社会公平感对不同阶层目标达成的影响及其过程

基于目标追求理论和社会阶层心理学的相关理论, 本文通过3个研究, 逐步深入地考察了社会公平感对不同阶层个体目标达成的影响作用及其过程。研究1为相关研究, 考察了高低阶层成人被试的教育领域社会公平感与为孩子进行教育投入的目标承诺及目标达成之间的关系; 研究2为准实验研究, 通过操纵公平或不公平教育情境启动公平感, 考察其对高低阶层中学生的学习目标承诺与目标达成的影响; 研究3为实验研究, 通过实验操纵社会公平感和社会阶层, 考察社会公平感对高低阶层大学生的实验任务目标承诺和目标达成的影响。研究发现, 社会公平感通过正向影响低阶层者的目标承诺, 进而正向影响其目标达成; 而对于高阶层者来说, 变量之间这些关系则不显著。这表明：相对于高阶层来说, 低阶层者的目标追求易受社会公平感的影响; 低阶层者的社会公平感水平越高, 其追求目标的动机水平就越高, 进而越有利于目标达成。     

Implicit and explicit COVID-19-vaccine harmfulness/helpfulness associations predict vaccine beliefs,intentions, and behaviors

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.     

低阶层大学生的炫耀性消费:自尊补偿与地位追求

近年来低阶层大学生炫耀性消费负性事件频发,研究以补偿性消费理论为基础,考察低阶层大学生炫耀性消费的内因与外因。实验一通过比较高、低状态自尊条件下不同阶层被试的炫耀性消费倾向来考察自尊的作用,结果表明低阶层大学生的炫耀性消费倾向受到其状态自尊的调节; 实验二通过比较不同阶层被试对地位及非地位符号商品的支付意愿来考察商品符号价值的作用,结果表明低阶层大学生只有在商品具有地位符号价值时,才会表现出比高阶层大学生更强烈的炫耀性消费倾向。     

“转换-坚持”对低阶层健康的保护作用及其机制

低社会阶层是不良健康状况最可靠的社会决定因素之一。然而, 很少有人理解为什么同样处于低阶层, 有些个体却能保持良好的健康状况。在大量实证研究的基础上, 研究者们发现“转换-坚持”策略这一心理因素能有效保护处于逆境中的低阶层者的健康, 使其免于受到疾病的侵扰。当个体面临持续或频繁的压力时, “转换-坚持”策略减轻了下丘脑-垂体-肾上腺轴的急性生理激活, 有效抑制了低阶层面临逆境时的生理应激反应, 随着时间的推移, 阻止了致病过程的发展; 同时, 该策略还减少了低阶层者的不良健康行为, 进而对健康起到保护作用。未来研究应在深入探索核心机制基础上开发出有效的干预方案, 为解决我国相对贫困问题中的健康贫困提供新的路径。     

The associations of cultural worldviews,political orientation,and trust with COVID-19 risk beliefs in the U.S.

Given that risk beliefs predict engagement in behaviors to prevent disease, it is important to understand the factors associated with risk beliefs. In the present paper, we conducted path analyses to investigate the associations of belief systems (political orientation and cultural worldviews of individualism and hierarchy) with COVID-19 risk beliefs (i.e., perceived likelihood, perceived severity, and worry about disease; Studies 1 and 2), and the indirect effect through trust in information sources in these relationships (Study 1). Two online panels of U.S. adults were surveyed at three timepoints during the COVID-19 pandemic (Study 1: baseline n = 1,667, 1-year follow-up n = 551; Study 2: n = 404). Results of path analyses indicated that, across studies and timepoints, when controlling for political orientation, trust, and demographic factors, greater individualism had consistent significant direct effects on lower perceived severity and worry about COVID-19, whereas greater hierarchy had consistent significant direct effects on lower perceived severity. However, after accounting for cultural worldviews of individualism and hierarchy (and trust and demographic factors), none of the associations among political orientation and any of the three COVID-19 risk beliefs were significant. The test of indirect effects indicated that individualism and hierarchy were indirectly associated with lower perceived severity of and worry about COVID-19 through less trust. The findings suggest that cultural worldviews of individualism and hierarchy play a role in shaping people's risk beliefs.     

