Rui Pei, Danielle Cosme, Mary E. Andrews, Bradley D. Mattan, José Carreras‐Tartak, Emily B. Falk
Abstract Major challenges faced by humans often require large‐scale cooperation for communal benefits. We examined what motivates such cooperation in the context of social distancing and mask wearing to reduce the transmission intensity of the coronavirus pandemic (COVID‐19). We hypothesized that collectivism, a cultural variable characterizing the extent that individuals see themselves in relation to others, contributes to people's willingness to engage in these behaviors. Consistent with preregistered predictions, across three studies ( n = 2864), including a U.S. nationally representative sample, collectivist orientation was positively associated with intentions, positive beliefs, norm perceptions, and policy support for the preventive behaviors. Further, at a country level, more collectivist countries showed lower growth rates in both COVID‐19 confirmed cases and deaths. Together, these studies demonstrate the role of collectivism in reducing COVID‐19 transmission, and highlight the value of considering culture in public health policies and communications.
{"title":"Cultural influence on COVID‐19 cognitions and growth speed: The role of collectivism","authors":"Rui Pei, Danielle Cosme, Mary E. Andrews, Bradley D. Mattan, José Carreras‐Tartak, Emily B. Falk","doi":"10.1111/spc3.12908","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12908","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Major challenges faced by humans often require large‐scale cooperation for communal benefits. We examined what motivates such cooperation in the context of social distancing and mask wearing to reduce the transmission intensity of the coronavirus pandemic (COVID‐19). We hypothesized that collectivism, a cultural variable characterizing the extent that individuals see themselves in relation to others, contributes to people's willingness to engage in these behaviors. Consistent with preregistered predictions, across three studies ( n = 2864), including a U.S. nationally representative sample, collectivist orientation was positively associated with intentions, positive beliefs, norm perceptions, and policy support for the preventive behaviors. Further, at a country level, more collectivist countries showed lower growth rates in both COVID‐19 confirmed cases and deaths. Together, these studies demonstrate the role of collectivism in reducing COVID‐19 transmission, and highlight the value of considering culture in public health policies and communications.","PeriodicalId":53583,"journal":{"name":"Social and Personality Psychology Compass","volume":"59 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136097325","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Mijin Jeong, Jennifer Turner, Jody Greaney, Ashley Darling, Giselle Ferguson, Stacey Scott, Heejung Jang, Jacqueline Mogle
Abstract The policies related to COVID‐19 pandemic such as stay at home orders and social distancing increased daily stress and associated impairments in mental health. This study examines the association between COVID‐related stress and cognitive functioning by examining two different types of daily memory lapses, those related to prospective memory (i.e., memory for future plans) and retrospective memory (i.e., memory for past information) as well as the perceived emotional and functional consequences of daily memory problems. As part of a larger study, 58 adults (18 men; 22 ± 3 years) completed a web‐based version of the daily inventory of stressful events including stress related to COVID‐19 and positive/negative affect for eight consecutive days between 8 September 2020 and 11 November 2020. Findings showed that prospective lapses were positively correlated with COVID‐19 stressors ( r = 0.41, p = 0.002). At the within‐person level, daily COVID‐19 stressors were significantly associated with the number of prospective lapses ( b = 0.088, SE = 0.040). COVID‐19‐related stressors were not significantly related to retrospective lapses (all p s > 0.05). Our findings suggested that more daily COVID‐19 stressors were related to greater numbers of prospective lapses in daily life even among healthy younger adults. Thus, future research should address long term relations of COVID‐19 stress and cognitive functioning in addition to the specific cognitive impairments related to COVID‐19 infection.
