Mental health symptoms,well-being and experiences of the COVID-19 pandemic: A mixed-methods practice-based study

The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated abrupt and substantial changes in daily life, and public health strategies intended to protect physical health can negatively affect mental health and well-being, especially for individuals with pre-existing mental health challenges. For this study, we surveyed a sample of clients (N = 94) in the summer of 2020 from a community mental health clinic in the northeast United States. A mixed-methods, concurrent triangulation design was used to (a) identify client subgroups on indicators of mental health (i.e. anxious and depressive symptoms) and emotional, psychological, and social well-being using latent profile analysis (LPA), and (b) within these subgroups, examine qualitative, thematic patterns in self-described challenges, benefits and learning related to the pandemic. The LPA revealed five distinct subgroups with various levels of symptoms and well-being, including Stagnant (moderate symptoms/moderate well-being), Languishing (high symptoms/low well-being), Flourishing (low symptoms, high well-being), Fortitudinous (high symptoms, moderate well-being) and Mobilized (moderate symptoms, high well-being). These divergent subgroups support the need to conceptualise mental health symptoms apart from well-being and assess for heterogeneous constellations of such constructs among psychotherapy clients. Thematic analysis offered additional insight into pandemic experiences within each subgroup, including attention to psychological, emotional, behavioural/lifestyle, relational, physical and ecological/contextual dimensions of self-experience, as well as the ways clients had adjusted to the pandemic's circumstances. Findings support nuanced conceptualisations of positive mental health and offer insight into coping and adaptation during this public health crisis.     

Heterogeneous heterogeneity by default: Testing categorical moderators in mixed-effects meta-analysis

Categorical moderators are often included in mixed-effects meta-analysis to explain heterogeneity in effect sizes. An assumption in tests of categorical moderator effects is that of a constant between-study variance across all levels of the moderator. Although it rarely receives serious thought, there can be statistical ramifications to upholding this assumption. We propose that researchers should instead default to assuming unequal between-study variances when analysing categorical moderators. To achieve this, we suggest using a mixed-effects location-scale model (MELSM) to allow group-specific estimates for the between-study variance. In two extensive simulation studies, we show that in terms of Type I error and statistical power, little is lost by using the MELSM for moderator tests, but there can be serious costs when an equal variance mixed-effects model (MEM) is used. Most notably, in scenarios with balanced sample sizes or equal between-study variance, the Type I error and power rates are nearly identical between the MEM and the MELSM. On the other hand, with imbalanced sample sizes and unequal variances, the Type I error rate under the MEM can be grossly inflated or overly conservative, whereas the MELSM does comparatively well in controlling the Type I error across the majority of cases. A notable exception where the MELSM did not clearly outperform the MEM was in the case of few studies (e.g., 5). With respect to power, the MELSM had similar or higher power than the MEM in conditions where the latter produced non-inflated Type 1 error rates. Together, our results support the idea that assuming unequal between-study variances is preferred as a default strategy when testing categorical moderators.     

跨期选择的变易程度正向预测中华文化圈国民的自评扛疫成效：亚非欧美大洋洲18国跨国研究

跨期选择是对不同时间点的得失的权衡与选择。伊索寓言《蚂蚁和蚱蜢》假借群居型昆虫的跨期选择偏爱暗喻投资未来的慢策略比只顾眼前的快策略更利于生存。用跨期选择领域通用的语言解读这一寓言便是：选择大而迟选项的蚂蚁比选择小而早选项的蚱蜢更可能扛过严冬而生存下来。为了探索何种跨期选择策略更有助于我们扛过疫情,本研究调查了亚非欧美大洋洲这5大洲18个国家共计26355名受测者对混合得失双结果的跨期选择偏爱,测量了人们平时和疫时跨期选择偏爱的变易程度(2类变易的程度指标),以及人们自评的扛疫成效。跨文化比较结果的主要发现是：不同通货的选择变易程度(指标1)和不同时期的选择变易程度(指标2)能联合预测中国/新加坡文化圈国民的自评扛疫成效;不同时期的选择变易程度(指标2)也可以单独预测印度/马来西亚/菲律宾/尼日利亚文化圈国民的自评扛疫成效;这2类选择偏爱变易的程度指标不能预测其他文化圈国民的自评扛疫成效(或者预测方向和假设相反)。基于易经“穷则变,变则通”的要旨和跨国比较的发现,我们认为：面临历史危机时善于变通的特长抑或成就了中华民族特有的竞争优势;在应对危机时,与中国文化距离越相近的国家或民族抑或也能...     

