Well-being during the coronavirus pandemic: The effect of big five personality and COVID-19 beliefs and behaviors

This study examined the relationship between personality traits, COVID-specific beliefs and behaviors, and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. In July 2020, at the onset of a second major lockdown, Australian adults (n = 1453) completed measures of Big Five personality, COVID beliefs and behaviors (i.e., belief in a rapid recovery, perceived risk, compliance, change in exercise, and change in interpersonal conflict), subjective well-being and COVID-specific well-being. Personality correlates of COVID-specific well-being differed from those with general life satisfaction. The benefits of conscientiousness were elevated whereas the benefits of extraversion and agreeableness were reduced. Neuroticism was related to greater perceived risk from the pandemic, elevated interpersonal conflict during the pandemic, and more pessimistic views about the rate at which society would recover from the pandemic. In contrast, conscientiousness was notably related to greater compliance with directions from public health authorities. While regression models showed that general well-being was largely explained by personality, COVID factors provided incremental prediction, and this was greatest when predicting COVID-specific well-being and lowest for global evaluations of life satisfaction. The observed prediction by beliefs and behaviors on well-being beyond personality, provides potential opportunities for targeted interventions to support the management of future novel stressors.     

Goal disruption during COVID-19: Reimagining goals during a global pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has been a major source of professional and personal disruption and has had both direct and downstream consequences on almost every aspect of peoples' lives, including their personal goal pursuits. In the face of unexpected hardships and obstacles, people have had to find new paths to goal achievement. In the present work, we examined whether difficulty adjusting goal pursuit during the global disruption of the COVID-19 pandemic is related to negative affective, cognitive, and behavioral goal-related outcomes. Across two studies, we found that people who had more difficulty adjusting their goal pursuit during the pandemic experienced more negative feelings toward their goals, were less satisfied with the status of their goals, and were less likely to actually achieve their goals. Moreover, individual differences in planning tendencies, need for predictability, general adaptability, and perceived pandemic disruption were related to more difficulty adjusting goal pursuit. This work demonstrates the importance of flexibility in the face of setbacks and obstacles, especially during times of disruption and uncertainty.     

Changes in college students' socioeconomic status aspirations during the COVID-19 pandemic

Although university students tend to be optimistic about their future socioeconomic status (SES), little is known how their SES aspirations changed during the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Using latent growth curve modeling techniques, we examined changes in subjective SES aspirations for students who began college before the pandemic (cohort 1; Fall 2019) and students who began college during the pandemic (cohort 2; Fall 2020). Moreover, we assessed how SES indicators (i.e., subjective family SES; first-generation status; low-income status) and a contextual financial indicator (i.e., pandemic-related financial impacts) predicted changes in SES aspirations for both groups of students. Although SES aspirations were similar at the beginning of college for both groups of students, students who began college before the pandemic experienced a greater rate of downward change between the baseline assessment and the assessment shortly after the pandemic began. In both cohorts, students from higher-SES families had higher SES aspirations at the beginning of college and steeper rates of downward change. Furthermore, despite having similar SES aspirations at the beginning of college, first-generation students whose first year was interrupted by the pandemic experienced steeper downward changes in their SES aspirations. However, pandemic-related financial impacts did not predict this downward change for either cohort. Our findings suggest that uncertainty in the early stages of the pandemic may have led to cautiousness in students' aspirations for their future SES attainment, particularly for first-generation students.     

Associations between power,stress, and dominance in romantic relationships during the COVID-19 pandemic: Examining curvilinear and within-person effects

Two key processes in romantic relationships—power and dominance—can contribute to relationship disruption, but the association between these variables is complex. Elucidating the association between power and dominance during the COVID-19 pandemic is particularly important given the economic, social, and health-related stressors that pose a risk to relationship health. We examined associations between power, stress, and dominance by recruiting 1813 participants to complete an initial online survey at the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. Participants were contacted 10 and 22 months later to complete follow-up surveys. Results revealed two main effects: individuals who had greater relationship power and experienced more COVID-19-related stressors than other people engaged in more dominance behaviors. A significant curvilinear effect revealed that at low levels of power, power was not associated with dominance behaviors. However, once power surpassed low levels, individuals with more power engaged in more dominance behaviors. Finally, people engaged in more dominance behaviors when they experienced more power and stress compared to their own average (i.e., within-person effects) during the pandemic. Implications for theories of power, dominance, and relationship disruption and distress are discussed.     

Relationship between COVID-19-related stress and social inhibition among university students in China: The mediating role of psychological richness

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, the mental health issues of university students received increasing attention. However, little is known about the effect of COVID-19-related stress on social inhibition among Chinese university students and its psychological mechanism in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. This study aimed to explore the relationship between COVID-19-related stress and social inhibition as well as the mediating role of psychological richness. In late 2022, 1250 Chinese university students were recruited for participation in an online survey. Modified SARS-Stress Scale, Social Inhibition Questionnaire, and Psychologically Rich Life Questionnaire were used to assess participants' COVID-19-related stress, social inhibition, and psychological richness. The Results indicate that COVID-19-related stress positively predicts social inhibition and negatively predicts psychological richness. Meanwhile, Psychological richness negatively predicts social inhibition. Mediation analysis shows that the relationship between COVID-19-related stress and social inhibition was partially mediated by psychological richness. The results indicate the significant predictive value of psychological richness when studying mental health issues.     

