Prepper and Covid-19

ORIGINAL RESEARCH
published: 14 April 2021

doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.659925
Doomsday Prepping During the

COVID-19 Pandemic
Nina Smith 1 and Susan Jennifer Thomas 2,3*
1
Faculty of Social Sciences, School of Psychology, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW, Australia, 2 Illawarra Health
and Medical Research Institute, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW, Australia, 3 Faculty of Science, Medicine and
Health, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW, Australia
“Doomsday prepping” is a phenomenon which involves preparing for feared societal

collapse by stockpiling resources and readying for self-sufficiency. While doomsday
prepping has traditionally been reported in the context of extremists, during the
COVID-19 pandemic, excessive stockpiling leading to supply shortages has been
reported globally. It is unclear what psychological or demographic factors are associated
with this stockpiling. This study investigated doomsday prepping beliefs and behaviors
in relation to COVID-19 proximity, demographics, coping strategies, psychopathology,
intolerance of uncertainty (IU), and personality in 384 participants (249 female) in an online
study. Participants completed a number of questionnaires including the Post-Apocalyptic
and Doomsday Prepping Beliefs Scale and a scale designed for the current study to
measure prepping in the context of COVID-19. These were analyzed using ANOVAs,
Edited by: correlational, and mediation analyses to examine relationships between psychometric
Leonardo Carlucci, variables and stockpiling. Prepping beliefs and behaviors were higher in males than
University of Studies G. d’Annunzio
females and positively associated with anxiety, obsessive-compulsive symptoms, IU, and
Chieti and Pescara, Italy
traditional masculinity traits. Older age, male gender, obsessive-compulsive symptoms,
Reviewed by:
Vasiliki Holeva, and traditional masculinity predicted unique variance in prepping. The relationship
Papageorgiou General between gender and stockpiling was mediated by social learning (witnessing other
Hospital, Greece
Eleni Parlapani, people panic buying) and the perceived threat of COVID-19 (doomsday interpretations)
Aristotle University of while proximity and personal vulnerability to COVID-19 were non-significant. Results
Thessaloniki, Greece
indicate that panic buying was influenced more by witnessing others stockpiling,
*Correspondence:
personality, and catastrophic thinking rather than by proximity to danger. Education could
Susan Jennifer Thomas
[email protected] target these factors in ongoing waves of the pandemic or future catastrophes.
Keywords: doomsday prepping, anxiety, OCD, masculinity, hoarding, pandemic (COVID-19)
Specialty section:
This article was submitted to
Personality and Social Psychology,
a section of the journal INTRODUCTION
Frontiers in Psychology
Since the advent of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, there have been global news reports of
Received: 28 January 2021
widespread, excessive stockpiling and panic-buying of supplies such as toilet paper, food, hand
Accepted: 22 March 2021
Published: 14 April 2021
sanitizer, and cleaning products. This panic-buying has led to supply shortages, empty shelves, and
distress. It is unclear what psychological factors are associated with excessive stockpiling during the
Citation:
Smith N and Thomas SJ (2021)
current COVID-19 pandemic. These behaviors have been described as panic-buying and hoarding
Doomsday Prepping During the which suggest links to anxiety. However, little is known about influences such as demographics,
COVID-19 Pandemic. proximity or vulnerability to the virus, coping strategies, psychopathology, and personality.
Front. Psychol. 12:659925. The concept of “doomsday prepping” entered popular culture through a National Geographic
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.659925 Channel reality television series called Doomsday Preppers, which focussed on a subculture of
Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 1 April 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 659925

Smith and Thomas Doomsday Prepping During the Pandemic
people preparing for a post-apocalyptic world by hoarding learnt via social pressures which are then exacerbated by fear.
supplies and weapons and rehearsing responses to hypothetical Social influence and group interactions may be important factors
and often unlikely apocalyptic scenarios (Fetterman et al., in shaping behavior during crises (Abdulkareem et al., 2020)
2019). Doomsday preppers in the pre-pandemic world often which require further examination in the context of stockpiling.
appeared to be extremists, performing elaborate drills in Community disease outbreaks can have profound impacts
preparation for unlikely scenarios. There is little research on mental health. A Hong Kong study on women discovered
on psychological characteristics associated with pre-COVID-19 that during the SARS outbreak, women reported higher scores
survivalist prepping however an initial study found that it was of depression and stress than they had prior (Yu et al.,
associated with personality factors such as low agreeableness, 2005). Increased levels of stress and depression were directly
paranoia, cynicism, conspiracy mentality, conservatism, and associated with feelings of fear, poor sleep, and financial loss.
social dominance orientation (Fetterman et al., 2019). With its unpredictability, economic impact, and need for social
The concept of the apocalypse appears in a variety of contexts isolation, COVID-19 has the potential to cause great mental
throughout history and popular culture. Doomsday preppers strain as it demands the population to adapt in ways that are
are preoccupied in anticipating hypothetical scenarios that may extremely novel to most (Horesh and Brown, 2020). It is thus
bring about the end of civilization. The anticipated causes important to investigate prepping in relation to coping and
of doom differ markedly from person to person (Routledge mental health symptoms.
et al., 2018). These survivalists or “preppers” typically secure There is limited research on those who identify as preppers
places of shelter and stock up on food, water, medicine, fuel, and even less research on prepping in general populations.
and sometimes weapons. Many preppers are part of an online Recently, Fetterman et al. (2019) developed the Post-Apocalyptic
survivalist community. Despite any differences that may exist and Doomsday Prepping Beliefs Scale (PAPBS) to assess prepping
between preppers due to their personal visions of the apocalypse, in the general population. The authors found that prepping
they ultimately share the belief that there will be civil unrest and beliefs were predictive of low agreeableness and humility, and
breakdown of law and order (Kabel and Chmidling, 2014). positively correlated with cynicism, conspiracy mentality, and
The term doomsday prepping may evoke images of extremists, paranoia (Fetterman et al., 2019). Prepping beliefs were also
but it is also thought that prepping occurs on a continuum in related to conservatism and social dominance orientation (SDO),
the general population (Fetterman et al., 2019). On March 11, and the belief in the need to prep was associated with negative
2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the novel daily experiences and global political events. A limitation was that
Coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak a global pandemic (World they did not include any measures of psychopathology, thus there
Health Organization, 2020). The excessive stockpiling during is a need for further research.
the pandemic suggests that psychological factors including There is ample evidence to suspect a potential link between
doomsday interpretations may be important influences on these prepping and anxiety, but no research has explored this yet.
behaviors. While it is understandable to see an increase in Those who engage in preparatory behaviors tend to express
purchases of essential supplies in readiness of the need to remain concerns surrounding resource availability and fears of others
at home to avoid transmission, the extent of stockpiling has been (Fetterman et al., 2019). This pessimistic outlook reflects both a
excessive and has created inequitable situations that are risky to distrust of humans and a fixation on negative future events, which
vulnerable people. There have been violent scenes as people fight can be an indicator of anxiety (Miranda and Mennin, 2004).
over limited resources and some have left stores with nothing The anxious undertones of preparatory beliefs may stem
while others have excessive supplies. beyond general anxiety to a more specific existential anxiety
Past pandemics have also fueled preparatory behaviors. surrounding fears of uncertainty and death (Fetterman et al.,
Fung and Loke (2010) investigated the impact Severe Acute 2019). Terror Management Theory (TMT) proposes that death-
Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) had on Hong Kong families related cues can trigger personal and social defenses (Jonas
regarding preparatory behaviors. After the pandemic, most et al., 2014). The juxtaposition of the inevitability of death
families considered infectious diseases their greatest worry and with the desire for survival is a fundamental threat to the
68% of households had a food supply of 3 days, conveying human self (Greenberg et al., 1997). In response to death
that exposure to a global pandemic can influence preparatory cues and uncertainty, it is common to buffer existential
behaviors. The spread of Influenza A (swine flu) also led to anxiety through attempts to control one’s environment and
behavioral changes. One UK study reported that during the investment in groups (Jonas et al., 2014). Prepping may
outbreak 20% of respondents had bought preparatory supplies reflect an attempt to obtain control over a chaotic world
(Goodwin et al., 2011). Swine flu’s impact on daily living and and to ease anxiety related to mortality and potential chaos
societal functioning is dwarfed by that of COVID-19 and yet (Fetterman et al., 2019). Investing in groups is also evident
prepping behaviors emerged, albeit on a smaller scale. in prepping culture. Many preppers engage in online forums
While there is little research on stockpiling during COVID- which may strengthen their sense of security in their actions
19, one study found that consumers felt pressured to stockpile and even foster a sense of superiority as they tend to display
after seeing peers do the same (Zheng et al., 2020). Social learning great amounts of sociotropy, meaning they exhibit excessive
theory (Bandura, 1977), states that behavioral conditioning and investment in their social group. Morris and Johnson (2002)
observational learning are mediated by cognitive processes such found that apocalyptic thinking was positively correlated with
as motivation, therefore excessive preparatory responses may be negative sociotropy, thus those high in apocalyptic thinking

