COVID-19 Pandemic: Applying a Multisystemic Lens

The COVID-19 pandemic has a pervasive effect on all aspects of family life. We can distinguish the collective societal and community effects of the global pandemic and the risk and disease impact for individuals and families. This paper draws on Rolland’s Family Systems-Illness (FSI) model to describe some of the unique challenges through a multisystemic lens. Highlighting the pattern of psychosocial issues of COVID-19 over time, discussion emphasizes the evolving interplay of larger systems public health pandemic challenges and mitigation strategies with individual and family processes. The paper addresses issues of coping with myriad Covid-19 uncertainties in the initial crisis wave and evolving phases of the pandemic in the context of individual and family development, pre-existing illness or disability, and racial and socio-economic disparities. The discussion offers recommendations for timely family oriented consultation and psychoeducation, and for healthcare clinician self-care.     

个人主义文化价值观对疫情控制效果的影响及其计算心理机制

COVID-19疫情是一场重大的全球健康危机, 一些国家在控制COVID-19感染和死亡率上存在明显困难。我们提出, 个人主义的文化价值观不利于对疫情的控制。跨文化分析结果显示, 个人主义文化价值观正向预测COVID-19死亡数、每百万死亡数和死亡率, 独立自我建构负向预测疫情前期控制速度。演化博弈模型和跨文化实验进一步提示, 个人主义文化通过增强个体在疫情背景下的死亡恐惧, 增加个体违反疫情管控的流动性倾向, 从而降低了整体疫情控制的效率。我们的结果支持自然-行为-文化协同进化的理论模型, 提示文化对COVID-19病毒传播管控和死亡可能性的影响, 为各国应对全球公共卫生危机提供了重要科学参考。     

Positive and Negative Peace as Predictors of Pandemic Preparedness: Evidence from a Micro- and Macro-Level Investigation During the Onset of the COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has generated unprecedented human loss and financial difficulties worldwide. In line with recent calls for social sciences to help collective efforts to address COVID-19, we investigated the link between peace and pandemic preparedness, advancing the literatures on negative (i.e., absence of direct violence) and positive peace (i.e., absence of structural violence and presence of equality) and governments' crisis preparedness as well as crisis relief efforts. Two studies tested whether both positive and negative peace predict pandemic preparedness, operationalized as COVID-19 tests, cases, and positivity rates, during the onset of the pandemic. Study 1 did so at the national level across 155 countries; Study 2 did so at a local level, across 3144 counties within the United States. Even after controlling for population size, population density, GDP, and amount of air travel, higher levels of both negative and positive peace predicted a greater number of COVID-19 tests per one million people, fewer overall COVID-19 cases, and a lower positivity rate. These findings point to the possibility that by promoting peace, governments and the international community could potentially become better prepared to handle future pandemics and other crises.     

Social determinants of health,prenatal maternal stress,and earlier birth during the COVID-19 pandemic

During the COVID-19 pandemic, pregnant women, especially those from socioeconomically disadvantaged and marginalized groups, experienced unprecedented stress. Prenatal stress and social determinants of health (SDoH) such as lower education and lack of a relationship partner are known to contribute to earlier birth. However, whether SDoH and stress independently contribute or whether the harmful impact of SDoH is mediated by stress is unknown. Moreover, the contributions of these factors has not been investigated in the context of a communal health crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic. To examine these processes, we used a longitudinal cohort of 2473 women pregnant during the COVID-19 pandemic who reported a live birth. We compared structural equation models predicting gestational age at birth from SDoH (race/ethnicity, education, financial security, health insurance, relationship status, and lifetime abuse) and from prenatal maternal stress related and unrelated to the COVID-19 pandemic. Results indicate that the association of SDoH with earlier birth was partially mediated by prenatal stress. These findings help uncover mechanisms explaining health disparities in the U.S. and highlight the need to address both SDoH and the stress that these factors produce in under-resourced and marginalized communities.     

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.     

