COVID-19 before, those who responded Yes (54.4%) while the No (45.6%). All results are shown in Table I\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable I:\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;Participants\u0026rsquo; characteristics (N=271)\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47.8331%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCharacteristic\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.3226%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003en\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.9278%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e%\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9.63082%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eM\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.2857%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eSD\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47.8331%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAge\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e(range 18-25)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.3226%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.9278%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9.63082%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19.89\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.2857%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.53\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47.8331%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eGender\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.3226%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.9278%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9.63082%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.2857%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47.8331%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.3226%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e117\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.9278%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e53.9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9.63082%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.2857%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47.8331%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.3226%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e97\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.9278%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e44.7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9.63082%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.2857%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47.8331%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNonbinary\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.3226%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.9278%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; 1.4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9.63082%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.2857%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47.8331%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eYear in College\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.3226%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.9278%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9.63082%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.2857%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47.8331%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFreshmen\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.3226%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e90\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.9278%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e41.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9.63082%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.2857%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47.8331%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSophomore\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.3226%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e48\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.9278%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9.63082%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.2857%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47.8331%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJunior\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.3226%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e57\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.9278%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e26.3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9.63082%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.2857%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47.8331%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSenior\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.3226%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.9278%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;6.9\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9.63082%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.2857%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47.8331%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSuper senior (5+ years)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.3226%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.9278%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;3.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9.63082%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.2857%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47.8331%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLiving Condition\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.3226%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.9278%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9.63082%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.2857%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47.8331%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAlone\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.3226%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.9278%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9.63082%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.2857%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47.8331%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFamily\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.3226%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e46\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.9278%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e21.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9.63082%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.2857%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47.8331%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFriends/Roommates\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.3226%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e148\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.9278%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e68.2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9.63082%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.2857%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47.8331%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOthers\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.3226%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.9278%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.8\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9.63082%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.2857%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47.8331%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCOVID-19 Vaccination Status\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.3226%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.9278%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9.63082%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.2857%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47.8331%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFully vaccinated.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.3226%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e101\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.9278%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e46.5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9.63082%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.2857%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47.8331%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVaccinated and boosted.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.3226%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.9278%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.0\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9.63082%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.2857%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47.8331%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOne shot\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.3226%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e48\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.9278%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22.1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9.63082%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.2857%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47.8331%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNot vaccinated\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.3226%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e55\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.9278%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25.3\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9.63082%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.2857%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47.8331%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePrevious COVID-19 diagnosis\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.3226%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.9278%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9.63082%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.2857%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47.8331%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eYes\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.3226%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e118\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.9278%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e54.4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9.63082%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.2857%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 47.8331%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.3226%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e99\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.9278%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e45.6\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 9.63082%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 14.2857%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLevel of perceived risk\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe purpose of the research question was to find out the perceived risk of students wearing a face mask.