{"title":"Memory lapses during a pandemic: Differential associations between COVID‐stress and daily memory lapses?","authors":"Mijin Jeong, Jennifer Turner, Jody Greaney, Ashley Darling, Giselle Ferguson, Stacey Scott, Heejung Jang, Jacqueline Mogle","doi":"10.1111/spc3.12906","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12906","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The policies related to COVID‐19 pandemic such as stay at home orders and social distancing increased daily stress and associated impairments in mental health. This study examines the association between COVID‐related stress and cognitive functioning by examining two different types of daily memory lapses, those related to prospective memory (i.e., memory for future plans) and retrospective memory (i.e., memory for past information) as well as the perceived emotional and functional consequences of daily memory problems. As part of a larger study, 58 adults (18 men; 22 ± 3 years) completed a web‐based version of the daily inventory of stressful events including stress related to COVID‐19 and positive/negative affect for eight consecutive days between 8 September 2020 and 11 November 2020. Findings showed that prospective lapses were positively correlated with COVID‐19 stressors ( r = 0.41, p = 0.002). At the within‐person level, daily COVID‐19 stressors were significantly associated with the number of prospective lapses ( b = 0.088, SE = 0.040). COVID‐19‐related stressors were not significantly related to retrospective lapses (all p s > 0.05). Our findings suggested that more daily COVID‐19 stressors were related to greater numbers of prospective lapses in daily life even among healthy younger adults. Thus, future research should address long term relations of COVID‐19 stress and cognitive functioning in addition to the specific cognitive impairments related to COVID‐19 infection.","PeriodicalId":53583,"journal":{"name":"Social and Personality Psychology Compass","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135093428","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Nikolette P. Lipsey, Jeni L. Burnette, Whitney Becker, Levi R. Baker, Jordyn McCrimmon, Joseph Billingsley
Abstract COVID‐19 poses a considerable threat to adolescent mental health. We investigated depression rates in teens from pre to post‐COVID. We also explored if leveraging a growth mindset intervention (“Healthy Minds”) could improve adolescent mental health outcomes during the pandemic, especially for adolescents experiencing the most distress. In Study 1, we recruited youth from schools in a rural southern community ( N = 239) and used a pre‐post design. In Study 2, we recruited an online sample ( N = 833) and used a longitudinal randomized control trial design to test the effectiveness of Healthy Minds. Across both studies, there is evidence of higher rates of depression in youth during COVID‐19, relative to pre‐pandemic numbers. In Study 1, the intervention effectively changed psychological and behavioral processes related to mental health, especially for adolescents experiencing greater COVID‐19 stress. However, in Study 2, the intervention failed to impact depression rates or symptoms at follow‐up.
{"title":"A growth mindset intervention to improve mental health in adolescents during COVID‐19","authors":"Nikolette P. Lipsey, Jeni L. Burnette, Whitney Becker, Levi R. Baker, Jordyn McCrimmon, Joseph Billingsley","doi":"10.1111/spc3.12894","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12894","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract COVID‐19 poses a considerable threat to adolescent mental health. We investigated depression rates in teens from pre to post‐COVID. We also explored if leveraging a growth mindset intervention (“Healthy Minds”) could improve adolescent mental health outcomes during the pandemic, especially for adolescents experiencing the most distress. In Study 1, we recruited youth from schools in a rural southern community ( N = 239) and used a pre‐post design. In Study 2, we recruited an online sample ( N = 833) and used a longitudinal randomized control trial design to test the effectiveness of Healthy Minds. Across both studies, there is evidence of higher rates of depression in youth during COVID‐19, relative to pre‐pandemic numbers. In Study 1, the intervention effectively changed psychological and behavioral processes related to mental health, especially for adolescents experiencing greater COVID‐19 stress. However, in Study 2, the intervention failed to impact depression rates or symptoms at follow‐up.","PeriodicalId":53583,"journal":{"name":"Social and Personality Psychology Compass","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134943941","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Jane K. Stallman, Kirsten N. Bains Williams, Jason T. Goodson, Gerald J. Haeffel
Abstract Research shows that people who use safety behaviors are at greater risk factor for anxiety than people who do not use safety behaviors. However, the perception of some safety behaviors changed during the COVID‐19 pandemic; behaviors that were once considered unnecessary or excessive were now commonplace (e.g., monitoring bodily symptoms, avoiding crowds). The purpose of this study was to determine the degree to which the pandemic changed the status of health‐related safety behaviors as a risk factor for symptoms of anxiety. To this end, we tested the effect of safety behavior use on anxious symptoms during the first year of the pandemic using a longitudinal design with 8 time points and participants ( n = 233) from over 20 countries. Despite possible changes in their perception, those engaging in high levels of safety behaviors reported the greatest levels of anxious symptoms throughout the pandemic year. However, the outcomes for safety behavior users were not all negative. Safety behavior use at baseline was the only predictor of participants' willingness to receive the COVID‐19 vaccine (measured one year later).