Did COVID-19 really change our well-being? It's up to meaning in life: Evidence from two longitudinal studies

Since the outbreak of COVID-19, copious studies have explored whether and how COVID-19 has changed individuals' well-being. However, research has revealed mixed and inconsistent findings on this topic, with some suggesting that the pandemic hampered well-being, and others showing non-significant or even opposite patterns. Yet, little is known about what psychological factors could explain such discrepancies. The present study aims to fill this gap by proposing meaning in life (MIL) as a key moderator of the changes in well-being following the pandemic. Two studies reported here (total N = 19,828), which took within-person longitudinal approaches comparing subjective well-being (SWB; hedonic well-being) and psychological well-being (PWB; eudaimonic well-being) before and during COVID-19 (Study 1: 2018, 2019 vs. 2020, 2021; Study 2: 2019 vs. 2021), provided empirical evidence supporting our theoretical claims. Specifically, we found significant moderative effects of MIL in both studies, such that individuals who held a higher MIL amidst COVID-19 experienced an increase in SWB as well as PWB. In stark contrast, the two indicators of well-being declined over time among those who possessed a lower MIL during the pandemic. Overall, our results suggest that MIL serves as one of the significant moderators of the changes in well-being following COVID-19, which may address the previous conflicting findings in this field.     

Loneliness and the sexual behavior of sexual minority men in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic

In March 2020, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Canadian provincial governments instituted a variety of public health measures that included social distancing and isolation, which may have had unintended consequeses. According to the Loneliness and Sexual Risk Model, gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (GBM) often cope with loneliness through risky sexual behaviors. Previous studies have demonstrated that COVID-19 measures such as social distancing and isolation led to increases in loneliness; thus, these measures may also have led to elevated sexual risk-taking among some GBM. Participants were recruited from an ongoing cohort study on GBM health and well-being, and were included in the current analysis if they had completed relevant study questions (n = 1134). GBM who reported lower levels of social support pre-COVID-19, were younger, and lived alone each reported greater loneliness during the first year of COVID-19. Although feelings of loneliness did not predict sexual risk-taking within the first year of COVID-19, loneliness did predict greater sexual risk-taking 6 months later. Additionally, younger GBM and those living alone were more likely to engage in sexual risk-taking at both COVID-19 data collection points. These findings offer some support of the Loneliness and Sexual Risk Model; however, it is possible that the unique circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in a temporary suspension of this association, as many GBM took steps to protect themselves and partners in the context of COVID-19.     

Internal,external, genetic,or cultural? Lay theories about racial health disparities predict perceived threat,adherence, and policy support

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) reported that Black and Latinx communities experienced a disproportionate burden of illness. The goal of this study is to investigate laypeople's attribution of these disparities. We hypothesized the following four potential attributions: external causes (e.g. systemic racism), internal causes (e.g. personal choices), cultural causes (e.g., being close knit), or genetic causes (e.g., being more vulnerable for genetic reasons). Data from 447 participants revealed that lay theories involving external factors were the most endorsed, whereas theories relating to genetic causes were the least endorsed. Our analyses further revealed that external attributions predicted broader COVID-19 relevant outcomes (i.e., perceived threat of COVID-19, adherence to CDC guidelines, and support for government policies in response to COVID-19), even after controlling for political orientation, participant race, and other attributions. This research provides insight into how lay people's explanations for disparities can predict their reactions to the pandemic.     

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.     

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.     

死亡凸显对消费者体验性消费选择偏好的影响及其作用机制

消费者的决策心理与购买行为会受到周边环境暴露的死亡信息的影响发生变化。本文从意义维持模型出发,通过4个实验探讨了死亡凸显对消费者体验性消费选择偏好的影响及其作用机制。结果发现,死亡凸显情境下消费者更倾向选择体验性消费。进一步分析发现,死亡凸显通过降低消费者的生命意义感提高了其对体验性消费的选择偏好。同时,社会支持对此间接效应起到了缓冲作用。研究结果初步揭示,补偿生命意义感的缺失是死亡凸显增加体验性消费选择的潜在机制,这也为新冠疫情背景下的消费者决策行为干预提供了一定参考。     

A call for caution regarding infection-acquired COVID-19 immunity: The potentially unintended effects of “immunity passports” and how to mitigate them