\u0026nbsp;The cut-off points on the five-point Likert scale for the set of data are 1.00-1.60 = low, 1.61-2.20 = weak, 2.21-2.80 = moderate, 2.81-3.40 = strong and 3.41-4.00 = perfect. The results of the descriptive statistics for the perceived risk of face mask wearing as expressed by the students is presented in Table II.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable II\u003c/strong\u003e- \u003cem\u003eDescriptive statistics of students\u0026rsquo; perceived risk of face mask wearing.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"649\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 46.2963%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStatements\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 6.48148%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eN\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 10.1852%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 11.4198%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStd. Dev\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSkewness\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eKurtosis\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46.2963%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHow likely is it that you might become infected with COVID-19 when wearing a face mask?\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6.48148%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10.1852%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.89\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 11.4198%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.906\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.191\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.167\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46.2963%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHow likely is it that people in your family and friends might become infected with COVID-19 when wearing a face mask?\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6.48148%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10.1852%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.89\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 11.4198%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.899\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.021\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.099\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46.2963%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eHow likely are you from dying of COVID-19 when wearing face mask?\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6.48148%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10.1852%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.38\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 11.4198%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.003\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.202\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.450\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46.2963%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDo I worry about myself contracting COVID-19 while wearing a face mask?\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6.48148%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10.1852%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.49\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 11.4198%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.137\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.424\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.632\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46.2963%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDo I worry about a family member contracting COVID-19 while wearing a face mask?\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6.48148%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10.1852%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.71\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 11.4198%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.128\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.162\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.799\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46.2963%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDo I worry about COVID-19 becoming severe in the school because of our attitude and behavior toward face mask wearing?\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6.48148%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10.1852%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.88\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 11.4198%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.277\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.070\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-1.034\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46.2963%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eDo I worry about COVID-19 causing a shutdown in schools because of our attitude and behavior toward face mask wearing?\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6.48148%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10.1852%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.99\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 11.4198%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.253\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.069\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.970\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46.2963%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean of Means\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean of Std. Dev.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOverall skewness\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOverall kurtosis\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6.48148%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10.1852%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.75\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 11.4198%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.086\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.349\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; The result shows that the distribution of students\u0026rsquo; perceived risk of wearing mask is normal (Sk = 0.000) and platykurtic (kp \u0026lt;3). The results show that, the students expressed that they have moderate level of risk of face mask wearing. This is because the means of means (2.75) lies within the range of moderate level of risk in wearing face mask.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePerceived benefit\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe purpose of the research question was to find out the perceived benefit of students in wearing face mask. The cut-off points on the five-point Likert scale for the set of data are 1.00-1.60 = low, 1.61-2.20 = weak, 2.21-2.80 = moderate, 2.81-3.40 = strong and 3.41-4.00 = perfect. The results of the descriptive statistics for perceived of benefit face mask wearing as expressed by the students are presented in Table III.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable III:\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cem\u003eDescriptive statistics of students\u0026rsquo; perceived benefit of face mask wearing.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"649\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 46.2963%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStatement\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 6.48148%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eN\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 10.1852%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 11.4198%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStd. Dev\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSkewness\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eKurtosis\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46.2963%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI believe that wearing a face mask is an effective precautionary measure\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6.48148%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10.1852%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.55\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 11.4198%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.306\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.638\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.702\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46.2963%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI believe that wearing a face mask will protect my health\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6.48148%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10.1852%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.36\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 11.4198%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.313\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.364\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-1.027\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46.2963%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI believe that wearing a face mask reduces the chances of getting infected\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6.48148%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10.1852%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.55\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 11.4198%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.294\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.545\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.816\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46.2963%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI believe that wearing a face mask reduces the chances of inhaling unhealthy air\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6.48148%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10.1852%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.57\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 11.4198%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.223\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.608\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.544\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46.2963%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI believe that wearing a face mask will reduce my exposure to novel SARS-CoV-2 virus\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6.48148%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10.1852%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.46\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 11.4198%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.305\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.427\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.969\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46.2963%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI do not fear going out after wearing a face mask\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6.48148%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10.1852%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.76\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 