are likely to display hostility or disdain to those they daily experiences (Fetterman et al., 2019). The COVID-19
consider “outsiders.” pandemic has resulted in significant changes to daily living
Prepping may also bear similarities to obsessive-compulsive- such as loss of employment, working from home, financial
like rituals. People with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) impacts, restrictions on movement and social activities, all of
will perform rituals to neutralize or reduce the distress they which may contribute to stress (Horesh and Brown, 2020) and
experience from a perceived threat (Jurgens et al., 2019). It is increase prepping beliefs (Fetterman et al., 2019).This study
common amongst extreme preppers to rehearse the evacuation will examine preparatory beliefs and behaviors in the context
drills they intend to enact when their envisioned doomsday of the COVID-19 pandemic in relation to demographic and
arrives (Kabel and Chmidling, 2014). Repeatedly rehearsing psychological variables. There is anecdotal evidence to suggest
these drills in some ways resemble OCD-type rituals performed that anxiety, obsessive-compulsive-like tendencies, IU, and
to prevent feared consequences (Jurgens et al., 2019). It may traditional masculinity traits may be associated with prepping but
be that preparing for feared future eventualities temporarily there is no direct research. Results may inform the development
eases anxiety, which then reinforces further prepping behavior of responses to crises by identifying which factors are associated
when distressing cognitions arise. Additionally, thoughts of an with excessive stockpiling. Additionally, there is anecdotal
impending apocalypse could show similarities to obsessions. information in the media about coping strategies being employed
Hoarding excessive quantities of supplies that may never be by people in the context of the unprecedented circumstances of
used may resemble hoarding symptoms (Boerma et al., 2019). the COVID-19 pandemic which require many people to shelter
Approximately 20% of people with OCD experience hoarding at home and physically isolate, however there is little research
symptoms, which are defined as the excessive accumulation available about the nature and uptake of coping strategies. We
of items regardless of their actual value (Matthews et al., also sought to ascertain the nature of coping strategies reported
2014). There are differences between OCD-type symptoms and during the pandemic in order to better understand reactions to
prepping behavior however, as OCD symptoms typically have the pandemic.
an ego-dystonic quality, where the person feels compelled to The aims of the study are to:
perform them against their will. The extent to which this
1. Measure beliefs and behaviors related to doomsday prepping
applies to doomsday prepping is unclear and there is a lack of
in a sample of people during the COVID-19 pandemic,
research examining relationships between OCD-type symptoms
as well as levels of psychopathology, coping strategies, and
and prepping.
personality traits and whether these differ by gender.
Additionally, intolerance of uncertainty (IU) may be related to
2. Assess correlations between prepping beliefs and behaviors
prepping beliefs and behaviors. IU refers to an aversive response
and other demographic and psychological variables.
to situations involving uncertainty where they are often perceived
3. Examine which constructs account for the most variance in
as threatening regardless of the true probability of threat (Tanovic
prepping, and mediating factors.
et al., 2018). IU may be related to TMT as uncertainty around
mortality can lead to an existential anxiety that causes one
to seek control over their environment (Jonas et al., 2014). METHODS
Therefore, prepping may relate to IU due to ongoing uncertainty Participants
in the pandemic. The sample consisted of 384 participants (249 female), with ages
IU is higher in those with OCD (Wheaton and Ward, 2020) ranging from 18 to 62 (M = 23.91, SD = 7.87). Participants were
and is also associated with subclinical obsessive-compulsive- recruited via social media and through the university’s research
type symptoms and need for control (Fourtounas and Thomas, participation scheme for psychology students.
2016). Control may be particularly important as preppers
display a large need to exert control over their environment Materials
(Fetterman et al., 2019). Demographic Questionnaire
It is not yet clear whether prepping behaviors in general A demographic questionnaire was developed to collect
and during the current pandemic differ by gender, however information including age, country of birth and residence,
Fetterman et al. (2019) found that prepping beliefs are correlated gender, dependents, occupation, and level of education.
with social dominance. Because males are often higher in SDO
(Feather and McKee, 2012) and masculine socialization increases Prepping and Coping During a Pandemic Scale
rates of SDO (Foels and Pappas, 2004), this may suggest a (PCP-Scale)
connection between prepping characteristics and traditionally Due to the unprecedented nature of such a pandemic in
masculine personality traits. In the context of the pandemic recent history, there were no existing measures tailored to
however, it is also possible that stockpiling may be linked to assess doomsday prepping, hoarding and stockpiling behaviors
caring for dependent people such as children. Gender personality as well as other forms of coping in the context of a global
traits in relation to prepping have not yet been explored. health crisis. We therefore developed a measure to capture
To summarize, while doomsday prepping has traditionally pandemic-specific aspects of doomsday prepping and coping,
been considered an activity adopted by extremists, the COVID- which were not assessed by existing doomsday prepping or
19 pandemic has seen widespread preparatory behaviors in the general coping questionnaires (Supplementary Material). Due
general population. Prepping beliefs are influenced by negative to the rapidly evolving crisis and the need to collect data

while stockpiling was widespread during the pandemic, we did to have strong internal reliability both yielding a Cronbach’s alpha
not generate items using some formal processes such as focus of 0.87 (Jackson, 2018).
groups or the Delphi method. The items were generated based
on expert and clinical input, discussion in university research
symposia, qualitative analysis of media reports of common Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale (GAD-7)
responses to the COVID-19 pandemic and themes related The GAD-7 (Spitzer et al., 2006) is a brief measure developed to
to stockpiling and coping and review of the small literature assess the extent of anxiety symptoms over the past fortnight. It
relating to stockpiling during previous pandemics (Fung and is a seven item self-report measure that employs a 4-point Likert
Loke, 2010; Goodwin et al., 2011). Similar approaches have scale with responses ranging from 0 (not at all) to 3 (nearly every
been adopted in other COVID-19 research requiring rapid day). The scale has four cut off points of 0–4 (minimal anxiety),
survey design (Ballou et al., 2020). Twenty reflective items of 5–9 (mild), 10–14 (moderate), and 15–21 (severe).
the questionnaire were developed which assessed preparatory When tested amongst clinical populations the scale has shown
behaviors (e.g., stockpiling), perceived motives for stockpiling to have excellent internal reliability with a Cronbach’s alpha of
(e.g., concerns about lockdowns), positive coping strategies (e.g., 0.92 as well as good test-retest reliability with an intra class
exercise, socializing online, focusing on personal goals) and correlation of 0.83 (Spitzer et al., 2006). The questionnaire has
beliefs about the pandemic (e.g., I associate the current pandemic demonstrated good construct, convergent, and factorial validity
with a doomsday scenario). We did not include questions (Spitzer et al., 2006). The GAD-7 is also a reliable measure of
about alcohol/drug use which were covered in existing coping anxiety symptoms for general, non-clinical populations yielding
questionnaires. Further contextual items such as proximity and a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.89 (Lowe et al., 2008). Construct and
vulnerability to COVID-19, prepping activity not related to factorial validity of the measure has also been supported in
COVID-19 and previous exposure to disasters were included to studies on non-clinical populations (Lowe et al., 2008).
measure and control for COVID-19 threat level, general prepping
tendencies and previous exposure to disasters, all of which may
influence responses to the pandemic. Items were rated on a The Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory- Revised
four point Likert scale with response corresponding to: 1 = (OCI-R)
Not at all, 2 = Somewhat, 3 = Moderately, 4 = Very much so. The OCI-R (Foa et al., 2002) is a self-report measure of symptoms
To gather more information in this new area of research, three related to OCD. The questionnaire consists of 18 items that assess
open questions were included to ask respondents for any further distress related to symptoms on a 5-point Likert scale ranging
information about their reasons for stockpiling, coping strategies from 0 (not at all) to 4 (extremely). Individuals can score within a
and feared eventualities they were prepping for which were not possible range of 0–72 with authors suggesting that a score of 21
included in the questionnaire. The scale produced a Cronbach’s or greater is indicative of likely OCD (Foa et al., 2002).
alpha of 0.72 indicating good internal consistency. The OCI-R has shown to have good internal consistency
across various clinical populations as well as non-clinical. The
The Post-Apocalyptic and Doomsday Prepping overall scale has yielded Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranging
Beliefs Scale (PAPBS) from 0.81 to 0.93 in populations with OCD, PTSD, Generalized
The PAPBS is a 12-item questionnaire designed by Fetterman Social Phobia (GSP), and non-anxious controls (Foa et al., 2002).
et al. (2019) to measure people’s attitudes and beliefs about The validity of the OCI-R is also evident in the significant
the post-apocalyptic world and prepping. Each item contains a positive correlations that have been observed between it and
statement that is rated on a 5-point Likert scale from completely other measures of OCD (Foa et al., 2002).
disagree (1) to completely agree (5). The themes of Humanity and
resource concerns, Competitive survival, and Belief in the need to
prep serve as the three subscales for the questionnaire. The Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS-21)
The PAPBS has been established to have good internal The DASS-21 (Lovibond and Lovibond, 1995) explores distress
consistency yielding Cronbach’s alphas ranging from 0.71 to 0.88 experienced in the last 7 days. The measure contains 21 items
across studies (Fetterman et al., 2019). that are scored on a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 0 (did not
apply to me at all) to 3 (applied to me very much, or most of the
The Survivalist Behavior Questionnaire (SBQ) time) with a total score between 0 and 63. The DASS-21 has three
The SBQ (Jackson, 2018) focuses specifically on prepping subscales; Depression, Anxiety, and Stress.
behaviors that may be adopted by survivalists. The questionnaire The internal consistency for the three subscales is strong with
contains eight items that explore prepping behaviors rated on a 5- Cronbach’s alphas ranging from 0.87 to 0.94 and the scale also has
point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly good concurrent validity as it has moderate to strong correlations
agree (5). Half of the items focus on physical behaviors (e.g., with other measures such as the Beck Depression Inventory,
I have stockpiled food and water to survive a potential major Beck Anxiety Inventory (Antony et al., 1998), and the Positive
disaster) and half assess planning behaviors (e.g., I have a plan I and Negative Affect Schedule (Henry and Crawford, 2005). The
could put into operation to survive a potential major disaster). The DASS-21 has displayed excellent internal reliability within non-
overall scale has shown to have excellent internal reliability with a clinical populations with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.93 for the overall
Cronbach’s alpha of 0.90 and both subscales have been confirmed scale (Henry and Crawford, 2005).

The Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale- Short Form Procedure

(IUS-12) The current study was reviewed and approved by the Institutional
The IUS-12 (Carleton et al., 2007) is a self-report measure that Human Research Ethics Committee. Participants were given
assesses a person’s tendency to respond to uncertainty about the information about the study and gave informed consent. Data
future negatively. The scale contains 12 items with a 5-point were collected from 25th April to 28th August 2020.
Likert response scale ranging from 1 (not at all characteristic
of me) to 5 (entirely characteristic of me) to gauge how people Statistical Analyses
cope with uncertain situations. The IUS-12 explores two factors, Statistical Analyses of the data were conducted using the
Prospective IU which refers to anxiety surrounding future events Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) Version 26.
(7 items) and Inhibitory IU which refers to inhibited action or Study variables were tested for violation of assumptions, missing
experience due to uncertainty (5 items). data, and outliers. Responses with missing data were excluded
The internal consistency of the IUS-12 is excellent, the from the analyses. After the deletion of incomplete responses,
Cronbach’s alpha of the overall scale is 0.91 and the two factors the final sample size was 378. A small number of outliers were
both yield alpha coefficients of 0.85 (Carleton et al., 2007). The detected in the sample, however results remained consistent
internal consistency of the measure has been demonstrated across after the removal of outliers and so the analyses reported
numerous clinical populations including those with OCD (Jacoby include the outliers. The internal consistency of the psychometric
et al., 2013) as well as anxiety and depression (McEvoy and instruments was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha.
Mahoney, 2011). The IUS-12 has also been established as a To explore the dimensionality of the new PCP-S
reliable measure of IU in non-clinical populations (Fourtounas questionnaire, an exploratory factor analysis with Varimax
and Thomas, 2016). The construct validity of the IUS-12 has been rotation was used to evaluate the factor structure of the PCP-S,
demonstrated in several studies (Carleton et al., 2007; Jacoby with Eigen values >1.0 and visual inspection of the scree plot
et al., 2013). used to identify potential subscales. Cronbach’s alpha was used to
assess the internal consistency and also as a measure of reliability
The Brief Coping Orientation to Problems as it is equivalent to the mean of all split-half reliabilities
Experienced Scale (Brief COPE) (Warrens, 2015). Tests for normal distribution (skewness and
The Brief COPE (Carver, 1997) is a self-report measure of kurtosis) were conducted for each item of the scale. Spearman’s
different coping strategies. The scale consists of 28 items that Rho was conducted between each PCP-S item and the Total
assess how people have utilized different coping styles to manage score. Concurrent validity of the PCP-S was examined through
a hardship according to a 4-point Likert scale ranging from 1 correlations with other prepping, survivalist, coping and mental
(I haven’t been doing this at all) to 4 (I’ve done this a lot). The health measures which were hypothesized to be conceptually
Brief COPE measures two coping styles; Avoidant Coping and related to coping responses during the pandemic.
Approach Coping. Within these two composite subscales are 14 One-way Analyses of Variance (ANOVAs) were conducted to
subscales (Cooper et al., 2008). compare psychometric scores, prepping beliefs and behaviors,
The Brief COPE has been established to have good internal personality traits, and coping by gender. Pearson’s correlational
consistency, the two subscales have both yielded Cronbach’s analyses were performed to evaluate the relationships between
alphas >0.72 (Cooper et al., 2008). Convergent and concurrent the measures of personality and psychopathology (anxiety, OCD-
validity of the Brief COPE have also been confirmed via regression like symptoms, IU, and traditional masculinity traits) with
analyses (Cooper et al., 2008). prepping beliefs and behaviors. Linear regression analyses (LRAs)
were performed to assess the extent to which each psychometric
The Masculine Behavior Scale (MBS) construct accounted for unique variance in prepping beliefs
The MBS (Snell, 1989) is a self-report measure of gender-related and behaviors beyond that explained by demographic variables.
behavioral tendencies. The instrument is constructed of 20 items Finally, a parallel mediation analysis was conducted via
that are scored using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from −2 PROCESS Macro Model 4, Version 3.5 (Hayes, 2018), using SPSS
(disagree) to +2 (agree). The MBS contains four subscales to examine which variables successfully mediate the relationship
that explore traditionally masculine-related behaviors: Success between gender and stockpiling.
Dedication, Restrictive Emotionality, Inhibited Affection, and
Exaggerated Self-reliance. Each subscale can yield a total score RESULTS
of −10 to +10, more positive scores indicating an engagement
in more stereotypically masculine behavior. Demographic and Psychometric
The MBS has demonstrated good internal consistency, Characteristics of the Sample
the Cronbach’s alpha of the subscales range from a low Table 1 displays the demographic information and psychometric
of 0.69 to a high of 0.89 and have reported test-retest properties of the sample grouped by gender as well as the
coefficients at an average of 0.62 (Snell, 1989). The concurrent Cronbach’s alpha coefficients of the scales. Of the sample, 250
validity of the MBS has been confirmed through observed participants were psychology students. The other participants
positive correlations with other measures of masculinity and worked in approximately 120 different occupations spanning
femininity such as the Personal Attributes Questionnaire health care, science, education, law, trades and engineering.
(PAQ; Spence and Helmreich, 1978). Some common occupations were retail/hospitality (n = 60),

TABLE 1 | Demographic and psychometric variables by gender (N = 373).
Overall Male Female

(n = 384) (n = 125) (n = 248)
Variable M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) F p Partial η2 a
Age (Years) 23.87 (7.79) 26.26 (9.01) 22.54 (6.78) 18.28 <0.001 0.04
Dependents 0.51 (1.05) 0.56 (1.08) 0.49 (1.06) 0.34 0.563 0.01
Years of 14.77 (2.55) 14.97 (2.73) 14.68 (2.48) 2.00 0.159 0.01
education
PAPBS 31.85 (7.38) 34.26 (8.66) 30.68 (6.33) 16.64 <0.001 0.04 0.81
SBQ 13.18 (5.56) 15.52 (6.07) 12.04 (4.92) 30.64 <0.001 0.08 0.84
GAD-7 7.47 (5.43) 7.19 (5.53) 7.65 (5.37) 0.57 0.452 0.01 0.91
OCI-R 17.06 (12.47) 17.68 (11.96) 16.81 (12.72) 0.41 0.525 0.00 0.90
DASS-21 17.24 (11.86) 16.82 (11.89) 17.48 (11.87) 0.25 0.620 0.01 0.93
IUS-12 30.61 (9.28) 31.04 (9.07) 30.43 (9.40) 0.36 0.549 0.00 0.89
COPE Avoidant 25.50 (5.76) 25.45 (6.17) 25.54 (5.57) 0.01 0.904 0.00 0.76
COPE 31.33 (6.83) 30.14 (6.51) 32.84 (6.89) 5.00 0.026 0.01 0.86
Approach
MBS 4.30 (14.16) 7.78 (15.41) 2.66 (13.24) 9.37 0.003 0.02 0.89
PAPBS, Post-Apocalyptic and Doomsday Prepping Beliefs Scale; SBQ, Survivalist Behavior Questionnaire; GAD-7, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7; OCI-R, Obsessive-Compulsive
Inventory-Revised; DASS-21, Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21; IUS-12, Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale- Short Form; MBS, Masculine Behavior Scale.
Participants who did not answer the gender question (n = 5) were excluded from the gender comparative analyses.
and business owner (n = 15). Twenty were unemployed or Males reported higher rates of stockpiling, and higher rates
furloughed, and one was a stay-at-home parent. of stockpiling in response to observing others panic buying
Most participants resided in Australia (n = 259), with the (social learning) than females. Males and females did not differ
remainder spanning 27 other countries [Andorra (n = 1), significantly in their proximity or vulnerability to COVID-19 nor
Armenia (n = 1), Austria (n = 2), Belgium (n = 1) Brazil (n = 1), did they differ significantly in their concern about society’s future
Bulgaria (n = 1), Canada (n = 6), Czech Republic (n = 1), due to COVID-19. However, males were significantly more likely
Finland (n = 1), France (n = 2), Germany (n = 7), Hong Kong to associate the current pandemic with a doomsday scenario. The
(n = 1), India (n = 3), Ireland (n = 1), Italy (n = 1), Japan most common reported strategies for remaining positive during
(n = 1), Liechtenstein (n = 1), Malaysia (n = 1), Mexico (n = 2), COVID-19 were socializing via technology, focusing on personal
Netherlands (n = 16), New Zealand (n = 1), Norway (n = 4), goals or hobbies, and looking for positives that emerged during
Portugal (n = 1), Spain (n = 3), United Arab Emirates (n = 1), the pandemic such as reductions in pollution. Females reported
United Kingdom (n = 13), USA (n = 32)]. Prior to analyses, significantly more socializing via technology, spending time with
normality was assessed via skewness and kurtosis statistics, which pets, and consulting a doctor than males. Males reported focusing
indicated that the sample met normality assumptions except on personal interests significantly more than females.
for items 18, 19 and 20 of the PCP-S (seeking help from a An exploratory factor analysis was conducted on reflective
doctor, psychologist or help-line) which showed floor effects. The questions, items 1–20, but not including the contextual
homogeneity of variance between the male and female groups (control) or open questions, to explore the dimensionality of
was violated and so the Welch ANOVA statistic is reported. Males the questionnaire. The Kaise-Meyer-Olkin index of sampling
were significantly older than females, but males and females adequacy was 0.74 and Bartlett’s sphericity test was significant
did not differ significantly in years of education or number of (χ2 = 1,654.24, p < 0.001), indicating that the PCP scale data
dependents. Males averaged higher scores on the PAPBS and the from our survey were suitable for factor analysis. No item
SBQ than females. There were no significant differences between detracted from the scale alpha.
genders on the other psychological and personality measures of Principal components analysis revealed six factors with
the study except for masculinity (MBS) where, as expected, males eigenvalues >1, accounting for 62.23% of the variance (Factor
averaged higher scores, and approach-focused coping (COPE) 1: 22.34%; Factor 2: 12.46%; Factor 3: 8.31%; Factor 4: 7.38%;
where females averaged higher scores than males. Factor 5: 5.93%; Factor 6: 5.78%). All 20 reflective items of the
PCP-S loaded robustly onto one of the identified factors rotated
Properties of the New Prepping and with Varimax method, with no overlap when loadings of <0.36
Coping During a Pandemic Scale (PCP-S) were eliminated (Table 3). The anti-image correlation matrix
Table 2 displays the descriptive information for the items of the indicated that all measures of sampling adequacy were above the
PCP-S for the current sample, by gender. The most common acceptable level of 0.50.
reported reasons for stockpiling were concerns about lockdowns, As shown in Table 4, each item was significantly correlated
responding to others stockpiling, and fears of getting sick. with the Total score, with small to large correlations (0.17–0.64).