The ‘White Male Effect’ in perceptions of risk of dying from COVID-19

During the COVID-19 pandemic people had to gauge their personal health risks in order to decide which protective behaviors to adopt. We explored whether mortality risk perceptions varied by demographic background. Using data from a nationally representative U.S. survey, we analyzed bi-weekly mortality estimates of 8339 individuals from 1 April 2020 to 21 July 2021. Consistent with a White Male Effect, White men estimated the risk of death to be lower than White women, non-White men, and non-White women. Furthermore, when linking those estimates to the actual risk of dying from COVID-19, as reflected in official fatality rates recorded by the U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), White men were indeed less likely to die from the coronavirus than would be expected based on their proportion of the populations. In contrast, deaths in non-White men and non-White women were higher than would be expected. Thus, subjective risk perceptions tracked objective mortality risks. Because White men tend to disproportionally hold positions with high decision-making power, although biased risk estimates may be less likely to have negative consequences for themselves, they may be especially detrimental to those for whom such decisions are made.     

Unvaxxed and unafraid: Unvaccinated Americans perceive less disease risk than do vaccinated Americans

Is disease risk perception accurately calibrated among the unvaccinated? People shift their attitudes to rationalize their choices, so those who choose to be unvaccinated may be motivated to feel less at risk. In three studies (total N = 1446), we asked Americans how worried they were about catching/spreading influenza and COVID-19 and whether they were vaccinated against those diseases. Unvaccinated participants felt less at risk of catching/spreading the diseases they were unvaccinated against than vaccinated participants. For instance, unvaccinated participants felt ∼24% less at risk of catching/spreading COVID-19 and had ∼28% stronger intention to engage in activities that carried a high risk of COVID-19 transmission (Study 3). Overall, those who choose to be the most vulnerable to disease feel and act the least vulnerable.     

Beyond cognitive deficits: how social class shapes social cognition

Lower social class is thought to contribute to poorer executive functioning and working memory. Nevertheless, lower social class individuals consistently outperform their higher-class counterparts on social cognitive tasks that rely on similar underlying cognitive processes (e.g., working memory and executive functioning). Why would lower social class inhibit such processes in one domain, but promote them in another? We argue that features of lower-class communities (e.g., resource scarcity) promote social cognition via cultural processes. We then argue that social cognition involves partially unique task and neural demands that are separate from nonsocial cognition. We conclude that unique task and neural demands, together with the distinctive cognitive proclivities of lower- and higher-class cultures, can explain variable associations between social class and cognitive functioning.     

社会不平等如何影响低地位者的系统合理信念

系统合理信念反映了人们的系统支持态度,即对社会系统公正性、合理性、正当性的感知,以及相应的支持和维护社会系统的态度。以往关于社会不平等与低地位者系统合理信念的关系形成了两种对立的理论观点。一方面,社会认同理论等自利取向的理论认为,严重的不平等不利于低地位者维护自我及内群体利益,因此会损害其系统合理信念;另一方面,系统合理化理论却提出,在不平等更极端（而非平等）的社会中,人们（甚至是低地位者）反而更可能合理化不平等,表现出更高的系统合理信念。实证研究中,两种观点分别得到了一些研究的支持,但同时也面临很多质疑。 面对上述分歧,本文提出了一个整合性的解释框架,即“社会不平等影响低地位者系统合理信念的双路径模型”。该模型认为,自利取向理论与系统合理化理论其实并不矛盾,而是共同解释了不平等与低地位者系统合理信念关系的“全貌”。因此,理论争议的焦点不在于不平等究竟增强还是减弱低地位者的系统合理信念,而在于分析不平等增强或减弱低地位者系统合理信念的不同条件（即认知基础）及其内在机制（即动机基础）。 第一,在认知基础方面,不同于以往研究仅关注不平等“量”的程度及其与系统合理信念的线性关系,该模型认为还应关注不平等“质”的差异及其不同效应,即关注低地位者对不平等的认知过程。一方面,严重的不平等损害低地位者个人或群体的现实利益,构成一种现实威胁;另一方面,严重不平等的社会现状与人们关于社会系统公正性、合理性的信念相冲突,构成一种象征威胁。 第二,在动机基础方面,低地位者的自利动机与系统合理化动机分别使其反对或维护不平等现状,且两种动机彼此冲突;不同于以往研究采用对立视角考察两种动机,或是过于强调二者之一的作用;该模型认为,两种动机是并存的,相互之间并非全或无的关系。因此有必要厘清二者发挥作用的条件,即什么影响二者孰强孰弱,又是什么决定了何者发挥主导作用。 第三,区分不平等“质”的差异是厘清自利动机与系统合理化动机如何发挥作用的关键。换言之,不同动机为低地位者反对或维护不平等现状提供了动力,而何种动机发挥主导作用则取决于低地位者如何对不平等进行认知。具体而言,当凸显不平等在个体或群体水平的现实威胁时,更可能激活低地位者的自利动机（进而抑制其系统合理化动机）,继而损害其系统合理信念;而当凸显不平等在系统水平的象征威胁时,更可能激活其系统合理化动机（进而抑制其自利动机）,继而增强其系统合理信念。 “双路径模型”通过分析不平等影响低地位者系统合理信念的不同认知基础,进而厘清不同动机的作用,将以往研究中看似矛盾的结论整合于一,为理解不平等对低地位者系统合理信念的影响、解释两种理论的“分歧”提供了一种整合框架,需要未来研究进一步检验和发展。     