11.4198%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.087\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.504\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.366\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46.2963%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eI believe that society will get protected from\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eviral diseases if people wear face masks\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6.48148%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10.1852%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.14\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 11.4198%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.327\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.169\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-1.124\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 46.2963%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean of Means\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean of std. dev\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOverall skewness\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eOverall kurtosis\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 6.48148%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 10.1852%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.49\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 11.4198%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.27\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.391\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 12.8086%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.68\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe result shows the distribution of students on the perceived benefit is negatively skewed (overall Sk = -.391) and platykurtic (overall kp \u0026lt;3). The results show that, the students expressed perfect level of benefit of face mask wearing. This is because the means of means (3.49) lies within the range of perfect level of benefit in wearing face mask.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThere is no significant difference in perceived risk due to gender and level.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe purpose of the hypothesis was to find if students have different risk level in wearing face mask as result of their gender and undergraduate student classification level. The result of the descriptive statistics is presented in Table IV.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable IV:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003eDescriptive statistics of students perceived risk of face mask wearing by gender and level\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"587\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 152px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;Gender\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLevels\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStd. Deviation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eN\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 152px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFreshmen\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19.58\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.08\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e53\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSophomore\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19.88\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.80\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJuniors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e20.19\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.54\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e32\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSeniors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19.57\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.26\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"5\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 152px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFreshmen\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19.41\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.38\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e37\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSophomore\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5.35\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJuniors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e17.28\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.74\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSeniors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e19.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.69\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSuper seniors (5 + years)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 152px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNonbinary\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSeniors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e18.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSuper seniors (5 + years)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24.50\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e3.54\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe results showed that among females, the juniors (M = 20.19; SD = 4.54; N = 32) have the highest risks of wearing face masks. The seniors (M = 19.57; SD = 3.26; N = 7) however, have the least risks in wearing face masks. The result also shows that among males, the freshmen (M = 19.41; SD = 5.38; N = 37) have the highest risks in wearing face mask. Conversely, the juniors (M = 17.28; SD = 4.74; N = 25) have the least risks in wearing face masks. Within the Non-binary, it was found that the super seniors (M = 24.50; SD = 3.54; N = 2) have higher risks in wearing face masks than the seniors (M = 18.00; N = 1). To find out whether the differences in the means are significant, a two-way ANOVA was used to test the hypothesis. The result of the two-way ANOVA is presented in Table V.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable V:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003eResults of the two-way ANOVA on perceived risk due to gender and level\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"629\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 21.9048%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSource\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 19.2063%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eType III Sum of Squares\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 13.4921%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003edf\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 18.4127%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean Square\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 13.4921%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 13.4921%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSig.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 21.9048%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGender\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 19.2063%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e114.502\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.4921%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18.4127%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e57.251\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.4921%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2.466\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.4921%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.087\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 21.9048%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLevel\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 19.2063%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e38.837\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.4921%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18.4127%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.709\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.4921%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.418\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.4921%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.795\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 21.9048%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGender * Level\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 19.2063%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e96.898\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.4921%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18.4127%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24.224\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.4921%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.043\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.4921%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.386\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 21.9048%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eError\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 19.2063%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4782.382\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.4921%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e206\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18.4127%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23.215\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13.4921%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13.4921%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 21.9048%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 19.2063%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e85308.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.4921%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18.4127%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13.4921%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13.4921%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe results show that there is no statistically significant gender difference in the perceived risk of the students in wearing face masks, (F\u003csub\u003e2,206\u003c/sub\u003e = 2.466, \u003cem\u003ep=\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e0.087, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026gt;0.05). This means male and female students have the same level of risk in wearing face masks. Also, the result shows that there is no statistically significant level difference in the perceived risk of the students wearing face masks (F\u003csub\u003e4,206\u003c/sub\u003e = 0.418, \u003cem\u003ep=\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e0.795, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026gt;0.05). This means that students irrespective of their level have the same risks in wearing face masks. Finally, the result shows that there is no significant difference in students\u0026rsquo; risk of wearing face by the interaction of gender and level (F\u003csub\u003e4,206\u003c/sub\u003e = 1.043, \u003cem\u003ep=\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e0.386, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026gt;0.05). This means that female and male students of a particular level have the same risks in wearing face masks.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThere is no significant difference in perceived benefit due to gender and level.