Research PP 270203 Zulhafizi Dzulkifli

SCHOOL OF TOURISM, HOSPITALITY AND EVENT MANAGEMENT
COLLEGE OF LAW, GOVERNMENT AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
UNIVERSITI UTARA MALAYSIA
TOPIC RESEARCH: POST COVID-19 TRAVEL RISK PERCEPTION AMONG
UUM STUDENTS
GHZZ4076 TOURISM RESEARCH PROJECT PAPER (GROUP I)
FIRST SEMESTER SESSION 2022/2023 (A221)
ZULHAFIZI BIN DZULKIFLI
270203
MADAM RASLINDA BT MOHD GHAZALI

Submission of Final Research Report Form (Chapters One to Five)
SCHOOL OF TOURISM, HOSPITALITY AND EVENT MANAGEMENT

COLLEGE OF LAW, GOVERNMENT AND INTERNATIONAL
STUDIES UNIVERSITI UTARA MALAYSIA
Second Semester 2021/2022 Session (A212)
GHZZ 4076 Tourism Research Project
Paper
RESEARCH TITLE: POST COVID-19 TRAVEL RISK PERCEPTION AMONG

UUM STUDENTS
STUDENT’S NAME: ZULHAFIZI BIN DZULKIFLI
MATRIC NUMBER: 270203
SUPERVISOR’S NAME: MADAM RASLINDA BT MOHD GHAZALI
This student’s progress is *satisfactory / unsatisfactory. The research report is *allowed

/ not allowed to be submitted for grading.
*delete as applicable
Supervisor’s signature and
stamp:
DATE:
Declaration
I declare that all of work in this task of this research project paper is my own efforts and
words. I also refer to information from the original and valid sources as my reference
material to conduct and complete this research project paper. I also carry out this
assignment with intense and earnest. I also understand all the guidelines provided to me
to complete this research project research. All the data I presented in this assignment
also collected myself.
Zulhafizi bin Dzulkifli
270203
Acknowledgment
Assalamualikum, firstly I would like to thank God for granting me the strength and
patience to fulfil my responsibilities as a Tourism Management student and allowing me
to finish the Research Project Paper. Even I was faced a few difficulty while completing
this task, but I try to finish it with successful. I try to solve any problem that I faced
during do this research.
In addition, I would like say thank you to my parents and family because always
support me. Also I want say thank you to my supervisor, Madam Raslinda Binti Mohd
Ghazali, because always guide me and teach me how to carry on this task. She also
always give me an advice and always have a time to see me if I have problem.
Lastly, I also would like to show my gratitude to my fellow friends and
group mate who are always help me and give moral support for me to completing this
work. I hope with all my effort and help also support from family, supervisor and
friends can give a successful result for this research project paper.
Abstract
Tourism industry is one of large industry that contributed the development of national
economy. Recently, in December 2019 world was shocked by spreading of virus call as
Corona Virus or Covid-19. Because of that, many of industry operation need to stop as
method to avoid spreading of this virus. Tourism industry also one of industry that badly
affected by this pandemic. After a few period of time, the industry can reopen back so
tourism industry also can continue back operation. This research is about travel risk
perception among UUM students due to post Covid-19.
Keyword: Risk perception, Travel risk perception, Covid-19 and students

Table of Contents
CHAPTER 1...............................................................................................................................1
1.0 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................1
1.1 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM AND JUSTIFICATION.....................................2
1.2 RESEARCH QUESTION................................................................................................5
1.3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE..............................................................................................5
1.4 DEFINITION OF TERM................................................................................................5
1.5 SCOPE AND LIMITATION OF THE STUDY.............................................................6
1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY................................................................................6
CHAPTER 2...............................................................................................................................8
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW................................................................................................8
2.0.1 TRAVEL RISK PERCEPTION...............................................................................9
2.0.2 DEMOGRAPHIC....................................................................................................10
2.1 DEVELOPMENT OF CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK...........................................13
CHAPTER 3.............................................................................................................................15
3.0 DESCRIPTION OF RESEARCH APPROACH/DESIGN.........................................15
3.1 SELECTION OF SUBJECT/RESPONDENTS...........................................................16
3.1.1 TARGET POPULATION.......................................................................................16
3.1.2 SAMPLING TECHNIQUE....................................................................................16
3.1.3 SAMPLING SIZE...................................................................................................17
3.2 INSTRUMENTATION..................................................................................................18
3.2.1 MEASUREMENT ITEM........................................................................................19
3.3 DATA COLLECTION AND PROCEDURE...............................................................21
3.3.1 PRIMARY DATA...................................................................................................21
3.3.2 SECONDARY DATA.............................................................................................22
3.4 DATA PROCESSING AND ANALYSIS.....................................................................22
3.4.1 DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS...................................................................................23
3.4.2 CROSS TABULATION..........................................................................................23
CHAPTER 4.............................................................................................................................24
4.1 INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................24
4.2 RESPONDENT DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE............................................................24
4.3 DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS..........................................................................................28
4.3.1 Descriptive analysis on travel risk perception (mean and standard deviation). .28
4.3.2 Descriptive analysis on travel risk perception (frequency and percentage)........30
4.4 CROSSTAB TABLE TO SHOW THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN
DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE AND TRAVEL RISK PERCEPTION..............................39
4.4.1 The relationship between age and travel risk perception.....................................39

4.4.2 The relationship between gender and travel risk perception...............................51
4.4.3 The relationship between marital status and travel risk perception...................59
4.4.4 The relationship between races and travel risk perception..................................66
4.4.5 The relationship between education level and travel risk perception..................74
4.4.6 The relationship between year of study and travel risk perception.....................82
4.4.7 The relationship between frequency of travel in a year and travel risk
perception.........................................................................................................................91
4.4.8 The relationship between financial support and travel risk perception............100
CHAPTER 5...........................................................................................................................109
5.0 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................109
5.1 DISCUSSION OF KEY FINDING.............................................................................109
5.2 RESEARCH IMPLICATION.....................................................................................112
5.3 RESEARCH LIMITATION........................................................................................113
5.4 FUTURE STUDY.........................................................................................................114
REFERENCE.........................................................................................................................116
APPENDIX.............................................................................................................................122
i. QUESTIONNAIRE.........................................................................................................122
CHAPTER 1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Tourist is people that go to visit new place or leave their usual surrounding or place of
their daily activity. The activity they do like previous sentences is call as tourism. There
are many factor why people go to travel. For example, go for recreation, sport, health,
holiday also for study (Camilleri, 2017). Mostly, tourist or visitor go to travel for study
is student either local or international student. Tourism is one of major industry that
contribute highest income to the most countries and national in the world
Now days, student mostly youngster or university student like to go to travel with their
family, friends, member and sometimes student go to travel in solo mode. This is
because, attractive of low cost to travel make them free to socialize also join the local
culture at the destination they go. They also feel free to explore new place to find new
experience (Wantono & McKercher, 2020).
There are a few of factor why student go to travel. For example, push factor such as
escape from daily life like study, or they want to fulfil their self-want and for recreation
purpose or explore something new. So all of this factor can lead the student to make a
decision to go to travel. Besides of that, with the technology such as social media
student can know what factor can attract or pull them to go travel to some destination.
The example of pull factor such natural attraction, weather, and variety of food, culture,
leisure amenities and the image at the destination (Xie, 2018).
Lately, people or tourist pay more attention to travel safety and also travel risk. Travel
risk perception is one of quantitative assessment in the security and safety of tourism
activities. Perception risk on destination will directly influence or affect the intention of
tourist on that destination (Cui, 2016). Destination in tourism is very important to the
tourist because destination is their aim to travel. Risk perception by tourist can be the
1
factor tourist make a choice for their destination. In tourism, safety and security is one
of key aspect to achieve a successful of the destination. (Karl, 2017).
In this time, risk perception is more focus on healthy because spread of Covid-19
viruses. There are a few of element to have safe travel during Covid-19 pandemic such
as health policies. Before go to travel, tourist advised to have health insurance to cover if
something bad happen related to health issues during travelling (Wilson, 2020). It is one
of good preparation before someone go to travel.
1.1 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM AND JUSTIFICATION

Before go to travel tourist will make perception of risk to certain destination based on
the different thing such as travel experience, different of geographic and cultural and
also psychological (Hasan, 2017). Besides of that, safety and health issues also one of
perception risk think by tourist before travel.
There are a lot of risk perception that include criminal, harassment, accidents and other
but now days the most risk is about health that relate with Covid-19 viruses. In this
study researcher focus on travel risk perception among UUM students in Post Covid-19.
Around end of year 2019, world affected with spreading of Covid-19 that start at Wuhan
China. This viruses infected about 4,806,299 people, and caused 318,599 deaths around
May 2020 (Ciotti, 2020). Many sector and industry was affected including the tourism
and hospitality industry. Malaysia is one of country that affected by Covid-19
pandemic, because of that Malaysia government impose the Movement Control Order to
preventing and avoiding Covid-19 spreading widely among the Malaysian resident. So
because of that situation Malaysia Government losses as much RM 3.37 billion in early
month (January and February) in year 2020 income from tourism and hospitality
industry (Karim, 2020).
2
After a few of time, tourism industry can reopen and comeback to operation like usual
but need to follow a few of rule and guideline from government and Ministry of Health
Malaysia. Risk perception also affected because Covid-19 just not give a big impact on
physical health but it also impact the mental health (Cheng, 2021). Because of that, it
will influence the tourist to make a perception risk about their plan to travel.
Recently, in tourism industry or travel activities safety and security is the one of major
concern. Every of minute something bad like crime will happen to the tourist at the
certain of destination. The action may cause by human, animal or something else. So
because of that, perception of someone tourist to that destination are risky to them
(Hasan, 2017). Tourist will not like to go to that place because they think if they go to
that destination it can cause the danger to their safety or life. If tourist risk perception
about some destination are positive it might can be a factor to them revisit or repeat
travel at the destination.
In the other hand, demographic have a relationship risk perception. This is because,
different people or individual with different personal characteristic will have different
perceived or perception of risk even the same travel plan. Mostly older people have an
experience in travel but they have a less awareness or alertness about potential risk can
happen such as health risk, natural disaster or safety issues like terrorism. Older people
most focus on service that provide and engagement or relation with guide during travel
(Zhu & Deng, 2020). Besides that, based on the gender women have a more perception
on travel risk compare to men. Women more think about risk during travel compare
with the men. This situation shoe women have more awareness about risk perception
during travel and men have a low awareness compare to women (Zhu & Deng, 2020).
For example, women have a high perception about health and food at the destination to
avoid something bad happen to them. In this study, researcher focus on youth market
3
university
4
student because there are lack of study among university because previous study more
focus on public and general community.
Past study more focus on the Australian population that said Australia people have more
perception on health risk. The result also recorded in Hong Kong. So it show that in
Malaysia still have a lack of this study. According to the same article, previous study
also make study in US about three scenario. The first one is perception of risk, risk
mitigation decision to people affected with virus and risk mitigation decision on people
not affected with viruses (Hotle et al., 2020). In this study, researcher want to study
what factor that can influence travel risk perception. In this study also researcher focus
on university student that study in Universiti Utara Malaysia (UUM). Besides that,
previous study also conduct the study among university student but focus on student
who study in Australian university. It show that still lacking of study for this term in
University around Malaysia (Deng & W. Ritchie, 2019).
Besides that, youth market also important in the tourism industry. This is because, travel
be one of phenomenon among youth or university students. Youth market in tourism
can make the contribution to the economic sector growing up very fast. It also long term
of characteristic that can make tourism industry always success and relevant every time.
World Tourism Organisation or (UNWTO) defined the youth tourist age range between
16 to 25 years old. Commonly this age stage will go and travel at least for stay one
night. However there are some different with others, other researcher was say that the
youth traveller age range between 15 to 34 years old. Traveller or tourist that age over
than 30 years old that call as “flashpacker” and this was defined by UNWTO 2008
(Mohamed et al., 2010). In this study, researcher focus on traveller that are UUM
students, so previous study said that the youth are over than 30 years and it also
suitable with UUM students
5
because there are UUM students that age over than 30 years old. Previous study focus
on youth in Malaysia but this study focus youth tourist or students in UUM.
1.2 RESEARCH QUESTION

1. What the Post Covid-19 travel risk perception UUM students?
2. What the relationship between demographic factors and UUM student’s travel risk
perception?
1.3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVE
1. To measure Post Covid-19 travel risk perception UUM students.
2. To measure the relationship between demographic factors and UUM student’s travel
risk perception.
1.4 DEFINITION OF TERM

i. Risk perception
The definition of term by Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English for perception
is how the individual think about something and also what your idea come after see
something. Besides that, perception also define as how way you look or alert for
something with the five sense human have such as hearing, seeing and others.
Perception also define someone ability to understand or notice or alert with something
around them (Qiong, 2017). Perception process are include three stage or level such as
selection, organization, and interpretation. Besides that, perception is also the unique of
experience that someone feel. Someone only just can have perception based on what
they know in themselves (Mcdonald, 2012). In cognitive psychology risk perception is
the one of theoretical concept and mostly used in tourism research especially about how
to manage perception (Zhan, 2020). The risk varies according to several characteristics
such as demographic characteristics, psychological characteristics, values and
knowledge or understanding of something. Based on this study, risk perception that can
conclude is feeling or awareness that think by someone before do or make decision on
something.
6
ii. Demographic
7
Based on demographic characteristic, a few item include in the gender, age, income and
education. For the gender, previous research test white woman and man state that
woman is most perceived the risk highest than white man. But for the other cultural,
woman and man have a same level of perceived risk in their life (Siegrist & Árvai,
2020).
1.5 SCOPE AND LIMITATION OF THE STUDY

The scope that focus in this study is UUM student that study in this university in Kedah.
The student I focus is someone who have an experience in traveling to anywhere
destination. I will distribution the questionnaire use the google form. This is because,
mostly UUM student class at campus is run via online. So I only need to collect the data
by google form to ease all student to answer whenever they have a free time. My scope
to find respondent which is student for my study is around 80 to 100 of respondent.
The difficult thing in this study is to find a student who are alert about risk perception in
tourism context. Sometime student just go to travel without think about risk during their
traveling. So if the student want to answer my questionnaire. Besides of that, student
also busy with their assignment and course assessment might make them have lack of
time to answer my questionnaire. This is because, at the time that I want to collect data
maybe same time with student assignment due date. It may be difficult to find 80 of
student that are suitable as a respondent to answer my questionnaire.
1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

The significance of this study is to know what factor that influence the UUM student
risk perception during them want to go traveling. This study also want to measure either
UUM student alert or not with risk perception before going to any destination for travel
purpose. So with the study and data that can be use by authority to make some
8
improvement. For
example, if student say they very alert and focus about safety. So tour operator can create
9
the package that can guarantee the safety of student during travel. This study also help
to find out which gender mostly have a high perception about risk in the tourism
industry. So with the data, authority or tour operator can plan special tourism by gender
to make them feel save during travel. With this study also, tourism industry operator can
guide the tourist how to manage the risk perception toward travel purposes.
Besides that, this study also have significance to the future researcher. With the data and
result in this study, future researcher can use to make their research in the future. Future
researcher also can make the correcting the shortcomings or weakness of this study.
Future researcher also can use the item that list in this study to conduct their research
study. The future researcher also can compare their study with this study to achieve
more successful in the research study.
1
CHAPTER 2
2.0 LITERATURE REVIEW
Risk perception can be descript as an evaluation subjective towards the risk based on
threat in the certain situation following the characteristic and severity (Neuburger &
Egger, 2020). In addition also according to Larissa risk perception also can influence
someone behaviour or attitude. Risk perception is different following the perceiver that
different characteristic and how to present the perception. Risk perception also have
different individual characteristic, culture, belief and social structure based on that
individual. Risk perception use to understanding human interaction toward the danger
that they face it (Marshall, 2020). Risk perception also can be determine as general or
public opinion or advice toward bad effect of risk. (Qureshi et al., 2021)
Besides that, perceived risk or risk perception also consider as a losses because of
uncertainties about something. The number of losses is following mismatch toward the
something do not want by person or individual and between of something that can
achieve the outcome they want (Emami & Ranjbarian, 2019). Risk perception also will
influence the decision making that will do by someone in anything purpose.
In tourism industry risk perception was identified with a few of alternative method. For
an example, there a few feeling that is related with risk such as anxiety, paranoid, over
worried, nervous and fear of the something. Besides that, tourist also perceived the risk
with the probability risk that maybe can happen (Wolff et al., 2019). Based on that, risk
perception in tourism context can be consider as subjective consideration that made my
tourist or consumer in tourism industry that can influence them to create a negative
decision for tourism (Zhu & Deng, 2020). Risk perception of someone or individual are
different following their personality, gender, culture and also their experience
(Godovykh et al., 2020).
1
Travel risk perception also descript as the possibility that someone will involve
suffering with any types of misfortunes during the tourist in the trip of travelling or
either after arrive at the destination that choose by the tourist. Travel risk perception is
important key factor to describe the tourist behaviour during travel and also it will
influence the tourist or individual travel decision making. Usually, risk that related with
tourism destination is multi dimension. So because of that, risk perception also
following the multi dimension and it mostly it direction will end with negative affect
that maybe can happen during the travelling (She et al., 2019).
There are a lot of risk when someone go for travel or holiday. Risk come with a few of
factor or type such as theft, health and safety. For example, health risk one of the risk
very common in tourism. In year 2019, world was attacked by virus that name as Covid-
19 or Coronavirus. This virus already spread to around 200 countries and recorded the
positive cases around 4 million until May 2020. Because of that, tourism sector get and
facing a hard impact to continue the operation (Agyeiwaah et al., 2021). This is because,
if tourism sector continue operation it may can give a risk to the consumer or tourist.
2.0.1 TRAVEL RISK PERCEPTION