Research suggests that emerging information about infection-acquired COVID-19 immunity should be interpreted with caution. The introduction of “immunity passports” that would enable people who have recovered from COVID-19 to travel freely and return to work may therefore have detrimental consequences if not managed carefully. In two studies, we examined how perceived (suspected or imagined) recovery from COVID-19, and the concept of immunity passports, influence people’s intentions to engage in behaviors aimed to reduce the spread of COVID-19. We also consider ways to lessen potential negative effects. In Study 1 (N = 1604), participants asked to imagine that they had recovered from COVID-19 reported lower social distancing intentions compared to a control condition. Participants who suspected (versus imagined) that they had recovered from past infection did not report lower preventative intentions compared to the control condition, even at high levels of certainty of past infection. In Study 2 (N = 1732), introducing the idea of immunity passports also reduced social distancing intentions compared to a control condition. The latter effect was, however, attenuated when cautious information about the equivocal science on COVID-19 was also presented to participants. Participants who suspected that they had COVID-19 in the past (compared to the control condition) revealed a similar pattern of results, but only at higher levels of certainty of past infection. Caution regarding infection-acquired COVID-19 immunity and immunity passports will be crucial in the COVID-19 response. Implications for premature pandemic announcements, as well as their potential remedies, are discussed.     

Family Science in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Solutions and New Directions

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has precipitated substantial global disruption and will continue to pose major challenges. In recognition of the challenges currently faced by family scientists, we share our perspectives about conducting family research in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. There are two primary issues we address in this article. First, we present a range of potential solutions to challenges in research, resulting from the pandemic, and discuss strategies for preserving ongoing research efforts. We discuss approaches to scaling back existing protocols, share ideas for adapting laboratory-based measures for online administration (e.g., using video chat platforms), and suggest strategies for addressing missing data and reduced sample size due to lower participation rates and funding restrictions. We also discuss the importance of measuring COVID-19 relevant factors to use as controls or explore as moderators of primary hypotheses. Second, we discuss how the COVID-19 pandemic represents a scientifically important context for understanding how families adjust and adapt to change and adversity. Increased stress precipitated by the pandemic, varying from acute stress associated with job loss to more chronic and enduring stress, will undoubtedly take a toll. We discuss ways that family scientists can contribute to pandemic-related research to promote optimal family functioning and protect the health of family members.     

Sleep disturbances and depression are bidirectionally associated among college student athletes across COVID-19 pandemic exposure classes

College athletes may be vulnerable to sleep disturbances and depression during the COVID-19 pandemic as a result of large shifts in social and athletic obligations. In a national sample of college athletes, we examined the associations between sleep disturbances and depression across two timepoints, using COVID-19 exposure as a moderator. Data were collected from 2098 NCAA Division I, II, and III college athletes during two timepoints, from April 10 to May 23, and from August 4 to September 15, 2020. First, a latent class analysis was conducted with five indicators of levels of COVID-19 exposure to determine different exposure profiles. Second, to examine the directionality of associations between sleep disturbance and depression, a cross-lagged panel model was added to the latent class membership structural equation model; this allowed for testing of moderation by COVID exposure class membership. Four highly homogeneous, well-separated classes of COVID-19 exposure were enumerated: Low Exposure (57%); Quarantine Only (21%); High Other, Low Self Exposure (14%); and High Exposure (8%). COVID-19 exposure class membership did not significantly moderate associations between sleep disturbances and depression. However, student athletes significantly differed in T2 depression by their COVID-19 exposure class membership. Depression and sleep disturbances were positively correlated at both timepoints (r_T1 = 0.39; r_T2 = 0.30). Additionally, cross-lagged associations were found such that T2 depression was associated with T1 sleep disturbances (β = 0.14) and vice versa (β = 0.11). These cross-lagged associations were not significantly affected by athletes’ level of COVID-19 exposure during the beginning of the pandemic.     

