key: cord-0988511-tqty9arj authors: Glückstad, Fumiko Kano title: Risk perceptions, attitudes, and behavioral intentions to spend on experiences in the post-Corona crisis: Data from Italy, Denmark, China, and Japan date: 2022-05-13 journal: Data Brief DOI: 10.1016/j.dib.2022.108259 sha: 7fb1787a717fd6985ef700c5befc81d4e4ddd22e doc_id: 988511 cord_uid: tqty9arj The dataset provides comprehensive cross-cultural data on individuals’ value priorities, risk perceptions, attitudes, and behavioral intentions to spend on experiences in the post-Corona crisis. The questionnaire was designed to incorporate several theoretical concepts around cultural psychology, tourism, and public health as well as specific questions about tourists’ behavioral intentions suggested by practitioners from the experience economy sector. The survey sample was collected based on quota sampling representative in terms of age, gender, and geography (gross sample) in the respective countries: China, Denmark, Italy, and Japan. The target sample was set as males and females the age of 18 years old or above in each country who have traveled abroad (either leisure or business) at least once within the past three years. The survey was conducted for the period between the 10th and 24th of July 2020 and collected a total of 4172 respondents divided into the four nationalities: Chinese (n = 1019), Danish (n = 1,028), Italian (n = 1014), and Japanese (n = 1111). Analyzed data are presented with mean, standard deviation, the minimum and maximum range of responses for the scale-based questions, and frequencies and proportions for the categorical questions. Raw data are accessible in ‘sav’ and ‘csv’ formats. The dataset provides comprehensive cross-cultural data on individuals' value priorities, risk perceptions, attitudes, and behavioral intentions to spend on experiences in the post-Corona crisis. The questionnaire was designed to incorporate several theoretical concepts around cultural psychology, tourism, and public health as well as specific questions about tourists' behavioral intentions suggested by practitioners from the experience economy sector. The survey sample was collected based on quota sampling representative in terms of age, gender, and geography (gross sample) in the respective countries: China, Denmark, Italy, and Japan. The target sample was set as males and females the age of 18 years old or above in each country who have traveled abroad (either leisure or business) at least once within the past three years. The survey was conducted for the period between the 10th and 24th of July 2020 and collected a total of 4172 respondents divided into the four nationalities: Chinese ( n = 1019), Danish ( n = 1,028), Italian ( n = 1014), and Japanese ( n = 1111). Analyzed data are presented with mean, standard deviation, the minimum and maximum range of responses for the scale-based questions, and frequencies and proportions for the categorical questions. Raw data are accessible in 'sav' and 'csv' formats. The dataset presents attitudes and intentions to the Covid-19 related preventive behaviors and to the experience economy (EE) including domestic and international traveling activities in the post-Corona crisis. The dataset contains in total 4172 respondents divided into four nationalities: China ( n = 1,019), Denmark ( n = 1028), Italy ( n = 1014) and Japan ( n = 1111). The dataset accessible in [2] consists of four 'sav' files that are country-specific files including demographic variables (region, educational background, households-and personal income) specific to the respective countries, and one 'sav' file that merges responses from the four countries to the question items that are common across the four countries. The files are provided in both ' sav' and ' csv' formats in [2] . The first group of variables addresses the background profiles of respondents. Table 1 shows country-specific distributions of respondents in terms of age and gender. Fig. 1 overviews the country-specific distribution of respondents in terms of region, educational background, and (household and personal) income level. Tables 2 and 3 indicate respondents' overnight travel experiences within the last two years (Q1-Q2). In Table 2 , respondents were asked to indicate Male 159 218 131 50 20 578 Female 126 179 89 37 10 441 Total 285 397 220 87 30 1019 Denmark Gender Male 45 126 37 93 206 507 Female 50 120 55 86 210 521 Total 95 246 92 179 416 1028 Italy Gender Male 44 65 81 102 202 494 Female 42 68 81 101 228 520 Total 86 133 162 203 430 1014 Japan Gender Male 46 74 79 102 188 489 Female 46 126 77 91 282 622 Total 92 200 156 193 470 1111 Total Gender Male 294 483 328 347 616 2068 Female 264 493 302 315 730 2104 Total 558 976 630 662 1346 4172 Table 3 overviews their overseas travel experiences in different regions in