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org
Smith and Thomas

TABLE 2 | Prepping and Coping during a Pandemic Scale (PCP-Scale), Mean Scores and Response Percentages (N = 373).
Male (n = 125) Female (n = 248) Overall Sample
Response percentages
Variable M (SD) M (SD) F P partial η2 1 2 3 4

Proximity to COVID-19 2.40 (0.83) 2.41 (0.92) 0.01 0.945 0.00 10.7% 51.7% 25.7% 8.5%
Vulnerability to COVID-19 1.42 (0.80) 1.47 (0.82) 0.27 0.606 0.00 71% 17.4% 7.5% 4.2%
Stockpiling 2.08 (1.10) 1.63 (0.68) 17.61 <0.001 0.09 44.2% 40.4% 8.5% 6.9%
Stockpiling Reasons
Fears of supermarkets closing 1.63 (0.88) 1.56 (0.78) 0.57 0.452 0.02 54.9% 24.6% 10.2% 2.9%
Fears of lockdown 2.06 (0.97) 1.85 (0.94) 3.58 0.060 0.01 39.4% 28.4% 17.6% 6.9%
In response to others 2.14 (1.24) 1.87 (1.01) 4.11 0.044 0.02 44.5% 20.9% 15.4% 12.8%
Friend and family advice 1.48 (0.89) 1.52 (0.77) 0.12 0.737 0.00 61.1% 20.1% 7.5% 3.7%
Fears of getting sick 1.89 (1.06) 1.79 (0.93) 0.74 0.392 0.03 45.5% 24.1% 15% 7.7%
Associating COVID-19 with doomsday 1.99 (0.91) 1.81 (0.76) 3.53 0.047 0.02 36.4% 45.5% 14.2% 4.5%
Concern about society’s future 2.67 (1.01) 2.76 (0.84) 0.65 0.421 0.01 7.2% 37.3% 31.9% 23.8%
Coping Strategy
Socializing via technology 2.70 (0.88) 3.02 (0.82) 11.45 0.001 0.03 5.1% 26% 41.8% 27.3%
7
Support forums 1.51 (0.86) 1.64 (0.83) 2.00 0.158 0.01 60% 24.1% 12.6% 3.4%
Personal interests 3.11 (0.94) 2.87 (0.90) 5.88 0.016 0.02 6.7% 25.5% 35.1% 32.9%
Exercise 2.47 (1.07) 2.45 (1.02) 0.05 0.818 0.00 20.1% 35.6% 23.6% 20.9%
Practicing meditation 1.65 (0.91) 1.80 (0.93) 2.21 0.139 0.01 51.5% 30% 11.5% 7.2%
Spiritual practice 1.58 (0.94) 1.60 (0.93) 0.02 0.882 0.00 65.7% 16% 12.3% 10.4%
Home improvements 2.10 (0.95) 2.28 (0.96) 3.23 0.074 0.01 26.8% 35.1% 27.9% 10.4%
Spending time with pets 2.14 (1.22) 2.43 (1.23) 4.42 0.037 0.01 38.9% 15.5% 20.4% 25.5%
Positive impacts of COVID-19 2.45 (1.02) 2.66 (0.97) 3.57 0.060 0.01 16.3% 29.5% 33.8% 20.6%
Consulting a doctor 1.22 (0.64) 1.37 (0.68) 4.16 0.042 0.02 77.5% 14.7% 6.7% 1.3%
Consulting a psychologist 1.22 (0.69) 1.37 (0.83) 3.33 0.069 0.01 83.1% 6.9% 5.4% 3.8%
Phoning a helpline 1.06 (0.32) 1.11 (0.43) 1.80 0.180 0.01 94.3% 3.2% 2.1% 0.54%
Doomsday Prepping During the Pandemic

April 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 659925
Scores correspond to the following qualitative descriptors of the response scale: 1 = Not at all, 2 = Somewhat, 3 = Moderately, 4 = Very much so. Participants who did not answer the gender question (n = 5) were excluded from the
gender comparative analyses.
TABLE 3 | Component loading values of the six-factor structure of the Prepping and Coping during a Pandemic Scale.
Factor
1 2 3 4 5 6
1. Overall stockpiling during COVID-19 0.711

2. Stockpiling due to fears/concerns about supermarkets closing 0.731
3. Stockpiling due to fears/concerns about restrictions on going out, or lockdowns 0.818
4. Stockpiling in response to other people buying excessive amounts of supplies 0.637
5. Stockpiling because friends or family advised to 0.639
6. Stockpiling due to fears about getting sick and not being able to go out 0.762
7. Associating COVID-19 with a “doomsday” scenario 0.781
8. Worrying about the future of society because of COVID-19 0.750
9. Socializing with friends and family via technology 0.579
10. Reading or engaging in support forums 0.502
11. Focusing on personal interests/goals/hobbies 0.656
12. Keeping positive through exercise 0.624
13. Practicing meditation/mindfulness 0.783
14. Engaging in spiritual practice or thought 0.808
15. Home maintenance/improvements 0.523
16. Spending time with pets. 0.787
17. Looking for positives, e.g., reductions in pollution, the return of animals to certain areas, etc. 0.680
18. Consulting a doctor 0.750
19. Consulting a psychologist 0.772
20. Phoning a helpline 0.662
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis. Rotation method: Varimax with Kaiser normalization. Factors correspond to themes of: 1“Stockpiling,” 2 “Formal help,” 3
“Self-care/hobbies,” 4 “Doomsday cognitions,” 5 “Mindfulness/spirituality,” 6 “Nature and animals”.
Additionally, correlations between each of the six factors and the out of some items like meat/produce, no bread to feed the
Total score were significant and moderate to large (0.38-0.74). children, worried that essentials like feminine hygiene products
The positive correlations between each item and each subscale would run out), stocking up to be ready to bug out to a remote,
with the Total score suggest that the questionnaire is measuring off-grid location, stockpiling due to previous experience of war,
a range of related cognitive and behavioral responses to the and wanting to help neighbors.
pandemic, as well as providing a specific measure of pandemic- Responses to the open questions about any other coping
related stockpiling. The PCP-S Total showed low-moderate strategies used included electronic entertainment (watching
significant correlations with traditional doomsday prepping and more television series, streaming, radio, podcasts, gaming,
survivalist questionnaires, psychopathology measures (anxiety listening to music, watching pornography), food (cooking,
and OCD-related) and stress (Table 5), which were theoretically eating more healthily), spending more time with loved ones
related concepts, supporting concurrent validity of the scale. (family, partners, spending precious time with children) focusing
The positive correlations between the PCP-S Total, stress and on self-improvement (studying, reading books, journaling),
psychopathology (Table 5) also suggest that while some coping thinking positively (only looking at positive news stories and
methods (e.g., meditation, exercising) may be considered more vaccine development, pretending it’s not happening), finding out
“positive,” and others (e.g., stockpiling) might be considered more about the virus (watching the world cases, researching
undesirable, all these coping methods are positively related to literature on the virus), sleeping, oversleeping, masturbation,
the stressful nature of the pandemic. The Total score may using weed/alcohol, family cocktail nights at home and partying
therefore potentially be used as a measure of overall cognitive with roommates.
and behavioral responses to the pandemic, in addition to the Answers to the open question about whether people were
prepping scores. preparing for anything other feared events not listed included
Responses to the open question about additional reasons mass civil disobedience, societal collapse, loss of jobs due to
for stockpiling resources during COVID-19 included fear of automation, and a post-brexit slump.
going out and catching COVID-19, financial worries (economic
downturn or collapse, job loss, price increases and not being able Correlational Analyses
to afford resources later on), fear of the collapse of civilization Two-tailed Pearson’s correlational analyses indicated that
due to multiple threats (climate change, natural disasters, fires, prepping beliefs measured by the PAPBS were positively
earthquakes, drought, flood, terrorism, or solar flare), fear of the associated with the GAD-7, OCI-R, DASS-21, IUS-12, and MBS
grid going down, fear of collapse of supply chains (stores running (Table 5). Additionally, prepping behaviors as measured by the

