The experience of self-awareness and its relation to level of self-consciousness: An experiential sampling study

The present research studied self-awareness by utilizing experiential sampling methodology, which allows for the random sampling of individuals' thoughts and feelings as they go about their normal daily activities. Neither Study 1 nor 2 found a relation between private or public self-awareness and negative affect. However, attention to private self-aspects was generally more positive and less ruminative for low as opposed to high private self-conscious subjects, and awareness of oneself as a social object was generally more positive but less important for low as opposed to high public self-conscious subjects. What may have accounted for the negative relation between private self-consciousness and average affect was that low private self-conscious subjects were more likely to attend to their private self-aspects if they were pleasant than if they were unpleasant, while high private self-conscious subjects' degree of private self-awareness was unrelated to whether the content of this state was pleasant or not. These findings are consistent with the hypothesis that low private self-conscious individuals engage in a more selective type of self-attention when in the private self-aware state than do high private self-conscious individuals. Regarding the relation between self-awareness and social context, both studies found that the presence of others results in a heightened public self-awareness. However, even though subjects were more attentive to public self-aspects when with others than when alone, in general, they were more attentive to their “private self” than to their “public self”. Results are discussed in terms of current self-awareness theory.     

Divine Relations as a Basis of Subjective Social Status During Later-Life: Direct and Moderating Effects

Early social theorists, including W.E.B Du Bois, recognized the importance of religion and its links to inequality, particularly in how religious vocabularies are attuned to frictions with inimical concrete social and political realities. We apply these ideas to research on the intersection of religious beliefs and economic deprivation, examining how beliefs in divine relations not only structure subjective social status (SSS), but also the association between financial stress and SSS. Analyses of data from the Caregiving, Aging, and Financial Experiences Study—a national study of Canadian older adults (N = 4010)—show that financial strain is associated with lower SSS, but better divine relations (higher support from a divine power and lower troubled relationships with a higher power) benefit SSS. Divine support also attenuates the association between financial strain and SSS. This research suggests a Du Bosian “double consciousness,” in which relations with a divine power serve as a basis for individual conceptualizations of social status that run counter to predominant narratives based on economic standing. We suggest directions for future research to explore the nuances of SSS within the religious context informed by a Du Boisian mode of inquiry.     

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.     

The sociodemographic and psychosocial correlates of COVID-19 vaccine concerns among urban college students

COVID-19 vaccine concerns remain high among Americans. Although recent studies have investigated the sociodemographic disparities in vaccine concerns, less attention has been given to reasons for vaccine skepticism and psychosocial factors that may explain it. The current study examined specific types of vaccine concerns among a diverse sample of college students (N = 1985) living in New York City. Participants who identified as Black, younger, with later immigrant generational status, and those with more conservative political leanings reported more vaccine concerns. Concerns regarding vaccine side effects were the most frequently reported source of concern. Reason for getting vaccinated, personal experiences with COVID, and COVID stress was also associated with vaccine concerns. Study results emphasize the importance of sociodemographic factors and COVID knowledge and stress in examining and addressing vaccine concerns.     

A test of vaccine endorsement by political in- versus out-group sources: Effect on vaccination likelihood and exploration of mediation through perceived bias and liking

This study investigated whether political endorsements from in- versus out-group political elites would influence likelihood of COVID-19 vaccination. In March 2021, we ran an experiment with Democrats and Republicans in the United States to examine whether they would be more likely to get vaccinated following endorsements by former Presidents Obama or Trump. Participants reported greater likelihood of getting vaccinated if the vaccine was endorsed by an elite from their own rather than the opposing party. This effect was driven by Trump, who increased vaccination likelihood among Republicans but decreased it among Democrats. We also investigated the mechanisms underlying this persuasion effect and found that perceived bias and liking were plausible mediators, whereas perceived trustworthiness and expertise were not. This study highlights the potential of having endorsements from both Democrat and Republican political elites to increase support for health behaviors in a politically charged climate.     

Distress,wellbeing, and growth amidst COVID-19: Considering the dynamic interplay between positive and negative anticipatory emotions

Although negative anticipatory emotions are typically seen as risk factors for poorer psychological outcomes over COVID-19, emotion theorists suggest that this risk may be attenuated if balanced by the experience of positive emotion. Thus, the current study examined whether interactions between positive and negative anticipatory emotions were concurrently associated with psychological distress and greater personal wellbeing/posttraumatic growth (PTG) at three distinct periods (i.e., pre-lockdown, during lockdown, post-lockdown), and whether associations varied by these three COVID-19 time periods. The study utilizes two large longitudinal Australian samples, surveyed in 2020 prior to, during, and after a strict 4-month lockdown that occurred in Australia. Overall, positive emotions attenuated the adverse psychological outcomes arising from higher levels of negative emotion (i.e., higher psychological distress and lower personal wellbeing). Observed effects varied according to COVID-19 threat exposure. Specifically, the interaction was significantly associated with psychological distress prior to the lockdown for Sample 2, and during the lockdown for both samples. The interaction was significantly associated with wellbeing (Sample 2) prior to, and during, the lockdown but only marginally associated post-lockdown. The interaction, however, was not significantly associated with PTG (Sample 1). The results suggest that it is valuable for future research to consider greater emotional complexity (i.e., mixed emotions) over COVID-19, and other stressors more generally, to encompass a more nuanced understanding of resilience.     

Validity of the DSM-III-R personality disorder Clusters

This study assessed the validity of the DSM-III-R personality disorder clusters (i.e., odd-eccentric, dramatic-emotional-erratic, and anxious-fearful) by examining the relationships between self-report measures that tap the core features shared by disorders from each cluster and Cluster scores established via a semistructured interview in a sample of 57 outpatients. Results indicated a high degree of correlation among the DSM-III-R personality disorder Cluster scores. In addition, a series of regression analyses revealed that self-report scores did not account for a significant amount of variance in their respective Cluster scores over and above that accounted for by other self-report measures and other Cluster scores. These results suggest that the current DSM-III-R cluster classification scheme may not be appropriate, and it is recommended that a more empirically justifiable classification of the personality disorders be adopted in DSM-IV.     

Order effects in belief updating with consistent and inconsistent evidence

The current study tests for the presence of differential order effects in evaluation tasks with consistent and inconsistent evidence as predicted by the Hogarth and Einhorn (1992) belief-adjustment model. The results, based on both between-subjects and within-subjects experiments, demonstrate that there were significant recency effects with inconsistent evidence as predicted, larger recency effects when the inconsistent evidence was farther apart in subjective value as predicted, and significant recency effects even when subjects were given training designed to both help them understand the task as completely as possible and to be better able to assess the pieces of evidence. By including a within-subjects design, we were able to demonstrate that the difference in subjective value between two pieces of evidence is the primary factor influencing the magnitude of the recency effect, regardless of whether the evidence is consistent or inconsistent. This latter finding is unique and contrary to previous research and theory.