Ally confrontations as identity-safety cues for marginalized individuals

Three studies and an integrative data analysis (N = 1,017) demonstrated that confrontations (speaking up against a stereotypical or prejudiced statement), when affirmed by bystanders, serve as an effective safety cue for targets of bias. In Studies 1 and 2, Chinese-American and White women witnessed anti-Asian and sexist remarks, respectively. Results revealed that a lone confronter (i.e., a confronter not affirmed by others) was unable to boost identity-safety (e.g., belonging, safety) compared to when the bias was not confronted, regardless of confronter identity (i.e., ally vs. ingroup confronter). Study 2 demonstrated that other people in the interaction group (i.e., bystanders) must affirm the confrontation for it to serve as an effective safety cue. Study 3 replicated and extended these results among White women for confrontation of sexism and Black women for confrontation of racism. Overall, these studies suggest that confrontations, when affirmed, can serve as a safety cue.     

Mask-wearing increases present-mindedness

Besides health consequences, in what subtle ways do mask-wearing affect our psychology? In this research, we explored whether the experience of mask-wearing, like other disruptive visceral states (e.g., hunger), affects our time perspective. In two experiments (total N = 596), we examined if mask-wearing temporarily generates present-mindedness (more focus on present than future). Study 1 found that mask-wearing (vs. no-mask) lowered considerations about the future, which was mediated by a sense of stuffiness. Study 2 extended this finding and examined whether the effect spillovers to other time-relevant judgments, such as ideals about a good life. Again, when experiencing stuffiness because of mask-wearing, people were more likely to favor pleasure in current life than future life meaning. Our finding implies that concrete visceral experience (stuffiness) linked with the pandemic may shape our mind in subtle, unforeseen ways.     

Contagious or prosocial? Perceptions of mask-wearers toward Whites and Asians: A cross-cultural comparison during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a worldwide increase in the use of face masks to prevent viral transmission. However, as mask-wearing was a new behavior in many countries, there was a limited understanding of how mask-wearers are perceived and how such perceptions impact one's own mask-wearing behavior. Mask-wearers may be seen as contagious or prosocial, and these perceptions may vary based on the race of the mask-wearer and the country of the observer, particularly given the rise in pandemic-related anti-Asian rhetoric in the U.S. In three experiments (N = 579), we investigated these questions, conducting two studies in the United States (May and July 2020), where mask-wearing was new and anti-Asian rhetoric has been prevalent, and one study in South Korea (November 2020), where mask-wearing was relatively common. Results indicate that masked individuals are perceived as less contagious and more prosocial, regardless of target race or participant nation. These perceptions were more pronounced among American political liberals, Americans who are more sensitive to infection transmission (Study 2), and Koreans who self-perceived a greater vulnerability to infection (Study 3). Especially in the U.S., perceiving the masked target as more prosocial predicted more self-reported mask-wearing, while perceiving the masked target as more contagious and less prosocial predicted less mask-wearing (Study 2). These findings provide insights into social perceptions of masks and race during the pandemic.     

Confronting prejudice (literally): reactions to confrontations of racial and gender bias

Participants in two studies reported how they would feel, think, and behave after being confronted about either gender-biased or equivalent racial-biased responses. In Study 2, whether the confrontation was from a target group member (Black or female) or nontarget (White or male) group member was manipulated. Regardless of confronter status, allegations of racial bias elicited more guilt and apologetic-corrective responses and greater concern over having offended the confronter than similar confrontations of gender bias, which elicited more amusement. Target confrontations elicited less guilt but greater discomfort than nontarget confrontations and were associated with feelings of irritation and antagonism among more prejudiced participants. In addition, participants perceived a target's confrontation as more of an overreaction than the same confrontation from a nontarget. The implications of these findings for prejudice-reduction efforts are discussed.     

Why do U.S. conservatives take fewer COVID-19 precautions? The role of worry,perceived risk,and governmental trust

Research suggests a U.S. political ideology gap for taking COVID-19 precautions, but we do not know the role of cognitive risk (assessed here as perceived risk) and affective risk (assessed here as worry) in explaining why conservative Americans participated in fewer recommended precautions (e.g., mask wearing) and whether governmental trust attenuates the effect. We predicted that conservatives (compared with liberals) would take fewer precautions because they thought they were less at risk and were less worried about COVID-19, but that this would be more pronounced for those with low governmental trust. In this study, U.S. adults (representative sample: N = 738; M_age = 46.8; 52% women; 78% white) who had not had COVID-19 took two online surveys 2 weeks apart during the first wave of the pandemic (April 2020). Participants reported ideology, perceived risk of getting or dying of COVID-19, worry about COVID-19, and trust in the CDC and state officials at baseline. At follow-up, participants reported on COVID-19 precautions: (1) prevention behavior participation (e.g., mask wearing) and (2) behavioral willingness for future behaviors (e.g., vaccination). Results showed that, politically conservative Americans took fewer precautions due to lower worry (but unexpectedly not due to lower perceived risk). As predicted, when trust was high, the ideology gap was muted for predicting precautions as well as for predicting perceived risk and worry. In sum, conservatives worried less about COVID-19 which predicted fewer precautions, but trust in governmental institutions reduced this ideological gap. Improving governmental trust could be one fruitful path to increasing COVID-19 precautions.     