{"title":"Safety behaviors were associated with greater anxious symptoms during the first year of the COVID‐19 pandemic","authors":"Jane K. Stallman, Kirsten N. Bains Williams, Jason T. Goodson, Gerald J. Haeffel","doi":"10.1111/spc3.12904","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12904","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Research shows that people who use safety behaviors are at greater risk factor for anxiety than people who do not use safety behaviors. However, the perception of some safety behaviors changed during the COVID‐19 pandemic; behaviors that were once considered unnecessary or excessive were now commonplace (e.g., monitoring bodily symptoms, avoiding crowds). The purpose of this study was to determine the degree to which the pandemic changed the status of health‐related safety behaviors as a risk factor for symptoms of anxiety. To this end, we tested the effect of safety behavior use on anxious symptoms during the first year of the pandemic using a longitudinal design with 8 time points and participants ( n = 233) from over 20 countries. Despite possible changes in their perception, those engaging in high levels of safety behaviors reported the greatest levels of anxious symptoms throughout the pandemic year. However, the outcomes for safety behavior users were not all negative. Safety behavior use at baseline was the only predictor of participants' willingness to receive the COVID‐19 vaccine (measured one year later).","PeriodicalId":53583,"journal":{"name":"Social and Personality Psychology Compass","volume":"66 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135347284","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Manon A. van Scheppingen, Anne K. Reitz, Elien De Caluwé, Gerine Lodder
Abstract The social distancing measures implemented to slow the spread of COVID‐19 impacted many aspects of people's lives. Previous research has reported negative consequences of these measures for people's psychological well‐being, and that people differed in the impact on their psychological well‐being. The present study aimed to describe the different coping strategies Dutch people used to deal with these measures and to link these strategies to loneliness. In addition, the study aimed to examine mean‐level changes in loneliness and to explore individual differences in loneliness change. We used data from 2009 participants of a panel study of representative Dutch households. We assessed coping strategies used during the first wave of the COVID‐19 pandemic in May 2020 and examined changes in loneliness between October 2019 (before COVID‐19) and May 2020 (during the first wave of COVID‐19). First, results showed that most people employed specific coping strategies. The most frequently used social strategies were chatting and (video)calling; the most frequently used non‐social strategies were going outside, doing chores, watching TV, reading and self‐care. Second, people who used more coping strategies reported lower levels of loneliness. Third, analyses revealed an average increase in loneliness between October 2019 and May 2020. Fourth, we observed two significant interaction effects, showing a stronger positive link between the number of social coping strategies and initial loneliness levels among those with a partner or living with others than for those who were single or lived alone. Yet, no moderating effects on changes in loneliness were found: people using more coping strategies did not differ in loneliness changes from people using fewer coping strategies. Together, findings suggest that loneliness increased in the Netherlands during the first phase of COVID‐19 and that, while people's coping strategies were related to loneliness levels, they did not buffer against loneliness increases.
{"title":"Changes in loneliness and coping strategies during COVID‐19","authors":"Manon A. van Scheppingen, Anne K. Reitz, Elien De Caluwé, Gerine Lodder","doi":"10.1111/spc3.12895","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12895","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The social distancing measures implemented to slow the spread of COVID‐19 impacted many aspects of people's lives. Previous research has reported negative consequences of these measures for people's psychological well‐being, and that people differed in the impact on their psychological well‐being. The present study aimed to describe the different coping strategies Dutch people used to deal with these measures and to link these strategies to loneliness. In addition, the study aimed to examine mean‐level changes in loneliness and to explore individual differences in loneliness change. We used data from 2009 participants of a panel study of representative Dutch households. We assessed coping strategies used during the first wave of the COVID‐19 pandemic in May 2020 and examined changes in loneliness between October 2019 (before COVID‐19) and May 2020 (during the first wave of COVID‐19). First, results showed that most people employed specific coping strategies. The most frequently used social strategies were chatting and (video)calling; the most frequently used non‐social strategies were going outside, doing chores, watching TV, reading and self‐care. Second, people who used more coping strategies reported lower levels of loneliness. Third, analyses revealed an average increase in loneliness between October 2019 and May 2020. Fourth, we observed