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe purpose of the hypothesis was to find if students have perceived benefits in wearing face mask as result of their gender and level. The result of the descriptive statistics is presented in Table VI.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable VI:\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cem\u003eDescriptive statistics of students\u0026rsquo; perceived benefit of face mask wearing by gender and level\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"587\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 152px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;Gender\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLevels\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eStd. Deviation\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eN\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"4\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 152px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFemale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFreshmen\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24.19\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.16\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e53\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSophomore\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25.44\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.65\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJuniors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24.41\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.09\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e32\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSeniors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e29.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4.73\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"5\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 152px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMale\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eFreshmen\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25.05\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7.31\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e37\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSophomore\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24.57\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.24\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eJuniors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22.88\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.98\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSeniors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e23.29\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e9.69\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSuper seniors (5 + years)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e24.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e6.40\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 152px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eNonbinary\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSeniors\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e22.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 180px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSuper seniors (5 + years)\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e13.00\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 105px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e8.49\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 75px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe results showed that among females, the seniors (M = 29.00; SD = 4.73; N = 7) have the highest risks of wearing face masks. The freshmen (M = 24.19; SD = 7.16; N = 53) have the least benefit from wearing face masks. The result also shows that among the males, the freshmen (M = 25.05; SD = 7.31; N = 37) have the highest benefit in wearing face masks. The juniors (M = 22.88; SD = 6.98; N = 25) have the least benefit from wearing face masks. Among the non-binary, it was found that the seniors (M = 22.00; N = 1) have higher benefits in wearing face masks than the super seniors (M = 13.00; SD = 8.49; N = 2). To find out whether the differences in the means are significant, a two-way ANOVA was used to test the hypothesis. The result of the two-way ANOVA is presented in Table VII.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable VII:\u003cem\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003eResults of the two-way ANOVA on the perceived benefit due to gender and level\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"596\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 21.9799%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSource\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 19.2953%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eType III Sum of Squares\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 13.4228%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003edf\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 18.4564%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eMean Square\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 13.4228%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eF\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 13.4228%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eSig.\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 21.9799%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGender\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 19.2953%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e130.481\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.4228%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18.4564%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e65.241\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.4228%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e1.322\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.4228%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.269\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 21.9799%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eLevel\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 19.2953%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e145.906\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.4228%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18.4564%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e36.477\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.4228%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.739\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.4228%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.566\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 21.9799%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eGender * Level\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 19.2953%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e180.195\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.4228%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18.4564%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e45.049\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.4228%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.913\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.4228%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.458\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 21.9799%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eError\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 19.2953%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e10169.605\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.4228%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e206\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 18.4564%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e49.367\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13.4228%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13.4228%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 21.9799%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 19.2953%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e139997.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 13.4228%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 18.4564%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13.4228%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd style=\"width: 13.4228%;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe results indicate that there is no statistically significant gender difference in perceived benefit of the students in wearing face masks, (F\u003csub\u003e2,206\u003c/sub\u003e = 1.322, \u003cem\u003ep=\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e0.269, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026gt;0.05). This means male and female students have the same perceived benefit in wearing face masks. Also, the result shows that there is no statistically significant level difference in the perceived benefit of the students in wearing face masks (F\u003csub\u003e4,206\u003c/sub\u003e = 0.739, \u003cem\u003ep=\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e0.566, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026gt;0.05). This means that students irrespective of their level have the same perceived benefit in wearing face masks. Finally, the result shows that there is no significant difference in students\u0026rsquo; benefit of wearing face masks by the interaction of gender and level (F\u003csub\u003e4,206\u003c/sub\u003e = .913, \u003cem\u003ep=\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e0.458, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026gt;0.05). This means that female and male students of a particular level have the same benefit in wearing face masks.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThere is no positive relationship between perceived benefit and attitude.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; The purpose of the hypothesis is to find out if there is a positive relationship between students\u0026rsquo; perceived benefit of face mask wearing and their attitude towards face mask wearing. The Pearson Moment Correlation Coefficient was used to test the hypothesis. The result of the Pearson Moment Correlation Coefficient is presented in Table VIII.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable VIII:\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cem\u003ePearson Moment Correlation Coefficient of the relationship between students\u0026rsquo; perceived benefit and attitude\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"442\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 162px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariable\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eN\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eR\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eR\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 58px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 162px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAttitude\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.502\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 84px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.252\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 58px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.000\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 162px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePerceived benefit\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 54px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe result as indicated in table IX shows that there is a significant negative moderate relationship between students\u0026rsquo; perceived benefit of face mask wearing and their attitude towards face mask wearing (r\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e= -.502; \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = 0.000, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026lt;0.05). This indicates that students with high perceived benefits have moderately low attitudes toward face mask wearing. All things being equal, students with high attitudes have a 25.2% chance of exhibiting low attitudes toward mask wearing.