Disparagement humor permits unsafe COVID-19 behaviors: A prejudiced norm perspective

Extending prejudiced norm theory, we hypothesized that memes diminishing the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic promote tolerance of unsafe pandemic behaviors (as in contrary to contemporary advice of public health agencies, i.e., not wearing a protective mask) by establishing a perceived norm of tolerance for such behaviors. In Spring 2021, members of several Reddit communities (n = 106) reported their perceived threat of COVID-19 and then completed a roleplay exercise in which they imagined they were with a group of friends in a church setting. In this context, participants viewed memes shared among their friends that belittled COVID-19 (COVID-19 disparagement condition) or memes unrelated to COVID-19 (control condition). Then, participants responded to a vignette describing a woman confronting an usher about a couple who violated protocol by not wearing masks. The results supported our hypothesis. First, participants in the COVID-19 disparagement condition perceived a greater norm of tolerance of the mask protocol violation among others in the immediate context compared to those in the control condition. Second, for participants who viewed COVID-19 as a low threat, that local norm resulted in greater personal tolerance of the mask protocol violation. However, for participants who view COVID-19 as a high threat, the local norm had no impact on their personal tolerance.     

Immoral,infectious, or both? How disgust sensitivity predicts judgments of violations against COVID-19 mitigation actions

Violations against mitigation actions to prevent the spreading of the SARS-CoV-2 virus causing COVID-19, such as not wearing a mask or not practicing social distancing, were seen as immoral and could also increase the likelihood of spreading the virus. In two studies (N1 = 318, N2 = 293), we found that moral and pathogen disgust sensitivity differentially predicted perceptions of such COVID-19 violations against mitigation actions, framed as a moral, pathogen, or on a good-bad dimension, albeit in a less specific way than initially hypothesized (e.g., regarding the pathogenic framed violations, not only pathogen but also moral disgust was associated with higher perceptions of infectiousness). These results suggest that individual differences, especially in pathogen disgust (and, more inconsistently, moral disgust), are important when evaluating violations against mitigation actions. Further research on the role of moral disgust is needed.     

Taking Care of Each Other: How Can We Increase Compliance with Personal Protective Measures During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Chile?

In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, personal protective measures (e.g., social distancing, handwashing, and mask wearing) have been adopted as a cornerstone to limit the spread of the disease. Yet, the effectiveness of these measures depends on people's levels of adherence. In this article, we apply social-psychological research to the study of compliance with personal protective measures during the COVID-19 pandemic in Chile. We consider three possible models underlying adherence: (1) sociodemographic and socioeconomic factors, (2) instrumental factors, and (3) normative factors. We draw on data from a longitudinal nonrepresentative panel study (Study 1, n = 32,304) and a cross-sectional representative survey (Study 2, n = 1,078) to explore the impact of these different factors on personal protective measures compliance. Findings show the strongest support for the role of instrumental and normative factors, in that people who comply with protective measures report to a greater extent that relatives and friends comply too and tend to perceive high risk of COVID-19. We finish by proposing policy recommendations to promote effective strategies to contain the spread of the virus.     

Standing up for a change: reducing bias through interpersonal confrontation

Three experiments examined the effectiveness of interpersonal confrontations as a means for decreasing stereotypic responding. After making stereotypic inferences about Black individuals, participants were confronted and reactions were measured across various intrapersonal and interpersonal response domains. Confrontations varied in level of hostility (Experiment 1) and whether they were expressed by a Black or White person (Experiment 2). Results indicate that although confrontations (and particularly hostile ones) elicited negative emotions and evaluations toward the confronter, participants also experienced negative self-directed affect. Furthermore, regardless of who did the confronting or how much hostility was expressed, confronted participants subsequently were less likely to provide stereotypic responses (Experiments 1-2), and the effect of the confrontation generalized to reporting less prejudiced attitudes (Experiment 3).     