TABLE 4 | Spearman Rho’s correlations between each PCP-S item, factors and regardless of their removal the outliers were retained for the
the total score. analysis. The presence of multivariate outliers was indicated as
Item r Mahalanobis distance exceeded the critical X 2 for df = 7 (at α =
0.001) of 24.32 for two cases. Likewise, as the pattern of results
1. Overall stockpiling during COVID-19 0.583** after the multivariate outliers’ removal remained consistent with
2. Stockpiling due to fears/concerns about 0.476** the results prior to their removal, the multivariate outliers
supermarkets closing were retained.
3. Stockpiling due to fears/ concerns about restrictions 0.641** The first LRA investigated the variance explained by
on going out, or lockdowns
psychometric constructs on prepping beliefs as measured by
4. Stockpiling in response to other people buying 0.545**
the PAPBS while controlling for age and gender. At step 1, age
excessive amounts of supplies
and gender as well as the GAD-7, OCI-R, DASS-21, IUS-12,
5. Stockpiling because friends or family advised to 0.547**
and MBS were entered in the regression model, the combined
6. Stockpiling due to fears about getting sick and not 0.529**
being able to go out
demographic and psychometric variables accounted for 52% of
7. Associating COVID-19 with a “doomsday” scenario 0.379**
the variance in prepping beliefs, R2 = 0.27, F (7,342) = 17.85,
p < 0.001. The values of unstandardized (B) and standardized
8. Worrying about the future of society because of 0.339**
COVID-19 (β) regression coefficients, and semi-partial correlations (sr2 ) for
9. Socializing with friends and family via technology 0.274** each predictor in the regression model are reported in Table 6.
10. Reading or engaging in support forums 0.408** Significant predictors were age, gender, the OCI-R, IUS-12, with
11. Focusing on personal interests/goals/hobbies 0.358**
the MBS. Age (β = 0.25, p < 0.001) and IU (β = 0.21, p = 0.001)
12. Keeping positive through exercise 0.370**
being the strongest predictors.
13. Practicing meditation/mindfulness 0.368**
The second LRA examined the relative utility of the
14. Engaging in spiritual practice or thought 0.349**
psychometric constructs in predicting variance in prepping
behaviors as measured by the SBQ while controlling for age and
15. Home maintenance/improvements 0.367**
gender. At step 1, age and gender, the GAD-7, OCI-R, DASS-21,
16. Spending time with pets 0.288**
IUS-12, and MBS were entered and the psychometric constructs
17. Looking for positives, e.g., reductions in pollution, 0.326**
the return of animals to certain areas, etc. combined with age and gender accounted for 49% of variance
18. Consulting a doctor 0.170**
in prepping behaviors, R2 = 0.24, F (7,342) = 15.02, p < 0.001.
19. Consulting a psychologist 0.181**
Significant predictors for prepping behaviors were age, gender,
20. Phoning a helpline 0.312**
the OCI-R, and the MBS (Table 7).
Factors
The final LRA explored the variance explained by
psychometric constructs on stockpiling in response to COVID-
1. Stockpiling 0.742**
19 (item 3 on the PCP-S) while controlling for age and gender. At
2. Formal help 0.379**
step 1, age and gender, the GAD-7, OCI-R, DASS-21, IUS-12, and
3. Self-care/hobbies 0.542**
MBS were entered in the regression model. Demographic and
4. Doomsday cognitions 0.412**
psychometric variables combined accounted for 51% of variance
5. Mindfulness/spirituality 0.434**
in COVID-19 stockpiling, R2 = 0.26, F (7,342) = 17.11, p < 0.001.
6. Nature/animals 0.381**
Age, gender, the GAD-7, OCI-R, and the MBS were the strongest
PCP, Prepping and Coping during a Pandemic Scale. predictors of stockpiling (Table 8).
**Correlation is significant at p < 0.01.
Mediation Analyses
To further examine the relationship between gender and
SBQ positively correlated with the GAD-7, OCI-R, DASS-21, IUS- stockpiling, a parallel mediation analysis (displayed in Figure 1)
12, and MBS. Unlike prepping beliefs, prepping behaviors were was conducted using PROCESS Macro Model 4 in SPSS. The
only significantly related to the Stress subscale of the DASS-21 and analysis examined which variables significantly mediated the
the Prospective IU subscale of the IUS-12. The PCP-S Total score relationship between gender and stockpiling. The mediators
correlated significantly with general prepping measures (PAPBS included potential vulnerability to contracting COVID-19 (such
and SBQ), psychopathology (GAD-7, OCI-R, DASS Anxiety), as proximity to active cases or personal health vulnerability),
Stress and IU. doomsday-like perceptions of COVID-19, concerns about
lockdowns, and responding to other people’s excessive panic
Linear Regression Analyses (LRAs) buying. As anxiety was a significant predictor of stockpiling it was
Three linear regressions were conducted to assess the extent also included as a mediator to see if it explained the relationship
to which each psychometric construct accounted for unique between gender and stockpiling.
variance in prepping characteristics (as measured by the PAPBS, Anxiety was not a significant mediator (b = 0.006(0.009),
SBQ, and self-reported stockpiling due to COVID-19) while 95% CI [−0.008, 0.029]) suggesting that while anxiety had
controlling for age and gender. a significant effect on stockpiling it does not account for
The presence of univariate outliers was revealed through higher rates of stockpiling in males. Witnessing other
boxplots but as the pattern of results remained consistent people buying excessive amounts of supplies significantly

TABLE 5 | Correlations for Study Variables (N = 373).
Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
1. PAPBS –
2. SBQ 0.55** –
3. GAD-7 0.24** 0.15** –
4. OCI-R 0.29** 0.19** 0.46** –
5. DASS-21 Overall 0.22** 0.12* 0.78** 0.50** –
6. DASS Depression 0.15** 0.06 0.59** 0.34** 0.86** –
7. DASS Anxiety 0.11* 0.02 0.65** 0.49** 0.84** 0.61** –
8. DASS Stress 0.29** 0.21** 0.76** 0.46** 0.87** 0.59** 0.63** –
9. IUS-12 0.34** 0.19** 0.55** 0.45** 0.58** 0.43** 0.50** 0.57** –
10. IUS Prospective 0.37** 0.26** 0.49** 0.36** 0.48** 0.33** 0.36** 0.54** 0.91** –
11. IUS Inhibitory 0.22** 0.06 0.48** 0.43** 0.54** 0.43** 0.53** 0.45** 0.85** 0.54** –
12. MBS 0.26** 0.18** 0.14** 0.18** 0.17** 0.12* 0.07 0.23** 0.29** 0.31** 0.17** –
13. PCP-S Total 0.348** 0.366** 0.205** 0.322** 0.102 −0.028 0.112* 0.182** 0.117* 0.178** 0.008 0.021
PAPBS, Post-Apocalyptic and Doomsday Prepping Beliefs Scale; SBQ, Survivalist Behavior Questionnaire; GAD-7, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7; OCI-R, Obsessive-Compulsive
Inventory-Revised; DASS-21, Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21; IUS-12, Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale- Short Form; MBS, Masculine Behavior Scale, PCP-S, Prepping and
Coping during a Pandemic Scale.
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.01.
TABLE 6 | Linear Regression Predicting Prepping Beliefs as measured by the TABLE 8 | Linear Regression Predicting Stockpiling as measured be the Prepping
PAPBS (n = 373). and Coping during a Pandemic Scale (PCP-S) (n = 373).
Predictor B β sr2 p Predictor B β sr2 p
Age 0.23 0.25** 0.27 <0.001 Age 0.04 0.39** 0.40 <0.001
Gender −2.10 −0.14* −0.15 0.006 Gender −0.23 −0.13* −0.14 0.010
GAD-7 0.14 0.10 0.07 0.187 GAD-7 0.03 0.21* 0.15 0.007
OCI-R 0.11 0.19* 0.18 0.001 OCI-R 0.01 0.12* 0.11 0.038
DASS-21 −0.06 −0.10 −0.07 0.198 DASS-21 −0.01 −0.08 −0.06 0.290
IUS-12 0.16 0.21* 0.18 0.001 IUS-12 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.688
MBS 0.09 0.18** 0.19 <0.001 MBS 0.01 0.13* 0.14 0.012
PAPBS, Post-Apocalyptic and Doomsday Prepping Beliefs Scale; GAD-7, Generalized GAD-7, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7; OCI-R, Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory-
Anxiety Disorder-7; OCI-R, Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory-Revised; DASS-21, Revised; DASS-21, Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21; IUS-12, Intolerance of
Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21; IUS-12, Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale- Short Uncertainty Scale- Short Form; MBS, Masculine Behavior Scale.
Form; MBS, Masculine Behavior Scale. *p < 0.05, **p < 0.001.
*p < 0.01, **p < 0.001.
TABLE 7 | Linear Regression Predicting Prepping Behaviors as measured by the mediated the relationship between gender and stockpiling
SBQ (n = 373). (b = −0.101(0.052), 95% CI [−0.213, −0.008]). Fears of
lockdown was not a significant mediator (b = 0.011(0.007),
Predictor B β sr2 p
95% CI [−0.056, 0.078]), suggesting that males stockpiling
Age 0.22 0.30** 0.31 >0.001
at a higher rate is related to social learning. Additionally,
Gender −2.51 −0.21** −0.20 >0.001
associating the current pandemic with a doomsday scenario
significantly mediated the relationship between gender and
GAD-7 0.14 0.14 0.09 0.064
stockpiling (b = −0.019 (0.018), 95% CI [−0.057, −0.008]),
OCI-R 0.08 0.17* 0.17 0.002
suggesting that males interpreting COVID-19 as a doomsday
DASS-21 −0.06 −0.12 −0.08 0.136
scenario was related to their greater stockpiling. However,
IUS-12 0.04 0.07 0.06 0.251
proximity to COVID-19 cases and personal vulnerability to
MBS 0.04 0.11* 0.12 0.025
COVID-19 were not significant mediators, indicating that
SBQ, Survivalist Behavior Questionnaire; GAD-7, Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7; OCI- doomsday connotations or catastrophic thinking in relation
R, Obsessive-Compulsive Inventory-Revised; DASS-21, Depression Anxiety Stress to COVID-19, along with social learning were more powerful
Scale-21; IUS-12, Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale- Short Form; MBS, Masculine
Behavior Scale.
than proximity or personal vulnerability to COVID-19 in
*p < 0.05, **p < 0.001. influencing stockpiling.