the world (Asia, Oceania, North America, South America, Africa, and Europe) in five levels: (1) Never, (2) Once, (3) 2-5 times, (4) More than 5 times, and (5) Lived there for a longer period . Finally, Table 4 shows the frequencies of their rankings with regard to preferred travel formats. Specifically, the first question (Q3) in Table 4 asked respondents to rank two options: (1) Arranged by a third party and (2) Self-planned ; and in the second question (Q4) three options: (1) Traveling with a larger group, (2) Traveling with closest family or friends , and (3) Traveling alone or with a significant other . The second group of variables addresses general personal factors such as value priority in life [3] and satisfaction in life. The first sub-group (Q5) asked respondents to indicate how the 21 descriptions of people are like respondents on the 6-point Likert scale: (1) Not at all like me, (2) Not like me, (3) A little like me, (4) Somewhat like me, (5) Like me, and (6) Very much like me . Table 5 overviews the mean differences across the four countries. Table 5b further discloses the results of the country-specific reliability test of the theoretical constructs [3] for the four countries. The second sub-group consists of three questions that asked respondents to indicate their position on a slider scale (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) about their satisfaction in life (Q6), their satisfaction in the government (Q20), and their satisfaction in the health service (Q21) in their country. The two questions (Q20-Q21) asking about the government and the health service were excluded for the Chinese questionnaire by the survey company administrating the Chinese data collection due to the restriction on research involving anything that relates to the Chinese politics and to the authorities. Accordingly, only respondents from Denmark, Italy, and Japan answered Q20-Q21. (7) Strongly agree . The mean differences across the four countries are summarized in Table 8 . Table 9 overviews the proportions of "true/false" answers to the seven statements. The last group consists of several complex questions (Q10-Q22) addressing attitudes and intentions to various traveling activities and protection-related behaviors. • Table 10 summarizes the mean scores of seven statements on respondents' behavioral intentions to experience public services and traveling in a certain condition after their government gradually allowing more socialization (Q10 ( continued on next page ) Reliability test -Human values (Schwartz theory of ten basic human values). Table 11 shows the means scores of the 20 items across the four countries. • Q12 and Q13 asked respondents to indicate at which time they would start using experience services in their country listed in Q12 and would start feeling safe to visit oversea destinations listed in Q13. Fig. 2 depicts their responses to seven specific services (Q12) and six specific oversea destinations (Q13). For Q12, the response categories were set as (0) Already using it, ( • Fig. 3 displays respondents' preferences in terms of public transportation (Q14) and accommodation (Q15) to be used for an overnight trip to a destination that is 500 km away from their home. Respondents were asked to rank seven types of public transportations (Q14a) and ten types of accommodations (15a) according to their preferences. Subsequently, they were asked to indicate what are the primary factors of their rankings from nine and eleven choices in Q14b and Q15b, respectively. These questions were asked only to Chinese, Danish and Italian respondents. • Q16 asked respondents' positions on four pairs of two opposing statements coded as 1 and 10 in four slider questions: Slider 1: 1 = "Testing of temperature or mouth swabs by travel agents, airlines, accommodation, and staff at tourism attraction sites is an intolerable invasion of privacy. I will avoid doing business with such companies" 10 = "For better protection of their customers' health, travel agents, airlines, accommodation, and staff at tourism attraction sites may ask to test mine. I give my consent" Slider 2: 1 = "I don't want to travel to a destination that enforces mobile tracking of Covid-19 for tourists because it interferes with my privacy" 10 = "I don't mind traveling to a destination that enforces mobile tracking of Covid-19 for tourists. I would use it to avoid the Covid-19 hotspots and protect myself" Slider 3: Fig. 2 . Frequencies of responses to Question 12 (When will you start using the following services and experiences within your country?: 1. As soon as it is opened 2. If my friends, family or colleagues ask me to join in the next 3 months, 3. When the media indicate other people in the society start to enjoy the services without any problems in the next 3 months, 4. When the