Risk perception and conspiracy theory endorsement predict compliance with COVID-19 public health measures

Public health measures such as spatial distancing and physical hygiene have been found effective in mitigating the spread of the coronavirus. However, there is considerable variability in individual compliance with such public health measures and factors contributing to these interindividual differences are currently still understudied. The present study set out to determine the role of risk perception and conspiracy theory endorsement on compliance with COVID-19 public health measures and explored variations in these associations across participant age and the developmental status of a country, leveraging a large multi-national data set (N = 45,772) across 66 countries/territories, collected via online survey during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic (between April and May 2020). Human Development Index (HDI), developed by the United Nations Development Program, was used as a proxy of a country's achievement in key dimensions of human development. Overall, higher risk perception was associated with greater compliance, particularly in individuals with greater conspiracy theory endorsement. Specifically, people from more developed countries who perceived themselves less at risk but showed stronger conspiracy theory endorsement reported the lowest compliance with COVID-19 public health measures. Findings from this study advance understanding of the interplay between risk perception and conspiracy theory endorsement in their effect on compliance with COVID-19 public health measures, under consideration of both individual-level and country-level demographic variables and have potential to inform the design of tailored interventions to fight the current and future global pandemics.     

Depressive symptoms and conspiracy beliefs

Conspiratorial beliefs can endanger individuals and societies by increasing the likelihood of harmful behaviors such as the flouting of public health guidelines. While scholars have identified various correlates of conspiracy beliefs, one factor that has received scant attention is depressive symptoms. We use three large surveys to explore the connection between depression and conspiracy beliefs. We find a consistent association, with the extent of the relationship depending on individual and situational factors. Interestingly, those from relatively advantaged demographic groups (i.e., White, male, high income, educated) exhibit a stronger relationship between depression and conspiracy beliefs than those not from such groups. Furthermore, situational variables that ostensibly increase stress—such as having COVID-19 or parenting during COVID-19—exacerbate the relationship while those that seem to decrease stress, such as social support, vitiate it. The results provide insight about the development of targeted interventions and accentuate the need for theorizing about the mechanisms that lead depression to correlate with conspiracy beliefs.     

Trust in information mediates the relationship between political orientation and perceptions of the COVID-19 pandemic

The past few decades have experienced a decline in the use of traditional news sources as an increasing number of individuals rely on social media for information. Although this change has made it easier to obtain information, individuals often selectively expose themselves to information that confirms their beliefs. The current study examined if this pattern could explain political perceptions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Based on past research, it would be expected that liberals and conservatives would hold differing views of the COVID-19 pandemic. Republicans downplayed the pandemic and were more likely to consider it a hoax, while Democrats exaggerated the pandemic and were more likely to advocate for excessive measures. In this study, we collected two samples at different points during the pandemic in which we asked participants to indicate their political ideology, their perception of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the sources of information that they trusted. Our results indicated that trust in information sources mediated the relationship between political ideology and perceptions of the pandemic, suggesting that the informational sources that an individual trusted was a factor in determining perceptions of the COVID-19 pandemic.     