FIGURE 1 | Mediating effects of perceived and actual threat of COVID-19 and social learning on stockpiling (n = 373). *p < 0.05, **p < 0.001; an = effect of gender
on variables; bn = effect of variables on COVID stockpiling; c′ = direct effect of gender on stockpiling; c = total effect of gender on stockpiling.
Summary nature of preparatory beliefs and behaviors and the associated

First, one-way ANOVAs confirmed that males scored higher sociodemographic, psychopathology, and personality constructs.
on the PAPBS and SBQ and also reported higher rates of This is an area of key importance in the context of the current
stockpiling in response to COVID-19, although males and pandemic as there is limited research on what drives excessive
females did not differ significantly in their proximity and stockpiling behaviors which have led to distress, conflict, and
vulnerability to COVID-19 nor did they differ significantly negative ramifications on daily living.
in psychological symptoms. The new PCP-S scale showed The overall sample reported fears of lockdown, seeing
adequate reliability and concurrent validity. Correlational others stockpile, and fears of getting sick as their most
analyses revealed significant positive associations between common reasons for stockpiling due to COVID-19, showing
prepping beliefs and behaviors and anxiety, OCD-like symptoms, the importance of feared future outcomes to hoarding and
IU, and traditional masculinity traits. LRAs revealed that age panic-buying. Males reported stockpiling due to COVID-19 at
and gender were consistent significant predictors across all significantly higher rates than females and had higher scores
measures of prepping. Additionally, LRAs indicated that OCD- on measures of doomsday prepping beliefs and behaviors.
like symptoms, IU, and traditional masculinity accounted for the Similarly, traditional masculinity traits correlated positively with
most unique variance in predicting prepping beliefs (measured all prepping measures. These are novel findings in the literature
by the PAPBS). In comparison, traditional masculinity and OCD- which are somewhat consistent with previous findings of links
like symptoms were significant predictors for prepping behaviors between prepping beliefs, social dominance orientation, and
(measured by the SBQ) and, with the addition of anxiety, were competitiveness (Fetterman et al., 2019) which have both been
significant predictors for COVID-19 stockpiling (PCP-S). A observed to occur more in males (Apicella et al., 2011; Feather
parallel mediation analysis indicated two psychological variables and McKee, 2012).
(doomsday connotations and seeing other people panic buying) We assessed self-reported levels and reasons for stockpiling
mediated the relationship between gender and stockpiling while during the pandemic, using a scale developed for the current
variables related to the actual danger of COVID-19 such as study. Males reported being influenced to stockpile when
proximity or personal vulnerability were non-significant. observing others panic-buying at higher rates than females,
suggesting social learning processes. Additionally, males were
DISCUSSION more likely to interpret the current pandemic as a doomsday
scenario than were females. Additionally, there were no gender
This study investigated doomsday prepping during the COVID- differences in the measures of psychopathology (anxiety, OCD-
19 pandemic to better understand global waves of resource type symptoms, and IU). This suggests that higher prepping
hoarding and panic buying. We aimed to investigate the characteristics in males were related to personality traits seen in

traditional masculinity, as well as social learning and catastrophic traditional masculinity were significant predictors of prepping
thinking. The findings of the link between traditional masculinity beliefs, behaviors, and COVID-19 stockpiling, while IU was only
traits and prepping are perhaps not surprising, as traditional predictive of prepping beliefs, and anxiety was only predictive of
masculinity traits include being in control, in charge and not COVID-19 stockpiling.
relying on others, all of which are conceptually related to self- OCD-like symptoms were a significant predictor of all
sufficiency. Traditional male traits may fuel competitiveness prepping measures. Prepping may be interpreted as a coping
and a perceived need to compete for supplies and display an mechanism to alleviate intrusive thoughts related to a post-
exaggerated self-reliance when confronted with images of others apocalyptic world (Jurgens et al., 2019). Preparing for feared
hoarding resources (Zheng et al., 2020). future outcomes may temporarily ease anxiety, which then
Prepping characteristics were positively related to anxiety, reinforces prepping behaviors like stockpiling when anxious
obsessive-compulsive-like symptoms, and intolerance of cognitions arise. Traditional masculinity was also a significant
uncertainty. The relationship between prepping characteristics predictor of all measures indicating that features of stereotypical
and anxiety may be explained by negative future-based thinking hyper-masculinity like an exaggerated self-reliance may promote
that is seen in anxious individuals (Miranda and Mennin, 2004) the evolution of prepping characteristics. Traditional masculinity
which can be compared to the pessimistic outlook that serves as remained a significant predictor when gender was controlled for
a foundation for prepping (Fetterman et al., 2019). In the context which further supports the argument that it is not merely males
of the current pandemic, many people have lost their source of engaging in prepping actions but those who possess a greater
employment, social connections, and receive frequent reminders degree of these stereotypical masculine traits like competitiveness
via the media of the negative ramifications of COVID-19 such and dominance.
as shortages, social unrest, and economic fallout (Horesh and Age was a significant predictor of all prepping measures. This
Brown, 2020). In turn, this negative outlook may fuel beliefs in is a novel finding for the field of research. Males in this sample not
the need to prep (Fetterman et al., 2019). only reported higher prepping scores but were also significantly
It was unclear how much prepping and obsessive-compulsive- older than females. This raises the possibility that it is not traits
like symptoms would relate, due to a lack of previous research. of traditional masculinity alone accounting for males’ greater
The OCD-symptom measure used in the current study examines prepping scores but perhaps also age, however multivariate
symptoms that occur on a continuum related to alleviating regression analyses indicated that both male gender and age
intrusive thoughts about feared outcomes (Foa et al., 2002). Its significantly accounted for unique variance in prepping scores.
positive correlation with prepping measures suggests a potential Finally, this study sought to understand which factors
overlap between intrusive thoughts, which may elevate beliefs mediated the relationship between gender and stockpiling
in the need to prep. Therefore, people may be attempting during the pandemic. Social learning (witnessing panic-buying)
to soothe distress associated with these intrusive thoughts via and catastrophic thinking (doomsday interpretations of the
prepping behaviors. pandemic) were found to significantly mediate the relationship
The association between prepping characteristics and between gender and stockpiling, however objective threat of
intolerance of uncertainty is consistent with research that COVID-19 (proximity and vulnerability) did not. This suggests
suggests IU is related to fears in one’s ability to cope with that males’ greater stockpiling is associated with constructs
unpredictability (Jensen et al., 2016), which may manifest in other than rational risk appraisal, including catastrophic thinking
self-reassuring behaviors like stockpiling. Furthermore, the related to COVID-19 and a sense of competition with others
positive association between anxiety and IU and prepping for supplies. This novel finding may explain why stockpiling has
characteristics supports the propositions of TMT (Greenberg persisted even when risks reduce, and reassurances are given by
et al., 1997). As individuals feel uncertain about the future and authorities and suppliers.
receive a heightened number of death cues due to COVID-19, Observing others panic buying was a significant mediator
they may attempt to ease their existential anxiety through for the relationship between gender and stockpiling indicating
prepping behaviors such as stockpiling as it allows them to seek that social learning has a substantial impact on preparatory
control over a chaotic environment (Jonas et al., 2014). responses during COVID-19. This finding supports the research
The Stress subscale of the DASS-21 had the strongest of Zheng et al. (2020) which found that consumers panic buying
correlation with prepping behaviors (measured by the SBQ) while during a crisis is heavily influenced by social learning. Stockpiling
the Anxiety and Depression subscales were non-significant. Stress, may manifest through observational learning which is mediated
by definition is an appraisal of not having sufficient resources to through motivations. For example, the motivation to suppress
cope with the demands of a situation, and therefore may be a feelings of fear that are produced through catastrophic thinking
catalyst for preparatory behaviors during the current pandemic. (Bandura, 1977). This finding signifies the importance of group
Research during the 2003 SARS outbreak demonstrated how the interactions in shaping responses to a crisis, which is consistent
crisis led to elevated levels of stress (Yu et al., 2005), however with the research of Abdulkareem et al. (2020) on how collective
we are not aware of previous research linking stress levels learning is instrumental in behavioral change in an epidemic.
to stockpiling. These findings convey that prepping beliefs and behaviors may
Next, we examined which psychological constructs predicted be fuelled by psychological factors other than objective threat and
prepping. The variables were not all significant predictors across that social learning and catastrophic cognitions may be the root
the different prepping measures. OCD-type symptoms and of some prepping behaviors.

