↓ Skip to main content

原発事故後の福島県浜通りと避難地域における放射線の「次世代影響不安」と情報源およびメディアとの関連

Overview of attention for article published in [Nippon kōshū eisei zasshi] Japanese journal of public health, August 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • One of the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#1 of 462)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2687 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
4 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
原発事故後の福島県浜通りと避難地域における放射線の「次世代影響不安」と情報源およびメディアとの関連
Published in
[Nippon kōshū eisei zasshi] Japanese journal of public health, August 2021
DOI 10.11236/jph.20-140
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chihiro Nakayama, Hajime Iwasa, Nobuaki Moriyama, Hideto Takahashi, Seiji Yasumura

Abstract

Objectives Nine years after the accident at the TEPCO Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in March 2011, anxiety about the effects of radiation on future generations persists. We considered the possibility that information from mass media sources and the Internet might influence this anxiety. Thus, this study examined the relationship between information sources and anxiety; based on the results, we consider the necessary measures to reduce this anxiety.Methods We conducted a mail-based survey by distributing an anonymous self-administered questionnaire to 2,000 Fukushima Prefecture residents aged 20 to 79. We randomly selected 500 residents from Aizu, Nakadori, Hamadori, and the evacuation areas, and compared the data obtained from Hamadori and the evacuation areas. The objective variable was anxiety about the effects (of radiation) on future generations, while the explanatory variables were trusted sources and media the respondents used to get information on radiation. Other variables assessed included health status and knowledge of radiation. We conducted univariate analysis of combined data to assess the relationship between anxiety and the questionnaire items. This was followed by multiple regression analysis with anxiety as the objective variable and those showing significant differences in the univariate analysis as the explanatory ones. We then conducted multiple regression analysis, that included the interaction means between explanatory variables and evacuation areas.Results Of the 500, 201 respondents were from Hamadori (40.2%) and 192 from the evacuation areas (38.4%). Multiple regression analysis revealed that anxiety was significantly lower among those who trusted government ministries and those who were healthy. Anxiety was also significantly lower among those who correctly answered the question on the genetic influence of radiation, while it was significantly higher among those who correctly answered the question on the dose-response model of radiation-induced cancer. In Hamadori, anxiety was significantly higher among those who watched private national television. In the evacuation areas, the result was the same as that of the combined data.Conclusion Different information sources and media were significantly associated with anxiety about the effects of radiation on future generations. Therefore, media sensationalism should be reduced to prevent anxiety among citizens. Our findings highlight the importance of selecting information sources and media that disseminate accurate information, as well as the need to improve media literacy among citizens. Furthermore, a dose-response model of radiation-induced cancer must be communicated in a way that is not misleading. Receiving accurate information on the genetic effects of radiation can reduce anxiety among citizens.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2,687 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 4 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 4 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Librarian 1 25%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 25%
Unknown 2 50%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 1 25%
Sports and Recreations 1 25%
Unknown 2 50%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1452. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 06 September 2024.
All research outputs
#8,915
of 26,580,681 outputs
Outputs from [Nippon kōshū eisei zasshi] Japanese journal of public health
#1
of 462 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#381
of 440,115 outputs
Outputs of similar age from [Nippon kōshū eisei zasshi] Japanese journal of public health
#1
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,580,681 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 462 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 440,115 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them