Culture Wars and COVID-19 Conduct: Christian Nationalism,Religiosity, and Americans’ Behavior During the Coronavirus Pandemic

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Americans’ behavioral responses were quickly politicized. Those on the left stressed precautionary behaviors, while those on the (religious) right were more likely to disregard recommended precautions. We propose the far right response was driven less by partisanship or religiosity per se, but rather by an ideology that connects disregard for scientific expertise; a conception of Americans as God's chosen and protected people; distrust for news media; and allegiance to Trump―Christian nationalism. Analyzing panel data collected in the thick of the COVID-19 crisis, we find Christian nationalism was the leading predictor that Americans engaged in incautious behavior like eating in restaurants, visiting family/friends, or gathering with 10+ persons (though not attending church), and was the second strongest predictor that Americans took fewer precautions like wearing a mask or sanitizing/washing one's hands. Religiosity, in contrast, was the leading predictor that Americans engaged in more frequent precautionary behaviors. Findings document that Christian nationalism, not religious commitment per se, undergirded the far-right response to COVID-19 that disregarded precautionary recommendations, thus potentially worsening the pandemic.     

Altered Arm-Body Coordination with Triggered Pointing Responses as Influenced by Task Predictability

Abstract

Reaching movements generate reaction forces that affect postural stability, requiring sophisticated coordination between body and arm movement to maintain balance. In voluntary movement, this coordination involves feedforward shifts of posture, and such anticipatory postural muscle activity also accompanies the rapid modulation of an ongoing point to suddenly a shifting target (double-step). However, it is unknown if this early postural activity depends on target-shift predictability and whether arm and body motion are similar coordinated to voluntary movement. Body and arm motion coordination during double-step pointing movements from standing were done under differing conditions of target-shift predictability. In a proportion of trials, the pointing target was displaced, with the predictability of target-shift direction varied between two peripheral targets (target-shift direction known) and two central targets (target-shift direction uncertain). The target jump evoked an adjustment in the arm then body response, opposite to the pointing responses to the initial target. The triggered arm-then-body ordering was consistent across target-shift predictability, although known target-shift direction resulted in closer timing of arm and body onsets. The altered coordination in triggered corrections suggests that the body component in triggered reactions depend on response predictability, showing an altered control of arm and body motion.     

A Restricted Four-Parameter IRT Model: The Dyad Four-Parameter Normal Ogive (Dyad-4PNO) Model

Psychometrika - Recently, there has been a renewed interest in the four-parameter item response theory model as a way to capture guessing and slipping behaviors in responses. Research has shown,...     

The Importance of Perceived Body-Inclusiveness among Physically Active Women in Larger Bodies

Sex Roles - Despite the many benefits of physical activity, women participate less frequently than men do, and this is particularly the case among women in larger bodies. The purpose of the present...     

Commentaries on “Beyond statistical significance: Five principles for the new era of data analysis and reporting”

Three commentaries below provide different perspectives on data analysis and reporting. They generally focus on how the quality of the measures and manipulations determines the value of the analysis. Norbert Schwarz and Fritz Strack's comment is less on the right statistic and more on “sloppy reasoning, gaps between theoretical concepts and their operationalizations, and blissful ignorance of the situated nature of human thinking, feeling, and doing contribute more to the limited reproducibility of empirical findings than the choice of a particular test statistic.” They propose that particular effects are contextual and inappropriately labeled as true or false. Instead, our job is to focus on general constructs that make sense of the diversity of human experience and psychological reactions. Too often studies replicating psychological effects in the noisy and confounded conditions of the marketplace result in statistical uncertainty of garbage in, garbage out. Researchers instead need to look toward tests of specific interactions, which can clarify the influencing factors based on theoretical considerations. The second comment is by Andrew Gelman, an outstanding psychological statistician. He proposes that “once the data have been collected, the most important decisions have already been done.” He then provides four recommendations that enable the statistics to work appropriately. The first requirement of an effective study is to be sure that the measures address the construct of interest. Similar to the position of Schwarz and Strack, it is important to articulate the relevance of a statistically significant finding. The second recommendation seeks to curb large number of studies with inflated effect sizes built from narrow studies and unwarranted optimism. The third recommendation is to simulate data from a model and consider the distribution of possible results. That is often done to test a new analysis method, but it can be even more important in marketplace studies where novel characteristics of the sample and experimental conditions are included in the analysis. Finally, he recommends that one consider likely analyses needed before getting the data. Such foresight would encourage, for example, thinking about the kind of data needed to defend the equality of the control demographics against the treatment. The final commentary is by Stijn van Osselaer. He agrees that p-values reflect the detailed methods from a given study but do not focus on the problem of generalizability. Like Gelman, he sees designs focused on effect sizes may have generated too many studies that do not replicate. He contrasts broad explorations with narrowly defined existence tests that provide evidence that an effect exists somewhere but are mute on other contexts where they may apply. For theoretical problems relevant to applications, it is important to identify moderators through broad sampling across population characteristics, stimuli, and situations. He proposes that consumer psychologists should not try to do everything in one paper, but to build practically relevant, applicable knowledge across multiple articles. Different articles, authors, and research methods play various roles, with each article focusing on important stages in the process from generating hypotheses, providing existence proofs, and exploring their broad applicability. That pragmatic approach can integrate theoretical silos that seek to resolve complex human problems and has promise as a criterion for relevant publications.     

Staff-administered functional analysis and treatment of aggression by an elder with dementia

In the current study, nursing home staff were taught to administer functional analyses to determine the variables maintaining aggression by an elder with dementia. The results indicated that aggression was evoked during bathroom routines and that escape maintained aggression. Staff then reduced aggression to near-zero levels with noncontingent escape. Implications for the assessment and treatment of problem behaviors in nursing home settings are discussed.     

Putting phonetic context effects into context: a commentary on Fowler (2006)

On the basis of a review of the literature and three new experiments, Fowler (2006) concludes that a contrast account for phonetic context effects is not tenable and is inferior to a gestural account. We believe that this conclusion is premature and that it is based on a restricted set of assumptions about a general perceptual account. Here, we briefly address the criticisms of Fowler (2006), with the intent of clarifying what a general auditory and learning approach to speech perception entails.