Facial comparison behaviour of forensic facial examiners

Facial examiners make visual comparisons of face images to establish the identities of persons in police investigations. This study utilised eye-tracking and an individual differences approach to investigate whether these experts exhibit specialist viewing behaviours during identification, by comparing facial examiners with forensic fingerprint analysts and untrained novices across three tasks. These comprised of face matching under unlimited (Experiment 1) and time-restricted viewing (Experiment 2), and with a feature-comparison protocol derived from examiner casework procedures (Experiment 3). Facial examiners exhibited individual differences in facial comparison accuracy and did not consistently outperform fingerprint analysts and novices. Their behaviour was also marked by similarities to the comparison groups in terms of how faces were viewed, as evidenced from eye movements, and how faces were perceived, based on the made feature judgements and identification decisions. These findings further understanding of how facial comparisons are performed and clarify the nature of examiner expertise.     

Lies and bullshit: The negative effects of misinformation grow stronger over time

In a world where exposure to untrustworthy communicators is common, trust has become more important than ever for effective marketing. Nevertheless, we know very little about the long-term consequences of exposure to untrustworthy sources, such bullshitters. This research examines how untrustworthy sources—liars and bullshitters—influence consumer attitudes toward a product. Frankfurt's (1986) insidious bullshit hypothesis (i.e., bullshitting is evaluated less negatively than lying but bullshit can be more harmful than are lies) is examined within a traditional sleeper effect—a persuasive influence that increases, rather than decays over time. We obtained a sleeper effect after participants learned that the source of the message was either a liar or a bullshitter. However, compared to the liar source condition, the same message from a bullshitter resulted in more extreme immediate and delayed attitudes that were in line with an otherwise discounted persuasive message (i.e., an advertisement). Interestingly, attitudes returned to control condition levels when a bullshitter was the source of the message, suggesting that knowing an initially discounted message may be potentially accurate/inaccurate (as is true with bullshit, but not lies) does not result in the long-term discounting of that message. We discuss implications for marketing and other contexts of persuasion.     

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

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.     

Pandemic precarity: A multi-level study of neoliberal precarity and COVID-Related outcomes in the United States

Neoliberalism is the political-economic system that has characterized the United States for the past half century. Structurally, neoliberalism has involved privatization, deregulation, and government divestment from public health systems. Cultural psychologists have begun to outline the ways that neoliberalism is reflected in attitudes, ways of being, and ideologies, such as in the form of heightened individualism, justification of inequality, depoliticization, and precarity. We argue that neoliberal structures and psychologies may contribute to deleterious outcomes in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. We demonstrate that neoliberalism at the US state level (n = 51) is associated with higher COVID mortality and case fatality rates, as well as lower vaccination rates (Study 1). We also demonstrate that individual-level (n = 8280) neoliberal ideology predicts less adaptive beliefs and attitudes such as the belief that the federal response to the pandemic was too fast and belief in COVID-related misinformation (Study 2). We demonstrate using multilevel modeling that state-level neoliberalism predicts individual-level COVID-related attitudes, which is explained in part by heightened neoliberal ideology in more neoliberal states (Study 2). This study contributes to an understanding of the structural and cultural psychological factors that have contributed to the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic in the US.     

Sense of purpose and food insecurity during the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic brought new attention to the issues of food insecurity faced by individuals throughout the United States, a stressor exacerbated by disruptions to work status and supply chains. The burden of food insecurity likely carries consequences for whether individuals feel capable of pursuing their broad goals and life engagements; put differently, food insecurity may pose a threat to people perceiving a sense of purpose in life. The current study tested this claim across three samples taken during 2020 (n = 2009), 2021 (n = 1666), and 2022 (n = 1975). Participants completed inventories for perceived food insecurity, sense of purpose, depressive symptoms, and anxiety, among other measures. Results found consistent negative associations between food insecurity and sense of purpose across all three samples. In addition, food insecurity moderated associations between sense of purpose and depressive or anxiety symptoms. Sense of purpose was more strongly negatively associated with depressive and anxiety symptoms for those participants who reported no food insecurity. That said, sense of purpose remained negatively associated with psychological distress even among those reporting food insecurity.     

Behavioral extremity moderates the association between certainty in attitudes about COVID and willingness to engage in mitigation-related behaviors

People generally intend to act more on beliefs and attitudes about which they have greater certainty. However, we introduce a boundary condition to the positive association between certainty and behavioral intentions—behavioral extremity. Uncertainty about a threatening issue like COVID-19 can be disconcerting, and we propose that uncertain people cope in part through increased openness to extreme actions like accepting risky medical treatments and aggression toward those defying mitigation policies. Testing this, we compiled and analyzed all the data on certainty about COVID-19 mitigation policies and willingness to engage in mitigation-related behaviors that our lab collected during the pandemic (6 samples, 20 behaviors, Ns up to 1496). External ratings of the behaviors' extremity moderated certainty-willingness associations: whereas greater certainty was associated with increased willingness to engage in moderate behaviors (the typical result), lower certainty was associated with increased willingness to engage in extreme behaviors, especially among those worried about becoming ill.