Recently, Covid-19 was popular after this viruses was spread to many part of the world.
Many restriction do by government every country to reduce spread of viruses. This
situation show that, Covid-19 changed many thing in the tourism sector. During Covid-
19 pandemic, mostly risk perception that perceived by tourist is such as movement and
travel restriction, ban of travel and probability to affected with Covid-19(Angguni &
Lenggogeni, 2021).
After reopen back the tourism sector tourist behaviour on the tourism industry is based
by their risk perception. Tourist risk perception mostly about safety and healthy that
related with their travel activities. This risk perception is important to tourist to make
1
sure
1
themselves can avoid from risk or danger. This is because, based on previous study
author say that tourism one of factor spread of disease (Godovykh et al., 2020). Student
is one of group that like to socialize such as travel. Travel risk perception also give the
impact toward the student. Student also have own risk perception on the Covid-19
viruses (Ding et al., 2020).
Health risk perception also including that the travel or tourism activities will cause the
physical danger or affected of injury and sickness. Mostly tourist or individual will
evaluate or perceived the health risk according to water quality, food hygiene and
safety, level of health care, potential of disease infection, drug problem and physical
injury (Emami & Ranjbarian, 2019).
Tourism also always associated with crime because many researcher conduct the studies
about the relationship between tourism and crime. Tourist maybe perceived the risk they
will involve for tourism crime and be victim for crime activities such as physical
violence, robbery, pick pocketing, rape, theft or larceny and murderer. Some tourist also
have a perception on terrorism risk because they think they might involve with the
terrorist attack when travel (Emami & Ranjbarian, 2019).
Natural disaster also related with tourism activities. This is also one risk that perceived
by tourist or individual person. This is because, natural disaster or hazard can threatened
life people of tourist who are going to travel at certain destination. For the example,
tsunamis, earthquake, hurricanes and flood can give the bad affect to tourist if this
disaster happen during tourist travel (Emami & Ranjbarian, 2019).
2.0.2 DEMOGRAPHIC
Demographic and risk perception have a relation between each other. In demographic
such as gender female more think about risk perception rather than male. This is
because, previous study say that in year 2012 43% young women experiencing sexual
1
harassment
1
in public area. (Orozco-Fontalvo et al., 2019). When women have experience for this
cases so they will be aware and always priority on the risk perception before do
anything.
Besides that, risk perception are also different following the individual or person
characteristic. The older people or tourist that like to travel mostly a lot of experience
travel so they will have a less awareness about the potential of risk such as health risk,
safety or disaster. Older tourist less think about the risk perception and more think about
the service and they more to need a services during travel such as guide services. It
mostly happen in group of senior traveller (Zhu & Deng, 2020).
Furthermore, women have a high risk perception based on the previous study. Women
have a perception about risk that related with food, healthy risk and also international
travel or visit. Women expect that if travel with luxury or rich mode will have a low risk
during they travelling. Women also usually think about risk that can effect themselves
safety like sexual problem or violence against their self (Zhu & Deng, 2020).
There are also have a women like to do the solo traveller. Women who are solo traveller
will has a risk perception on the social risk. Other perception of people also will
influence the perception of women. Women like to perceive about satisfaction on the
travelling. Besides that, women also like to have a perception if they travel without
family, friend or couple the risk that will facing is loneliness and also feel unhappy
feeling mood (Wantono & McKercher, 2020).
According to previous study on the risk perception, the researcher say that white women
have a very highest feeling toward risk perception rather than white men. Based on the
same study, women and men other than white people have a same or more and less their
think about risk perception. Risk perception that feeling by gender is follow the certain
1
culture because certain culture have highest women risk perception rather than men and
other culture have opposite think on risk perception (Siegrist & Árvai, 2020).
2.0.3 COVID-19
At the end of year 2019, world was shock by spreading of Covid19 viruses. Covid-19 or
Corona Virus was started for the first case at Wuhan, China. The reported cases was
started in December year 2019 but this pandemic officially declared in March 2020.
Because of this pandemic many operation of sector and industry need to close
immediately because want to avoid spreading of Covid-19 viruses. It also affected
tourism and hospitality industry operation (Borges & Byrne, 2022).
In Malaysia, tourism and hospitality also affected by Covid-19 viruses. Malaysia
government was started the Movement Control Order (MCO) to avoid spreading of
Covid-19 cases in Malaysia. Hotel industry most affected because they cannot receive
guest or tourist to come and stay at hotel. A lot of issues happen regarding this problem.
For example, many of workers was laid off from a job. Malaysia Association Hotel
(MAH) also said this industry was losses RM 560.72 Million during MCO period
(Karim, 2020). Tourist activities in the Malaysia also reduced very badly and it also
include the small business in tourism and hospitality industry. Malaysia government
forced to all event or anything that can make people crowded in one place need to
cancel. Many of job was affected such as tour guide and cruise operation (Abhari et al.,
2020). After vaccination was introduce, Malaysia also one of country that faster give
vaccination to all Malaysian resident. So tourism industry can continue the operation
back.
2.0.4 TOURISM YOUTH MARKET
Youth or young tourist also one of tourist group that important to the tourism industry.
1
Mostly young travel age are between 16 to 25 years old. This categories mostly at least
1
travel and stay for one night in the destination. However, some traveller or tourist that
mid teen or mid-twenties like to travel by their self or in other word alone and
independent traveller. Sometime they might travel in a group such as with a friends.
Others researcher say that youth traveller ages are 26 to 30 years old but this ages was
categories as young adult traveller. People or traveller that ages over than 30 years old
call as flash packer or gap packing. Mostly this categories have a big and more budget
to travel. They also will travel with the complete equipment (Mohamed et al., 2010).
Youth traveller also developed significantly now days. Age also one of that can
influence someone to go to travel. Someone interest not enough to attract him or her to
go to travel or vacation (Yusoff N.M. et al, 2017). Mostly youth age have high interest
to travel such as bag packer or adventure tourism.
2.1 DEVELOPMENT OF CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
Demographic Travel risk perception
1
Figure 1: Conceptual framework Post Covid-19 travel risk perception among UUM
student
Figure 1 above show the relation between factors that can influence of travel risk
perception among UUM student. The figure 1 also show what benefit succeeded based
on the risk perception. Based on the conceptual framework, health and safety can
influence the travel risk perception. According to (Chang, 2021), after government open
back the tourism industry people or tourist still think about risk if they to go travel or
holidays. It show health can influence someone travel risk perception. Besides that,
demographic factor also have relation with travel risk perception. This statement
supported by previous study that state that old people have less travel risk perception
because they only think about services that provided in destination. Other than that,
women have more high risk perception other than men. For example, women have high
perception about food quality during travel (Zhu & Deng, 2020). The last one is past
experience have a relationship with travel risk perception. With experience during
previous travel tourist can create awareness to think about safety to avoid something
bad happen to them (Deng & W. Ritchie, 2019).
2
CHAPTER 3
3.0 DESCRIPTION OF RESEARCH APPROACH/DESIGN
In this study, research approach or design as one of the method to do the analysing
process and also the method for collect the data. There are two method for analysis the
data collection that quantitative and qualitative analysis. Some studies combine both
quantitative and qualitative. Qualitative analysis is the analysis use to find out which
meaning is produced, negotiated as well as maintained in a particular social context.
This qualitative analysis is used for the analysis of the intent or interpretation of a
person. Qualitative analysis is often made to find out the real perspective of the person
asked through the interview session. This qualitative analysis needs to be driven by a
process with as much content as possible. Qualitative analysis is not just a description of
one's interpretation but it is an analytical interpretation that results through one's
perspective (Jarvinen & Mik-Meyer, 2013). Interviews are a method that is often used
in qualitative analysis to obtain data from a person related to the study conducted.
Besides that, in this study researcher also use the quantitative analysis. Quantitative
analysis method is the process of finding accuracy and precision based on the
conclusions made by previous researchers (Asmus & Radocy, 2017). Quantitative
analysis method is a process of collecting and analysing data that is structured and
numerical. Measurements from this method of quantitative analysis are accurate and
reliable. Quantitative analysis method is a method of analysis that focuses on data
whose nature can be measured. This method is very effective for answering “what or
how” in a given situation. There are several advantages of using quantitative analysis
methods such as general findings can be specified. In addition, large data sets and
findings representing populations as well as and framework documentation can be
shared and replicated. Last the standard approach allows the study replicated from time
by time (Goertzen, 2017). Mostly, quantitative analysis in the form of surveys through
2
questions that need to be answered by
2
respondents. In this study, researcher make a surveys use the questionnaire to collect
data from respondents that consisting of UUM students.
3.1 SELECTION OF SUBJECT/RESPONDENTS

Sampling is a process to select a sample that is statistically representative of the
population of selected individuals or individuals who are in a study area is conducted.
The sampling process is very important as a tool for the study to find the right
individual as the respondent because there are too many populations in the scope of the
study who want to be selected as participants or respondents. A good sampling is a
representative sample of population statistics that refers to the individual being targeted
for answering a questionnaire. There are a few type of sampling such as convenience,
simple random, cluster and stratified random (Majid, 2018). In this study, researcher use
the simple random to find respondent to collect the data.
3.1.1 TARGET POPULATION

Population is the target group who will be participants or respondents to answer
questions in the study. In the study the researcher was not encouraged to take the entire
number from the population because it was too many. In research studies, demographics
are an important factor to describe. The demographics of the population that are often
asked are age, gender, nationality, semester and races. In this study, the scope for
respondents is UUM students. The population of UUM students is 32 000 in season
2021/2022 (Juhari, 2021). But in this study, the number respondent for real purpose of
study around 80 to 100 respondents. Researcher cannot pass the questionnaire to all of
population of the UUM student.
3.1.2 SAMPLING TECHNIQUE

The sampling technique that choose in this study is simple random. In this technique
shows each person in the same population has the opportunity to be selected as a
2
respondent to answer questions from the researcher (Majid, 2018). For example in this
study, UUM students were selected as a population to answer the question.
3.1.3 SAMPLING SIZE

The number of UUM student reach until 32 000 people for session 2021/2022 so it hard
for researcher to collect data from all of students that stay in UUM. This is because
researcher have a limited period time to do the data collection. If researcher collect data
from whole number students it might take a long time. Besides that, not all of UUM
student have an empty time to answer the questionnaire. So that why sampling size will
help to choose the right respondents to answer the question. The objective for sample
size is to obtain the number of samples represented by the statistics of a population. It
aim to obtain a sample of the actual and accurate size of the target population. The
population of UUM students is 32 000 until year 2022. So sample size will determine
what numbers of 32 000 can be a respondents in this study. According to (Islam, 2018),
previous researchers suggested in sample size the confidence level = 95 % and while the
margin of error is 5 %. This value can determine the total population. Based on the table
below, the student population of UUM is 32 000 and is not listed. Then the nearest
population size is between 25 000 to 50 000 which is equivalent to a sample size of 394
to 397. But for the purpose of this study the researcher only selected 80 to 100 people
from the UUM student population as respondents.
2
Figure 1: Sample Size Table
3.2 INSTRUMENTATION
The platform that use in this study is online survey. The survey conducted use the
questionnaire that distribute by using the google form platform. Researcher create the
questionnaire to collect data from respondent that consist of UUM student. However,
the questionnaire that create by researcher was adapted from previous study that use by
other researcher. The development of questionnaire is based on Research Objective
(RO). The platform use to distribute this questionnaire that create by researcher is
Google Form. This is because, Google Form is easy to use and pass to the respondents
which is UUM student. Researcher create and develop the questionnaire at the Google
Form platform then the link will be pass to respondents by social media. The common
social media that will use is WhatsApp application. This is because, majority UUM
students communicate in daily life use WhatsApp. So it can ease the researcher to pass
the questionnaire through the WhatsApp application. Researcher can pass the
questionnaire in Google Form with private message or pass in the group of targeted
2
respondents in WhatsApp application.
2
For the safety purpose, all of respondents’ personal information will be kept safe and
confidential and just use to conduct the study. The questionnaire will written in English
because it easy to understand by all respondents.
3.2.1 MEASUREMENT ITEM

In this study, questionnaire will create and divide to 4 section that section A and section
B. The first section which is section A is demographic question to ask about the general
personal information of respondents. The question will be ask in this question is age,
gender, marital status, races, education level, year of study, frequency of travel in a year
and financial support. The section A also be as independent variable for this research
study. In next section which is section B, the question structure design use the Likert
Scale. Respondents had to answer the question by tick their choices ranging from
strongly disagree to strongly agree. This option is assigned to each item on a metric
scale (Joshi et al., 2015). All of item measure will be ask and respondents need to tick
the scale given. The range for Likert Scale is like that 1 is Strongly Disagree, 2 is
Disagree, 3 is Neither disagree nor agree, 4 is Agree and number 5 is Strongly Agree.
Respondents just need to pick scale at the each one item or question will be ask.
Next, in section B which is will ask about dependent variable that content of “travel risk
perception”. The travel risk perception among UUM student will measure by item that
take from (Aydin et al., 2021). Researcher adapt 19 item from the previous study to
insert in questionnaire in the section B.
Table 1: Measurement item of dependent variable (Travel Risk Perception)
Dimension Measurement item Sources
2
Travel risk 1. I will consider the hygiene measures taken (Aydin et al.,
perception by the establishment in my accommodation 2021).
establishment preferences.
2. I will prefer accommodation
establishments taking safety precautions
against the pandemic in my travels.
3. I will prefer destinations taking safety
precautions against the pandemic in my
travels.
4. I will consider the hygiene measures taken
by the destination in my vacation
preferences.
5. I will prefer public transport vehicles
taking safety precautions against the
pandemic in my travels.
6. I will pay more attention to hygiene in my
travels.
taking hygiene measures in my travels.
8. I will carry sanitizer with me during my
travels.
9. I will use a mask during my travels.
10. I will completely avoid travel for
entertainment purposes for the next year.
11. I will think that travel and tourism
activities for the next year will be short-term.

2
2
12. I will take part in package tours less.
13. I will not prefer crowded vacation
destinations for next year.
14. I will prefer to travel only with my family.
15. I will prefer high-quality hotels only.
16. I will prefer high-quality restaurants only.
17. I think that COVID-19 has caused
concerns at an international level.
18. I think that traveling has become unsafe
due to COVID-19
19. COVID-19 has caused me to lower my
travel plans for the next year to a large extent.
3.3 DATA COLLECTION AND PROCEDURE

Data collection is the process after completion of defining a problem. In addition, it is
start after the research design has been completed and also the plan in the study has
been recorded. The collection of data from the right sources can produce logical and
accurate results in an investigation. There are two type of data collection that primary
data and secondary data. The procedures for gathering primary and secondary data are
different since primary data must be gathered first, whereas secondary data just require
compilation of primary data (Khotari, 2004). Researcher need to list the various data
collection techniques along with their benefits and drawbacks.
3.3.1 PRIMARY DATA

The first one is primary data that obtained from original information or original source.
Primary data is a set of data received from the original source and is the first time the
data is obtained. Primary data were collected during the study to obtain accurate
3
information.
3
Collection methods such as surveys and censuses are effective methods (Khotari, 2004).
Primary data also have a more reliable to researcher make decision making because the
source is trusted and it can make the analysis easier to be done (Sileyew, 2013). In this
study researcher use the survey with distribute the questionnaire to collect the data.
Researcher create and design the questionnaire to distribute to the population targeted
which is UUM student. UUM student can be a respondents to answer all questionnaire
that create by researcher. The data from respondents can use as measurement to do the
analysis in this study. Open-ended questions that create by researcher is use to
respondents give the suggestion or additional information during researcher conduct the
survey.
3.3.2 SECONDARY DATA

Secondary data is data or information that has been collected by others. Secondary data
is not the original data from that information source. Secondary data is also data or
information that already exists and only needs to be accessed. Secondary data were
collected and analysed by previous researchers. If the researcher uses secondary data
then it is necessary to first examine from which sources can be used. Secondary data is
often not as problematic as primary data because it has been collected from the original
source. Secondary sources can consist of published data or unpublished data (Khotari,
2004). The example of secondary data such as, journal, article, magazine, newspaper,
proceeding, website and others more (Sileyew, 2013). In this study, researcher use
journal, article and also website to get extra information for conduct the study. For
example, researcher use google scholar, Emerald Insight, Research Gate and also other
source. The reason why researcher use this source because easy to access and faster get
the information.
3.4 DATA PROCESSING AND ANALYSIS

After finish collect the data, the data need to process and analyse with the purpose of
3
this study why this study develop. Data processing is very important for all the data
required
3
for the study has been obtained for comparison as well as analysis. Among the
processes in data processing are editing, coding, classification and tabulation of the data
that has been collected. This is so that all the data can be analysed properly and easily
(Khotari, 2004). In this study, the data that collect from respondents will be analyse use
the IBM SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Science) version 25.0. The analysis use in
this study is descriptive analysis and cross tabulation.
3.4.1 DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS

Descriptive analysis is analysis that helps summarize, illustrate, or explain data points
obtained through data collection by constructing appropriate patterns for the outcome of
the data (Rawat, 2021). Usually descriptive statistic will included the frequencies,
percentage, standard deviation and mean. In this study, the section B of questionnaire
which is independent variable item will analyse use the descriptive analysis. So the
element such as frequency, percentage, mean and standard deviation will help to do the
analyse process.
3.4.2 CROSS TABULATION

Cross tabulation or another name contingency table is an analysis that can show the
relationship between two or more variables in the study. It includes the relationship
between the independent variable and the dependent variable. This cross tabulation will
display all the information about the relationship between the variables used by the
researcher to make a research study. The information can be obtained from the data
collected by the researcher when conducting the survey. In addition, this cross
tabulation also does not require any formula to perform the analysis because it is
basically just a table that displays the frequency count and also the percentage from the
survey made (Library, 2022).
3
CHAPTER 4
4.1 INTRODUCTION
In this chapter, researcher will analyse the data from survey. The review statistical of
finding data from respondents answer in the survey will be present. The survey was
from questionnaire that use the google form as platform for respondents answer the
questionnaire. Based on that google form, researcher get about 100 people number of
respondents. After that data from respondent will analysed used the SPSS or Statistical
Package for Society Science Version 25.0 program. This chapter will continue and
accomplish the study or research objective from previous chapter. The aim of this study
is to measure Post Covid-19 travel risk perception UUM students and to measure the
relationship between demographic factors and UUM student’s travel risk perception.
4.2 RESPONDENT DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE

In this section for this study researcher use 8 questionnaire for collect demographic
data. The questionnaire such as age, gender, marital status, races, education level, year
of study, frequency of travel in a year and financial support. Demographic profile is the
first section in the survey questionnaire. The factor why demographic important in this
study because to know about characteristic of respondents and also to make sure
respondent suitable to answer the questionnaire.
Demographic variables Categories Frequency Percentage

(N=100) (%)
Age 18-20 4 4.0
21-23 57 57.0
24-26 26 26.0
27-29 7 7.0
30-32 4 4.0
33-40 2 2.0
Gender Male 45 45.0
Female 55 55.0
3
Marital status Single 9 9.0
Married 91 91.0
Races Malay 76 76.0
Chinese 10 10.0
India 12 12.0
Others 2 2.0
Education level Undergraduate 11 11.0
Post graduate 89 89.0
Year of study 1 5 5.0
2 16 16.0
3 18 18.0
4 61 61.0
Others 0 0
Frequency of travel in a 1 to 2 times 43 43.0
year 3 to 4 times 41 41.0
5 to 6 times 10 10.0
7 times and above 6 6.0
Financial support PTPTN 55 55.0
Scholarship 12 12.0
Part time work 11 11.0
Family support 22 22.0
Others 0 0
Table 1: Demographic profile of respondents
4.2.1 AGE
Based on the table, first demographic profile analysis is age. From 100 of respondents
the highest category was 21 to 23 which is 57 (57.0%) people was be a respondents.
Second highest age category was 24 to 26 which is 26 (26.0%) from 100 of total
respondents. The respondents age between of 27 to 29 answer the questionnaire was 7
people (7.0%). Next the categories between of 18 to 20 and 30 to 32 record the same
number which is 4 response (4.0%). The lowest one was category age between of 33 to
40 that only had 2
3
3
response (2.0%). This result show that, young student around age 21 to 23 have a
highest interest to share their travel risk perception.
4.2.2 GENDER
Based on the table and figure of gender above, the highest and majority respondent for
this survey was female which 55 individual (55.0%). Male respondents only had 45
individual (45.0%). It can show that female students have a more attention to answer the
questionnaire about travel risk perception.
4.2.3 MARITAL STATUS
Based on the table and figure above, the majority of respondents was not in relay which
mean single. Single respondents was recorded 91 individual (91.0%). The balance
number for married was 9 individual (9.0%). It can conclude mostly UUM students are
single and not have an official relationship yet.
4.2.4 RACES
Based on the table, the data show the number of respondents for each races. The
majority respondents was Malay because recorded 76 response (76.0%). The lowest
respondents was from other category which Bumiputera Sabah only had 2 response
(2.0%). For the Indian races recorded 12 respondents (12.0%). The last one is Chinese
races was recorded 10 response from the 100 respondents (10.0%). It can show that, this
survey about travel risk perception mostly answer by Malay students in UUM.
4.2.5 EDUCATION LEVEL
Next table and figure analysis on data education level. Between of this two categories,
mostly respondents answer this survey was undergraduate student. The undergraduate
respondents recorded 89 (89.0%) from total 100 respondents. While the respondents for
post graduates only had 11 response (11.0%). Based on the data, researcher can
conclude
3
that mostly questionnaire about travel risk perception only answered by undergraduate
because easy to found in the campus.
4.2.6 YEAR OF STUDY
Year of study also one of demographic profile in this survey. Based on the data
collection, highest respondents was student year 4 which is 61 respondents (61.0%).
The lowest respondents was from year 1 students which is only had 5 individual and it
equal to (5.0%). Second highest was from year 3 recorded 18 respondents (18.0%).
Year 2 students recorded 16 response (16.0%). So researcher can conclude the year 4
student have a highest interest to answer the questionnaire about travel risk perception.
4.2.7 FREQUENCY OF TRAVEL IN A YEAR
Next analysis for demographic question for frequency of travel in a year. Based on the
data collection the highest category was 1 to 2 time’s travel which is 43 respondent
(43.0%). The lowest category was 7 times and above because only had 6 response
(6.0%) for this category. For category between 3 to 4 times had response 41 (41.0%).
Second lowest 5 to 6 times only had 10 response (10.0%). It can conclude that mostly
UUM student only travel 1 to 2 times in one year.
4.2.8 FINANCIAL SUPPORT
The last question in demographic section is financial support. From 100 response, 55
respondents (55.0%) get financial support from PTPTN. For family support had 22
respondent (22.0%). Besides that, scholarship respondents was recorded 12 response
(12.0%). The last one is part time work only had 11 respondents (11.0%). Based on the
analysis it can show that mostly student get financial support from PTPTN and they also
use it as travel budget.
3
4.3 DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS
Descriptive analysis was use to interpret the data that researcher got from survey by
respondents. Descriptive analysis can show and summarize the point of data to know the
condition data. In this study, researcher create two table for descriptive analysis. The
first table have a content mean and standard deviation and the second table have a
content of frequency and percentage.
4.3.1 Descriptive analysis on travel risk perception (mean and standard deviation)
No. Item Mean Standard
deviation
I consider the hygiene measures
1. taken by establishment in the 4.04 1.109
accommodation that I will choose
I prefer accommodation
2. establishment that take safety 4.29 0.913
precautions against the
pandemic
3. I will prefer destination taking 4.13 1.012
safety precautions against the
pandemic
I will consider the hygiene measure
4. taken by the destination in my 4.23 0.941
vacation preferences
I will prefer public transport
5. vehicles taking safety precautions 3.97 1.114
6. I will pay more attention to hygiene 4.20 0.985
in my travels.
I will prefer public transport
7. vehicles taking hygiene measures in 4.10 1.078
my travels.
8. I will carry sanitizer with me during 4.11 1.024
my travels.
9. I will use a mask during my travels. 4.25 0.957
4
I will completely avoid travel for
10. entertainment purposes for the next 3.55 1.067
year.
I will think that travel and tourism
11. activities for the next year will 3.91 1.055
be short-term.
12. I will take part in package tours 3.81 1.061
less
I will not prefer crowded vacation 4.00 1.035
13. destinations for next year.
14. I will prefer to travel only with my 3.96 1.091
family.
15. I will prefer high-quality hotels 3.62 1.090
only.
16. I will prefer high-quality restaurants 3.69 1.161
only.
17. I think that COVID-19 has caused 4.18 0.936
18. I think that traveling has become 4.10 1.020
unsafe due to COVID-19.
COVID-19 has caused me to lower
19. my travel plans for the next year to 4.00 0.995
a large extent.
N=100
Table 2: Descriptive analysis on travel risk perception
Based on table above, the mean for all 19 statement between of 3.55 to 4.25 was
recorded. Based on the number, the highest mean was “I will using my mask during
travel” and the lowest mean was “I will completely avoid travel for entertainment
purposes for the next year”. The standard deviation that state in the table above between
of 0.913 to 1.161. The highest standard deviation was “I will prefer high-quality
restaurant only” and the lowest
4
standard deviation was “I prefer accommodation establishment that take safety
precautions against the pandemic”.
4.3.2 Descriptive analysis on travel risk perception (frequency and percentage)

No. Item Categories Frequency Percentage
(%)
I consider the Strongly disagree 7 7.0%
1. hygiene measures Disagree 2 2.0%
taken by Neither disagree nor 11 11.0%
establishment in the agree
accommodation that I Agree 40 40.0%
will choose Strongly agree 40 40.0%
I prefer accommodation Strongly disagree 3 3.0%
2. establishment that take Disagree 2 2.0%
safety precautions Neither disagree nor 7 7.0%
against the pandemic agree
Agree 39 39.0%
Strongly agree 49 49.0%
3. I will prefer destination Strongly disagree 5 5.0%
taking safety precautions Disagree 1 1.0%
against the pandemic Neither disagree nor 12 12.0%
agree
Agree 40 40.0%
I will consider the Strongly disagree 4 4.0%
4. hygiene measure taken Disagree 1 1.0%
by the destination in my Neither disagree nor 8 8.0%
vacation preferences agree
Agree 42 42.0%
I will prefer public Strongly disagree 5 5.0%
5. transport vehicles taking Disagree 6 6.0%
4
safety precautions Neither disagree nor 15 15.0%
against the pandemic in agree
my travels. Agree 35 35.0%
6. I will pay more attention Strongly disagree 5 5.0%
to hygiene in my travels. Disagree 1 1.0%
Neither disagree nor 7 7.0%
agree
Agree 43 43.0%
I will prefer public Strongly disagree 5 5.0%
7. transport vehicles taking Disagree 4 4.0%
hygiene measures in my Neither disagree nor 11 11.0%
travels. agree
Agree 36 36.0%
8. I will carry Strongly disagree 5 5.0%
sanitizer with me Disagree 1 1.0%
during my travels. Neither disagree nor 14 14.0%
agree
Agree 38 38.0%
9. I will use a mask during Strongly disagree 3 3.0%
my travels. Disagree 3 3.0%
agree
Agree 36 36.0%
I will completely avoid Strongly disagree 4 4.0%
10. travel for entertainment Disagree 13 13.0%
purposes for the next Neither disagree nor 26 26.0%
year. agree
Agree 38 38.0%
4
I will think that travel Strongly disagree 2 2.0%
11. and tourism activities Disagree 10 10.0%
for the next year will be Neither disagree nor 18 18.0%
short-term. agree
Agree 35 35.0%
12. I will take part in Strongly disagree 4 4.0%
package tours less Disagree 9 9.0%
agree
Agree 44 44.0%
I will not prefer crowded Strongly disagree 3 3.0%
13. vacation destinations for Disagree 8 8.0%
next year. Neither disagree nor 11 11.0%
agree
Agree 42 42.0%
14. I will prefer to travel Strongly disagree 1 1.0%
only with my family. Disagree 13 13.0%
agree
Agree 29 29.0%
15. I will prefer high-quality Strongly disagree 2 2.0%
hotels only. Disagree 18 18.0%
agree
Agree 38 38.0%
16. I will prefer high-quality Strongly disagree 2 2.0%
restaurants only. Disagree 19 19.0%
4
agree
Agree 30 30.0%
17. I think that COVID-19 Strongly disagree 4 4.0%
has caused concerns at Disagree 0 0.0%
an international level. Neither disagree nor 12 12.0%
agree
Agree 42 42.0%
18. I think that traveling Strongly disagree 4 4.0%
has become unsafe due Disagree 3 3.0%
to COVID-19. Neither disagree nor 14 14.0%
agree
Agree 37 37.0%
COVID-19 has caused Strongly disagree 3 3.0%
19. me to lower my travel Disagree 7 7.0%
plans for the next year Neither disagree nor 10 10.0%
to a large extent. agree
Agree 47 47.0%
N=100
Table 3: Descriptive analysis on travel risk perception
4.3.2.1 Hygiene measure on accommodation
The table show the frequency and percentage from the respondents answer.
Based on the data, the highest frequency was strongly agree and agree because both
share the same frequency and percentage which is 40 choice by respondents (40.0%). It
following with neither disagree nor agree were chosen by 11 respondent’s (11.0%).
Next is, 7 respondent (7.0%) choose strongly disagree for this question. The last one is,
2 respondents (2.0%) chosen for disagree.
4
4.3.2.2 Accommodation safety precautions
Based on the frequency and percentage show in table above, 49 respondents
(49.0%) chosen strongly agree. Respondents that chosen agree was 39 (39.0%). For the
neither disagree nor agree recorded 7 (7.0%) choice from respondents. Next, 3
respondents (3.0%) choose strongly disagree for this question. Disagree was the lowest
choice by respondent which is had only 2 (2.0%).
4.3.2.3 Destinations safety precaution
Based on the table above show the highest frequency and percentage in the table
above is 42 (42.0%) choice of respondents that represent strongly agree. 40 respondents
(40.0%) choose the agree answer. For the neither disagree nor agree 12 respondents
(12.0%) made a choice it for this question. Second lowest was strongly disagree only 5
respondents (5.0%) chosen it. The lowest one was disagree that choice only by 1
respondent (1.0%).
4.3.2.4 Hygiene measure on destination
Table above show the frequency and percentage of question, 45 respondents
(45.0%) from total 100 choose the strongly. 42 respondents (42.0%) chosen agree. For
the neither disagree nor agree only 8 respondents (8.0%) make a choice. Only 4
respondents (4.0%) were chosen for strongly disagree and 1 respondent (1.0%) was
chosen disagree.
4.3.2.5 Public transportation safety precautions
The table also show the frequency and percentage from the respondents answer.
Based on the data, the highest frequency was strongly agree which is 39 respondent
(39.0%) was chosen it. For the agree answer 35 respondent (35.05) was chosen it. It
following with neither disagree nor agree that chosen by 15 respondent’s (15.0%). Next
4
is, 6 respondent (6.0%) chosen disagree for this question. The last one, 5 respondents
(5.0%) chosen for strongly disagree.
4.3.2.6 Pay attention more on hygiene during travel
neither disagree nor agree recorded 7 choice from respondents (7.0%). Next, 5
respondents (5.0%) chosen strongly disagree for this question. The lowest choice by
respondent was disagree which is had only 1 (1.0%).
4.3.2.7 Hygiene measure on public transport
4.3.2.8 Carry sanitizer during travel
4.3.2.9 Use mask during travel
Table above show the frequency and percentage of question, 49 respondents
(49.0%) from total 100 chosen the strongly agree. 36 respondents (36.0%) chosen agree.
For the neither disagree nor agree only 9 respondents (9.0%) was made a choice. 3
respondents (3.0%) chosen for both strongly disagree and disagree.
4
4.3.2.10 Avoid travel for entertainment next year
(38.0%) chosen agree. Respondents that chosen strongly agree was 19 (19.0%). For the
respondents (13.0%) chosen disagree for this question. The lowest choice by respondent
was strongly disagree which is had only 4 (4.0%).
4.3.2.11 Travel and tourism activities next year will be short-term
share the same frequency and percentage which is 35 (35.0%) choice from respondents.
It following with neither disagree nor agree was chosen by 18 respondent’s (18.0%).
Next is, 10 respondent (10.0%) chosen disagree for this question. The last one is, 2
respondents (2.0%) chosen for strongly disagree.
4.3.2.12 Take part in package tour less
Based on the data, the highest frequency was agree which is 44 (44.0%) choice from
respondents. For strongly agree 27 respondents (27.0%) made a choice. It following
with neither disagree nor agree that chosen by 16 respondent’s (16.0%). Next is, 9
respondent (9.0%) chosen disagree for this question. The last one is, 4 respondents
(4.0%) chosen for strongly disagree.
4.3.2.13 Not prefer crowded vacation destination next year
Based on the data, the highest frequency is was agree which is 42 (42.0%) choice from
respondents. For strongly agree respondents chosen 36 (36.0%) and it following with
neither disagree nor agree that chosen by 11 respondent’s (11.0%). Next is, 8
respondent
4
(8.0%) chosen disagree for this question. The last one is, 3 respondents (3.0%) chosen
for strongly disagree.
4.3.2.14 Travel only with family
Based on the data, the highest frequency was strongly agree which is 41 (41.0%) choice
from respondents. For agree respondents chosen 29 (29.0%). It following with neither
disagree nor agree that chosen by 16 respondent’s (16.0%). Next is, 13 respondent
(13.0%) chosen disagree for this question. The last one is, 1 respondent (1.0%) has
selected for strongly disagree.
4.3.2.15 Prefer high-quality hotel
Based on the data, the highest frequency was agree which is 38 choice from
respondents. For strongly agree respondents chosen 23 (23.0%). It following with
neither disagree nor agree that chosen by 19 respondent’s (19.0%). Next is, 18
respondents (18.0%) have chosen disagree for this question. The last one is, 2
respondents (2.0%) chosen for strongly disagree.
4.3.2.16 Prefer high-quality restaurant
Based on the data, the highest frequency was strongly agree 31 (31.0%) choice from
respondents. For agree respondents chosen 30 (30.0%). It following with neither
disagree nor agree that chosen by 18 respondent’s (18.0%). Next is, 19 respondent have
chosen disagree for this question. The last one is, 2 respondents (2.0%) have chosen for
strongly disagree.
4
4.3.2.17 COVID-19 has caused concerns at an international level
share the same frequency and percentage which is 42 (42.0%) choice from respondents.
It following with neither disagree nor agree that chosen by 12 respondent’s (12.0%).
Next is, 4 respondents (4.0%) has chosen strongly disagree for this question.
4.3.2.18 Traveling become unsafe due to COVID-19
The also show the frequency and percentage from the respondents answer.
Based on the data, the highest frequency was strongly agree which is 42 (42.0%) choice
from respondents. For agree 37 respondents (37.0%) have made a choice. It following
with neither disagree nor agree that choose by 14 respondent’s (14.0%). Next is, 3
respondents (3.0%) have chosen disagree for have this question. The last one is, 4
respondents (4.0%) have chosen for strongly disagree.
4.3.2.19 COVID-19 lower travel plan for the next year to a large extent
Based on the data, the highest frequency was strongly agree which is 33 choice from
respondents (33.0%). For agree 47 respondents (47.0%) have chosen. It following with
neither disagree nor agree that choose by 10 respondent’s equivalent to 10.0%. Next is,
7 respondent (7.0%) have chosen disagree for this question. The last one is, 3
respondents (3.0%) have chosen for strongly disagree.
5
4.4 CROSSTAB TABLE TO SHOW THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE AND TRAVEL
RISK PERCEPTION
Cross tabulation is use to show the relationship between two or more variable in the research study. In this study, researcher use the crosstab to
measure the relationship between demographic profile and the travel risk perception. This table above show the frequency and percentage of
respondent data according to the categories and demographic profile.
4.4.1 The relationship between age and travel risk perception

No Item Categories 18-20 21-23 24-26 27-29 30-32 33-40
f % f % f % f % f % f %
I consider Strongly 0 0.0 2 2.0 4 4.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.0
1. the hygiene disagree
measures Disagree 1 1.0 0 0.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
taken by Neither 1 1.0 6 6.0 4 4.0 0 00 0 0.0 0 0.0
establishme disagree nor
nt in the agree
accommoda Agree 1 1.0 25 25.0 10 10.0 1 1.0 3 3.0 0 0.0
tion that I Strongly 1 1.0 24 24.0 7 7.0 6 6.0 1 1.0 1 1.0
will choose agree
I prefer Strongly 0 0.0 2 2.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