two significant interaction effects, showing a stronger positive link between the number of social coping strategies and initial loneliness levels among those with a partner or living with others than for those who were single or lived alone. Yet, no moderating effects on changes in loneliness were found: people using more coping strategies did not differ in loneliness changes from people using fewer coping strategies. Together, findings suggest that loneliness increased in the Netherlands during the first phase of COVID‐19 and that, while people's coping strategies were related to loneliness levels, they did not buffer against loneliness increases.","PeriodicalId":53583,"journal":{"name":"Social and Personality Psychology Compass","volume":"440 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135481522","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Jingrun Lin, Alexis Drain, Azaadeh Goharzad, Peter Mende‐Siedlecki
Abstract Racial disparities in pain care affecting Black Americans are mirrored by a similar perceptual bias: perceivers see pain less readily on Black (vs. White) faces. Here, we examine the findings of the initial wave of research on this phenomenon, described herein as anti‐Black bias in pain perception. Specifically, we conducted an internal meta‐analysis across 40 studies conducted in the U.S. with primarily White samples ( N = 6252) assessing the generalizability, robustness, and psychological correlates of anti‐Black bias in pain perception. We also assessed the evidence for accounts of this bias focused on intergroup processes, racialized stereotypes and prejudice, dehumanization, and contact. This meta‐analysis strongly confirms our prior findings. Moreover, anti‐Black bias in pain perception is consistently associated with bias in treatment recommendations. These effects are robust to differences in stimuli, samples, and perceiver gender and race. Notably, both Black and White perceivers demonstrate more conservative perceptual thresholds for seeing pain on Black faces, suggesting this bias is not merely a consequence of group membership. Further, increased dehumanization of and decreased intergroup contact with Black individuals predicts biased pain perception and treatment recommendations, though these effects were small. These results demonstrate the robustness of anti‐Black bias in pain perception and establish a strong foundation for future inquiry.
{"title":"What factors predict anti‐Black bias in pain perception? An internal meta‐analysis across 40 experimental studies","authors":"Jingrun Lin, Alexis Drain, Azaadeh Goharzad, Peter Mende‐Siedlecki","doi":"10.1111/spc3.12901","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12901","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Racial disparities in pain care affecting Black Americans are mirrored by a similar perceptual bias: perceivers see pain less readily on Black (vs. White) faces. Here, we examine the findings of the initial wave of research on this phenomenon, described herein as anti‐Black bias in pain perception. Specifically, we conducted an internal meta‐analysis across 40 studies conducted in the U.S. with primarily White samples ( N = 6252) assessing the generalizability, robustness, and psychological correlates of anti‐Black bias in pain perception. We also assessed the evidence for accounts of this bias focused on intergroup processes, racialized stereotypes and prejudice, dehumanization, and contact. This meta‐analysis strongly confirms our prior findings. Moreover, anti‐Black bias in pain perception is consistently associated with bias in treatment recommendations. These effects are robust to differences in stimuli, samples, and perceiver gender and race. Notably, both Black and White perceivers demonstrate more conservative perceptual thresholds for seeing pain on Black faces, suggesting this bias is not merely a consequence of group membership. Further, increased dehumanization of and decreased intergroup contact with Black individuals predicts biased pain perception and treatment recommendations, though these effects were small. These results demonstrate the robustness of anti‐Black bias in pain perception and establish a strong foundation for future inquiry.","PeriodicalId":53583,"journal":{"name":"Social and Personality Psychology Compass","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134973673","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Bianca M. Hinojosa, William B. Meese, Jennifer L. Howell, Kristen P. Lindgren, Brian O’Shea, Bethany A. Teachman, Alexandra Werntz
Abstract We investigated the role of implicit and explicit associations between harm and COVID‐19 vaccines using a large sample ( N = 4668) of online volunteers. The participants completed a brief implicit association test and explicit measures to evaluate the extent to which they associated COVID‐19 vaccines with concepts of harmfulness or helpfulness. We examined the relationship between these harmfulness/helpfulness COVID‐19 vaccine associations and vaccination status, intentions, beliefs, and behavior. We found that stronger implicit and explicit associations that COVID‐19 vaccines are helpful relate to vaccination status and beliefs about the COVID‐19 vaccine. That is, stronger pro‐helpful COVID‐19 vaccine associations, both implicitly and explicitly, related to greater intentions to be vaccinated, more positive beliefs about the vaccine, and greater vaccine uptake.