Additionally we examined a range of coping strategies during Previous research on prepping during pandemics is scarce
the unfolding health crisis. The most common reported strategies and previous studies on doomsday prepping have failed to
were socializing via technology, focusing on personal goals or incorporate measures of psychopathology and rarely explore
hobbies, and looking for positives that emerged during the prepping in general samples. This study has also developed
pandemic such as reductions in pollution. Females socialized a new measure of prepping and coping during a pandemic
more via technology, spent more time with pets, and more (PCP-S) which has provided insights into the reasons for
frequently consulted a doctor than males. Males reported pandemic prepping and stockpiling, other ways of coping and
significantly more focusing on personal interests than females. gender differences.
Uptake of formal help, such as through health care professionals, This study also has a number of limitations. The new
was lower than other strategies, consistent with many pre- scale measuring prepping during the pandemic was developed
pandemic studies (Thomas and Larkin, 2018). rapidly to begin data collection during a rapidly evolving
crisis, therefore further, studies are suggested to assess the
Implications psychometric properties of the scale, items and subscales. There
The current study’s examination of COVID-19’s impact has were more female participants, although this was controlled
provided some of the first evidence of preparatory beliefs and for in multivariate analyses. Nevertheless, further studies are
behaviors in the context of a global pandemic and psychosocial needed to explore and replicate the results. The majority of
correlates. This study revealed that males and females have the participants were young psychology students from Australia.
different prepping and coping responses during the pandemic, Because of the relatively small number of participants in other
with males reporting higher rates of stockpiling. Additionally, countries we were not able to make comparisons between
stockpiling was related to psychopathology, catastrophic countries. Additionally, participants self-selected to take part in
thinking, stress, anxiety, and traditionally male personality traits. the study, therefore they may not be representative of those who
These findings can be informative to developing future strategies do not volunteer to participate in research. Further studies are
for communities in responding to a global crisis. The knowledge needed to assess the generalizability of the results to broader
that peers are considerably influential in driving behavior in a populations. The finding regarding age would suggest that higher
crisis can be utilized to suppress undesirable behaviors like panic rates of prepping beliefs and behaviors may have been reported in
buying. Additionally, public information can target cognitive an older sample. The relationship between age and prepping may
factors that exacerbate competition and catastrophising. be worth exploring further in future research.
The current pandemic has led to global increases in The study’s cross-sectional design does not allow for causal
prepping behaviors like stockpiling. The current results suggest interpretations to be made. It is unclear if prepping beliefs and
that stereotypical aspects of masculinity such as dominance, behaviors give rise to symptoms such as anxiety or if these
competitiveness, and exaggerated self-reliance is associated with variables increase the likelihood of prepping. Likewise, it may be
stockpiling behaviors. These traits may be being nurtured in the the case that the spread of COVID-19 triggered an increase in
current conditions of society as people put their own needs before prepping and simultaneously an increase in these symptoms. The
others like we have observed throughout COVID-19 (Smith, ambiguity of the direction of these findings may be resolved by
2005). Panic-buying may be ameliorated in environments that future longitudinal research.
do not fuel these traditional hyper-masculine traits. An emphasis
on togetherness may be a possible solution to encourage positive
and self-aware behaviors. As group interactions are paramount in CONCLUSIONS
shaping behavior during crises (Abdulkareem et al., 2020), it may
be productive to utilize these interactions and increase a sense of Overall, research on doomsday prepping is limited and more
comradery to minimize self-serving behaviors like stockpiling. research is required to understand the striking increase in panic-
The current findings have the potential to frame prepping buying and stockpiling during the COVID-19 pandemic. This
as a dysfunctional and maladaptive coping response to stress study has provided some of the first evidence that preparatory
and fear (Jurgens et al., 2019). These results show prepping beliefs and behaviors during the pandemic are related to anxiety,
was more related to personality traits, social learning, and obsessive-compulsive-like symptoms, intolerance of uncertainty,
doomsday interpretations than to levels of legitimate threat and traditional masculinity traits. Additionally, males reported
through proximity and vulnerability to the virus. Providing greater stockpiling of resources and prepping beliefs and
adequate public health guidance as well as mental health behaviors than females. The study results suggest that stockpiling
support during a crisis may aid in limiting hoarding behaviors. is fueled to a greater extent by seeing others stockpile, through a
Furthermore, Strategies to address these psychological factors process of social learning, along with doomsday interpretations
could be provided during ongoing waves of the pandemic or of COVID-19, than it is by actual proximity or vulnerability
future crises. to infection. Overall, these findings indicate that doomsday
prepping in the context of the current pandemic is grounded
Strengths, Limitations, and Future less in rational concerns than observational learning, as well
Directions as psychological and personality characteristics interacting with
The current study examined several unexplored areas in research chaotic environments that lead to catastrophic thinking and
thereby advancing our understanding of prepping characteristics. feelings of fear and uncertainty.

DATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT first draft. ST conceived the study, revised and edited
the manuscript, oversaw the design, analyses, and
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be interpretation of results. All authors agreed on the manuscript
made available by the authors, without undue reservation. final content.
ETHICS STATEMENT
FUNDING
The studies involving human participants were reviewed and
approved by Joint University of Wollongong and Illawarra This study was funded by the University of
Shoalhaven Local Health District Human Research Ethics Wollongong, Australia.
Committee. The patients/participants provided their written
informed consent to participate in this study.
SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found
NS had input into the study design, recruited participants, online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.
collected and analyzed data, and wrote the manuscript 2021.659925/full#supplementary-material
REFERENCES versus Inhibitory Intolerance of Uncertainty. J. Obsess. Compuls. Relat. Disord.