2. accommoda disagree
5
tion Disagree 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.0
establishme Neither 1 1.0 1 1.0 5 5.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
nt that take disagree nor
safety agree
precautions Agree 1 1.0 27 27.0 8 8.0 3 3.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
against the Strongly 2 2.0 27 27.0 11 11.0 4 4.0 4 4.0 1 1.0
pandemic agree
3. I will prefer Strongly 0 0.0 2 2.0 2 2.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.0

destination disagree
taking Disagree 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
safety Neither 3 3.0 5 5.0 2 2.0 2 2.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
precautions disagree nor
against the agree
pandemic Agree 0 0.0 24 24.0 13 13.0 2 2.0 1 1.0 0 0.0

Strongly 1 1.0 26 26.0 8 8.0 3 3.0 3 3.0 1 1.0
agree
I will Strongly 0 0.0 2 2.0 2 2.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
4. consider the disagree
hygiene Disagree 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.0
5
measure Neither 0 0.0 2 2.0 4 4.0 2 2.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
taken by disagree nor
the agree
destination Agree 3 3.0 29 29.0 9 9.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
in my Strongly 1 1.0 24 24.0 11 11.0 4 4.0 4 4.0 1 1.0
vacation agree
preferences
I will prefer Strongly 0 0.0 2 2.0 3 3.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
5. public disagree
transport Disagree 1 1.0 4 4.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
vehicles Neither 1 1.0 8 8.0 4 4.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 1 1.0
taking disagree nor
safety agree
precautions Agree 1 1.0 20 20.0 12 12.0 1 1.0 1 1.0 0 0.0

Strongly 1 1.0 23 23.0 6 6.0 5 5.0 3 3.0 1 1.0
against the
agree
pandemic in
my travels.
6. I will pay Strongly 0 0.0 2 2.0 2 2.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.0
more disagree
attention to Disagree 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
5
hygiene in Neither 0 0.0 3 3.0 3 3.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
my travels. disagree nor
agree
Agree 3 3.0 26 26.0 11 11.0 3 3.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Strongly 1 1.0 26 26.0 9 9.0 3 3.0 4 4.0 1 1.0
agree
I will prefer Strongly 0 0.0 3 3.0 2 2.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
7. public disagree
transport Disagree 0 0.0 0 0.0 3 3.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.0
vehicles Neither 0 0.0 7 7.0 3 3.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
taking disagree nor
hygiene agree
measures in Agree 3 3.0 22 22.0 9 9.0 0 0.0 2 2.0 0 0.0

Strongly 1 1.0 25 25.0 9 9.0 6 6.0 2 2.0 1 1.0
my travels.
agree
8. I will carry Strongly 0 0.0 2 2.0 3 3.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
sanitizer disagree
with me Disagree 0 0.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
5
during my Neither 0 0.0 5 5.0 6 6.0 2 2.0 0 0.0 1 1.0
travels. disagree nor
agree
Agree 4 4.0 20 20.0 10 10.0 1 1.0 3 3.0 0 0.0
Strongly 0 0.0 29 29.0 7 7.0 4 4.0 1 1.0 1 1.0
agree
9. I will use a Strongly 0 0.0 2 2.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
mask during disagree
my travels. Disagree 0 0.0 1 1.0 1 1.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Neither 0 0.0 7 7.0 2 2.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
disagree nor
agree
Agree 0 0.0 18 18.0 14 14.0 1 1.0 2 2.0 1 1.0
Strongly 4 4.0 29 29.0 8 8.0 5 5.0 2 2.0 1 1.0
agree
I will Strongly 0 0.0 3 3.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
10. completely disagree
avoid travel Disagree 0 0.0 12 12.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
5
for Neither 2 2.0 16 16.0 7 7.0 0 0.0 1 1.0 0 0.0
entertainme disagree nor
nt purposes agree
for the next Agree 2 2.0 16 16.0 13 13.0 5 5.0 1 1.0 1 1.0
year. Strongly 0 0.0 10 10.0 4 4.0 2 2.0 2 2.0 1 1.0
agree
I will think Strongly 0 0.0 1 1.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
11. that travel disagree
and tourism Disagree 0 0.0 9 9.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
activities for Neither 0 0.0 12 12.0 5 5.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
the next disagree nor
year will be agree
short-term. Agree 3 3.0 14 14.0 14 14.0 1 1.0 3 3.0 0 0.0

Strongly 1 1.0 21 21.0 5 5.0 5 5.0 1 1.0 2 2.0
agree
12. I will take Strongly 0 0.0 3 3.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
part in disagree
Disagree 0 0.0 6 6.0 2 2.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 0.0
5
package Neither 0 0.0 12 12.0 4 4.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
tours less disagree nor
agree
Agree 3 3.0 22 22.0 12 12.0 3 3.0 4 4.0 0 0.0
Strongly 1 1.0 14 14.0 7 7.0 4 4.0 0 0.0 1 1.0
agree
I will not Strongly 0 0.0 1 1.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.0
13. prefer disagree
crowded Disagree 0 0.0 4 4.0 4 4.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
vacation Neither 1 1.0 7 7.0 2 2.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
destinations disagree nor
for next agree
year. Agree 3 3.0 22 22.0 12 12.0 2 2.0 3 3.0 0 0.0

Strongly 0 0.0 23 23.0 7 7.0 4 4.0 1 1.0 1 1.0
agree
to travel disagree
Disagree 0 0.0 10 10.0 1 1.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 1 1.0
5
only with Neither 0 0.0 8 8.0 7 7.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
my family. disagree nor
agree
Agree 3 3.0 14 14.0 8 8.0 2 2.0 2 2.0 0 0.0
Strongly 1 1.0 25 25.0 9 9.0 3 3.0 2 2.0 1 1.0
agree
high-quality disagree
hotels only. Disagree 0 0.0 13 13.0 3 3.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 1 0.0
Neither 0 0.0 14 14.0 4 4.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
disagree nor
agree
Agree 3 3.0 17 17.0 14 14.0 3 3.0 1 1.0 0 0.0
Strongly 1 1.0 12 12.0 4 4.0 2 2.0 3 3.0 1 1.0
agree
Disagree 0 0.0 17 17.0 2 2.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
5
restaurants Neither 0 0.0 11 11.0 6 6.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.0
only. disagree nor
agree
Agree 2 2.0 13 13.0 11 11.0 1 1.0 3 3.0 0 0.0
Strongly 2 2.0 16 16.0 6 6.0 5 5.0 1 1.0 1 1.0
agree
17. I think that Strongly 0 0.0 1 1.0 2 2.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.0
COVID-19 disagree
has caused Disagree 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
concerns at Neither 1 1.0 6 6.0 4 4.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
an disagree nor
internationa agree
l level. Agree 1 1.0 24 24.0 14 14.0 1 1.0 2 2.0 0 0.0

Strongly 2 2.0 26 26.0 6 6.0 5 5.0 2 2.0 1 1.0
agree
18. I think that Strongly 0 0.0 2 2.0 2 2.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
traveling disagree
has become Disagree 0 0.0 3 3.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
5
unsafe due Neither 0 0.0 9 9.0 5 5.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
to COVID- disagree nor
19. agree
Agree 2 2.0 23 23.0 10 10.0 1 1.0 1 1.0 0 0.0
Strongly 2 2.0 20 20.0 9 9.0 6 6.0 3 3.0 2 2.0
agree
COVID-19 Strongly 0 0.0 2 2.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
19. has caused disagree
me to lower Disagree 0 0.0 5 5.0 2 2.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
my travel Neither 1 1.0 5 5.0 3 3.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.0
plans for the disagree nor
next year to agree
a large Agree 1 1.0 30 30.0 12 12.0 3 3.0 1 1.0 0 0.0
extent. Strongly 2 2.0 15 15.0 8 8.0 4 4.0 3 3.0 1 1.0
agree
N=100
Table 6: Relationship between age and travel risk perception
6
Based on the table above, the higher of first item is choice by respondent for age
21 to 23 year was agree that recorded 25 (25.0%). The lowest choice were recorded for
many stages of age was strongly disagree because only had 1 respondents (1.0%) for
age 33 to 40 years.
The higher data for second item was 27 respondents (27.0%) that age 21 to 23
years made a choice for agree and strongly agree which is both are same. The lowest
recorded was strongly disagree because only had 1 respondents (1.0%) by age 24 to 26
years.
The highest data for third item was strongly agree which is had 26 respondent
(26.0%) for age category 21 to 23 years. The lowest data was for age 24 to 26 years
cause only had 1 respondent (1.0%).
Next for item number 4, agree was be the highest choice for respondents
because recorded 29 responses (29.0%) for age 21 to 23 years. While, the lowest
number only had 1 respondents for age 33 to 40 year that chosen disagree.
Item number 5 also show the highest number 23 respondents (23.0%) for age 21
to 23 years that made a choice for strongly agree. While the lowest is also 1 respondents
(1.0%) for age 18 to 20 years and 24 to 26 years that chosen disagree.
Based on the table above, 26 respondents (26.0%) was be the highest data for
item number 6. The age for respondents for highest data from 21 to 23 years was chosen
strongly agree and agree. The lowest for this item was disagree that only had 1
respondents (1.0%) from age 24 to 26 years.
Next, for item number 7 the highest data that showed in table was 25
respondents (25.0%) for age 21 to 23 years that chosen strongly agree. While the lowest
one had 1 respondents (1.0%) that chosen neither disagree nor agree for the age 33 to 40
years.
61
According to the table also, for the item number 8 from all stage of age the
highest data is from age 21 to 23 years which is 29 respondents (29.0%) chosen strong
agree. While the lowest was recorded only 1 respondents (1.0%) for age 33 to 40 years
that chosen neither disagree nor agree.
The highest data for item number 9 also 29 respondents (29.0%) for age 21 to 23
years that chosen strongly agree. The lowest data also 1 respondents (1.0%) respondents
that chosen strongly disagree by age 24 to 26 years.
The higher data for item number 10 was 16 respondents (16.0%) that age 21 to
23 years made a choice for agree and neither disagree nor agree which is both are same.
The lowest recorded was strongly disagree because only had 1 respondents (1.0%) by
respondents for age 24 to 26 respondents.
Next, 21 respondents (21.0%) for age 21 to 23 years be a highest data for item
number 11. This respondent were chosen strongly agree. While the lowest data for this
item had 1 respondents (1.0%) for age 24 to 26 years that chosen disagree.
Item number 12 data from the table show that the highest was 22 respondents
(22.0%) for age 21 to 23 years that chosen agree. While the lowest for strongly disagree
only had 1 respondents (1.0%) from age 24 to 26 years.
Based on the same table also, the highest data for item 13 was recorded 23
respondents (23.0%) for age 21 to 23 years that chosen strongly agree. The lowest was 1
respondents (1.0%) that chosen strongly disagree from age 21 to 23, 24 to 26 and 33 to
40 year.
respondents for age 21 to 23 years that chosen strongly agree. While the lowest one had
1 respondents (1.0%) that chosen strongly agree for the age 24 to 26 years.
62
17 respondents (17.0%) was the highest data for them item 15. This data from
respondents that age 21 to 23 years which is have made a choice for agree. While the
lowest only had 1 respondents by age 33 to 40 years that chosen disagree.
Item number 16 show the highest data also 17 respondents (17.9%) that chosen
disagree by respondents that age 21 to 23 years. While the lowest only had 1 respondent
(1.0%) that chosen neither disagree nor agree by respondent that age 33 to 40 years.
Next, following the table above highest data for item number 17 was 26
respondents (26.0%) that chosen strongly agree by respondents that age 21 to 23 years.
The lowest was had 1 respondent (1.0%) that made a choice for strongly disagree by
respondent that age 33 to 40 years.
According to table above, the highest data for item number 18 was 23
respondents (23.0%) that age 21 to 23 year which is chosen agree. The lowest data also
on agree that only had 1 respondent that age 27 to 29 and 30 to 32 years.
Last but not least, based on the table above the highest data for item 19 was 30
respondents (30.0%) that chosen agree which is from age 21 to 23 years. The lowest
only had 1 respondent (1.0%) that chosen strongly disagree which is age 24 to 26 years.
4.4.2 The relationship between gender and travel risk perception.

No. Item Categories FEMALE MALE
f % f %
I consider the Strongly 5 5.0 2 2.0
1. hygiene disagree
measures taken Disagree 0 0.0 2 2.0
by Neither 7 7.0 4 4.0
establishment disagree
in the nor agree
accommodation Agree 23 23.0 17 17.0
that I will Strongly 20 20.0 20 20.0
choose agree
63
I prefer Strongly 3 3.0 0 0.0
2. accommodation disagree
establishment Disagree 2 2.0 0 0.0
that take safety Neither 2 2.0 5 5.0
precautions disagree
against the nor agree
pandemic Agree 26 26.0 13 13.0
Strongly 22 22.0 27 27.0
agree
3. I will prefer Strongly 5 5.0 0 0.0
taking safety Disagree 0 0.0 1 1.0
precautions Neither 4 4.0 8 8.0
against the disagree
pandemic nor agree
Agree 26 26.0 14 14.0
Strongly 20 20.0 22 22.0
agree
I will consider Strongly 4 4.0 0 0.0
measure taken Disagree 1 1.0 0 0.0
by the Neither 3 3.0 5 5.0
destination in disagree
my vacation nor agree
preferences Agree 25 25.0 17 17.0
Strongly 22 22.0 23 23.0
agree
I will prefer Strongly 4 4.0 1 1.0
5. public transport disagree
vehicles taking Disagree 4 4.0 2 2.0
safety Neither 9 9.0 6 6.0
64
pandemic in Agree 20 20.0 15 15.0
my travels. Strongly 18 18.0 21 21.0
agree
6. I will pay Strongly 5 5.0 0 0.0
more attention disagree
to hygiene in Disagree 0 0.0 1 1.0
my travels. Neither 4 4.0 3 3.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 25 25.0 18 18.0
Strongly 21 21.0 23 23.0
agree
hygiene Neither 7 7.0 4 4.0
measures in my disagree
travels. nor agree

Agree 20 20.0 16 16.0
Strongly 20 20.0 24 24.0
agree
8. I will carry Strongly 4 4.0 1 1.0
sanitizer with disagree
me during my Disagree 0 0.0 1 1.0
travels. Neither 6 6.0 8 8.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 20 20.0 18 18.0
Strongly 25 25.0 17 17.0
agree
9. I will use a Strongly 3 3.0 0 0.0
my travels. Disagree 1 1.0 2 2.0
65
Neither 7 7.0 2 2.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 20 20.0 16 16.0
Strongly 24 24.0 25 25.0
agree
I will Strongly 4 4.0 0 0.0
avoid travel for Disagree 11 11.0 2 2.0
entertainment Neither 14 14 12 12.0
purposes for disagree
the next year. nor agree

Agree 20 20.0 18 18.0
Strongly 6 6.0 13 13.0
agree
I will think Strongly 2 2.0 0 0.0
11. that travel and disagree
tourism Disagree 9 9.0 1 1.0
activities for Neither 12 12.0 6 6.0
the next year disagree
will be short- nor agree
term. Agree 17 17.0 18 18.0

Strongly 15 15.0 20 20.0
agree
12. I will take Strongly 4 4.0 0 0.0
part in package disagree
tours less Disagree 8 8.0 1 1.0
Neither 12 12.0 4 4.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 20 2.0 24 24.0
66
Strongly 11 11.0 16 16.0
agree
I will not Strongly 3 3.0 0 0.0
13. prefer crowded disagree
vacation Disagree 5 5.0 3 3.0
destinations for Neither 6 6.0 5 5.0
next year. disagree
nor agree
Agree 24 24.0 18 18.0
Strongly 17 17.0 19 19.0
agree
14. I will prefer to Strongly 1 1.0 0 0.0
travel only with disagree
my family. Disagree 10 10.0 3 3.0
Neither 11 11.0 5 5.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 14 14.0 15 15.0
Strongly 19 19.0 22 22.0
agree
hotels only. Disagree 15 15.0 3 3.0
Neither 10 10.0 9 9.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 19 19.0 19 19.0
Strongly 10 10.0 13 13.0
agree
Disagree 16 16.0 3 3.0
67
restaurants Neither 10 10.0 8 8.0
only. disagree
nor agree
Agree 16 16.0 14 14.0
Strongly 12 12.0 19 19.0
agree
17. I think that Strongly 4 4.0 0 0.0
COVID-19 disagree
has Disagree 0 0.0 0 0.0
caused Neither 5 5.0 7 7.0
concerns at an disagree
international nor agree
level. Agree 30 30.0 12 12.0