{"title":"Implicit and explicit COVID‐19‐vaccine harmfulness/helpfulness associations predict vaccine beliefs, intentions, and behaviors","authors":"Bianca M. Hinojosa, William B. Meese, Jennifer L. Howell, Kristen P. Lindgren, Brian O’Shea, Bethany A. Teachman, Alexandra Werntz","doi":"10.1111/spc3.12905","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12905","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract We investigated the role of implicit and explicit associations between harm and COVID‐19 vaccines using a large sample ( N = 4668) of online volunteers. The participants completed a brief implicit association test and explicit measures to evaluate the extent to which they associated COVID‐19 vaccines with concepts of harmfulness or helpfulness. We examined the relationship between these harmfulness/helpfulness COVID‐19 vaccine associations and vaccination status, intentions, beliefs, and behavior. We found that stronger implicit and explicit associations that COVID‐19 vaccines are helpful relate to vaccination status and beliefs about the COVID‐19 vaccine. That is, stronger pro‐helpful COVID‐19 vaccine associations, both implicitly and explicitly, related to greater intentions to be vaccinated, more positive beliefs about the vaccine, and greater vaccine uptake.","PeriodicalId":53583,"journal":{"name":"Social and Personality Psychology Compass","volume":"190 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135591108","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Angela E. Johnson, Jacqueline Hua, Bianca Hinojosa, William B. Meese, Avia Gray, Jennifer L. Howell
Abstract In the present study, we examine how subgroups of people are characterized by different profiles of uncertainty surrounding COVID‐19, susceptibility, and recovery. Participants ( N = 199) were U.S. residents recruited online for a longitudinal study during the summer of 2020. We first, identified groups using latent profile analysis (LPA) and then examined whether these profiles predicted differences in COVID‐related risky and preventative behaviors. LPA identified five distinct profiles of people representing a combination of low and high uncertainty and low, moderate, and high risk perceptions. Results revealed that latent‐profile group membership predicted intention to interact with others outside of the household, intention to engage in non‐essential shopping, intention to attend an in‐person religious gathering, intention to wear a mask in public, and self‐reported physical distancing in the past week. Profile membership did not predict intentions to: dine out, go to the nail/hair salon, go to the gym, nor physically distance from others in the future, nor did it predict handwashing in the past week.
{"title":"Uncertainty and risk during the COVID‐19 pandemic: A latent profile analysis","authors":"Angela E. Johnson, Jacqueline Hua, Bianca Hinojosa, William B. Meese, Avia Gray, Jennifer L. Howell","doi":"10.1111/spc3.12890","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12890","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In the present study, we examine how subgroups of people are characterized by different profiles of uncertainty surrounding COVID‐19, susceptibility, and recovery. Participants ( N = 199) were U.S. residents recruited online for a longitudinal study during the summer of 2020. We first, identified groups using latent profile analysis (LPA) and then examined whether these profiles predicted differences in COVID‐related risky and preventative behaviors. LPA identified five distinct profiles of people representing a combination of low and high uncertainty and low, moderate, and high risk perceptions. Results revealed that latent‐profile group membership predicted intention to interact with others outside of the household, intention to engage in non‐essential shopping, intention to attend an in‐person religious gathering, intention to wear a mask in public, and self‐reported physical distancing in the past week. Profile membership did not predict intentions to: dine out, go to the nail/hair salon, go to the gym, nor physically distance from others in the future, nor did it predict handwashing in the past week.","PeriodicalId":53583,"journal":{"name":"Social and Personality Psychology Compass","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135597265","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Shuang Wang, Alexander S. English, Yue Deng, Ye Zi Zhou, Emma E. Buchtel
Abstract In the pandemic era, social media has provided the public with a platform to make their voice heard. One of the most important public opinions online during a pandemic is blame . Blame can lead to stigma towards patients as well as potential patients and decrease social cooperation, which might impede prevention and control measures during epidemics. Thus, studying online blame during the early days of COVID‐19 can facilitate the management and control of future pandemics. By analyzing 3791 posts from one of the most popular social media sites in China (Weibo) over the 10 days immediately after COVID‐19 was declared to be a communicable disease, we found that there were four main agents blamed online: Individuals, corporations, institutions, and the media. Most of the blame targeted individual agents. We also found that there were regional‐cultural differences in the detailed types of blamed individual agents, that is, between rice‐ and wheat‐farming areas in China. After controlling influence of distance from the epicenter of Wuhan, there were still stable differences between regions: people in wheat areas had a higher probability of blaming agentic, harmful individuals, and people in rice areas had a higher probability of blaming individuals with low awareness of social norms for preventive health behavior. Findings have implications for preventing and predicting blame across cultures in future pandemics.