The perceived vulnerability to disease scale: Cross-cultural measurement invariance and associations with fear of COVID-19 across 16 countries

Using cross-sectional data from N = 4274 young adults across 16 countries during the COVID-19 pandemic, we examined the cross-cultural measurement invariance of the perceived vulnerability to disease (PVD) scale and tested the hypothesis that the association between PVD and fear of COVID-19 is stronger under high disease threat [that is, absence of COVID-19 vaccination, living in a country with lower Human Development Index (HDI) or higher COVID-19 mortality]. Results supported a bi-factor Exploratory Structural Equation Modeling model where items loaded on a global PVD factor, and on the sub-factors of Perceived Infectability and Germ Aversion. However, cross-national invariance could only be obtained on the configural level with a reduced version of the PVD scale (PVD-r), suggesting that the concept of PVD may vary across nations. Moreover, higher PVD-r was consistently associated with greater fear of COVID-19 across all levels of disease threat, but this association was especially pronounced among individuals with a COVID-19 vaccine, and in contexts where COVID-19 mortality was high. The present research brought clarity into the dimensionality of the PVD measure, discussed its suitability and limitations for cross-cultural research, and highlighted the pandemic-related conditions under which higher PVD is most likely to go along with psychologically maladaptive outcomes, such as fear of COVID-19.     

Demand for mitigating the risk of COVID-19 infection in public transport: The role of social trust and fatalistic beliefs

The rapid surge of COVID-19 cases worldwide drew attention to COVID-19 infection as a new source of risk in transport. The virus introduced a need for viral transmission mitigation as a major priority when selecting a mode of travel, and caused a significant drop in public transport use. The recovery of public transport use in the post-COVID period requires that the transport authorities favourably address people’s demand for mitigation of the risk of COVID-19 transmission in public transport. The present study aims to explore the role of risk perception, worry and priority of COVID-19 risk reduction along with fatalistic beliefs and public trust in authorities in explaining public demand for risk mitigation. The present study is among the first to investigate the role of fatalistic beliefs, social trust and risk perception for public transport and public demand for risk mitigation. The link between priority of infection prevention and demand for risk mitigation has also been less explored in public transport research. An online survey was conducted among university students in Iran between 19th April and 16th June 2020, during the first wave of the pandemic, when the country was a major epicentre of the disease. A total of 271 out of 370 respondents whose dominant mode on university travels was public transport were included in the analysis. Results of structural equation modelling confirmed the paradox of trust, indicating that social trust is negatively associated with perceived risk of COVID-19 infection, which in turn may lead people to place less importance on COVID-19 prevention as a priority in travel mode choice, and consequently demand less risk mitigation efforts to prevent COVID-19 infection in public transport. Dissimilar to trust, however, the results revealed no relationship between fatalistic beliefs and risk perception, but a significant direct effect of fatalistic beliefs on demand for risk mitigation. To reinforce public demand for mitigating the risk of COVID-19 in public transport, the study calls on policymakers to exploit public trust resources for more effective risk communication, through disseminating the gradually accumulating evidence-based information regarding the infectivity and the virulence of COVID-19 and the scientific risk of infection. The study also underlined the potential importance of considering fatalistic beliefs when developing effective risk communication policies and practices to enhance public support for COVID-19 risk mitigation in public transport.     

The effectiveness of a scientific reasoning intervention for conspiracy theory beliefs

Conspiracy theory (CT) beliefs have become an important policy-relevant research area since the events of the COVID-19 pandemic. Increasing interest has been directed towards strategies that might reduce people's susceptibility to conspiratorial beliefs. In this study, we examined whether encouraging a stronger orientation towards critical scientific appraisal of conspiratorial accounts could reduce CT acceptance. After completing baseline measures of COVID-19 related beliefs and analytical and scientific reasoning abilities, a total of 700 adults were randomly allocated to a control or scientific reasoning manipulation. People assigned to the scientific reasoning condition were found to display significantly lower CT belief endorsement post-intervention as compared to the control group. As well as having implications for the design of future intervention studies, the results of this study encourage a greater focus on specific reasoning skills that may be amenable to a psychoeducation approach, in order to further develop methods to prevent CT beliefs.     

Prosocial orientation and COVID-19 vaccine willingness in the U.S.