Strongly 16 16.0 26 26.0
agree
traveling has disagree
become unsafe Disagree 2 2.0 1 1.0
due to COVID- Neither 11 11.0 3 3.0
19. disagree
nor agree
Agree 20 20.0 17 17.0
Strongly 18 18.0 24 24.0
agree
COVID-19 has Strongly 3 3.0 0 0.0
19. caused me to disagree
lower my travel Disagree 7 7.0 0 0.0
plans for the Neither 6 6.0 4 4.0
next year to a disagree
large extent. nor agree
Agree 28 28.0 19 19.0
Strongly 11 11.0 22 22.0
agree
68
N=100
Table 7: Relationship between gender and travel risk perception
Based on the table above, the highest data of first item 23 (23.0%) female
respondent agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded was disagree and
strongly disagree because had 2 male respondents (2.0%).
The higher data for second item was 26 female respondents (26.0%) that made a
choice for agree. The lowest also 2 female respondents (2.0%) that chosen disagree and
neither disagree nor agree. The lowest for male was 5 respondents (5.0%) that chosen
neither disagree nor agree.
The highest data of third item 26 (26.0%) female respondent agree for this item.
The lowest choice were recorded was disagree because had 1 male respondent (1.0%).
Next the highest data for item four 25 (25.0%) female respondent agree for it.
The lowest choice was recorded was disagree because had 1 female respondents (1.0%).
Item number 5 also show the highest number 20 female respondents (20.0%)
agree for this item. While the lowest was 1 male respondents (1.0%) strongly disagree
for this item.
The highest data of item 6 25 (25.0%) female respondent agree for this item.
The lowest choice were recorded was disagree because had 1 male respondent (1.0%).
Next, for item number 7 the highest data that showed in table was 20 female
respondents (20.0%) strongly agree for this item. While the lowest one had 1 male
respondents (1.0%) chosen disagree.
According to the table also, for the item number 8 from highest data were 25
female respondents (25.0%) chosen strong agree. While the lowest only 1 male
respondents (1.0%) strongly disagree and disagree for this item.
69
The highest data for item number 9 also 24 female respondents (29.0%) for age
21 to 23 years that chosen strongly agree. The lowest data also 1 female respondent
(1.0%) that chosen disagree.
The higher data for item number 10 was 20 female respondents (20.0%) made
choice for agree. The lowest recorded was disagree because only had 2 male
respondents (2.0%).
Next, 17 female respondents (17.0%) agree for this item and it was highest data
for item number 11.
Item number 12 data from the table show that the highest was 20 female
respondents (20.0%) agree for this item. While the lowest data for this item had 1 male
respondents (1.0%) that chosen disagree.
Based on the same table also, the highest data for item 13 was 24 female
respondents (24.0%) that chosen agree. The lowest was 3 male respondents (3.0%) that
chosen disagree.
Next, for item number 14 the highest data that showed in table was 19 female
respondents (19.0%) strongly agree for this item. While the lowest one also female
respondents which is 1 respondent (1.0%) chosen strongly disagree
19 respondents (19.0%) was the highest data for them item 15. This data from
female respondents that made a choice for agree.
Item number 16 show the highest data 16 female respondents (16.0%) that
chosen disagree and agree. While the lowest only had 1 female and male respondents
(1.0%) that chosen strongly disagree.
Next, following the table above highest data for item number 17 was 30 female
respondents (30.0%) that chosen agree. The lowest was also female which is 4
respondents (4.0%) made a choice for strongly disagree.
70
According to table above, the highest data for item number 18 was 20 female
respondents (20.0%) chosen agree. The lowest data also on disagree that only had 1
male respondent (1.0%).
female respondents (28.0%) that chosen agree. Lowest also female respondent which is
only had 3 respondent (3.0%) chosen strongly disagree.
4.4.3 The relationship between marital status and travel risk perception
No. Item Categories MARRIED SINGLE
f % f %
1. hygiene disagree
measures taken Disagree 0 0.0 2 2.0
by Neither 0 0.0 11 11.0
in the nor agree
choose agree


Strongly 7 7.0 42 42.0
agree
71
pandemic nor agree
Agree 3 3.0 37 37.0
Strongly 5 5.0 37 37.0
agree

Strongly 6 6.0 39 39.0
agree

Strongly 6 6.0 33 33.0
my travels.
agree
disagree
nor agree
Agree 2 2.0 41 41.0
Strongly 6 6.0 38 38.0
agree
72
travels. nor agree

Agree 3 3.0 33 33.0
Strongly 5 5.0 39 39.0
agree
disagree
nor agree
Agree 4 4.0 34 34.0
Strongly 4 4.0 38 38.0
agree
Neither 1 1.0 8 8.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 4 4.0 32 32.0
Strongly 4 4.0 45 45.0
agree
entertainment Neither 1 1.0 25 25.0
73
Agree 4 4.0 34 34.0
Strongly 3 3.0 16 16.0
agree
I will think that Strongly 0 0.0 2 2.0
11. travel and disagree
term. Agree 4 4.0 31 31.0

Strongly 4 4.0 31 31.0
agree
12. I will take Strongly 0 0.0 4 4.0
Neither 0 0.0 16 16.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 6 6.0 38 38.0
Strongly 1 1.0 26 26.0
agree
next year. disagree

nor agree
Agree 5 5.0 37 37.0
Strongly 3 3.0 33 33.0
agree
74
Neither 0 0.0 16 16.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 3 3.0 26 26.0
Strongly 4 4.0 37 37.0
agree
Neither 1 1.0 18 18.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 2 2.0 36 36.0
Strongly 4 4.0 19 19.0
agree
restaurants Disagree 1 1.0 18 18.0
only. Neither 1 1.0 17 17.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 4 4.0 26 26.0
Strongly 3 3.0 28 28.0
agree
COVID-19 has disagree
caused Disagree 0 0.0 0 0.0
concerns at an Neither 0 0.0 12 12.0
international disagree
level. nor agree
Agree 4 4.0 38 38.0
Strongly 4 4.0 38 38.0
agree
75
19. disagree
nor agree
Agree 2 2.0 35 35.0
Strongly 7 7.0 35 35.0
agree
Agree 3 3.0 44 44.0
Strongly 5 5.0 28 28.0
agree
N=100
Table 8: Relationship between marital status and travel risk perception
Based on the table above, the highest data of first item 36 (36.0%) single
respondent agree and strongly agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded
strongly disagree because had 1 married respondents (1.0%).
The higher data for second item was 38 single respondents (26.0%) that made a
choice for agree. The lowest for single respondents was 1 (1.0%) that chosen disagree.
The highest data of third item 37 (37.0%) single respondent agree and strongly
agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded strongly disagree because had 1
married respondents (1.0%).
76
The highest data of item 4, 41 (41.0%) single respondent agree for this item. The
lowest choice were recorded disagree, neither disagree nor agree and agree because had
1 married respondents (1.0%).
The highest data of item 5, 33 (33.0%) single respondent agree and strongly
agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded neither disagree nor agree because
had 1 married respondents (1.0%).
The highest data of item 6, 41 (41.0%) single respondent agree for this item. The
lowest choice were recorded strongly disagree because had 1 married respondents
(1.0%).
The highest data of item 7, 39 (39.0%) single respondent strongly agree for this
item. The lowest choice were recorded disagree because had 1 married respondents
(1.0%).
single respondents (38.0%) chosen strongly agree. While the lowest only 1 married
respondents (1.0%) neither disagree nor agree.
The highest data for item number 9, 45 single respondents (45.0%) strongly
agree this item. While the lowest only 1 married respondents (1.0%) neither disagree
nor agree.
The highest data of item 10, 34 (34.0%) single respondent agree for this item.
The lowest choice were recorded disagree and neither disagree nor agree because had 1
agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded disagree because had 1 married
respondents (1.0%).
The higher data for item 12 was 38 single respondents (26.0%) that made a
choice for agree. The lowest for single respondents was 1 (1.0%) that chosen disagree.
77
The highest data of item 13. 37 (37.0%) single respondent agree for this item.
The lowest choice were recorded strongly disagree because had 1 married respondents
(1.0%).
Next the highest data of item 14, 37 (37.0%) single respondent strongly agree
for this item. The lowest choice were recorded strongly disagree because had 1 also
single respondent (1.0%).
Table above show the highest data for item 15 36 (36.0%) single respondent
had 1 married respondents (1.0%).
The highest data of item 16, 28 (28.0%) single respondent strongly agree
for this item. The lowest choice were recorded disagree and neither disagree nor agree
because had 1 married respondents (1.0%).
agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded strongly disagree because had 1
According to table above, the highest data for item number 18 was 35 single
respondents (35.0%) chosen agree and strongly agree. The lowest data also on agree
that only had 2 married respondents (2.0%).
Last but not least, based on the table above the highest data for item number 19,
44 single respondents (44.0%) agree this item. While the lowest only 1 married
respondents (1.0%) neither disagree nor agree.
4.4.4 The relationship between races and travel risk perception

No. Item Categories Malay Indian Chinese Bumiputera
Sabah
f % f % f % f %
78
I consider the Strongly 6 6.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
1. hygiene disagree
measures taken Disagree 0 0.0 2 2.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
by Neither 9 9.0 0 0.0 2 2.0 0 0.0
in the nor agree
accommodation Agree 32 32.0 3 3.0 5 5.0 0 0.0
that I will Strongly 29 29.0 6 6.0 3 3.0 2 2.0
choose agree
I prefer Strongly 3 3.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

establishment Disagree 1 1.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
that take safety Neither 5 5.0 1 1.0 1 1.0 0 0.0
pandemic Agree 32 32.0 3 3.0 3 3.0 1 1.0

Strongly 35 35.0 7 7.0 6 6.0 1 1.0
agree
3. I will prefer Strongly 4 4.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
taking safety Disagree 0 0.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
precautions Neither 8 8.0 2 2.0 2 2.0 0 0.0
pandemic nor agree

Agree 31 31.0 4 4.0 4 4.0 1 1.0
Strongly 33 33.0 4 4.0 4 4.0 1 1.0
agree
I will consider Strongly 4 4.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
measure taken Disagree 0 0.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
by the Neither 5 5.0 1 1.0 2 2.0 0 0.0
nor agree
79
my vacation Agree 34 34.0 3 3.0 4 4.0 1 1.0
preferences Strongly 33 33.0 7 7.0 4 4.0 1 1.0
agree
I will prefer Strongly 4 4.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
vehicles taking Disagree 5 5.0 0 0.0 1 1.0 0 0.0
safety Neither 12 12.0 2 2.0 1 1.0 0 0.0
pandemic in Agree 27 27.0 2 2.0 6 6.0 0 0.0

Strongly 28 28.0 7 7.0 2 2.0 2 2.0
my travels.
agree
6. I will pay Strongly 4 4.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
to hygiene in Disagree 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
my travels. Neither 5 5.0 0 0.0 2 2.0 0 0.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 30 30.0 7 7.0 5 5.0 1 1.0
Strongly 36 36.0 4 4.0 3 3.0 1 1.0
agree
hygiene Neither 11 11.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
travels. nor agree

Agree 26 26.0 2 2.0 7 7.0 1 1.0
Strongly 32 32.0 9 9.0 2 2.0 1 1.0
agree
8. I will carry Strongly 4 4.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Disagree 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
80
me during my Neither 9 9.0 4 4.0 1 1.0 0 0.0
travels. disagree
nor agree
Agree 25 25.0 6 6.0 6 6.0 1 1.0
Strongly 37 37.0 1 1.0 3 3.0 2 2.0
agree
9. I will use a Strongly 3 3.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
my travels. Disagree 3 3.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Neither 9 9.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 25 25.0 6 6.0 3 3.0 2 2.0
Strongly 36 36.0 6 6.0 7 7.0 0 0.0
agree
I will Strongly 4 4.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
avoid travel for Disagree 12 12.0 0 0.0 1 1.0 0 0.0
entertainment Neither 21 21.0 1 1.0 3 3.0 1 1.0

Agree 25 25.0 7 7.0 5 5.0 1 1.0
Strongly 14 14.0 4 4.0 1 1.0 0 0.0
agree
I will think that Strongly 2 2.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
tourism Disagree 9 9.0 0 0.0 1 1.0 0 0.0
activities for Neither 18 18.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
term. Agree 22 22.0 7 7.0 5 5.0 1 1.0

Strongly 25 25.0 5 5.0 4 4.0 1 1.0
agree
81
12. I will take Strongly 3 3.0 0 0.0 1 1.0 0 0.0
tours less Disagree 8 8.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Neither 15 15.0 0 0.0 1 1.0 0 0.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 32 32.0 5 5.0 6 6.0 1 1.0
Strongly 18 18.0 6 6.0 2 2.0 1 1.0
agree
I will not Strongly 2 2.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
vacation Disagree 7 7.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
destinations for Neither 8 8.0 0 0.0 3 3.0 0 0.0
next year. disagree

nor agree
Agree 31 31.0 7 7.0 4 4.0 0 0.0
Strongly 28 28.0 3 3.0 3 3.0 2 2.0
agree
14. I will prefer to Strongly 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
my family. Disagree 12 12.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Neither 14 14.0 0 0.0 2 2.0 0 0.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 18 18.0 4 4.0 6 6.0 1 1.0
Strongly 31 31.0 7 7.0 2 2.0 1 1.0
agree
hotels only. Disagree 16 16.0 1 1.0 1 1.0 0 0.0
82
Neither 16 16.0 0 0.0 3 3.0 0 0.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 25 25.0 8 8.0 4 4.0 1 1.0
Strongly 17 17.0 3 3.0 2 2.0 1 1.0
agree
restaurants Disagree 18 18.0 0 0.0 1 1.0 0 0.0
only. Neither 14 14.0 1 1.0 3 3.0 0 0.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 19 19.0 6 6.0 4 4.0 1 1.0
Strongly 23 23.0 5 5.0 2 2.0 1 1.0
agree
17. I think that Strongly 3 3.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
caused Disagree 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
concerns at an Neither 11 11.0 0 0.0 1 1.0 0 0.0
level. nor agree

Agree 29 29.0 6 6.0 5 5.0 2 2.0
Strongly 33 33.0 5 5.0 4 4.0 0 0.0
agree
become unsafe Disagree 3 3.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
due to COVID- Neither 14 14.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
19. disagree
nor agree
Agree 25 25.0 7 7.0 5 5.0 0 0.0
Strongly 30 30.0 5 5.0 5 5.0 2 2.0
agree
83
COVID-19 has Strongly 3 3.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
lower my travel Disagree 7 7.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
plans for the Neither 6 6.0 1 1.0 3 3.0 0 0.0
Agree 36 36.0 4 4.0 5 5.0 2 2.0
Strongly 24 24.0 7 7.0 2 2.0 0 0.0
agree
N=100
Table 9: Relationship between races and travel risk perception
Based on the table above, the higher of first item is choice by 29 Malay respondent
(29.0%) was strongly agree. The lowest choice were recorded was strongly disagree
because only had 1 Indian respondents (1.0%)
The higher data for second item was 32 Malay respondents (32.0%) made a
choice for agree. The lowest recorded was disagree because only had 1 respondents
(1.0%) by Malay, Indian and Chinese respondents.
The highest data for third item was strongly agree which is had 33 Malay
respondent (33.0%). The lowest data was strongly disagree and disagree cause only had
1 respondent (1.0%) by Indian respondent.
Next for item number 4, agree was be the highest choice for respondents because
recorded 34 Malay respondents (34.0%). While, the lowest number only had 1 Indian
respondents chosen disagree and neither disagree nor agree while 1 Bumiputera Sabah
respondent chosen strongly agree.
Item number 5 also show the highest number 28 Malays respondents (28.0%)
strongly agree for this statement. While the lowest is also 1 Indian respondents (1.0%)
that chosen strongly disagree and 1 Chinese respondents chosen disagree also neither
disagree nor agree.
84
85
Based on the table above, 36 respondents (36.0%) was be the highest data for
item number 6 because strongly agree with this item. The lowest choice were recorded
was strongly disagree because only had 1 Indian respondents (1.0%).
respondents (32.0%) because strongly agree with this item. The lowest choice were
recorded was strongly disagree because only had 1 Chinese respondents (1.0%).
According to the table also, for the item number 8 from all stage of age the
highest data 37 Malay respondents (37.0%) chosen strongly agree. While the lowest was
recorded only 1 Indian respondents (1.0%) strongly disagree with this statement.
The highest data for item number 9 was 36 Malay respondents (36.0%) was be
the highest data for item number 6 because strongly agree with this item. The lowest
choice were recorded was agree because had 2 Bumiputera Sabah respondents (2.0%).
The higher data for item number 10 was 25 Malay respondents (25.0%) strongly
agree with this statement. The lowest choice were recorded was neither disagree nor
agree because only had 1 Indian and 1 Bumiputera Sabah respondents (1.0%).
Next, 25 Malay respondents (25.0%) strongly agree with this statement be a
highest data for item number 11. The lowest choice were recorded was disagree because
only had 1 Chinese respondents (1.0%).
Item number 12 data from the table show that the highest was 32 Malay
respondents (32.0%) chosen agree. The lowest choice were recorded was strongly
disagree and neither disagree nor agree because only had 1 Chinese respondents (1.0%).
Based on the same table also, the highest data for item 13 was recorded 31 Malay
respondents (31.0%) agree for this statement. The lowest choice were recorded was
strongly disagree and disagree because only had 1 Indian respondents (1.0%)
86
Next, for item number 14 the highest data that showed in table was 31 Malay
respondents (31.0%) agree for this statement. The lowest choice were recorded was
disagree because only had 1 Indian respondents (1.0%)
25 Malay respondents (25.0%) was the highest data for them item 15 because
chosen for agree. The lowest choice were recorded was disagree because only had 1
Indian respondent (1.0%) and 1 Chinese respondent (1.0%)
Item number 16 show the highest data also 23 Malay respondents (17.9%) that
chosen strongly agree. The lowest choice were recorded was neither disagree nor agree
because only had 1 Indian respondents (1.0%) and 1 Chinese respondents disagree for
this item.
Next, following the table above highest data for item number 17 The highest
data for third item was strongly agree which is had 33 Malay respondent (33.0%). The
lowest data was strongly disagree cause only had 1 respondent (1.0%) by Indian
respondent.
According to table above, the highest data for item number 18 was 30 Malay
respondents (30.0%) chosen strongly agree. The lowest choice were recorded was
strongly agree because had 2 Bumiputera Sabah respondents (2.0%).
Last but not least, based on the table above the highest data for item 19, 36
Malay respondents (36.0%) because agree with this item. While the lowest was
recorded only 1 Indian respondents (1.0%) neither disagree nor agree with this
statement.
4.4.5 The relationship between education level and travel risk perception
No. Item Categories Post graduate Undergraduate
f % f %
1. hygiene disagree
87
measures taken Disagree 0 0. 2 2.0
88
by Neither 1 1.0 10 10.0
in the nor agree
choose agree


Strongly 7 7.0 42 42.0
agree
pandemic nor agree

Agree 3 3.0 37 37.0
Strongly 6 6.0 36 36.0
agree

Strongly 6 6.0 39 39.0
agree
89

Strongly 6 6.0 33 33.0
my travels.
agree
disagree
nor agree
Agree 3 3.0 40 40.0
Strongly 7 7.0 37 37.0
agree
travels. nor agree

Agree 3 3.0 33 33.0
Strongly 6 6.0 38 38.0
agree
disagree
nor agree
90
Agree 3 3.0 35 35.0
Strongly 6 6.0 36 36.0
agree
Neither 0 0.0 9 9.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 5 5.0 31 31.0
Strongly 5 5.0 44 44.0
agree
entertainment Neither 2 2.0 24 24.0