{"title":"Stop the blame game: An analysis of blaming on Weibo during the early days of the COVID‐19 pandemic in rice and wheat areas in China","authors":"Shuang Wang, Alexander S. English, Yue Deng, Ye Zi Zhou, Emma E. Buchtel","doi":"10.1111/spc3.12903","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12903","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In the pandemic era, social media has provided the public with a platform to make their voice heard. One of the most important public opinions online during a pandemic is blame . Blame can lead to stigma towards patients as well as potential patients and decrease social cooperation, which might impede prevention and control measures during epidemics. Thus, studying online blame during the early days of COVID‐19 can facilitate the management and control of future pandemics. By analyzing 3791 posts from one of the most popular social media sites in China (Weibo) over the 10 days immediately after COVID‐19 was declared to be a communicable disease, we found that there were four main agents blamed online: Individuals, corporations, institutions, and the media. Most of the blame targeted individual agents. We also found that there were regional‐cultural differences in the detailed types of blamed individual agents, that is, between rice‐ and wheat‐farming areas in China. After controlling influence of distance from the epicenter of Wuhan, there were still stable differences between regions: people in wheat areas had a higher probability of blaming agentic, harmful individuals, and people in rice areas had a higher probability of blaming individuals with low awareness of social norms for preventive health behavior. Findings have implications for preventing and predicting blame across cultures in future pandemics.","PeriodicalId":53583,"journal":{"name":"Social and Personality Psychology Compass","volume":"132 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135246899","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Luke J. Tacke, David A. Lishner, Amy Knepple Carney, Michael J. Vitacco, Ben Saltigerald, Haley R. Jacquez, Vanessa Hillman, MacKenzie Meendering, Brittany Burgess, Allison Smith, Craig S. Neumann
Abstract Two direct replication studies were conducted to investigate the associations of psychopathic traits with engagement in COVID‐19 prevention behavior and motivational reasons for engaging in such behavior. College undergraduate students completed two self‐report measures of psychopathic traits based on the four‐factor conceptualization of psychopathy (callous affect, manipulative tendency, erratic lifestyle, criminal tendency) and the triarchic conceptualization of psychopathy (meanness, disinhibition, boldness). Participants then reported the degree to which they engaged in COVID‐19 prevention behavior currently and in the past, and reported their self‐focused and other‐focused motivational reasons for doing so. Results aggregated across both studies ( N = 292) revealed that traits reflecting emotional callousness and impulsivity independently predicted lower levels of other‐focused reasons for engaging in prevention behavior. Moreover, controlling for other‐focused reasons appreciably reduced negative associations of emotional callousness and impulsivity with prevention behavior. The results provide insight into points of convergence in conceptualization and measurement of psychopathy from multiple theoretical perspectives and the importance of considering the impact of divisive personality traits on motivation to protect others during pandemics.
{"title":"Psychopathy and COVID‐19: Callousness, impulsivity, and motivational reasons for engaging in prevention behavior","authors":"Luke J. Tacke, David A. Lishner, Amy Knepple Carney, Michael J. Vitacco, Ben Saltigerald, Haley R. Jacquez, Vanessa Hillman, MacKenzie Meendering, Brittany Burgess, Allison Smith, Craig S. Neumann","doi":"10.1111/spc3.12900","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12900","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Two direct replication studies were conducted to investigate the associations of psychopathic traits with engagement in COVID‐19 prevention behavior and motivational reasons for engaging in such behavior. College undergraduate students completed two self‐report measures of psychopathic traits based on the four‐factor conceptualization of psychopathy (callous affect, manipulative tendency, erratic lifestyle, criminal tendency) and the triarchic conceptualization of psychopathy (meanness, disinhibition, boldness). Participants then reported the degree to which they engaged in COVID‐19 prevention behavior currently and in the past, and reported their self‐focused and other‐focused motivational reasons for doing so. Results aggregated across both studies ( N = 292) revealed that traits reflecting emotional callousness and impulsivity independently predicted lower levels of other‐focused reasons for engaging in prevention behavior. Moreover, controlling for other‐focused reasons appreciably reduced negative associations of emotional callousness and impulsivity with prevention behavior. The results provide insight into points of convergence in conceptualization and measurement of psychopathy from multiple theoretical perspectives and the importance of considering the impact of divisive personality traits on motivation to protect others during pandemics.","PeriodicalId":53583,"journal":{"name":"Social and Personality Psychology Compass","volume":"97 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135386026","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：