Despite evidence of the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines and their wide availability, many in the U.S. are not vaccinated. Research demonstrates that prosocial orientations predict COVID-19 health behaviors (e.g., social distancing) and vaccination intentions, however, little work has examined COVID-19 vaccination willingness in the U.S. since vaccines were approved. Findings from two U.S. samples show that, in contrast to other COVID-19 health behaviors, vaccine willingness in unvaccinated people is unrelated to prosocial orientation. Study 2 demonstrates that the lack of association between vaccine willingness and prosocial orientation in unvaccinated participants was specific to those with stronger beliefs that COVID-19 vaccines are ineffective. Thus, in prosocial people, perceptions of vaccines' ineffectiveness may undermine COVID-19 vaccine willingness.     

Predictors of COVID-19 precautionary behaviors to protect people with disabilities

Disability is conceptualized using one of two major frameworks: the medical and the social model of disability. The medical model of disability describes disability as an individual issue in which the appropriate intervention is to remove the disability. The social model of disability describes disability as a social construction in which the appropriate intervention is societal change to increase accessibility. This study drew on models of disability to understand predictors of engagement in COVID-precautionary behavior prior to the vaccine to protect people with disabilities (PWD) from contracting COVID-19. Participants (n = 720) with and without disabilities (n = 77 and n = 633, respectively) completed an online questionnaire measuring disability beliefs, attitudes toward PWD, concerns about PWD contracting COVID-19, and engagement in behavior protecting PWD from contracting COVID-19. Medical model beliefs were negatively associated with behavior. In addition, negative attitudes toward PWD and low concern about PWD contracting COVID-19 fully accounted for the relationship. Social model beliefs were positively associated with behavior. In addition, positive attitudes toward PWD and greater concern about PWD contracting COVID-19 partially explained the relationship. These findings suggest that framing disability as a social construction rather than a medical issue could promote greater public health behavior to protect PWD from contracting COVID.     

Safety first,but for whom? Shifts in risk perception for self and others following COVID-19 vaccination

Vaccines can affect the mind as well as the body. Research on the psychological impact of vaccines has largely focused on risk-related judgments and behaviors involving the recipient. Here, we extend this work to risk-related judgments of others. In a prospective cohort study involving three samples and two timepoints (N = 588 adults), we tested competing hypotheses about the effects of receiving a COVID-19 vaccine on perceived risks to the unvaccinated: (1) a self/other differentiation hypothesis (vaccination will lead to estimation of lower risk for the self but higher risk for others) versus (2) a self/other correspondence hypothesis (vaccination will lead to estimation of lower risk from contracting COVID-19 for both self and others). Results revealed risk estimates as well as preferences for COVID-related social policies more consistent with the former hypothesis. We discuss potential psychological mechanisms and implications of these findings.     

There are higher levels of conspiracy beliefs in more corrupt countries

In four studies, I found evidence that people living in countries with higher levels of corruption have a greater tendency for conspiracy ideation. In Study 1 (21 countries, N = 20,207), participants living in more corrupt countries reported having higher COVID-19 and generic conspiracy beliefs. Study 2 (25 countries, N = 4935), Study 3 (25 countries, N = 24,424), and Study 4 (24 countries, N = 5973) replicated the same finding. Internal meta-analysis suggested that this association remained significant after adjusting for other relevant cross-country differences. Studies 1 and 2, but not 3 and 4, also showed that corruption moderated the association between individuals’ gullibility (i.e., lack of education) and their conspiracy beliefs, and this association was significant only in low-corruption countries. The findings suggest that country-level corruption breeds conspiracy beliefs and moderates the effect of individuals’ gullibility on conspiracy beliefs.     

Links between rational and irrational beliefs,trait anxiety and fear of COVID 19

IntroductionOur beliefs and knowledge influence the way we act, react, or adapt to an aversive situation such as the current COVID-19 pandemic. The purpose of this study is to explore factors that may influence perceived fear of COVID-19.MethodologyThree hundred and forty-two people from the general population participated in this study. The participants completed an online anamnestic questionnaire that included questions regarding feelings of vulnerability to illness, fear of COVID-19, rational and irrational beliefs about COVID-19, and trait anxiety.ResultsA stepwise regression analysis showed that trait anxiety, irrational and rational beliefs, and having comorbidities linked to severe forms of the disease were associated with perceived vulnerability concerning health and fear of COVID-19.DiscussionThis study seems to underline the importance of pre-existing vulnerabilities that were exacerbated during the pandemic.