Agree 6 6.0 32 32.0
Strongly 3 3.0 16 16.0
agree
I will think that Strongly 0 0.0 2 2.0
term. Agree 5 5.0 30 30.0

Strongly 4 4.0 31 31.0
agree
12. I will take part Strongly 0 0.0 4 4.0
in package disagree
91
Neither 1 1.0 15 15.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 7 7.0 37 37.0
Strongly 2 2.0 25 25.0
agree
next year. disagree

nor agree
Agree 5 5.0 37 37.0
Strongly 5 5.0 31 31.0
agree
Neither 1 1.0 15 15.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 4 4.0 25 25.0
Strongly 4 4.0 37 37.0
agree
Neither 2 2.0 17 17.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 3 3.0 35 35.0
Strongly 4 4.0 19 19.0
agree
92
restaurants Disagree 0 0.0 19 19.0
only. Neither 2 2.0 16 16.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 5 5.0 25 25.0
Strongly 3 3.0 28 28.0
agree
caused Disagree 0 0.0 0 0.0
concerns at an Neither 0 0.0 12 12.0
level. nor agree

Agree 5 5.0 37 37.0
Strongly 5 5.0 37 37.0
agree
19. disagree
nor agree
Agree 2 2.0 35 35.0
Strongly 9 9.0 33 33.0
agree
93
Agree 5 5.0 42 42.0
Strongly 5 5.0 28 28.0
agree
N=100
Table 10: Relationship between education level and travel risk perception
Based on the table above, the higher of first item is choice 37 undergraduate respondent
(37.0%) agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded was strongly disagree and
neither disagree nor agree because only had 1 post graduate respondents (1.0%).
The higher data for second item was 37 undergraduate respondent (37.0%) agree
for this item. The lowest choice were recorded was disagree and neither disagree nor
agree because only had 1 post graduate respondents (1.0%).
The highest data for third item was 37 undergraduate respondent (37.0%) agree
for this item. The lowest choice were recorded was strongly disagree and neither
disagree nor agree because only had 1 post graduate respondents (1.0%).
Next for item number 4, agree and strongly agree was be the highest choice
because had 39 graduate respondents (39.0%). The lowest choice were recorded was
disagree and neither disagree nor agree because only had 1 post graduate respondents
(1.0%).
Item number 5 also show the highest number 33 undergraduate respondent
(33.0%) agree and strongly agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded was
disagree because only had 1 post graduate respondents (1.0%).
Based on the table above, 40 undergraduate respondents (40.0%) was be the
highest data for item number 6 because agree for this item. The lowest choice were
recorded was disagree because had 2 post graduate and 2 undergraduate respondents
(2.0%).
94
undergraduate respondent (38.0%) strongly agree for this item. The lowest choice were
recorded was strongly disagree and neither disagree nor agree because only had 1 post
graduate respondents (1.0%).
According to the table for the item number 8, 36 undergraduate respondent
(36.0%) strongly agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded was disagree
because only had 1 undergraduate respondents (1.0%).
The highest data for item number 9, 44 undergraduate respondent (44.0%)
strongly agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded was disagree because only
had 1 post graduate respondents (1.0%).
The higher data for item number 10 was 32 undergraduate respondent (32.0%)
Next, the highest data for item number 11, 31 undergraduate respondent (31.0%)
Item number 12 data from the table show that the highest was 37 undergraduate
respondent (37.0%) agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded was disagree
and neither disagree nor agree because only had 1 post graduate respondents (1.0%).
Based on the same table also, the highest data for item 13 was recorded 37
undergraduate respondent (37.0%) agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded
was strongly disagree because only had 1 post graduate respondents (1.0%).
undergraduate respondent (37.0%) strongly agree for this item. The lowest choice were
95
recorded was neither disagree nor agree because only had 1 post graduate respondents
(1.0%).
For item 15 the highest data was 35 undergraduate respondent (35.0%) agree for
this item. The lowest choice were recorded was strongly disagree and neither disagree
nor agree because had 2 post graduate respondents (2.0%).
Item number 16 show the highest data 28 undergraduate respondents (28.0%)
because strongly agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded was strongly
disagree because had 1 post graduate and 1 undergraduate respondents (1.0%).
Next, following the table above highest data for item number 17 was 37
undergraduate respondent (37.0%) agree and strongly agree for this item. The lowest
choice were recorded was strongly disagree because only had 1 post graduate
respondents (1.0%).
According to table above, the highest data for item number 18 was 35
undergraduate respondent (35.0%) agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded
also agree because had 2 post graduate respondents (2.0%).
undergraduate respondents (42.0%) because agree for this item. The lowest choice were
recorded was neither disagree nor agree because had 1 post graduate respondents
(1.0%).
4.4.6 The relationship between year of study and travel risk perception
No. Item Categories Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4
f % f % f % f %

hygiene disagree
1.
measures taken
Disagree 0 0.0 1 1.0 1 1.0 0 0.0
96
by Neither 0 0.0 2 2.0 2 2.0 7 7.0
in the nor agree
accommodation
Agree 3 3.. 3 3.0 3 3.0 26 26.0
that I will
Strongly 2 2.0 8 8.0 8 8.0 24 24.0
choose
agree

accommodation disagree
2.
establishment
Disagree 0 0.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 1 1.0
that take safety
Neither 0 0.0 1 1.0 3 3.0 3 3.0
precautions
disagree
against the
nor agree
pandemic
Agree 1 1.0 4 4.0 6 6.0 28 28.0
Strongly 4 4.0 10 10. 9 9.0 26 26.0

agree 0

taking safety
Disagree 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.0 0 0.0
precautions
Neither 1 1.0 2 2.0 1 1.0 8 8.0
against the
disagree
pandemic
nor agree
Agree 2 2.0 4 4.0 6 6.0 28 28.0
Strongly 2 2.0 9 9.0 10 10. 21 21.0

agree 0

the hygiene disagree
4.
measure taken
Disagree 0 0.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
97
by the Neither 0 0.0 1 1.0 2 2.0 5 5.0
preferences
Agree 2 2.0 5 5.0 10 1.0 25 25.0
Strongly 3 3.0 9 9.0 6 6.0 27 27.0

agree

public transport disagree
5.
vehicles taking
Disagree 0 0.0 1 1.0 1 1.0 4 4.0
safety
Neither 1 1.0 4 4.0 0 0.0 10 10.0
precautions
disagree
against the
nor agree
pandemic in
my travels. Agree 3 3.0 3 3.0 10 1.0 19 19.0
Strongly 1 1.0 8 8.0 6 6.0 24 24.0

agree

my travels.
Neither 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.0 6 6.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 3 3.0 7 7.0 8 8.0 25 25.0
Strongly 2 2.0 8 8.0 8 8.0 26 26.0

agree

public transport disagree
7.
vehicles taking
Disagree 0 0. 1 1.0 2 2.0 1 1.0
98
hygiene Neither 0 0.0 1 1.0 0 0.0 10 1.0
travels. nor agree
Agree 4 4.0 5 5.0 7 7.0 20 20.0
Strongly 1 1.0 9 9.0 9 9.0 25 25.0

agree

me during my Disagree 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.0
travels.
Neither 0 0.0 2 2.0 4 4.0 8 8.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 1 1.0 9 9.0 8 8.0 20 20.0
Strongly 4 4.0 4 4.0 6 6.0 28 28.0

agree

Neither 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 1.0 8 8.0

disagree
nor agree
Agree 2 2.0 8 8.0 10 10. 16 16.0

0
Strongly 3 3.0 7 7.0 7 7.0 32 32.0

agree
I will Strongly 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 4 4.0

completely disagree
99
10. avoid travel for Disagree 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 2.0 11 11.0
entertainment
Neither 1 1.0 6 6.0 6 6.0 13 13.0
purposes for
disagree
the next year.
nor agree
Agree 3 3.0 8 8.0 7 7.0 20 20.
Strongly 1 1.0 2 2.0 3 3.0 13 13.0

agree

travel and disagree
11.
activities for
Neither 0 0.0 1 1.0 3 3.0 14 14.0
the next year
disagree
will be short-
nor agree
term.
Agree 2 2.0 10 10. 11 11. 12 12.0
0 0
Strongly 2 2.0 5 5.0 3 3.0 25 25.0

agree
12. I will take part Strongly 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 4 4.0

in package disagree
Neither 0 0.0 1 1.0 4 4.0 11 11.0

disagree
nor agree
Agree 3 3.0 13 13. 19 19. 19 19.0

0 0
Strongly 1 1.0 1 1.0 20 20. 20 20.0

agree 0
10
prefer crowded disagree
13.
vacation
Disagree 0 0.0 1 1.0 1 1.0 6 6.0
destinations for
Neither 1 1.0 1 1.0 1 1.0 8 8.0
next year.
disagree
nor agree
Agree 1 1.0 7 7.0 9 9.0 25 25.0
Strongly 3 3.0 6 6.0 7 7.0 20 20.0

agree

Neither 0 0.0 0 0.0 4 4.0 12 12.0

disagree
nor agree
Agree 4 4.0 7 7.0 7 7.0 11 11.0
Strongly 1 1.0 7 7.0 7 7.0 26 26.0

agree

hotels only.
Disagree 0 0.0 2 2.0 1 1.0 15 15.0
Neither 1 1.0 3 3.0 5 5.0 10 10.0

disagree
nor agree
Agree 1 1.0 8 8.0 9 9.0 20 20.0
Strongly 3 3.0 3 3.0 3 3.0 14 14.0

agree
10
restaurants
Disagree 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 2.0 17 17.0
only.
Neither 1 1.0 3 3.0 4 4.0 10 10.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 3 3.0 7 7.0 8 8.0 12 12.0
Strongly 1 1.0 5 5.0 4 4.0 21 21.0

agree

caused Disagree 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
concerns at an
Neither 0 0.0 2 2.0 2 2.0 8 8.0
international
disagree
level.
nor agree
Agree 1 1.0 8 8.0 9 9.0 24 24.0
Strongly 4 4.0 5 5.0 7 7.0 26 26.0

agree

due to COVID-
Neither 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 2.0 12 12.0
19.
disagree
nor agree
Agree 3 3.0 2 2.0 11 11. 21 21.0

0
10
Strongly 2 2.0 14 14. 5 5.0 21 21.0
agree 0

caused me to disagree
19.
lower my travel
Disagree 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 7 7.0
plans for the
Neither 1 1.0 1 1.0 1 1.0 7 7.0
next year to a
disagree
large extent.
nor agree
Agree 2 2.0 7 7.0 13 13. 25 25.0

0
Strongly 2 2.0 8 8.0 4 4.0 19 19.0

agree
N=100
Table 11: Relationship between year of study and travel risk perception
Based on the table above, the highest data of first item 26 (26.0%) year 4
respondent agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded disagree because had 1
year 2 respondents (1.0%).
The higher data for second item was 28 (28.0%) year 4 respondent agree for this
item. The lowest choice also were recorded agree because had 1 year 2 respondents
(1.0%).
The highest data of third item 28 (28.0%) year 4 respondent agree for this item.
The lowest choice were recorded neither disagree nor agree because had 1 year 1
respondents (1.0%).
The highest data of item 4, 27 (27.0%) year 4 respondent agree for this item.
The lowest choice were recorded disagree and neither disagree nor agree because had 1
year 2 respondent (1.0%).
10
The lowest choice were recorded strongly disagree and disagree because had 1 year 3
respondent (1.0%).
The lowest choice were recorded strongly disagree because had 1 year 2 respondents
(1.0%).
The highest data of item 7, 25 (25.0%) year 4 respondent strongly agree for this
item. The lowest choice were recorded disagree and neither disagree nor agree because
had 1 year 2 respondent (1.0%).
(28.0%) year 4 respondent agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded agree
because had 1 year 1 respondents (1.0%).
The highest data for item number 9, 32 (32.0%) year 4 respondent strongly agree
for this item. The lowest choice was recorded disagree because had 1 year 2 respondents
(1.0%).
The lowest choice were recorded neither disagree nor agree and strongly agree because
had 1 year 1 respondents (1.0%).
The lowest choice were recorded disagree because had 1 year 1 respondent (1.0%)
The higher data for item 12 was, 20 (20.0%) year 4 and year 3 respondent
strongly agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded disagree because had 1
year 1 and year 2 respondent (1.0%)
10
The lowest choice were recorded neither disagree nor agree and agree because had 1
year 1 respondent (1.0%)
Next the highest data of item 14, 26 (26.0%) year 4 respondent agree for this
item. The lowest choice were recorded strongly agree because had 1 year 1 respondent
(1.0%)
Table above show the highest data for item 15, 20 (20.0%) year 4 respondent
agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded disagree because had 1 year 3
respondent (1.0%)
The highest data of item 16, 21 (21.0%) year 4 respondent strongly agree
for this item. The lowest choice were recorded strongly disagree because had 1 year 2
respondent (1.0%)
The highest data of item 17, 26 (26.0%) year 4 respondent strongly agree for this
item. The lowest choice were recorded agree because had 1 year 1 respondent (1.0%)
According to table above, the highest data for item number 18 was 21 (21.0%)
year 4 respondent agree and strongly agree for this item. The lowest choice were
recorded neither disagree nor agree because had 2 year 3 respondent (1.0%)
25 (21.0%) year 4 respondent agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded
neither disagree nor agree because had 1 year 1, year 2 and year 3 respondent (1.0%)
4.4.7 The relationship between frequency of travel in a year and travel

risk perception
No. Item Categories 1 to 2 3 to 4 5 to 6 7 time and
times times times above
f % f % f % f %
10
1. hygiene disagree
10
by Neither 6 6.0 3 3.0 1 1.0 1 1.0
in the nor agree
accommodation Agree 18 18.0 17 17. 3 3.0 2 2.0
that I will 0
choose Strongly 19 19.0 14 14. 5 5.0 2 2.0
agree 0
pandemic Agree 19 19.0 14 14. 3 3.0 3 3.0

0
Strongly 22 22.0 19 19. 6 6.0 2 2.0
agree 0
taking safety
precautions Disagree 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
against the Neither 3 3.0 4 4.0 0 0.0 5 5.0
pandemic disagree
nor agree
Agree 18 18.0 19 19. 2 2.0 1 1.0
0
Strongly 21 21.0 14 14. 7 7.0 0 0.0
agree 0
10
by the Neither 4 4.0 3 3.0 1 1.0 0 0.0
preferences Agree 21 21.0 16 16. 2 2.0 3 3.0
0
Strongly 18 18.0 18 18. 6 6.0 3 3.0
agree 0
safety Neither 7 7.0 7 7.0 0 0.0 1 1.0
pandemic in Agree 18 18.0 12 12. 3 3.0 2 2.0
my travels. 0
Strongly 14 14.0 17 17. 6 6.0 2 2.0
agree 0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 19 19.0 17 17. 2 2.0 5 5.0
0
Strongly 21 21.0 16 16. 6 6.0 1 1.0
agree 0
hygiene Neither 4 4.0 7 7.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
travels. nor agree
10
Agree 20 20.0 11 11. 3 3.0 2 2.0
0
Strongly 17 17.0 18 18. 5 5.0 4 4.0
agree 0
travels. Neither 5 5.0 7 7.0 1 1.0 1 1.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 21 21.0 11 11. 2 2.0 4 4.0
0
Strongly 17 17.0 18 18. 6 6.0 1 1.0
agree 0
Neither 4 4.0 5 5.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 18 18.0 16 16. 1 1.0 1 1.0
0
Strongly 19 19.0 17 17. 8 8.0 5 5.0
agree 0
I will Strongly 0 0.0 3 3.0 1 1.0 0 0.0
entertainment Neither 15 15.0 10 1.0 0 0.0 1 1.0
Agree 16 16.0 14 14. 4 4.0 4 4.0
0
10
Strongly 4 4.0 9 9.0 5 5.0 1 1.0
agree
tourism Disagree 4 4.0 6 6.0 0 0.0 0 0.
activities for Neither 12 12.0 6 6.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
term. Agree 17 17.0 13 13. 2 2.0 3 3.0