authority announces the no more domestic spread of Covid-19, 5. When the vaccine against Corona-virus or medicine that cures Covid-19 is developed, 6. When the WHO announces that no more spread of Covid-19 worldwide, 7. Even when the risk of Corona-infection is completely eliminated in my country, I do not feel safe. Hence, I will avoid visiting those places), and Question 13 (When would you start feeling safe to visit the following destinations?: 1. When the boarder is opened, 2. When my friends, family or colleagues ask me to travel after the boarder is opened, 3. When the media indicate other people in the society start to travel that destination without any problems, 4. When the authority announces that no more spread of Covid-19 in that destination, 5. When the vaccine against Corona-virus or medicine that cures Covid-19 is developed, 6. When the WHO announces that no more spread of Covid-19 worldwide, 7. Even when the risk of Corona-infection is completely eliminated worldwide, I do not feel safe). 1 = "Travelling far away from home is an essential element of a fulfilling life" 10 = " Travelling far away is not necessary for my happiness and for a fulfilling life" Slider 4: 1 = "Global crisis can only be solved if everyone works together" 10 = "We have better chances to solve problems alone" Table 12 shows the mean scores of their responses in the four countries. Fig. 3 . Frequencies of responses to Question 14 (Imagine that you are planning a overnight trip together with your partner. Your destination is 500 km away from your home. To get to your destination, which transport options are preferable?, What are the primary factors influencing your ranking?), and Question 15 (Imagine a scenario where you are going on a vacation abroad for 2 nights and you have to choose a place to stay. Which types of accommodation is preferable? What are the primary factors influencing your ranking?). • Q17 asked respondents to select one option to organize international travel activities in the society during the absence of a vaccine. These options are stated as: (1) Each country will allow the entry of the same number of foreign tourists (arrivals) as the number of departures generated by its citizens traveling abroad for leisure (within the same calendar year), (2) Each country will allow a fixed number of its citizens to travel internationally for leisure worldwide (within one calendar year), (3) No international travels will be allowed for leisure, only for business or family emergencies, (4) Travels abroad for leisure purposes will be available for a fixed fee paid per each km distance from home, and (5) Each person will be able to travel abroad for leisure only once every 3 years . Table 13 overviews the distribution of responses in the four countries. • Q18 and Q19 asked respondents to evaluate the level of agreement with several statements relevant to international tourism and the protection of infectious diseases. In particular, Q18 asked respondents to evaluate five statements from the view of local residents hosting international tourists to their community. The other nine statements in Q19 addressed attitudes and behaviors towards socially responsible measures to prevent the spread of infectious diseases. The level of agreement was evaluated on the 7-point Likert scale: (1) Strongly disagree, • Q22 in Table 16 consists of three sub-groups of questions addressing attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control, behavioral intentions [4] , and risk-perception of domestic traveling. The first sub-group contains four slider questions about respondents' attitudes to travel within their country in the transitional phase of the Covid-19 in the summer of 2020. Accordingly, they were asked to indicate their position within the seven points for the four sliders where points 1 and 7 were, respectively, defined as (A) Dangerous-Safe, Due to the spread of Covid-19 infections, the experience economy (EE) sector -in particular, international tourism -was severely hit economically and it has been challenging to maintain workplaces for employees involved in this sector. In such a global health crisis (the Covid-19 crisis), local authorities needed to address complex tensions generated by an urgent need for economic restoration of EE businesses on one hand and a certain resistance to tourism developments on the other hand. It is assumed that these tensions have been generated by perceived-and actual risk of spreading of infectious diseases through interactions between tourists (inbound-and domestic) and residents [5, 6] . This historical event made EE stakeholders to reconsider their preparedness for potential crises not only triggered by infectious diseases, but also other disasters such as terrorism, climate change, and economic recessions [7] . Accord-ingly, a