Standing up for whom? Targets’ different goals in the confrontation of discrimination

We challenge the common interpretation of targets’ immediate confrontation in reaction to discrimination as self-serving behavior and propose different underlying motivations for this phenomenon. In five online scenario studies (N_overall = 1,447), we demonstrate across different samples and contexts that targets indicate a distinct pursuit of the following self-reported confrontation goals: individual-benefit (e.g., perpetrator apologizes); group-benefit (e.g., prejudice reduction); and distancing (e.g., demonstrating that one is different from typical group members). Furthermore, meaningful associations of the pursuits of individual-benefitting goals and group-benefitting goals with group identification, disidentification, and further collective action intentions indicate that they represent different confrontation motivations: Individual-benefitting confrontation serves to cope with the individual mistreatment of discrimination, whereas group-benefitting confrontation represents a form of collective action. Distancing goals were associated with disidentification and—unexpectedly—group identification. Our results show that the phenomenon of confrontation in reaction to discrimination can be the result of different underlying psychological processes.     

Motives behind the veil: Women’s affective experiences wearing a veil depend on their reasons for wearing one

Strong assumptions about Muslim women wearing a veil abound, yet few studies examine women’s felt experiences of wearing one. The current study applied self-determination theory to examine how individual differences in motives for wearing a veil relate to women’s experiences in the Muslim-majority countries of Iran and Saudi Arabia (N = 791). Confirmatory results showed autonomous motivation for wearing a veil (e.g., for self-expression) related robustly to more positive and fewer negative affective experiences, and exploratory analyses suggested autonomous motivation for the veil predicted women’s life satisfaction across these two countries. However, results for controlled motives (e.g., perceiving no choice) were mixed. Findings suggested the experience of wearing a veil depend heavily on women’s individual differences in motives.     

Cultural influence on COVID-19 cognitions and growth speed: The role of collectivism

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.     

Differences in the importance of romantic structures among transgender and cisgender adults during the COVID-19 pandemic

The stressors of the global COVID-19 pandemic have led to an increased need for support. For adults, romantic relationships often represent an environment of emotional support and stability; as such, attitudes toward—and particularly the importance of—romantic relationships may have shifted as a result of the pandemic. The present cross-sectional study explores how U.S. transgender (n = 99) and cisgender people (n = 1886) report whether they have perceived a change in their feelings about the importance of long-term romantic structures (i.e., committed relationships, monogamy, cohabiting with a romantic partner, and marriage) as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results found that transgender people reported a more positive perceived change in importance placed on all four romantic items relative to cisgender people. Different forms of stress (e.g., social, financial, health) associated with the COVID-19 pandemic may have contributed to an increased need, and subsequent desire, for social connection and support in the form of romantic relationships among transgender individuals to a greater extent than cisgender individuals, perhaps in part due to the additional layers of stress transgender people must navigate. Results are discussed through the lens of the minority stress framework.     

Do masks matter? Consumer perceptions of social media influencers who wear face masks amid the COVID-19 pandemic

The rapid spread of COVID-19 brought about an increased use of face masks among the general public. Focusing on disposable surgical masks in particular, this article examines consumer perceptions of and intentions toward social media influencers who wear such masks amid the pandemic. Drawing on the theory of product symbolism, this research experimentally demonstrates that masked (vs. unmasked) influencers remind consumers of highly competent healthcare professionals, leading in turn to greater competence inferences about and more favorable behavioral intentions toward these influencers. Additional analysis demonstrates that this effect might not hold for other groups of professionals who are considered relatively competent at the outset and/or whose profession is less reliant on external cues. Overall, this research suggests that apart from curtailing the spread of the pandemic, mask wearing might prove beneficial to certain groups of professionals, such as social media influencers, who have traditionally struggled to establish credibility. In a broader context, this research establishes mask wearing as a new form of nonverbal communication that warrants further examination.     

How mask gap impacts discrimination and anxiety during COVID-19: A study on overseas Chinese during the first outbreak in 2020

The outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic brought unrelenting waves of xenophobia against people representing vulnerable populations, among them those identified as Asians or more specifically as Chinese. Although previous studies have found that some discriminatory actions against overseas Chinese were closely related to mask use during the pandemic, there is not much evidence that explicates what might be the social-cultural triggers or impact of self-other mask discrepancy. The current study aims to examine how a mask use gap impacts perceived discrimination and anxiety during the first outbreak of COVID-19, and how perceived discrimination mediates the mask gap–anxiety relationship. This was operationalized by developing a new “mask gap” variable to capture the incongruent mask use norms between Chines and others around them in the host country. Data were collected from a cross-sectional sample of Chinese (n = 745) residing in 21 countries from March to May 2020 during the first wave of the pandemic. Results showed the newly explicated “mask gap” variable was associated with a higher level of anxiety. In addition, perceived discrimination mediated the mask gap-anxiety relationship. These findings advance both theoretical and practical understandings of how incongruent social norms impact discrimination and mental health during health threat events like the COVID-19 pandemic. The results also suggest important implications for both societal responses and the mental health of sojourners or immigrants during pandemics.     