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThere is no positive relationship between perceived risk and attitude.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe purpose of the hypothesis is to find out if there is a positive relationship between students\u0026rsquo; perceived risk of face mask wearing and their attitude towards face mask wearing. The Pearson Moment Correlation Coefficient was used to test the hypothesis. The result is presented in Table IX.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable IX:\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cem\u003ePearson Moment Correlation Coefficient of the relationship between students\u0026rsquo; perceived benefit and attitude\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"536\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 186px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariable\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eN\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003er\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 108px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eR\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 186px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eAttitude\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 102px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e-.053\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 108px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.003\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 74px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.433\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 186px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePerceived risk\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 66px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe result showed that there is a negative low relationship between students\u0026rsquo; perceived risk of face mask wearing and their attitude towards face mask wearing (r\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e= -.053; \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = 0.433, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026gt;0.05). The relationship is not significant. This indicates that students with high perceived risk have a low attitude toward face mask wearing. All things being equal, students with high attitudes have a 0.3% chance of exhibiting low attitudes toward mask wearing. That is students\u0026rsquo; perceived risk of wearing face does not significantly explain their attitude towards face mask wearing. Students\u0026rsquo; attitudes towards face wearing are explained by other factors other than their perceived risk of wearing face masks.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThere is a positive relationship between perceived risk and behavior.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe purpose of the hypothesis is to find out if there is a positive relationship between students\u0026rsquo; perceived risk of face mask wearing and their face mask wearing behavior. The Pearson Moment Correlation Coefficient was used to test the hypothesis. The result is presented in Table X.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable X:\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cem\u003ePearson Moment Correlation Coefficient of the relationship between students\u0026rsquo; perceived risk and behavior\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"567\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 121px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariables\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eN\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003er\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eR\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 121px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePerceived risk\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.087\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.008\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.243\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 121px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBehavior\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 111px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe result shows that there is a positive low relationship between students\u0026rsquo; perceived risk of face mask wearing and their face mask wearing behaviour (r\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e= .087; \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = 0.243, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026gt;0.05). The relationship is not significant. The relationship is due to chance. This indicates that students with high risk have low chance of exhibiting a high face mask wearing behaviour. All things considered, students with high risk have 0.8% chance of exhibiting high face mask wearing behaviour. This means that students\u0026rsquo; risk of wearing face does not significantly explain their behaviour of face mask wearing. Rather students\u0026rsquo; behaviour of face mask wearing is explained by other factors other than their risk of wearing face mask.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eThere is a significant relationship between perceived benefits and behavior\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe purpose of the hypothesis is to find out if there is a significant positive relationship between students\u0026rsquo; perceived benefit and behavior of wearing face masks. The Pearson Moment Correlation Coefficient was used to test the hypothesis. The result of the Pearson Moment Correlation Coefficient is presented in Table XI.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTable XI:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/strong\u003e\u003cem\u003ePearson Moment Correlation Coefficient of the relationship between students\u0026rsquo; perceived benefit and behavior\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003ctable border=\"1\" cellspacing=\"0\" cellpadding=\"0\" width=\"604\"\u003e\n \u003ctbody\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 129px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eVariable\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"bottom\" style=\"width: 119px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eN\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 119px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003er\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 119px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eR\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 119px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ep\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 129px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003eBehavior\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 119px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 119px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.233\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 119px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e.054\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd rowspan=\"2\" valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 119px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e0.002\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003ctr\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 129px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003ePerceived benefit\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003ctd valign=\"top\" style=\"width: 119px;\"\u003e\n \u003cp\u003e217\u003c/p\u003e\n \u003c/td\u003e\n \u003c/tr\u003e\n \u003c/tbody\u003e\n\u003c/table\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe result shows a significant positive relationship between students\u0026rsquo; perceived benefit of face mask wearing and their face mask wearing behaviour (r\u003csub\u003ep\u003c/sub\u003e= .233; \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e = 0.002, \u003cem\u003ep\u003c/em\u003e\u0026lt;0.05). This indicates that students with high benefit have slim chance of exhibiting a high face mask wearing behaviour. All things being equal, students who expressed high benefit have 5.4% chance of exhibiting high face mask wearing behaviour. That is even though students\u0026rsquo; benefits of wearing face significantly explain their behaviour of face mask wearing, it explains a small portion of their behaviour. Students\u0026rsquo; behaviour of face mask wearing is explained by other factors other than their benefit of wearing face mask.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eData on hypothesis seven was analysed with regression. The hypothesis seeks to check the effect of perceived benefits and perceived risks on attitude towards face mask wearing. The regression would be used because all variables of interest were recoded into continuous variables. are continuous in nature.