Centering culture in the treatment of opioid use disorder with American Indian and Alaska Native Communities: Contributions from a National Collaborative Board

American Indian/Alaska Native (AI/AN) communities are disproportionally impacted by the opioid overdose epidemic. There remains a dearth of research evaluating methods for effectively implementing treatments for opioid use disorder (OUD) within these communities. We describe proceedings from a 2-day Collaborative Board (CB) meeting tasked with developing an implementation intervention for AI/AN clinical programs to improve the delivery of medications to treat OUD (MOUD). The CB was comprised of Elders, cultural leaders, providers, individuals with lived experience with OUD, and researchers from over 25 communities, organizations, and academic institutions. Conversations were audio-recorded, transcribed, and coded by two academic researchers with interpretation oversight provided by the CB. These proceedings provided a foundation for ongoing CB work and a frame for developing the program-level implementation intervention using a strength-based and holistic model of OUD recovery and wellbeing. Topics of discussion posed to the CB included engagement and recovery strategies, integration of extended family traditions, and addressing stigma and building trust with providers and clients. Integration of traditional healing practices, ceremonies, and other cultural practices was recommended. The importance of centering AI/AN culture and involving family were highlighted as priorities for the intervention.     

Police,courts, and corrections: Experiences of procedural injustice among Black adults

Racial disparities and a corresponding lack of trust have been documented within the criminal legal system. In response, criminal legal system actors have sought to strengthen the legitimacy of their agencies. However, legitimizing these agencies can be problematic. Some argue that the current criminal legal system continues the legacy of slavery and Jim Crow as Blacks are disproportionately policed and incarcerated. As a framework, procedural injustice can offer a unique backdrop and interrogate ways in which the criminal legal system engages in delegitimizing actions that provoke noncompliance and enable social control. Using a procedural injustice lens, this study examines how justice-involved Black adults experience mistreatment by justice system actors. Semistructured interviews were conducted with 84 Black adults in Newark and Cleveland. Study findings offer a comprehensive account of how participants experience procedural injustice as arrestees, defendants, and incarcerated persons. More specifically, participant narratives describe deliberately antagonistic, abusive, and dehumanizing treatment by justice-system agents—often depicted as racially motivated. Participant accounts also describe this mistreatment as occurring in a context of coercion and powerlessness and as being institutionally sanctioned. Implications for the preservation of racial hierarchies, research, practice, and community psychology are discussed.     

Intentional response distortion during the COVID-19 pandemic

COVID-19 has abruptly and unexpectedly transformed nearly every aspect of work, including but not limited to increased unemployment rates and uncertainty regarding future job prospects. Response distortion has always been a concern given that many organizations rely on information that is self-reported by applicants regarding their potential employability (e.g., responses to self-reported personality instruments, resumes, interview responses). Drawing from the Valence-Instrumentality-Expectancy (VIE) theory of motivation, we propose that the uncertainty surrounding jobs may lead to amplified distorted responses on these measures in areas where COVID-19 was most salient. In a sample of 213 working adults [~50% female, age M = 38.48], the present study shows that increases in response distortion on a measure of conscientiousness were more pronounced as a function of (a) local COVID positivity rates and (b) job type, such that frontline workers distorted their responses the most. Findings are discussed in the context of VIE theory, personality measurement, and challenges with maintaining effective selection procedures.     

Rapport-building: Chat versus in-person witness interviews

Tactics recommended for rapport-building consist of verbal (e.g., finding common ground or shared experiences) and non-verbal (e.g., affirmations, displaying empathy) behaviours. Most of the research on rapport, however, has examined it in in-person contexts, where both verbal and non-verbal behaviours are present. In this study, we were interested in the effectiveness of rapport-building when conducting online witness interviews via chat, which de-emphasises the use non-verbal rapport behaviours, compared to traditional in-person interviews. Participants (N = 131) experienced a virtual reality (VR) scenario depicting a mock crime and were interviewed either in person or online via the chat function in Skype. Participants perceived rapport more positively when interviewed in person for three measures: attentiveness, trust and respect and expertise. Two other measures, cultural similarity and connected flow, were not perceived differently across interview medium. Participants interviewed online via chat disclosed similar amounts of crime-related information and were just as accurate as participants interviewed in person. We found that in-person interviews yielded better rapport ratings than interviews via chat but were equally productive in terms of the quality of information obtained, as measured by crime-related details and accuracy. If witnesses are to be interviewed via chat, investigators must carefully consider how to compensate for the lack of those non-verbal rapport tactics that influence witnesses' perceptions of attentiveness, trust/respect and investigator's expertise.     

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.     

Context-dependent shifts in self-regulatory personality processes during COVID-19: Changes in control predict dynamic shifts in goal reengagement capacity

The ability to reengage with new attainable goals after major setbacks is a core self-regulatory trait linked to health and well-being. Yet little is known about the extent to which such goal reengagement capacities may shift over time in response to changing contextual circumstances. Using a nationally-representative sample of U.S. adults aged 18–80 (n = 293), the present 1-year study examined whether changes in opportunity to influence life circumstances (perceived control) were coupled with dynamic shifts in goal reengagement capacity for individuals who differed in their levels of control at pandemic onset. Results from multilevel models showed that within-person increases in perceived control during the pandemic predicted corresponding within-person increases in goal reengagement capacity. Moderation models showed that the positive within-person association between perceived control and goal reengagement was pronounced for individuals with lower levels of control at pandemic onset who may be particularly sensitive to periods of opportunity to pursue new attainable goals. Findings inform theories of personality and self-regulation in pointing to contextual circumstances under which goal reengagement capacity exhibits dynamic shifts in populations who differ in their perceived opportunities for control.     

Social cohesion predicts COVID-19 vaccination intentions and uptake

COVID-19 vaccination is widely regarded as an individual decision, resting upon individual characteristics and demographic factors. In this research, we provide evidence that psychological group membership, and more precisely, social cohesion—a multidimensional concept that encompasses one's sense of connectedness to, and interrelations within, a group—can help us understand COVID-19 vaccination intentions (Study 1) and uptake (Study 2). Study 1 is a repeated-measures study with a representative sample of 3026 Australians. We found evidence that social cohesion can be conceptualised as a multidimensional structure; moreover, social cohesion at Wave 1 (early in the COVID-19) predicted greater vaccination intention and lower perceived risk of vaccination at Wave 2 (4 months later). In Study 2 (a cross-sectional study, N = 499), the multidimensional structure of social cohesion was associated with greater uptake of vaccine doses (in addition to willingness to receive further doses and perceived risk of the vaccine). These relations were found after controlling for a series of demographic (i.e., sex, age, income), health-related factors (i.e., subjective health; perceived risk; having been diagnosed with COVID-19), and individual differences (political orientation, social dominance orientation, individualism). These results demonstrate the need to go beyond individual factors when it comes to behaviours that protect groups, and particularly when examining COVID-19 vaccination—one of the most important ways of slowing the spread of the virus.     

Compensation for mental-mental claims under Canadian law

Canadian Workers Compensation Boards have recently been confronted with claims for compensation for disability related to workplace stress. Rules of adjudication applied to such claims are currently evolving in the 11 Canadian jurisdictions studied. This article describes the Canadian Workers' Compensation schemes and then proceeds to analyse the approach of the various provincial Boards to mental-mental claims. It explores some of the differences between the Canadian and American approaches to the issue of compensation for psychological workplace stress, offers hypotheses as to the reasons for the disparities, and looks at the future of such claims.