Q fever in the Netherlands: public perceptions and behavioral responses in three different epidemiological regions: a follow-up study

Table 2 Bivariate correlations ^a for demographic and cognitive variables (survey 2010, n = 1249)

^aCalculated using Cramérs V (for nominal vs. nominal/ordinal/interval variables) and Spearman’s Rho (for ordinal/interval vs. ordinal/interval variables);
^b1 = gender (1: male; 2: female); 2 = age (1: 18–30 yrs; 2: 30–50 yrs; 3: <50 yrs); 3 = ethnicity (1: native dutch; 2: immigrant); 4 = education (1: low; 2: intermediate; 3: high); 5 = employment status (1: unemployed/retired; 2: employed); 6 = marital status (1: single; 2: married/cohabiting; 3: divorced/widowed); 7 = children in household (1: no children; 2: one or more children < 18 yrs); 8 = contact with disease (1: no; 2: had Q fever themselves/partner/child(ren); 9 = knowledge = 0–7 items correct; number 10–15 on header row relate to the corresponding number and variable presented vertically (1–5 point likert scale); 16 = behaviour (0–5 number of preventive measures taken).
*Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed); ** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

ISSN: 1471-2458