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;The analysis shows a significant fit of the model, F (\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e, \u003csub\u003e214) =\u003c/sub\u003e 41.12, \u003cem\u003ep\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e= \u0026lt;0.001 with an R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e of 0.278. The result shows that only perceived benefit had a significant effect on students\u0026rsquo; attitude towards face mask wearing, t (216) = 9.04, \u003cem\u003er\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e= 0.06, \u003cem\u003ep\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e= \u0026lt;0.001; perceived risk did not make any significant effect to students\u0026rsquo; attitude towards face mask wearing, t (216) = -0.12, \u003cem\u003er\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e= -0.001, \u003cem\u003ep\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e= 0.91. This is because only students\u0026rsquo; perceived benefit of wearing face mask predicts students\u0026rsquo; attitude towards face mask wearing, which accounts for 52.8% of students\u0026rsquo; attitude toward face mask wearing. However, perceived risk is 0.7% of students\u0026apos; attitude towards face mask wearing. Hence, the regression model can be defined by the equation:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eATFW\u003csub\u003ei\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sub\u003e= 1.419 + 0.058PB\u003csub\u003ei\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026ndash; 0.001PR\u003csub\u003ei\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp;The regression result demonstrated a significant fit of the model, F (\u003csub\u003e2\u003c/sub\u003e, \u003csub\u003e178) =\u003c/sub\u003e 5.570, \u003cem\u003ep\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e= 0.005 with an R\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e of 0.059. The result also shows that only perceived benefit had a significant effect on students\u0026rsquo; behavior towards face mask wearing, t (180) = 3.12, \u003cem\u003er\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e= 0.11, \u003cem\u003ep\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e= 0.002; but the perceived risk did not make any significant effect on students\u0026rsquo; behavior towards face mask wearing, t (180) = 0.917, \u003cem\u003er\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e= 0.05, \u003cem\u003ep\u0026nbsp;\u003c/em\u003e= 0.36. This means only students\u0026rsquo; perceived benefit of wearing face mask predicts students\u0026rsquo; behavior towards face mask wearing, which accounts for 22.7% of students\u0026rsquo; behavior face mask wearing. However, perceived risk accounts for 6.7% of students\u0026rsquo; behavior towards face mask wearing. Hence, the regression model can be defined by the equation:\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eBTFW\u003csub\u003ei\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sub\u003e= 26.972 + 0.110PB\u003csub\u003ei\u0026nbsp;\u003c/sub\u003e+ 0.048PR\u003csub\u003ei\u003c/sub\u003e\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Discussion","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study aims\u0026nbsp;to examine the perception, attitudes, and behavior of college students towards facemask wearing on campus.\u0026nbsp;Perceived risk is conceptualized as the sense of the seriousness of a specific public health risk and the probability that the threat will lead to harm. Specifically, in this study perceived risk is defined as the student\u0026apos;s perception of the severity and probability of contracting COVID-19. The perceived risk will however compel students to engage in self-protective behaviors (i.e., wearing of mask) to fight the disease. Several research findings indicated that perceived risk positively and significantly influenced the use of self-protective measures\u0026nbsp;(17, 46, 47). This led us to hypothesize that there will be a positive relationship between perceived risk and behavior toward wearing face masks among US college students.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis is consistent with the health belief model (HBM) which posits that peoples\u0026rsquo; perceived risk is positively and directly related to protective behavior\u0026nbsp;(48). However, the results from this study indicated that there is a positive low relationship between students\u0026rsquo; perceived risk of face mask wearing and their face mask wearing behavior, the relationship therefore is not significant. This suggests that college students who are at a high perceived risk of COVID-19 are less likely to engage in high face mask wearing behavior. This could be due to myriad of factors, it could be lack of education of the potential benefit of mask wearing\u0026nbsp;(36). It could also be that the efficacy of vaccines is making vaccination a better option than mask wearing\u0026nbsp;(49).\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp; \u0026nbsp;The result also shows that there is a positive weak relationship between the perceived benefit of mask wearing and their face mask wearing behavior. This indicates that students with high benefits have a slim chance of exhibiting a high face mask wearing behavior.\u0026nbsp;Therefore, their\u0026nbsp;perceived benefits of wearing face mask predicted their behavior towards face masks wearing. This finding is consistent with Li et al.\u0026nbsp;(50)\u0026rsquo;s study which examined predictors of adopting preventive health behavior of handwashing, facemask wearing and maintaining social distance among student pharmacists. Their finding also disclosed that perceived benefit is one of the determinants of facemask wearing and supported the negative association we had on perceived risk.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eResults further indicated that there was no significant difference in perceived risk and perceived benefit towards face mask wearing by gender and level among US college students respectively. This means male and female students have the same perceived risk and perceived benefit in wearing face masks. This result is inconsistent with a study done in Uganda by Rawlings et al.(51)\u0026nbsp;to explore students\u0026rsquo; perceptions of COVID-19 risks and preventive measures. Their findings showed that students agreed on COVID-19 as a health risk, and their preventive behaviors were influenced by age, gender, marital status, and living situation. \u0026nbsp;These studies results are inconsistent with this study. Their findings show a significant difference in perceived risk and perceived benefit towards face mask wearing by gender. It was observed that younger people feel they are invincible to the coronavirus which, helps explain their lower perceptions of the benefits of facemask. These attitudes may also have arisen from reports of fewer COVID-19 infections among youth\u0026nbsp;(34, 35). However, this assertion is defective because many younger people who become exposed to or ill with COVID-19 are the same as the rest of the population who are indisposed or quarantined for a certain period\u0026nbsp;(52). Shifting to the level of students in college, Interestingly, only one of the studies captured the year of school the same way it was used in the present study but did not include it in the analysis\u0026nbsp;(36).\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eMost of the other studies categorized it as educational level. As a result, they used labels such as undergraduates/graduate or bachelors/masters for their university participants\u0026nbsp;(27, 53)\u0026nbsp;while the others focused on participants in grade level (10th grade, 11th grade, 12th grade etc.) or primary / elementary / secondary school \u0026nbsp;(54). Thus, analysing this variable is unique to this study. Therefore, for this study, the result showed that seniors had the highest behavior towards facemask wearing than the freshmen. This may be due to the notion that seniors will be more knowledgeable about the policies in the school as well as the consequences so do not want to bear the punishment if any. Also, seniors are known to be preparing for graduation so would not leave anything to chance to get COVID-19 due to negligence which can affect their academic performance and graduation plans. This is supported by studies and reports that analyzed undergraduates\u0026rsquo; and graduates\u0026rsquo; students\u0026rsquo; behavior towards certain health prevention measures and disclosed that graduate students are more likely to have positive attitudes and behavior than undergraduates, given the reasons of age, being knowledgeable and responsibility\u0026nbsp;(55). Therefore, since the seniors can be compared to the status of graduate students the same can be said about them.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe found a relationship between perceived benefits and attitudes towards wearing face masks among US college students. The result shows that there is a negative moderate relationship between students\u0026rsquo; perceived benefit of face mask wearing and their attitude towards face mask wearing. From the analysis, as perceived benefit increases students\u0026apos; attitude decreases moderately. This means that perceived benefits do not necessarily correlate with the attitude of students in wearing face mask. Therefore, it might be due to other factors such as the mandatory rule instituted for all to wear face mask on campus which support a study conducted by Dattel et al\u0026nbsp;(32)\u0026nbsp;examining divergent attitudes regarding the benefits of face masks in aviation colleges and universities. Their findings indicated that aviation colleges and universities located in states which had face mask mandates, exhibited a higher likelihood of community compliance, lower rates of COVID-19 in their state, and reports of less inconvenience predicted attitudes of greater benefits of wearing face masks. Additional comments were provided by 28% of the respondents, showing strongly polarized attitudes about the benefits of face masks. Respondents who had negative attitudes about the benefits of wearing face masks, nevertheless reported compliance on a college campus.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eHowever, Aboagye et al.\u0026nbsp;(18), findings were not consistent. They reported that perceived usefulness of masks similarly improved students\u0026rsquo; attitudes towards wearing face mask because they believe that wearing masks would protect them against COVID-19. However, the health challenges of wearing masks \u0026mdash; especially, for students with respiratory problems including asthma and for an extended period impacted attitudes towards mask use on campus. Instead, alternative prevention strategies such as physical distancing and remote learning were put forward to limit the use of masks for students while on campus. The perceived benefits of face masks have even been found to have a significant influence on individuals\u0026rsquo; intention to wear face masks\u0026nbsp;(24, 25, 26). \u0026nbsp;\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThere is also a negative low relationship between students\u0026rsquo; perceived risk of face mask wearing and their attitude towards face mask wearing. This therefore means that the relationship found here is quite weak although some relationship exists. Moreover, as perceived risk increases students\u0026rsquo; attitude toward face mask wearing decreases. Thus, the students were not afraid of the virus as they might have been when it began where lots of people were dying almost every day in different countries. It is understandable for the earlier studies to have revealed that the pandemic risk perceptions significantly influence individuals\u0026rsquo; attitudes or intention to wear face masks\u0026nbsp;(20, 21, 22)\u0026nbsp;during the period when the pandemic was at its peak. No wonder Limna et al.,\u0026nbsp;(19)\u0026nbsp;found that attitude had the most significant impact on the intention to wear a face mask, followed by the perceived benefit of a face mask and pandemic risk perception. Nonetheless, it was indicated that the respondents\u0026rsquo; pandemic risk perceptions greatly influenced attitudes. On the other hand, in a longitudinal study conducted by Isch et al.\u0026nbsp;(56)\u0026nbsp;on potential predictors of attitudes about mask wearing during COVID-19 pandemic, perceived risk (local incident rate of COVID-19 and stress about COVID-19) predicted the attitude among their respondents. This is likely because currently, the rate of infection and death has not been as rapid as it was in 2021 when their study was conducted. Again, the introduction of the COVID-19 vaccine might have also played a role in the present finding since people now have some hope of protection.