0
Strongly 10 10.0 15 15. 7 7.0 3 3.0
agree 0
12. I will take Strongly 1 1.0 2 2.0 1 1.0 0 0.0
Neither 11 11. 5 5.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 20 20.0 16 16. 5 5.0 3 3.0
0
Strongly 9 9.0 11 11. 4 4.0 3 3.0
agree 0
next year. disagree

nor agree
Agree 19 19.0 17 17. 2 2.0 4 4.0
0
Strongly 18 18.0 11 11. 6 6.0 1 1.0
agree 0
11
Neither 8 8.0 7 7.0 1 1.0 0 0.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 16 16.0 9 9.0 1 1.0 3 3.0
Strongly 12 12.0 19 19. 7 7.0 3 3.0
agree 0
hotels only. Disagree 7 7.0 10 10. 1 0.0 0 0.0
0
Neither 12 12.0 5 5.0 2 2.0 0 0.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 18 18.0 13 13. 3 3.0 4 4.0
0
Strongly 5 5.0 12 12. 4 4.0 2 2.0
agree 0
restaurants Disagree 11 11.0 7 7.0 1 1.0 0 0.0
only. Neither 9 19.0 7 7.0 2 2.0 0 0.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 15 15.0 12 12. 0 0.0 3 3.0
0
Strongly 7 7.0 14 14. 7 7.0 3 3.0
agree 0
caused Disagree 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
11
level. nor agree
Agree 21 21.0 16 16. 3 3.0 2 2.0
0
Strongly 17 17.0 16 16. 6 6.0 3 3.0
agree 0
due to COVID- Neither 5 5.0 9 9.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
19. disagree
nor agree
Agree 16 16.0 15 15. 1 1.0 5 5.0
0
Strongly 20 20.0 13 13. 8 8.0 1 1.0
agree 0
Agree 24 24.0 20 20. 2 2.0 1 1.0
0
Strongly 12 12.0 10 10. 7 7.0 4 4.0
agree 0
N=100
Table 12: Relationship between frequency of travel in year and travel risk
perception
11
Based on the table above, the highest data of first item 19 (19.0%) respondent
that travel 1 to 2 times strongly agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded
strongly disagree that chosen by 1 respondents (1.0%) that travel 5 to 6 times in a year.
The higher data for second item was 22 (22.0%) respondent that travel 1 to 2
times strongly agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded strongly disagree
that chosen by 1 respondents (1.0%) that travel 5 to 6 times in a year.
The highest data of third item 21 (21.0%) respondent that travel 1 to 2 times
strongly agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded strongly disagree that
chosen by 1 respondents (1.0%) that travel 5 to 6 times in a year.
The highest data of item 4, 21 (21.0%) respondent that travel 1 to 2 times agree
for this item. The lowest choice were recorded strongly disagree that chosen by 1
respondents (1.0%) that travel 3 to 4 times in a year.
respondents (1.0%) that travel 5 to 6 times in a year
The highest data of item 6, 21 (21.0%) respondent that travel 1 to 2 times
(21.0%) respondent that travel 1 to 2 times agree for this item. The lowest choice were
recorded strongly disagree and neither disagree nor agree that chosen by 1 respondents
(1.0%) that travel 5 to 6 times in a year.
11
The highest data for item number 9, 19 (19.0%) respondent that travel 1 to 2
times strongly agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded strongly disagree
and agree that chosen by 1 respondents (1.0%) that travel 5 to 6 times in a year.
for this item. While the lowest choice were recorded strongly disagree that chosen by 1
The highest data of item 11, 17 (17.0%) respondent that travel 1 to 2
times agree for this item. While the lowest choice were recorded strongly disagree that
The higher data for item 12 was, 20 (20.0%) respondent that travel 1 to 2 times
agree for this item. While the lowest choice were recorded strongly disagree that chosen
by 1 respondents (1.0%) that travel 1 to 2 times and 5 to 6 times in a year.
for this item. While the lowest choice were recorded strongly disagree and neither
disagree nor agree that chosen by 1 respondents (1.0%) that travel 5 to 6 times in a year.
Next the highest data of item 14, 19 (19.0%) respondent that travel 3 to 4 times
strongly agree for this item. While the lowest choice were recorded disagree, neither
disagree nor agree and agree that chosen by 1 respondents (1.0%) that travel 5 to 6
times
in a year.
Table above show the highest data for item 15, 18 (18.0%) respondent that travel
1 to 2 times agree for this item. While the lowest choice were recorded strongly
disagree that chosen by 1 respondents (1.0%) that travel 1 to 2 times and 3 to 4 times in
a year.
The highest data of item 16, 15 (15.0%) respondent that travel 1 to 2
times agree for this item. While the lowest choice were recorded strongly disagree that
11
chosen by 1 respondents (1.0%) that travel 1 to 2 times and 3 to 4 times in a year.
11
for this item. While the lowest choice were recorded strongly disagree that chosen by 1
According table above, the highest data for item number 18 was 20 (20.0%)
respondent that travel 1 to 2 times strongly agree for this item. While the lowest choice
were recorded strongly disagree that chosen by 1 respondents (1.0%) that travel 5 to 6
times in a year.
24 (24.0%) respondent that travel 1 to 2 times agree for this item. While the lowest
choice were recorded strongly disagree that chosen by 1 respondents (1.0%) that travel
5 to 6 times in a year.
4.4.8 The relationship between financial support and travel risk perception
No. Item Categories Family Part time PTPTN Scholarship
support work
f % f % f % f %
1. hygiene disagree
by Neither 3 3.0 1 1.0 7 7.0 0 0.0
in the nor agree
accommodation Agree 8 8.0 3 3.0 25 25. 4 4.0
that I will 0
choose Strongly 9 9.0 6 6.0 20 20. 5 5.0

agree 0
11
pandemic Agree 8 8.0 4 4.0 25 25. 2 2.0
0
Strongly 10 10.0 6 6.0 25 25. 8 8.0
agree 0
taking safety Disagree 1 1.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
precautions Neither 6 6.0 1 1.0 3 3.0 2 2.0
pandemic nor agree

Agree 7 7.0 6 6.0 24 24. 3 3.0
0
Strongly 6 6.0 4 4.0 26 26. 6 6.0
agree 0
by the Neither 3 3.0 3 3.0 2 2.0 0 0.0
preferences Agree 6 6.0 4 4.0 28 28. 4 4.0

0
Strongly 11 11.0 4 4.0 23 23. 7 7.0
agree 0
safety Neither 3 3.0 2 2.0 8 8.0 2 2.0
11
pandemic in Agree 9 9.0 4 4.0 20 20. 2 2.0
my travels. 0
Strongly 5 5.0 5 5.0 22 22. 7 7.0
agree 0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 8 8.0 4 4.0 26 26. 5 5.0
0
Strongly 10 10.0 4 4.0 24 24. 6 6.0
agree 0
hygiene Neither 3 3.0 0 0.0 8 8.0 0 0.0
travels. nor agree

Agree 7 7.0 5 5.0 20 20. 4 4.0
0
Strongly 10 10.0 4 4.0 23 23. 7 7.0
agree 0
travels. Neither 5 5.0 1 1.0 6 6.0 2 2.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 7 7.0 4 4.0 23 23. 4 4.0
0
11
Strongly 8 8.0 6 6.0 24 24. 4 4.0
agree 0
my travels. Disagree 2 2.0 0 0. 1 1.0 0 0.0
Neither 4 4.0 0 0.0 4 4.0 1 1.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 5 5.0 5 5.0 22 22. 4 4.0
0
Strongly 9 9.0 6 6.0 27 27. 7 7.0
agree 0
I will Strongly 2 2.0 0 0.0 1 1.0 1 1.0
entertainment Neither 7 7.0 2 2.0 15 15. 2 2.0
purposes for disagree 0

Agree 8 8.0 8 8.0 19 19. 3 3.0
0
Strongly 3 3.0 1 1.0 11 11. 4 4.0
agree 0
activities for Neither 5 5.0 1 1.0 12 12. 0 0.0
the next year disagree 0
term. Agree 7 7.0 4 4.0 19 19. 5 5.0

0
Strongly 6 6.0 6 6.0 17 17. 6 6.0
agree 0
11
12. I will take part Strongly 2 2.0 0 0.0 1 1.0 1 1.0
in package disagree
tours less Disagree 1 1..0 0 0.0 7 7.0 1 1.0
Neither 4 4.0 0 0.0 11 11. 1 1.0
disagree 0
nor agree
Agree 7 7.0 8 5.0 24 24. 5 5.0
0
Strongly 8 8.0 3 3.0 12 12. 4 4.0
agree 0
next year. disagree

nor agree
Agree 6 6.0 5 5.0 26 26. 5 5.0
0
Strongly 8 8.0 4 4.0 20 20. 4 4.0
agree 0
Neither 3 3.0 3 3.0 9 9.0 1 1.0
disagree
nor agree
Agree 8 8.0 4 4.0 15 15. 2 2.0
0
Strongly 7 7.0 4 4.0 22 22. 8 8.0
agree 0
15. Strongly 1 1.0 0 0.0 1 1.0 0 0.0
disagree
12
I will prefer Disagree 3 3.0 0 0.0 14 14. 1 1.0
high-quality 0
hotels only. Neither 4 4.0 3 3.0 11 11. 1 1.0
disagree 0
nor agree
Agree 11 11.0 3 3.0 18 18. 6 6.0
0
Strongly 3 3.0 5 5.0 11 11. 4 4.0
agree 0
restaurants Disagree 3 3.0 0 0.0 15 15. 1 1.0
only. 0
Neither 4 4.0 1 1.0 11 11. 2 2.0
disagree 0
nor agree
Agree 6 6.0 5 6.0 15 15. 3 3.0
0
Strongly 7 7.0 4 4.0 14 14. 6 6.0
agree 0
caused Disagree 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
level. nor agree

Agree 6 6.0 5 5.0 25 25. 5 5.0
0
Strongly 10 10.0 5 5.0 21 21. 6 6.0
agree 0
12
due to COVID- Neither 3 3.0 0 0.0 11 11. 0 0.0
19. disagree 0
nor agree
Agree 8 8.0 5 5.0 19 19. 5 5.0
0
Strongly 8 9.0 6 6.0 22 22. 6 6.0
agree 0
Agree 9 9.0 5 5.0 29 29. 4 4.0
0
Strongly 8 8.0 3 3.0 16 16. 6 6.0
agree 0
N=100
Table 13: Relationship between financial support and travel risk perception
Based on the table above, the highest data of first item 25 (25.0%) respondent that got
PTPTN agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded strongly disagree that
chosen by 1 respondents (1.0%) that got scholarship and do part time work.
The higher data for second item was 25 (25.0%) respondent that got PTPTN
agree and strongly agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded strongly
disagree and disagree that chosen by 1 respondents (1.0%) that also got PTPTN.
The highest data of third item, 26 (26.0%) respondent that got PTPTN agree for
this item. The lowest choice were recorded strongly disagree that chosen by 1
respondents (1.0%) that got scholarship.
12
The highest data of item 4, 28 (28.0%) respondent that got PTPTN agree for this
item. The lowest choice were recorded disagree that chosen by 1 respondents (1.0%)
that got scholarship.
item. The lowest choice were recorded disagree that chosen by 1 respondents (1.0%)
that got scholarship.
item. The lowest choice were recorded strongly disagree that chosen by 1 respondents
(1.0%) that got scholarship.
The highest data of item 7, 23 (23.0%) respondent that got PTPTN strongly
agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded strongly disagree and disagree that
chosen by 1 respondents (1.0%) that do part time work.
(24.0%) respondent that got PTPTN agree for this item. The lowest choice were
recorded strongly disagree and disagree that chosen by 1 respondents (1.0%) that got
scholarship.
The highest data for item number 9, 27 (27.0%) respondent that got PTPTN
agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded strongly disagree and disagree that
chosen by 1 respondents (1.0%) that also got PTPTN.
The highest data of item 10, 19 (19.0%) respondent that got PTPTN agree for
respondents (1.0%) that got scholarship and got PTPTN.
The highest data of item 11, 19 (19.0%) respondent that got PTPTN
agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded disagree that chosen by 1
.
12
The higher data for item 12 was, 24 (24.0%) respondent that got PTPTN agree
The highest data of item 13, 26 (26.0%) respondent that got PTPTN strongly
agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded strongly disagree that chosen by 1
Next the highest data of item 14, 22 (22.0%) respondent that got PTPTN
chosen by 1 respondents (1.0%) that had a family support.
Table above show the highest data for item 15, 28 (84.0%) respondent that got
PTPTN agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded strongly disagree that
chosen by 1 respondents (1.0%) that had a family support and got PTPTN.
The highest data of item 16, 24 (24.0%) respondent that got PTPTN
agree for this item. The lowest choice were recorded disagree that chosen by 1
The highest data of item 17, 25 (25.0%) respondent that got PTPTN agree for
According table above, the highest data for item number 18 was 22 (22.0%)
respondent that got PTPTN strongly agree for this item. The lowest choice were
recorded strongly disagree that chosen by 1 respondents (1.0%) that got scholarship and
got PTPTN.
29 (29.0%) respondent that got PTPTN agree for this item. The lowest choice were
recorded strongly disagree that chosen by 1 respondents (1.0%) that got scholarship.
12
CHAPTER 5
5.0 INTRODUCTION
In this chapter, researcher will make a conclusion to the all findings from the
data analysis in previous chapter which is chapter 4. All of important thing will be
discuss in this chapter such as research objective based on the result and also about the
relationship between dependent variable and independent variable. 100 respondents was
joined to answered survey questionnaire in this research study. Besides that, the
implication has been drawn based on the result in the previous chapter to make an
improvement for the future studies. All the limitation and problem that faced in this
study will be given solution for the future studies. The limitation and suggestion also
discussed at the end of this chapter.
5.1 DISCUSSION OF KEY FINDING

The first Research Objective (RO) for this research study is to measure Post
Covid-19 travel risk perception among UUM students. Risk perception have a many
type such as health risk and safety risk. In this study, researcher focus on travel risk
perception among UUM students as dependent variable to carry on the research. All of
the 19 measurement item in this RO was answered by 100 respondents that consist of
UUM students. UUM students one of youth tourism market because range of age
between of 18 to 25 for undergraduate students and over than that was post graduate
students. This dependent variable was analysed used the mean, standard deviation,
frequency and also percentage.
Based on the table 2 in the previous chapter, finding of the data showed that the
lower mean was 3.55 and the highest mean was 4.25. This data showed that mostly
respondents chosen the answer between neither disagree nor agree, agree and strongly
agree. It mean mostly respondent agreed with all item or statement that used by
researcher in the questionnaire. Mostly respondents have a high risk perception on the
12
travel due to
12
the pandemic Covid-19. Based on the table 2 also the standard deviation finding was
showed the number between of 0.913 to 1.161.
According to (Aydin et al, 2021) participants that joined to answer the survey
more concern on the hygiene and safety. It also same with this study, mostly
respondents agree and strongly agree the item that mentioned about hygiene and safety.
For example, “I consider the hygiene measure taken by establishment in the
accommodation that I will choose”. 40.0% respondents was agree and strongly agree for
this item measure in the survey for this research study. This study support the previous
study that conduct by Aydin et al year 2021.
Second RO is to measure relationship between demographic and UUM students
travel risk perception. Demographic categories use in this study such as age, gender,
marital status, races, education level, years of study, frequency of travel in a year and
financial support. Demographic categories use as independent variable in this study.
Respondents that answered the survey consist of UUM students. Their demographic
profile was analysed by researcher in the previous chapter.
The finding of this research study, show the relationship between independent
variable and dependent variable which is demographic profile and travel risk perception
among UUM students. All of 8 categories in the demographic profile was analysed by
researcher to know the relationship with post Covid-19 travel risk perception among
UUM students.
Based on the finding result, researcher found the significant relationship
between the demographic profile and the post Covid-19 travel risk perception. The
higher choice for age was strongly agree for the “I will consider hygiene measure taken
by the destination in my vacation preferences”. For the gender also have a higher
strongly agree
12
for the item in the questionnaire which is “I prefer accommodations establishment that
take safety precaution against the pandemic. Next, demographic profile for marital
status also high chosen on strongly agree for “I will consider hygiene measure taken by
the destination in my vacation preferences”. Following the result, also the highest
choice of respondent according to races was strongly agree on “I will consider hygiene
measure taken by the destination in my vacation preferences”. Education level also have
a strongly agree choice by respondents for the item “I will consider hygiene measure
taken by the destination in my vacation preferences”. Next demographic profile which is
year of study also same as other categories of demographic that chosen strongly agree
for “I think that travelling has become unsafe due to Covid-19”. Second last
demographic profile is frequency of travel in a year also have higher choice for strongly
agree on the item “I will prefer destination taking safety precautions against the
pandemic”. The last one is financial support that also have higher respondents that
chosen strongly agree on “I will consider hygiene measure taken by the destination in
my vacation preferences”.
Researcher can conclude that all of demographic have a significant relationship
between of demographic profile and post Covid-19 travel risk perception. This study
also support the previous study that also have significant demographic profile such as
age, travel frequency and gender (Neuburger & Egger, 2020). This study found a
significant on demographic profile such as age, gender, marital status, races, education
level, year of study, frequency of travel in a year and financial support.
12
5.2 RESEARCH IMPLICATION
Based on the finding of this study, this data can be use by the accommodation
operator and tourism destination operator. This is because, it related to the post Covid-
19 travel that include youth market in tourism. Based on the result and finding, the
significant data on item “I will consider the hygiene measure taken by the destination in
my vacation preferences”. This item have a significant relationship with demographic
categories which is age, marital status, education level and financial support. So the
operator need to make sure their hygiene be a priority to accepting the customers, guest
or tourist. So operator of accommodation or destination attraction operator need to make
their operation always good, their facilities always clean and the staff more priority to
the hygiene. It became more important due the pandemic Covid-19.
Besides that, this research study also use to Ministry of Tourism, Agriculture
and Culture (MOTAC). MOTAC can review the level of risk perception of tourists
especially for the youth group after the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic. Travel risk
perception data among youth or students is important as a benchmark for the
development of the tourism industry after the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic. This
is because the youth tourist market in the tourism industry is very important because it
also contributes to the development and economic progress of the industry. If this level
of perception is negative, it will certainly worsen the development of the tourism
industry. When cases of Covid- 19 increased, the tourism industry was among the
industries that were badly affected because tourism activities could not continue to
prevent the spread of Covid-19. So after the re-opening of the industry, data from the
findings of the study becomes important for MOTAC or the authorities to know the
level of risk perception of tourists especially for the youth during the Covid-19
pandemic.
12
This study is also important for future researchers. This is because future
researchers need this study as reference material in carrying out new studies. This study
can add to the existing literature review from other studies. Future researchers can also
see the weaknesses in this study to be improved in the studies they will do in the future.
In addition, future researchers can also use the measure item in this study as an item for
them to make a questionnaire that will be used when making a survey to the
respondents. Future researchers can also compare the data from the findings of this
study when analysing the study.
5.3 RESEARCH LIMITATION

Based on the process of research study, researcher was faced a few of limitation
to finish this research study. Firstly, researcher take a long time to collect data. This is
because, the scope for this study was University Utara Malaysia (UUM) students who
have been travel previously. It hard to found because some of students not travel during
their leisure time or semester break. Besides that, the period of data collection was
conduct after mid-semester break and that time most students were busy with their
assignment also mid semester examination. So mostly students only focus on their
assignment and have a lack of time to answer the questionnaire. Because of this
problem, researcher was take a long time reach to 3 weeks to complete of data
collection.
A part from that, limitation that faced by researcher was related to the
questionnaire that distributed to the respondents. Some of questionnaire confused the
respondents. Now days, Covid-19 cases was decreased so people or tourist perception
toward travel was different. According to (Aydin et al, 2021), this item measure study
was ask “I will wear mask during traveling”. Based on this item measure, respondent
feel like confused because they think Covid-19 was free and finish. Besides that, item
measure that mentioned about “prefer quality hotel”. Respondents also confused of this
13
statement
13
because they think this item measure mentioned about price and the service not about
the safety or hygiene that related to pandemic Covid-19 viruses.
Besides that, the questionnaire also limited because researcher only refer from one
previous study to create the questionnaire. In the others previous study (Zhang et al,
2022) the item measure was mentioned about “I’m worried about getting sick during my
travel”. This item measure very related with this research topic but researcher have
limited item because refer to article from (Aydin, 2021) to make sure the data collection
and result will not cross each other. Also according to (Zhang et al, 2022), their item
measure in the study also stated “worried the accommodation facilities will not be
sanitary”. This item measure also with this study because mostly due to Covid-19
pandemic all of facilities at everywhere will be sanitized to avoid spreading of Covid-19
viruses.
5.4 FUTURE STUDY