9, 30–35. doi: 10.1016/j.jocrd.2016.02.003
Abdulkareem, S. A., Augustijn, E., Filatova, T., Musial, K., and Mustafa, Y. T. Fung, O., and Loke, A. (2010). Disaster preparedness of families with
(2020). Risk perception and behavioral change during epidemics: comparing young children in Hong Kong. Scand. J. Public Health 38, 880–888.
models of individual and collective learning. PLoS ONE 15:e0226483. doi: 10.1177/1403494810382477
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0226483 Goodwin, R., Gains, S. O., Myers, L., and Neto, F. (2011). Initial
Antony, M. M., Bieling, P. J., Cox, B. J., Enns, M. W., and Swinson, R. P. (1998). psychological responses to swine flu. Int. J. Behav. Med. 18, 88–92.
Psychometric properties of the 42-item and 21-item versions of the depression doi: 10.1007/s12529-010-9083-z
anxiety stress scales in clinical groups and a community sample. Psychol. Assess. Greenberg, J., Solomon, S., and Pyszczynski, T. (1997). Terror management
10, 176–181. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.10.2.176 theory of self-esteem and cultural world views: empirical assessments
Apicella, C. L., Dreber, A., Gray, P. B., Hoffman, M., Little, A. C., and Campbell, B. and conceptual refinements. Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 29, 61–139.
C. (2011). Androgens and competitiveness in men. J. Neurosci. Psychol. Econ. 4, doi: 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60016-7
54–62. doi: 10.1037/a0021979 Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional
Ballou, S., Gray, S., and Palsson, O. S. (2020). Validation of the pandemic Process Analysis: A Regression-Based Approach, 2nd Edn. New York, NY: The
emotional impact scale. Brain Behav. Immunity Health 9:100161. Guilford Press.
doi: 10.1016/j.bbih.2020.100161 Henry, J. E., and Crawford, J. R. (2005). The short-form version of the
Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory, Vol. 1. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice- depression anxiety stress scale (DASS-21): construct validity and normative
hall. data in a large non-clinical sample. Br. J. Clin. Psychol. 44, 227–239.
Boerma, Y. E., de Boer, M. M., van Balkom, A., Eikelenboom, M., Visser, H. A., doi: 10.1348/014466505X29657
and van Oppen, P. (2019). Obsessive compulsive disorder with and without Horesh, D., and Brown, A. D. (2020). Traumatic stress in the age of COVID-19:
hoarding symptoms: characterizing differences. J. Affect. Disord. 246, 652–658. a call to close critical gaps and adapt to new realities. Psychol. Trauma Theory
doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2018.12.115 Res. Pract. Policy 12, 331–335. doi: 10.1037/tra0000592
Carleton, R. N., Norton, P. J., and Asmundson, G. J. G. (2007). Fearing the Jackson, C. J. (2018). Are survivalists malevolent? Pers. Individ. Diff. 129, 104–107.
unknown: a short version of the intolerance of uncertainty scale. J. Anxiety doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2018.03.006
Disord. 21, 105–117. doi: 10.1016/j.janxdis.2006.03.014 Jacoby, R. J., Fabricant, L. E., Leonard, R. C., Reimann, B. C., and Abramowitz, J.
Carver, C. S. (1997). You want to measure coping but your protocol’s too long: S. (2013). Just to be certain: Confirming the factor structure of the Intolerance
consider the Brief COPE. Int. J. Behav. Med. 4, 92–100. of Uncertainty Scale in patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder. J. Anxiety
Cooper, C., Katona, C., and Livingston, G. (2008). Validity and reliability of the Disord. 27, 535–542. doi: 10.1016/j.janxdis.2013.07.008
brief COPE in carers of people with dementia. J. Nerv. Ment. Dis. 196, 838–843. Jensen, D., Cohen, J. N., Mennin, D. S., Fresco, D. M., and Heimberg,
doi: 10.1097/NMD.0b013e31818b504c R. G. (2016). Clarifying the unique associations among intolerance of
Feather, N. T., and McKee, I. R. (2012). Values, right-wing authoritarianism, social uncertainty, anxiety, and depression. Cogn. Behav. Ther. 45, 431–444.
dominance orientation, and ambivalent attitudes towards women. J. Appl. Soc. doi: 10.1080/16506073.2016.1197308
Psychol. 42, 2479–2504. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.00950.x Jonas, E., McGregor, I., Klackl, J., Agroskin, D., Fritsche, I., Holbrook, C., et al.
Fetterman, A. K., Rutjens, B. T., Landkammer, F., and Wilkowski, B. M. (2019). On (2014). “Threat and defense: from anxiety to approach,” in Advances in
post-apocalyptic and doomsday prepping beliefs: a new measure, its correlates, Experimental Social Psychology, Vol. 49, eds J. M. Olson and M. P. Zanna
and the motivation to prep. Eur. J. Pers. 33, 506–525. doi: 10.1002/per. (Amsterdam: Elsevier Academic Press). p. 219–286
2216 Jurgens, C., Rupp, C., Doebler, P., Andor, F., and Buhlmann, L. (2019).
Foa, E. B., Huppert, J. D., Leiberg, S., Langner, R., Kichic, R., Hajcak, G., et al. Metacognition in obsessive-compulsive disorder symptom dimensions: role of
(2002). The obsessive-compulsive inventory: development and validation of a fusion beliefs, beliefs about rituals and stop signal. J. Obsess. Compuls. Relat.
short version. Psychol. Assess. 14, 485–496. doi: 10.1037/1040-3590.14.4.485 Disord. 21, 102–111. doi: 10.1016/j.jocrd.2019.03.002
Foels, R., and Pappas, C. J. (2004). Learning and unlearning the myths we Kabel, A., and Chmidling, C. (2014). Disaster prepper: health, identity,
are taught: gender and social dominance orientation. Sex Roles 50, 743–757. and american survivalist culture. Hum. Organ. 73, 258–266.
doi: 10.1023/B:SERS.0000029094.25107.d6 doi: 10.17730/humo.73.3.l34252tg03428527
Fourtounas, A., and Thomas, S. J. (2016). Cognitive factors predicting Lovibond, P. F., and Lovibond, S. H. (1995). The structure of negative emotional
checking, procrastination and other maladaptive behaviours: prospective states: comparison of the depression anxiety stress scale (DASS) with the

beck depression and anxiety inventories. Behav. Res. Ther. 33, 335–343. Tanovic, E., Gee, D. G., and Joormann, J. (2018). Intolerance of uncertainty:
doi: 10.1016/0005-7967(94)00075-U neural and psychophysiological correlates of the perception of uncertainty
Lowe, B., Decker, O., Muller, S., Brahler, E., Schellberg, D., Herzog, W., as threatening. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 60, 87–99. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2018.
et al. (2008). Validation and standardization of the generalized anxiety 01.001
disorder screener (GAD-7) in the general population. Med. Care 46, 266–274. Thomas, S., and Larkin, T. (2018). Plasma cortisol and oxytocin levels predict
doi: 10.1097/MLR.0b013e318160d093 help-seeking intentions for depressive symptoms. Psychoneuroendocrinology
Matthews, C. A., Delucchi, K., Cath, D. C., Willemsen, G., and Boomsma, D. 87, 159–165. doi: 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2017.10.018
I. (2014). Partitioning the etiology of hoarding and obsessive-compulsive Warrens, M. J. (2015). Some relationships between Cronbach’s alpha
symptoms. Psychol. Med. 44, 2867–2876. doi: 10.1017/S0033291714000269 and the Spearman-Brown formula. J. Classific. 32, 127–137.
McEvoy, P. A., and Mahoney, A. E. J. (2011). Achieving certainty about doi: 10.1007/s00357-015-9168-0
the structure of intolerance of uncertainty in a treatment-seeking Wheaton, M. G., and Ward, H. E. (2020). Intolerance of uncertainty and obsessive-
sample with anxiety and depression. J. Anxiety Disord. 25, 112–122. compulsive personality disorder. Pers. Disord. Theory Res Treat. 11, 357–364.
doi: 10.1016/j.janxdis.2010.08.010 doi: 10.1037/per0000396
Miranda, R., and Mennin, D. S. (2004). Depression, generalised anxiety disorder, World Health Organization (2020). WHO Director-General’s Opening Remarks at
and certainty in pessimistic predictions about the future. Cogn. Ther. Res. 31, the Media Briefing on COVID19 -March 2020. World Health Organization.
71–82. doi: 10.1007/s10608-006-9063-4 Yu, H., Ho, S. C., So, K., and Lo, Y. L. (2005). Short communication: the
Morris, N., and Johnson, M. P. (2002). Apocalyptic thinking, autonomy, and psychological burden experienced by Hong Kong midlife women during the
sociotropy. Psychol. Rep. 90, 1069–1074. doi: 10.2466/pr0.2002.90.3c.1069 SARS epidemic. Stress Health 21, 177–184. doi: 10.1002/smi.1051
Routledge, C., Abeyta, A. A., and Roylance, C. (2018). Death and end times: Zheng, R., Shou, B., and Yang, J. (2020). Supply disruption management
the effects of religious fundamentalism and mortality salience on apocalyptic under consumer panic buying and social learning effects. Omega 101:102238.
beliefs. Religion Brain Behav. 8, 21–30. doi: 10.1080/2153599X.2016.1238840 doi: 10.1016/j.omega.2020.102238
Smith, R. T. (2005). Characteristics of hypermasculinity: A relational perspective
(Doctoral dissertation), Fielding Graduate University, Santa Barbara, CA, Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the
United States. absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a
Snell, W. E. (1989). Development and validation of the masculine behaviour scale: a potential conflict of interest.
measure of behaviours stereotypically attributed to males vs. females. Sex Roles
21, 749–767. doi: 10.1007/BF00289806 Copyright © 2021 Smith and Thomas. This is an open-access article distributed
Spence, J. T., and Helmreich, R. L. (1978). Psychological Masculinity and under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use,
Femininity. Austin: University of Texas Press. distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original
Spitzer, R. L., Kroenke, K., Williams, J. B. W., and Lowe, B. (2006). A brief measure author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication
for assessing generalised anxiety disorder. Arch. Intern. Med. 166, 1092–1097. in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use,
doi: 10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092 distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

Prepper and Covid-19

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Prepper and Covid-19

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Prepper and Covid-19

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

published: 14 April 2021

Doomsday Prepping During the

“Doomsday prepping” is a phenomenon which involves preparing for feared societal

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 1 April 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 659925

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 2 April 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 659925

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 3 April 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 659925

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 4 April 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 659925

The Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale- Short Form Procedure

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 5 April 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 659925

TABLE 1 | Demographic and psychometric variables by gender (N = 373).

Overall Male Female

Variable M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) F p Partial η2 a

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 6 April 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 659925

Smith and Thomas

Male (n = 125) Female (n = 248) Overall Sample

Variable M (SD) M (SD) F P partial η2 1 2 3 4

Doomsday Prepping During the Pandemic

1. Overall stockpiling during COVID-19 0.711

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 8 April 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 659925

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 9 April 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 659925

TABLE 5 | Correlations for Study Variables (N = 373).

Predictor B β sr2 p Predictor B β sr2 p

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 10 April 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 659925

Summary nature of preparatory beliefs and behaviors and the associated

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 11 April 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 659925

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 12 April 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 659925

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 13 April 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 659925

REFERENCES versus Inhibitory Intolerance of Uncertainty. J. Obsess. Compuls. Relat. Disord.

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 14 April 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 659925

Frontiers in Psychology | www.frontiersin.org 15 April 2021 | Volume 12 | Article 659925

You might also like