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eWe also found that the perceived benefit of wearing a face mask influenced students\u0026rsquo; attitudes and behaviors toward face mask use which was also consistent with Limna et al., (19). However, against our expectations, perceived risk of COVID-19 infection did not significantly impact students\u0026rsquo; attitudes or behaviors toward face mask wearing in this study. This result has not been described elsewhere but is similar to Isch et al. (56) where perceived risk of COVID-19 infection was weakly associated with the length of time people were willing to wear a face mask. Our report is also closely related to that of Wismans et al. (57) who found that only risk perception of COVID-19 for self- predicted face mask use among students, while perceived risk of COVID-19 for family and friends was not associated with face mask use. In contrast to our findings, previous research (19, 58) reported that risk perceptions of COVID-19 transmission highly influenced attitudes and face mask wearing behaviours. A possible explanation for our findings could be the underestimation of COVID-19 prevalence and its negative impact on younger people, as older people have demonstrated to be more susceptible to the negative effects of the virus (59). Moreover, studies e.g.,(60) suggest that sociodemographic factors such as age (i.e., being older) and other factors including the prevalence of the COVID-19 pandemic were important predictors of COVID-19 risk perception. For example, when compared to older students (ages), younger college students were seen to demonstrate lower risk perceptions of COVID-19 (61, 62). Consequently, young people may perceive they are less likely to be infected by COVID-19 which, may manifest in poorer attitudes toward preventive measures and in high-risk behaviors including non-compliance with wearing face masks.\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Limitations and Future Directions","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis present study has limitations, and it is noteworthy. One of these is that the results might not be generalizable because they draw conclusions from a single undergraduate institution and again due to the small sample size used for the analysis. Further studies will be needed to expand the scope and the sample size to provide a broader perspective that can represent most students and make it more generalizable. With the sample, it is recommended that more studies could recruit all stakeholders in the institutions such as students, professors, and non-teaching staff to add up to the diversity of the sample which can provide richer data. Moreover, the perception of benefits and risks, as the attitudes and behaviors towards facemask wearing vary from a different person, gender, level of education, and culture, so might have influenced the quality of the responses for data analysis. A step further can be for future longitudinal research to investigate the association among variables such as COVID-19 status, COVID-19 vaccine status, race, and the status of a student as to whether domestic or international to attitude and behavior as well as adding adherence to the variable because attitude and behavior could predict adherence. Another research conducted to qualitatively explore the experiences of attitude and behavior of students towards facemask wearing using semi-structured interviews will be beneficial since it will afford the researchers the opportunity to investigate experiences unique to participants in wearing a face mask.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cbr\u003e\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eEthics approval and consent to participate\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThis study was reviewed and deemed exempt by Arizona State University Institutional Review Board (IRB) with the approval number \u003cstrong\u003eSTUDY00015710\u003c/strong\u003e. This study complies with all regulations.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eInformed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study\u0026nbsp;\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eAvailability of data and materials\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003e\u003cem\u003eCompeting interests\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e\n\u003cp\u003eThe authors declare that they have no competing interests.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLiao M, Liu H, Wang X, Hu X, Huang Y, Liu X, et al. A technical review of face mask wearing in preventing respiratory COVID-19 transmission. Current Opinion in Colloid \u0026amp; Interface Science. 2021;52:101417.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTang JW, Liebner TJ, Craven BA, Settles GS. A schlieren optical study of the human cough with and without wearing masks for aerosol infection control. Journal of the Royal Society Interface. 2009;6(suppl_6):S727-S36.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLiu X, Zhang S. COVID‐19: Face masks and human‐to‐human transmission. Influenza and other respiratory viruses. 2020;14(4):472.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChan KH, Yuen K-Y. COVID-19 epidemic: disentangling the re-emerging controversy about medical facemasks from an epidemiological perspective. International journal of epidemiology. 2020;49(4):1063-6.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHumphreys J. The importance of wearing masks in curtailing the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care. 2020;9(6):2606.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGuan L, Zhou L, Zhang J, Peng W, Chen R. More awareness is needed for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2019 transmission through exhaled air during non-invasive respiratory support: experience from China. European Respiratory Journal. 2020;55(3).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCheng VC-C, Wong S-C, Chuang VW-M, So SY-C, Chen JH-K, Sridhar S, et al. The role of community-wide wearing of face mask for control of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) epidemic due to SARS-CoV-2. Journal of Infection. 2020;81(1):107-14.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDuong HT, Nguyen HT, McFarlane SJ, Nguyen LTV. Risk perception and COVID-19 preventive behaviors: Application of the integrative model of behavioral prediction. The Social Science Journal. 2021:1-14.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSaey T. Why scientists say wearing masks shouldn\u0026rsquo;t be controversial. Science News. 2020;7.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSyal K. COVID‐19: herd immunity and convalescent plasma transfer therapy. Journal of Medical Virology. 2020;92(9):1380.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAndrew S. The psychology behind why some people won\u0026rsquo;t wear masks. CNN Health. 2020.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eEikenberry SE, Mancuso M, Iboi E, Phan T, Eikenberry K, Kuang Y, et al. To mask or not to mask: Modeling the potential for face mask use by the general public to curtail the COVID-19 pandemic. Infectious disease modelling. 2020;5:293-308.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCapatides C. Coronavirus cannot be cured by drinking bleach or snorting cocaine, despite social media rumors. CBS News March. 2020;9:2020.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGatter R, Mohapatra S. COVID-19 and the Conundrum of Mask Requirements. Wash \u0026amp; Lee L Rev Online. 2020;77:17.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBrug J, Aro AR, Richardus JH. Risk perceptions and behaviour: towards pandemic control of emerging infectious diseases: international research on risk perception in the control of emerging infectious diseases. Springer; 2009. p. 3-6.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLeppin A, Aro AR. Risk perceptions related to SARS and avian influenza: theoretical foundations of current empirical research. International journal of behavioral medicine. 2009;16:7-29.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhang B, Li Z, Jiang L. The intentions to wear face masks and the differences in preventive behaviors between urban and rural areas during COVID-19: An analysis based on the technology acceptance model. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021;18(19):9988.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAboagye E, Opoku IO, Adu N. Senior High School Students' Perception on the Use of Masks to Prevent COVID-19 in Ghana. Social Education Research. 2021:268-77.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLimna P, Siripipatthanakul S, Siripipattanakul S. Factors Affecting Intention to Wear Face Masks among Thai People. International Journal of Public Health and Health Sciences. 2022;4(1):1-10.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAhmad AR, Murad HR. The impact of social media on panic during the COVID-19 pandemic in Iraqi Kurdistan: online questionnaire study. Journal of medical Internet research. 2020;22(5):e19556.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMacIntyre CR, Chughtai AA. A rapid systematic review of the efficacy of face masks and respirators against coronaviruses and other respiratory transmissible viruses for the community, healthcare workers and sick patients. International journal of nursing studies. 2020;108:103629.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eIrfan M, Akhtar N, Ahmad M, Shahzad F, Elavarasan RM, Wu H, et al. Assessing public willingness to wear face masks during the COVID-19 pandemic: fresh insights from the theory of planned behavior. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021;18(9):4577.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMacIntyre CR, Cauchemez S, Dwyer DE, Seale H, Cheung P, Browne G, et al. Face mask use and control of respiratory virus transmission in households. Emerging infectious diseases. 2009;15(2):233.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBurnett ML, Sergi CM. Face masks are beneficial regardless of the level of infection in the fight against COVID-19. Disaster Medicine and Public Health Preparedness. 2020;14(5):e47-e50.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFeng S, Shen C, Xia N, Song W, Fan M, Cowling B. Rational use of face masks in the COVID-19 pandemic, Lancet Respiratory Medicine. Accessed on; 2020.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShukman D. Coronavirus: expert panel to assess face mask use by public. London: BBC News. 2020.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eNiba Rawlings N, Akwah EA, Musisi J, Awanchiri K, Babirye R, Emalieu D, et al. Perceived risks of COVID-19, attitudes towards preventive guidelines and impact of the lockdown on students in Uganda: A cross-sectional study. Plos one. 2022;17(4):e0266249.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHoward MC. Gender, face mask perceptions, and face mask wearing: Are men being dangerous during the COVID-19 pandemic? Personality and individual differences. 2021;170:110417.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLooi KH. Explicating gender disparity in wearing face masks during the COVID-19 pandemic. BMC Public Health. 