Based on this research study, researcher want to suggest a few of improvement that can
take action by the future researcher. Firstly, researcher want to suggest to future the
researcher would like to give suggestions to future researchers to enlarge the scope of
the study before conducting the study. In this study, the researcher only focused the
scope of the study on the young people who are university students. Future researchers
can focus on a larger scope such as young people throughout Malaysia. Future
researchers can also focus on university students but it is necessary to involve students
from all universities in Malaysia. This will make the data collected for the study more
perfect. For example, future researchers can focus the scope on university students who
are in the northern zone of Malaysia.
A larger scope will make the future researcher to get the right respondents. In this study,
the researcher distributed the questionnaire to a random sample. However, the right
13
respondents are required to answer the questionnaire so that the findings from the
survey
13
are accurate and valid. If a larger scope is used, the researcher will be able to find the
right and appropriate respondents to answer the questions asked. Indirectly, it will also
produce more accurate and easy to analyze data.
A larger context will make it easier for future researchers to obtain more accurate data
in carrying out the study. This is because, a little data may make the findings from the
survey made may produce invalid results. Future researchers will also find it easy to
analyze the data if they use a larger context or research scope. The data obtained may
also be relevant to the topic chosen for future researchers to conduct research in the
future.
The use of language is also very important to collect data. Easy-to-understand language
will make it easy for respondents to answer the given survey and not feel burdened. In
this study, the researcher only used one language which is English. Although English is
understood by everyone but if dual languages are used it will facilitate the data
collection process. For example, using Malay and English in the questionnaire
distributed to respondents. Respondents will understand more deeply about each
sentence in the questionnaire distributed by the researcher.
So researcher hope all the suggestions given are expected to facilitate the future
researcher's process to carry out the study. If the data collected is sufficient, it will
certainly make the research findings more perfect and significant.
13
REFERENCE
Abhari, S., Jalali, A., Jaafar, M., & Tajaddini, R. (2020). The impact of Covid-19
pandemic on small businesses in tourism and hospitality industry in Malaysia |
Emerald Insight. Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship, 24(1),
75–91. https://doi.org/10.1108\/JRME
Agyeiwaah, E., Adam, I., Dayour, F., & Baiden, F. B. (2021). Perceived impacts of
COVID- 19 on risk perceptions, emotions, and travel intentions: evidence
from Macau higher educational institutions. Tourism Recreation Research.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02508281.2021.1872263
Angguni, & Lenggogeni, S. (2021). The Impact Of Travel Risk Perception In Covid 19
And Travel Anxiety Toward Travel Intention On Domestic Tourist In
Indonesia. Jurnal Ilmiah MEA (Manajemen, Ekonomi, & Akuntansi), 5(2), 241–
259. https://doi.org/10.31955/mea.vol5.iss2.pp241-259
Asmus, E. P., & Radocy, R. E. (2017). Quantitative Analysis. Critical Essays in Music
Education, 129–172. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315095257-9
Bhatia, S. (2019). Predicting Risk Perception: New Insights from Data Science.
Management Science, 65(8), 3800–3823.
https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2018.3121
Camilleri, M. A. (2017). The Tourism Industry: An Overview.
Cheng, Y. (2021). The effects of community safety support on COVID-19 event strength
perception, risk perception, and health tourism intention: The moderating role
of risk communication.
Chua, B. L. (2020). Impact of health risk perception on avoidance of international

travel in the wake of a pandemic.
Ciotti, M. (2020). The COVID-19 pandemic.
Cui, F. (2016). An overview of tourism risk perception.
13
Deng, R., & W. Ritchie, B. (2019). International university students’ travel risk
perceptions: an exploratory study. Current Issues in Tourism.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13683500.2016.1142939
Ding, Y., Du, X., Li, Q., Zhang, M., Zhang, Q., Tan, X., & Liu, Q. (2020). Risk
perception of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and its related factors
among college students in China during quarantine. PLOS ONE, 15(8),
e0237626. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0237626
Emami, Ranjbarian, (2019). The Perceived Risk of Iran as a Tourism Destination (A

Mixed Method Approach). Iranian Journal of Management Studies, 12(1), 45-67.
doi:10.22059/ijms.2018.245946.672909
Godovykh, M., Pizam, A., & Bahja, F. (2020). Antecedents and outcomes of health risk
perceptions in tourism, following the COVID-19 pandemic | Emerald Insight.
Tourism Review, 76(4), 737–748. https://doi.org/10.1108\/TR
Goertzen, M. J. (2017). Chapter 3. Introduction to Quantitative Research and

Data. Library Technology Reports, 53(4), 12–18.
https://journals.ala.org/index.php/ltr/article/view/6325/8274
Hyman, M. R., & Sierra, J. J. (2016, February). Open- versus close-ended survey
questions. ResearchGate; unknown.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282249876_Open-_versus_close-
ended_survey_questions
Hasan, M. K. (2017). Tourist risk perceptions and revisit intention: A critical review of
literature.
Hotle, S., Murray-Tuite, P., & Singh, K. (2020). Influenza risk perception and travel-
related health protection behavior in the US: Insights for the aftermath of the
COVID-19 outbreak. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 5,
100127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2020.100127
Islam, M. R. (2018, February 27). Sample size and its role in Central Limit Theorem
(CLT). ResearchGate; unknown.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/325574161_Sample_size_and_its_role_
in_Central_Limit_Theorem_CLT#pf4
13
Jarvinen, M., & Mik-Meyer, N. (2013). Qualitative Analysis. Google Books.
https://books.google.com.my/books?hl=en&lr=&id=DcjLDwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&
pg=PP1&dq=what+is+qualitative+analysis&ots=YalMwiVAsU&sig=NZnj56QO
3055iJKYmmC3ZQvP_Oo&redir_esc=y%20-
%20v=onepage&q=what%20is%20qualitative%20analysis&f=false#v=onepage&
q&f=false
Joshi, A., Kale, S., Satish Chandel, & Dinesh Kumar Pal. (2015, January 10). Likert
Scale: Explored and Explained. ResearchGate; unknown.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/276394797_Likert_Scale_Explored_an
d_Explained
Juhari, N. A. (2021, October 10). 32,000 pelajar UUM mulakan sesi pengajian hari ini.
Utusan Digital. https://www.utusan.com.my/terkini/2021/10/32000-pelajar-uum-
mulakan-sesi-pengajian-hari-ini/
Karim, W. (2020). The Movement Control Order (MCO) for COVID-19 Crisis and its
Impact on Tourism and Hospitality Sector in Malaysia.
Karl, M. (2017). Understanding the role of risk (perception) in destination choice: A

literature review and synthesis.
Khotari C. R. (2004). Research Methodology.

http://14.99.188.242:8080/jspui/bitstream/123456789/12457/1/Research%20Met
hodology%20-%20Methods%20and%20Techniques%202004.pdf
Library, G. S. U. (2022). GSU Library Research Guides: SPSS: Crosstabs

(Contingency Table). Gsu.edu. https://research.library.gsu.edu/c.php?
g=844869&p=7657834%20-
%20:~:text=Workshops%20Materials-
,Cross%20Tabulation,relationship%20between%20the%20included%20variables
Majid, U. (2018, January 10). Research Fundamentals: Study Design, Population, and
Sample Size. ResearchGate; unknown.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/322375665_Research_Fundamentals_St
udy_Design_Population_and_Sample_Size
13
Marshall, T. M. (2020). Risk perception and safety culture: Tools for improving the
implementation of disaster risk reduction strategies. International Journal of
Disaster Risk Reduction, 47, 101557.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101557
Mcdonald, S. M. (2012). Analysis, Perception: A
Concept.
Mohamed, B., Shida Irwana Omar, & Lau Pei Mey. (2010, December). Malaysian
Youth Tourism Market: A Lucrative But Overlooked Tourist Segment.
ResearchGate; unknown.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/303311273_Malaysian_Youth_Tourism
_Market_A_Lucrative_But_Overlooked_Tourist_Segment
Neuburger, L., & Egger, R. (2020). Travel risk perception and travel behaviour during
the COVID-19 pandemic 2020: a case study of the DACH region. Current
Issues in Tourism.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13683500.2020.1803807
Orozco-Fontalvo, M., Soto, J., Arévalo, A., & Oviedo-Trespalacios, O. (2019).

Women’s perceived risk of sexual harassment in a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)
system: The case of Barranquilla, Colombia. Journal of Transport &
Health, 14, 100598. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2019.100598
Qiong, O. (2017). A Brief Introduction to Perception.
Qureshi, M. I., Khan, S. U., Rana, I. A., Ali, B., & Rahman, A. ur. (2021). Determinants
of people’s seismic risk perception: A case study of Malakand, Pakistan.
International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 55, 102078.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2021.102078
Rawat, A. S. (2021). What is Descriptive Analysis?- Types and Advantages | Analytics

Steps. AnalyticsSteps. https://www.analyticssteps.com/blogs/overview-
descriptive-analysis
13
She, S., Tian, Y., Lu, L., Eimontaite, I., Xie, T., & Sun, Y. (2019). An Exploration of
Hiking Risk Perception: Dimensions and Antecedent Factors. International
Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(11), 1986.
Siegrist, M., & Árvai, J. (2020). Risk Perception: Reflections on 40 Years of Research.
Risk Analysis, 40(S1), 2191–2206. https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.13599
Sileyew, K. J. (2013). Research Design and Methodology. Google Books.

https://books.google.com.my/books?hl=en&lr=&id=eqf8DwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&
pg=PA27&dq=quantitative+data+collection+procedures&ots=cKR28XfdR6&sig
=PxQh_xbNkZo6cIciX6B69I1zfjE&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=quantitative%20 data
%20collection%20procedures&f=false
TechTarget Contributor. (2020). statistical analysis. WhatIs.com; TechTarget.
https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/definition/statistical-
analysis#:~:text=Statistical%20analysis%20is%20the%20collection,or%20design
ing%20surveys%20and%20studies.
Visschers, V. H. (2018). Differences in Risk Perception Between Hazards and Between
Individuals.
Wantono, A., & McKercher, B. (2020). Backpacking and risk perception: the case of
solo Asian women. Tourism Recreation Research.
Wilson, M. E. (2020). Re-starting travel in the era of COVID-19: preparing anew.
Wolff, K., Larsen, S., & Øgaard, T. (2019). How to define and measure risk
perceptions. Annals of Tourism Research, 79,
102759.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2019.102759
Xie, L. (2018). The motivation, constraint, behavior relationship: A holistic approach

for understanding international student leisure travelers.
Yusoff, N.M., Wee, H. & Shamsol, N.I. (2017). Youth travel determinants and
destination choice: Mediation effects of safety and security. Journal of Tourism,
Hospitality & Culinary Arts, 9(2), 135-142.
Zhan, L. (2020). A risk perception scale for travel to a crisis epicentre: visiting Wuhan
13
after COVID-19.
14
Zhu, H., & Deng, F. (2020). How to Influence Rural Tourism Intention by Risk
Knowledge during COVID-19 Containment in China: Mediating Role of Risk
Perception and Attitude. International Journal of Environmental Research and
Public Health, 17(10), 3514.
14
APPENDIX
i. QUESTIONNAIRE
UNIVERSITI UTARA MALAYSIA
Assalamualaikum and Good Day. I am currently conducting the research study “Post
Covid-19 travel risk perception among UUM Student”. I do hope you could contribute
to this study and do appreciate your time going through the question provide. This
research is carried out as partial fulfilment of the requirements of Bachelor Degree at
University Utara Malaysia (UUM). I would therefore value your kind support and
valuable time in answering the questionnaire. All your answer will be kept strictly
confidential. Thank you for your time and compassionate support.
Have a nice day ahead
Thank You
Zulhafizi Bin Dzulkifli
zul99hafizi@gmail.com
SECTION A: DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE
1. Age
 18-20
 21-23
 24-26
 27-29
 30-32
 33-40
14
2. Gender
□ Male
□ Female
3. Marital status
□ Single
□ Married
4. Races
□ Malay
□ Chinese
□ Indian
□ Others (please specify : )
5. Education level
□ Undergraduate
□ Postgraduate
6. Year of study
□ Year 1
□ Year 2
□ Year 3
□ Year 4
□ Other (please specify: )
7. Frequency of travel in a year
□ 1 to 2 times
□ 3 to 4 times
□ 5 to 6 times
□ 7 times or more
8. Financial support
□ PTPTN
□ Scholarship
□ Part time work
14
□ Family support
□ Others
SECTION B: POST COVID-19 TRAVEL RISK PERCEPTION
FROM THE SCALE OF 1 (STRONGLY DISAGREE) TO 5 (STRONGLY

AGREE), PLEASE INDICATE THE ANSWER THAT IS MOST
APPROPRIATE TO YOU.
1-Strongly disagree
2-Disagree
3-Neither disagree nor
agree 4-Agree
5-Strongly agree
1 2 3 4 5
1. I will consider the hygiene measures
taken by the establishment in my
accommodation establishment preferences.
2. I will prefer accommodation
establishments taking safety precautions
3. I will prefer destinations taking safety
precautions against the pandemic in my
travels.
4. I will consider the hygiene measures
taken by the destination in my vacation
preferences.
taking safety precautions against the
pandemic in my travels.
6. I will pay more attention to hygiene in my
travels.
14
taking hygiene measures in my travels.
8. I will carry sanitizer with me during my
travels.
9. I will use a mask during my travels.
10. I will completely avoid travel for
entertainment purposes for the next year.
11. I will think that travel and tourism
activities for the next year will be short-term.
12. I will take part in package tours less
13. I will not prefer crowded vacation
destinations for next year.
14. I will prefer to travel only with my
family.
15. I will prefer high-quality hotels only.
16. I will prefer high-quality restaurants only.
17. I think that COVID-19 has caused
18. I think that traveling has become unsafe
due to COVID-19.
19. COVID-19 has caused me to lower my
travel plans for the next year to a large
extent.
14

Research PP 270203 Zulhafizi Dzulkifli

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

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

Research PP 270203 Zulhafizi Dzulkifli

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SCHOOL OF TOURISM, HOSPITALITY AND EVENT MANAGEMENT

COLLEGE OF LAW, GOVERNMENT AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

UNIVERSITI UTARA MALAYSIA

TOPIC RESEARCH: POST COVID-19 TRAVEL RISK PERCEPTION AMONG

GHZZ4076 TOURISM RESEARCH PROJECT PAPER (GROUP I)

FIRST SEMESTER SESSION 2022/2023 (A221)

ZULHAFIZI BIN DZULKIFLI

MADAM RASLINDA BT MOHD GHAZALI

SCHOOL OF TOURISM, HOSPITALITY AND EVENT MANAGEMENT

Second Semester 2021/2022 Session (A212)

GHZZ 4076 Tourism Research Project

RESEARCH TITLE: POST COVID-19 TRAVEL RISK PERCEPTION AMONG

STUDENT’S NAME: ZULHAFIZI BIN DZULKIFLI

MATRIC NUMBER: 270203

SUPERVISOR’S NAME: MADAM RASLINDA BT MOHD GHAZALI

This student’s progress is *satisfactory / unsatisfactory. The research report is *allowed

Supervisor’s signature and

also collected myself.

Zulhafizi bin Dzulkifli

patience to fulfil my responsibilities as a Tourism Management student and allowing me

during do this research.

Lastly, I also would like to show my gratitude to my fellow friends and

perception among UUM students due to post Covid-19.

Keyword: Risk perception, Travel risk perception, Covid-19 and students

4.4.1 The relationship between age and travel risk perception.....................................39

experience (Wantono & McKercher, 2020).

leisure amenities and the image at the destination (Xie, 2018).

of key aspect to achieve a successful of the destination. (Karl, 2017).

of good preparation before someone go to travel.

1.1 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM AND JUSTIFICATION

perception risk think by tourist before travel.

and hospitality industry. Malaysia is one of country that affected by Covid-19

industry (Karim, 2020).

travel at the destination.

focus on public and general community.

University around Malaysia (Deng & W. Ritchie, 2019).

be one of phenomenon among youth or university students. Youth market in tourism

suitable with UUM students

1.2 RESEARCH QUESTION

1.4 DEFINITION OF TERM

The definition of term by Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English for perception

they know in themselves (Mcdonald, 2012). In cognitive psychology risk perception is

such as demographic characteristics, psychological characteristics, values and

conclude is feeling or awareness that think by someone before do or make decision on

1.5 SCOPE AND LIMITATION OF THE STUDY

The student I focus is someone who have an experience in traveling to anywhere

to find respondent which is student for my study is around 80 to 100 of respondent.

traveling. So if the student want to answer my questionnaire. Besides of that, student

student that are suitable as a respondent to answer my questionnaire.

1.6 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY

more successful in the research study.

influence the decision making that will do by someone in anything purpose.

perception in tourism context can be consider as subjective consideration that made my

(Godovykh et al., 2020).

tourism destination is multi dimension. So because of that, risk perception also

2.0.1 TRAVEL RISK PERCEPTION

Many restriction do by government every country to reduce spread of viruses. This

viruses (Ding et al., 2020).

injury (Emami & Ranjbarian, 2019).

terrorist attack when travel (Emami & Ranjbarian, 2019).

disaster happen during tourist travel (Emami & Ranjbarian, 2019).

mostly happen in group of senior traveller (Zhu & Deng, 2020).

This student’s progress is satisfactory / unsatisfactory. The research report is allowed