Worth the risk? Fear of being single and willingness to make risky health decisions in sex and dating contexts

Does fear of being single (FOBS) predict risky health behaviors when such behavior could promote pursuit of a romantic connection? Study 1 tested general tendencies toward taking health risks associated with FOBS. Study 2 tested how those with stronger FOBS navigated romantic versus non-romantic risk behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic. Study 3 extended the test of risky behavior beyond the pandemic to test whether FOBS was associated with willingness to engage in risky sexual behavior. Despite nonsignificant associations with taking health risks more generally, FOBS was associated with greater willingness to engage in risky behaviors in dating contexts, particularly when considering their willingness to settle for less in relationships. This research provides novel insight into dating choices associated with stronger FOBS and how willingness to settle predicts risky health behavior when it could appeal to romantic prospects.     

From model minority to yellow peril: How threat perceptions and disgust predict anti-Asian prejudice during COVID-19

During the COVID-19 pandemic, hate crimes against Asians sharply increased in the United States. We investigated whether the threat of contracting COVID-19 and specific negative emotions (disgust, anxiety, fear, and anger) regarding COVID-19 predicted anti-Asian prejudice in a 3-wave longitudinal study of non-Asian American adults (N = 486) in the early days of the pandemic in 2020. In all 3 timepoints, participants who believed that they may have already contracted COVID and those who expressed greater disgust reported more anti-Asian attitudes, evaluated Asians as less than human, tolerated anti-Asian prejudice, and blamed Asians for spreading COVID-19. In a well-fitting longitudinal path model, we found longitudinal evidence for these associations, such that the belief that one had already contracted COVID-19 in March 2020 predicted greater disgust one month later, in April 2020, which in turn predicted greater anti-Asian prejudice in May 2020.     

“I'm Moderna,what are you?” Evidence that people favor those who received their same brand COVID-19 vaccine

In two studies, we investigated the extent to which people are biased toward people with the same COVID-19 vaccine brand using a monetary allocation task. Informed by theoretical approaches to intergroup bias and the minimal-groups paradigm, we expected that, when deciding how to allocate financial resources among three different people—each with an equal need for assistance but a different COVID-19 vaccine brand—people would allocate more money, on average, to those who received the same versus different vaccine brand than participants personally received. We found in Study 1 (N = 94) that people given a hypothetical $10.00 experimental endowment allocated an average of $2.00 more when a person was a member of their vaccine ingroup than to those from their vaccine brand outgroup. We replicated this effect in Study 2 (N = 219), finding that people continued to allocate more money ($1.42) to a person from their vaccine brand ingroup versus those from their vaccine brand outgroup. Taken together, this work suggests that, among vaccinated people, the brand of another person's vaccine meaningfully influences the allocation of monetary resources and that people are biased toward people with the same COVID-19 vaccine brand. Implications for social identity theories are discussed.     

Counterfactual thinking may attenuate polarization of COVID-19 prevention behavior

Data from two U.S. online samples (N = 613) indicated that conservatives consistently perceived face mask use as less important than did liberals. This difference was attenuated with high counterfactual engagement. Both studies provide correlational evidence of this robust moderation. Study 2 provides further insight into differences between liberals' and conservatives' emotional responses to COVID-19 information, and suggests that during on-going negative events, downward counterfactuals may not provide relief. Overall, these studies document the politicization of public health behavior, and find that emphasizing the causal links between behavior and COVID-19 prevention may improve conservatives' attitudes toward CDC guidelines.     

Contagious or prosocial? Perceptions of mask-wearers toward Whites and Asians: A cross-cultural comparison during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a worldwide increase in the use of face masks to prevent viral transmission. However, as mask-wearing was a new behavior in many countries, there was a limited understanding of how mask-wearers are perceived and how such perceptions impact one's own mask-wearing behavior. Mask-wearers may be seen as contagious or prosocial, and these perceptions may vary based on the race of the mask-wearer and the country of the observer, particularly given the rise in pandemic-related anti-Asian rhetoric in the U.S. In three experiments (N = 579), we investigated these questions, conducting two studies in the United States (May and July 2020), where mask-wearing was new and anti-Asian rhetoric has been prevalent, and one study in South Korea (November 2020), where mask-wearing was relatively common. Results indicate that masked individuals are perceived as less contagious and more prosocial, regardless of target race or participant nation. These perceptions were more pronounced among American political liberals, Americans who are more sensitive to infection transmission (Study 2), and Koreans who self-perceived a greater vulnerability to infection (Study 3). Especially in the U.S., perceiving the masked target as more prosocial predicted more self-reported mask-wearing, while perceiving the masked target as more contagious and less prosocial predicted less mask-wearing (Study 2). These findings provide insights into social perceptions of masks and race during the pandemic.