2022;22(1):1-9.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ePalmer CL, Peterson RD. Toxic Mask-ulinity: The link between masculine toughness and affective reactions to mask wearing in the COVID-19 era. Politics \u0026amp; Gender. 2020;16(4):1044-51.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTang CS-k, Wong C-y. Factors influencing the wearing of facemasks to prevent the severe acute respiratory syndrome among adult Chinese in Hong Kong. Preventive medicine. 2004;39(6):1187-93.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDattel A, Lubner M, Gao P, Xie H. Divergent attitudes regarding the benefits of face masks in aviation colleges and universities. 2022.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eSoltan EM, El-Zoghby SM, Salama HM. Knowledge, risk perception, and preventive behaviors related to COVID-19 pandemic among undergraduate medical students in Egypt. SN comprehensive clinical medicine. 2020;2(12):2568-75.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBarone E. US COVID-19 cases are skyrocketing, but deaths are flat\u0026mdash;so far: These 5 Charts Explain Why; 2020.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBarone E. Young adults are less likely to wear masks, take other measures against covid-19, CDC survey finds. Time. 2020.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDavis RE, Sharma M, Simon KE, Wilkerson AH. Conceptualization of college students\u0026rsquo; COVID-19 related mask-wearing behaviors using the Multi-Theory Model of health behavior change. Health promotion perspectives. 2021;11(2):194.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMwesige D, Nalugya A, Bulafu D, Tigaiza A, Nagawa BT, Balinda E, et al. Face mask use and associated factors among students in rural Eastern Uganda amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. medRxiv. 2021:2021.06. 27.21259131.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTaylor S, Asmundson GJ. Negative attitudes about facemasks during the COVID-19 pandemic: The dual importance of perceived ineffectiveness and psychological reactance. Plos one. 2021;16(2):e0246317.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eFrymier AB, Nadler M. The relationship between attitudes and behaviors. Persuasion: Integrating Theory, Research, and Practice, A Bainbridge Frymier and MK Nadler, Eds Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall Hunt Publishing Company. 2017:41-58.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eScheid JL, Lupien SP, Ford GS, West SL. Commentary: physiological and psychological impact of face mask usage during the COVID-19 pandemic. International journal of environmental research and public health. 2020;17(18):6655.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eTajvar A, Aghamolaei T, Mohseni S, Fakherpour A, Damiri Z, Jahangiri M, et al. Knowledge, performance, and attitude towards mask use to prevent and control COVID-19 outbreak among a group of iranian people: a cross-sectional study. Shiraz E-Medical Journal. 2021;22(11).\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLarebo YM, Abame DE. Knowledge, attitudes, and practices of face mask utilization and associated factors in COVID-19 pandemic among Wachemo University Students, Southern Ethiopia: A cross-sectional study. PloS one. 2021;16(9):e0257609.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDavis FD. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS quarterly. 1989:319-40.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eHamid S, Bano N. Behavioral intention of traveling in the period of COVID-19: an application of the theory of planned behavior (TPB) and perceived risk. International Journal of Tourism Cities. 2021.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eYıldırım M, G\u0026uuml;ler A. Factor analysis of the COVID-19 perceived risk scale: A preliminary study. Death studies. 2022;46(5):1065-72.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003ede Bruin WB, Bennett D. Relationships between initial COVID-19 risk perceptions and protective health behaviors: a national survey. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2020;59(2):157-67.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eGong Z, Veuthey J, Han Z. What makes people intend to take protective measures against influenza? Perceived risk, efficacy, or trust in authorities. American Journal of Infection Control. 2020;48(11):1298-304.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eChampion VL, Skinner CS. The health belief model. Health behavior and health education: Theory, research, and practice. 2008;4:45-65.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eShen M, Zu J, Fairley CK, Pag\u0026aacute;n JA, An L, Du Z, et al. Projected COVID-19 epidemic in the United States in the context of the effectiveness of a potential vaccine and implications for social distancing and face mask use. Vaccine. 2021;39(16):2295-302.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eLi M, Lv G, Hsieh S, Shao R, Yuan J. Pandemic worry and preventive health behaviors during the COVID-19 outbreak. Frontiers in Medicine. 2021;8:700072.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eAbramowitz S, McKune SL, Fallah M, Monger J, Tehoungue K, Omidian PA. The Opposite of Denial: Social Learning at the Onset of the Ebola Emergency in Liberia. Journal of Health Communication. 2017;22:59-65.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCOVID C, Team R, Food, Administration D. Allergic reactions including anaphylaxis after receipt of the first dose of Moderna COVID-19 Vaccine\u0026mdash;United States, December 21, 2020\u0026ndash;January 10, 2021. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 2021;70(4):125.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhang M, Li Q, Du X, Zuo D, Ding Y, Tan X, et al. Health behavior toward COVID-19: the role of demographic factors, knowledge, and attitude among Chinese college students during the quarantine period. Asia Pacific Journal of Public Health. 2020;32(8):533-5.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eMickells GE, Figueroa J, West KW, Wood A, McElhanon BO. Adherence to masking requirement during the COVID‐19 pandemic by early elementary school children. Journal of School Health. 2021;91(7):555-61.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDuperly J, Lobelo F, Segura C, Sarmiento F, Herrera D, Sarmiento OL, et al. The association between Colombian medical students' healthy personal habits and a positive attitude toward preventive counseling: cross-sectional analyses. BMC public Health. 2009;9:1-7.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eIsch C, Beltran DG, Ayers JD, Alcock J, Cronk L, Tidball KG, et al. What predicts attitudes about mask wearing? 2021.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eWismans A, van der Zwan P, Wennberg K, Franken I, Mukerjee J, Baptista R, et al. Face mask use during the COVID-19 pandemic: how risk perception, experience with COVID-19, and attitude towards government interact with country-wide policy stringency. BMC public health. 2022;22(1):1-14.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eZhao X, Knobel P. Face mask wearing during the COVID-19 pandemic: comparing perceptions in China and three European countries. Translational behavioral medicine. 2021;11(6):1199-204.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eCipolletta S, Andreghetti GR, Mioni G. Risk perception towards COVID-19: A systematic review and qualitative synthesis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022;19(8):4649.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eBeltran DG, Isch C, Ayers JD, Alcock J, Brinkworth JF, Cronk L, et al. Mask wearing is associated with COVID-19 Prevalence, Risk, Stress, and Future Orientation.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eDing Y, Du X, Li Q, Zhang M, Zhang Q, Tan X, et al. Risk perception of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and its related factors among college students in China during quarantine. PloS one. 2020;15(8):e0237626.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003cli\u003eQuansah F, Anin SK, Hagan Jr JE, Agormedah EK, Oduro P, Srem-Sai M, et al. Analysis of COVID-19 Risk Perception and Its Correlates among University Students in Ghana. COVID. 2022;2(8):1125-38.\u003c/li\u003e\n\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":true,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5306087/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-5306087/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"The emergence of respiratory viral infections has necessitated the use of face masks worldwide. Although several studies have examined the uses of the face and attested to its efficacy in preventing airborne diseases. In the United States, wearing face masks is a divisive and politicized topic. College students on campus have their own reservations on mask wearing and are influenced by a myriad of factors that determine compliance to mask mandate. The aim of this study is to examine the perception, attitudes, and behavior of college students toward facemask wearing on campus. To achieve that, we recruited 217 participants. 117 (53.9%) participants identified as females, 97 (44.7%) identified as males while the remaining three (1.4%) participants identified as non-binary, with an average age of 19.89. Participants were recruited using convenience sampling through the distribution of flyers both in class and online course pages or website. With an online survey, we measured participants’ attitude, behavior, perceived benefit, and perceived risk of wearing facemasks.\nWe conducted, one-way ANOVA, correlation, and regression analysis. The result indicated that there is no relationship between perceived benefit and attitude towards wearing face masks among US college students. From the analysis, as perceived benefit increases, students' attitude also decreases moderately. This means that perceived benefits do not necessarily correlate with the attitude of students in wearing face masks. Therefore, it might be due to other factors such as the mandatory rule instituted for all to wear face mask on campus. Additionally, there is a positive low relationship between students’ perceived risk of face mask wearing and their face mask wearing behavior, the relationship, therefore, is not significant. This suggests that college students who are at a high perceived risk of COVID-19 are less likely to engage in high face mask wearing behavior. Implications and future directions are discussed.","manuscriptTitle":"Southwestern College Students Attitudes and Behaviors towards Face Mask wearing on Campus. ","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2024-10-31 02:37:40","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-5306087/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"508d3d74-d023-42fd-ae7e-eff2e48d0dde","owner":[],"postedDate":"October 31st, 2024","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2025-04-30T13:06:30+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2024-10-31 02:37:40","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-5306087","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-5306087","identity":"rs-5306087","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"qtupq5eGEP_6zYnWcrvyt","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}