Occlusion of the lower visual field when wearing a facial mask does not compromise gait control when stepping into a hole in older adults

Visual exproprioception obtained from the lower visual field (LVF) is used to control locomotion on uneven terrain. Wearing a facial mask obstructs the LVF and can compromise gait control. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the effect of occluding the LVF when wearing a facial mask on gait control while walking and stepping into a hole in older adults. Fifteen older adults walked along a wooden walkway under two different surface conditions (without and with a hole [60 cm wide and long, with a depth of 9.5 cm] and three visual conditions (control, mask, and basketball goggles with an occluded LVF). We found that occlusion of the LVF with masks or goggles did not affect the adaptations necessary to step into a hole. Neither behavioral (gait speed, margin of stability, foot landing position) nor neuromuscular (EMG activation and co-activation) parameters were affected by either visual manipulation. Older adults used a downward head pitch strategy to compensate for visual obstruction and plan the anticipatory adjustments to step into the hole. The absence of lower limb visual exproprioception due to wearing a mask did not affect locomotion control when stepping into a hole in older adults. Older adults compensated for the obstruction of the LVF through head downward tilt, which allowed them to obtain visual information about the hole two steps ahead to make anticipatory locomotor adjustments.     

Intellectual humility predicts COVID-19 preventive practices through greater adoption of data-driven information and feelings of responsibility

Preventive health practices have been crucial to mitigating viral spread during the COVID-19 pandemic. In two studies, we examined whether intellectual humility—openness to one's existing knowledge being inaccurate—related to greater engagement in preventive health practices (social distancing, handwashing, mask-wearing). In Study 1, we found that intellectually humble people were more likely to engage in COVID-19 preventive practices. Additionally, this link was driven by intellectually humble people's tendency to adopt information from data-driven sources (e.g., medical experts) and greater feelings of responsibility over the outcomes of COVID-19. In Study 2, we found support for these relationships over time (2 weeks). Additionally, Study 2 showed that the link between intellectual humility and preventive practices was driven by a greater tendency to adopt data-driven information when encountering it, rather than actively seeking out such information. These findings reveal the promising role of intellectual humility in making well-informed decisions during public health crises.     

Blinded by trust in close others: Examining the effect of social closeness on cooperative behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic

In the context of public health crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic, it is essential that individuals cooperate by complying with preventive measures (e.g., wearing a mask). The current research examines how high trust in close others is linked to less cooperation—that is, less compliance with measures—and thus, undermines collective interests. Specifically, we test whether individuals are less willing to comply with preventive measures when interacting with close others they trust. We conducted two experiments in which participants read a vignette depicting a social interaction with either close others (e.g., family) or strangers. Participants had to report the extent to which they would (1) trust the other people in the situation and (2) comply with the mask wearing and physical distancing measures during this interaction. In both experiments, we find that when individuals are considering an interaction with close others, they report experiencing higher trust which is then linked to lower compliance with preventive measures. In Experiment 2, we further demonstrate that participants report less compliance with preventive measures around close others, even when they perceive non-compliance with the measures as morally “wrong”. Our findings shed light on the challenges that compliance with preventive measures poses during social interactions in a context of high trust.     

Perpetrator Responses to Victim Confrontation: DARVO and Victim Self-Blame

Perpetrators of violence often use a strategy of Deny, Attack, and Reverse Victim and Offender (DARVO) to confuse and silence their victims. Although some previous research has examined the individual elements of DARVO, this is the first study to directly examine DARVO as a unitary concept and to investigate how it relates to feelings of self-blame among victims. Subsequently, 138 undergraduate students were asked to report on a time they confronted an individual over a wrong-doing. DARVO was assessed with a new measure constructed for this study. Analyses revealed that: (1) DARVO was commonly used by individuals who were confronted; (2) women were more likely to be exposed to DARVO than men during confrontations; (3) the three components of DARVO were positively correlated, supporting the theoretical construction of DARVO; and (4) higher levels of exposure to DARVO during a confrontation were associated with increased perceptions of self-blame among the confronters. These results provide evidence for the existence of DARVO as a perpetrator strategy and establish a relationship between DARVO exposure and feelings of self-blame. Exploring DARVO aids in understanding how perpetrators are able to enforce victims’ silence through the mechanism of self-blame.