comprehensive cross-sectional survey was developed in collaboration with several EE stakeholders (destination management office and cultural institution) as well as public healthand tourism experts. The questionnaire includes several important theoretical concepts that explain individuals' behaviors. For example, as individuals' attitudes and behaviors to a crisis are strongly connected with personal values [3 , 8] , norms, and beliefs [4 , 9] , the questionnaire included questions about individuals' personal values [3, 8, 10] , perceived risk [11] and their associated attitudes and behavioral intentions [12 , 13] . The implication of some of these theoretical concepts has been elaborated and analyzed in [1] . Supplementary materials accessible in [2] include a coded master questionnaire in English and its translation to Chinese, Danish, Italian and Japanese. Participants were panels registered in the repositories respectively owned by the two survey companies in Denmark and in Japan. These companies implemented the data collection in the form of a self-administered online questionnaire for the period between the 10th and 24th of July 2020. The data collection was based on quota sampling representative with regard to gender, age, and geography of the respective countries: China, Denmark, Italy, and Japan. These four countries were selected because Denmark handled the first phase of the pandemic in a timely manner; Italy was the European Epicenter of the first phase of the pandemic; China was first hit by the pandemic and had experienced longer with the pandemic at the time of the survey implementation; and finally, Japan was successful in controlling Covid-19 at the first phase without enforcing the lock-down of the society. A target group was defined as males and females the age of 18 years old or above in each country who have traveled abroad (either leisure or business) at least once within the past three years. Accordingly, in total 4172 respondents (China = 1019; Denmark = 1028; Italy = 1014; and Japan = 1111) were collected after cleaning incomplete respondents. The identities of the respondents were already anonymized upon the delivery of the data collected by the two survey companies. Therefore, an ethical review has not been required in the institution the authors are affiliated with. The two survey agencies in Denmark and Japan undertook the data collection respectively complied with the GDPR and JIS Q 15001 in terms of the protection of personal information. The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships which have or could be perceived to have influenced the work reported in this article. Risk-perception, attitudes and behavioural intentions to spend on experiences in the post-Corona crisis: data from Italy, Denmark, China and Japan (Original data) (Zenodo) . Fumiko Kano Glückstad: Conceptualization, Methodology, Data curation, Visualization, Investigation, Writing -original draft. Cross-cultural bayesian network analysis of factors affecting residents' concerns about the spread of an infectious disease caused by tourism Risk-perception, attitudes and behavioural intentions to spend on experiences in the post-Corona crisis: data from Italy Basic human values: an overview The theory of planned behavior The effect of travel restrictions on the spread of the 2019 novel coronavirus (Covid-19) outbreak No Ebola…still doomed' -the Ebola-induced tourism crisis Pandemics, tourism and global change: a rapid assessment of Covid-19 The importance of (shared) human values for containing the Covid-19 pandemic A value-belief-norm theory of support for social movements: the case of environmentalism Personal values in human life How to define and measure risk perceptions The effect of risk perceptions on intentions to travel in the aftermath of september 11 Travel anxiety and intentions to travel internationally: implications of travel risk perception This work has been conducted as part of the project "UMAMI: Understanding Mindsets Across Markets, Internationally" No. 61579-0 0 0 01A funded by Innovation Fund Denmark.The author would like to thank Melanie Bertolin and Adriana Budeanu from Copenhagen Business School, Pernille Tangaard Andersen from the University of Southern Denmark, Dijana Radic Milosevic from Visit Denmark, Mike Wedel Hansen from Wonderful Copenhagen, and Søren Mosegaard Bjørnsen from the National Museum of Demark to provide valuable inputs for designing the questionnaire. The author also thanks Hiroyuki Fukuchi from Hitotsubashi University, Xiaowei Liu Lolk from Visit Fyn, and Mie Kano Glückstad from the University of Copenhagen for their translation/review of the questionnaire to the local languages. Supplementary material associated with this article can be found in the online version at doi: 10.1016/j.dib.2022.108259 .