Obedience to authorities is not unconditional: Differential effects of COVID-19 threat on three facets of RWA in Poland and Germany

Collective authoritarian responses to threat might differ depending on whether people trust collective authorities in reducing threat. Thus, we tested the differential effects of epidemic threat on three facets of right-wing authoritarianism, in Germany (a country with high authorities' efficacy in responses to COVID-19) and Poland (low authorities' efficacy context). Two representative sample longitudinal studies performed in Poland (N = 892) and Germany (N = 883) showed that in Germany feelings of COVID-19 threat explained increases in authoritarian submission and (to a lesser extent) authoritarian aggression, whereas in Poland such feelings of threat explained changes in authoritarian aggression and conventionalism after the pandemic, but did not alter authoritarian submission. These findings suggest that specific authoritarian reactions to threat (submissive vs. conventionalist) might depend on the general trust in authorities' ability to respond to crises.     

Compliance in crisis: Concern,trust and distrustful complacency in the COVID-19 pandemic

Two studies tested a distrustful complacency hypothesis, according to which either concern or political trust would be enough to sustain law-abiding attitudes and compliance with health-protective policies during the COVID-19 pandemic; but the absence of both concern and trust would result in markedly lower support and compliance. Study 1 supported this hypothesis with NatCen nationally representative sample of Great Britain (N = 2413; weighted regression analyses), focussing on law-abiding attitudes. Study 2 (preregistered) replicated these findings with a representative sample (N = 1523) investigating support for COVID-19 policies and compliant behaviour. Participants who were less concerned about the consequences of the pandemic (for themselves and for others) and simultaneously less trustful of the government expressed weaker law-abiding attitudes and reported less compliance with COVID-19 restrictions. These findings have implications for policy and public health strategies in time of crisis.     

COVID-19 Adaptations for Health Service Psychology Internship Training in a Medical School

Health service psychology internship directors confronted a myriad of training challenges in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically, internship training directors were tasked with ensuring that interns received appropriate training in each of the nine profession-wide competency (PWCs) areas while also ensuring the physical and emotional well-being of staff and trainees. The purpose of this paper is to describe one internship’s approach to adapting the nine PWCs during COVID-19 in the context of an academic medical setting. Successes and challenges associated with training adaptations in the context of each of the nine PWCs will be shared along with considerations for improving academic medical training programs’ ability to support interns’ educational goals and training requirements throughout and following the COVID-19 pandemic.

     

Emotional Reactions to COVID-19 Projections and Consequences for Protective Policies and Personal Behavior

How does the public react to information about the likely progression of COVID-19 cases in the United States? How do these reactions vary over the course of the pandemic and by partisanship, and with what consequences for policy attitudes and personal behavior? We argue that reading projections about the peak of COVID-19 cases in the United States is likely to lead to increased levels of anxiety and sadness. We expect that these effects will be more pronounced and less polarized along partisan lines earlier in the pandemic. Finally, we expect that elevated anxiety and sadness should in turn lead to greater support for protective policies to combat the pandemic and a greater inclination to engage in protective behaviors. To test these arguments, we fielded online survey experiments at three points in time (April, June, and August 2020), in which respondents were randomly assigned to a control group or one of two projections about the likely progression of COVID-19 cases in the United States. Across all three waves, we find that exposure to information about case peaks increases anxiety and sadness, though the effects get weaker over time, particularly among Republicans. We also find evidence that these elevated emotional responses increase support for protective policies and behavior.     

Chronic illness and COVID-19-related risk and protective behaviors

People with chronic illnesses are at increased risk of contracting COVID-19. Still, little is known about whether such an increased risk relates to COVID-19-related protective behaviors among those with chronic illness. This study compares the self-reported COVID-19 risky and protective behaviors—specifically physically distancing, handwashing, and having houseguests—of people (N = 936) (1) living with chronic illnesses or (2) cohabiting with someone with chronic illness to those who fall in neither category at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic (April 2020). Study results were mixed: people with a chronic illness were more likely to have had houseguests in the past 5 days and less likely to have increased their handwashing in response to the pandemic, but were also more likely to physical distance when outside the home. Those cohabiting with someone with a chronic illness were more likely to have had houseguests, but did not differ in other outcomes.