Testing the bidirectional relationship between belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories and psychological distress: A five-wave longitudinal study

Previous studies have primarily focused on understanding why people believe conspiracy theories, especially during societal crises (e.g., the COVID-19 pandemic). The investigation of how such conspiracy beliefs would influence people's mental well-being has just begun recently. The present research aims to address this crucial question by testing the relationships between psychological distress and COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs with a five-wave longitudinal study. On the one hand, COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs could be more appealing to people with heightened distress, as these theories apparently help people to make sense of the uncertainty and life-threatening disease outbreak. On the other hand, conspiracy theories could be a source of existential threat and thus, would induce rather than reduce psychological distress. We tested these possibilities empirically by a series of cross-lagged model analyses. Using the random intercept cross-lagged panel model analysis, we only found a between-person association but not a cross-lagged within-person relationship between the two. COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs was predicted by being more politically conservative. These findings were further corroborated by the supplementary latent growth curve analyses. Overall, our findings suggest that conspiracy beliefs may not induce or reduce psychological distress in the context of COVID-19.     

Did COVID-19 really change our well-being? It's up to meaning in life: Evidence from two longitudinal studies

Since the outbreak of COVID-19, copious studies have explored whether and how COVID-19 has changed individuals' well-being. However, research has revealed mixed and inconsistent findings on this topic, with some suggesting that the pandemic hampered well-being, and others showing non-significant or even opposite patterns. Yet, little is known about what psychological factors could explain such discrepancies. The present study aims to fill this gap by proposing meaning in life (MIL) as a key moderator of the changes in well-being following the pandemic. Two studies reported here (total N = 19,828), which took within-person longitudinal approaches comparing subjective well-being (SWB; hedonic well-being) and psychological well-being (PWB; eudaimonic well-being) before and during COVID-19 (Study 1: 2018, 2019 vs. 2020, 2021; Study 2: 2019 vs. 2021), provided empirical evidence supporting our theoretical claims. Specifically, we found significant moderative effects of MIL in both studies, such that individuals who held a higher MIL amidst COVID-19 experienced an increase in SWB as well as PWB. In stark contrast, the two indicators of well-being declined over time among those who possessed a lower MIL during the pandemic. Overall, our results suggest that MIL serves as one of the significant moderators of the changes in well-being following COVID-19, which may address the previous conflicting findings in this field.     

“They'll take a gun to me before I get that shot”: Rationalization,emotions, and misinformation in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy

Vaccine hesitancy—the reluctance, delay, or refusal to vaccinate regardless of availability—is not a new concept in psychology, medicine, or public health. However, given the emotions surrounding the COVID-19 vaccine, hesitancy has proven difficult to overcome. To-date, the bulk of available data on vaccine hesitancy are quantitative, leaving room for exploratory investigations into the reasons adults remain unvaccinated. This qualitative study assessed the motivations, beliefs, and perceptions of individuals who have decided to remain unvaccinated against COVID-19. We had one exploratory research question: What social psychological justifications emerge from vaccine hesitant people's explanations of their decisions to remain unvaccinated? To assess this question, we conducted 18 interviews with unvaccinated adults throughout 2021–2022. The interviews consisted of 20 questions regarding participants' perceptions of the COVID-19 vaccine and their intentions to get vaccinated. Thematic analysis revealed four main themes in the answers provided by participants: rationalization; identity, beliefs and potential modifiers; emotional responses; and information sources. These results offer insight for future vaccination efforts.     

The effects of social comparison,emotion induction,and parent vaccination status on parental intentions for COVID-19 vaccine uptake in children

Parental vaccine hesitancy—delays in vaccine uptake for children—is a significant public health concern. Using an online adult sample of U.S. parents (N = 183), the current research experimentally examined how exposure to cautious or risky social comparison models on social media (in terms of their COVID-19 beliefs and behaviors) influenced parental intentions to vaccinate their children against COVID-19 in the early stages of the pandemic. Additionally, we examined whether the influence of social comparison models was moderated by emotional state (fear or contentment) and parental vaccination status. Overall, we found that parents exposed to cautious (vs. risky) comparison models and vaccinated (vs. unvaccinated) parents reported greater vaccine intentions for their children. We further found that vaccination intentions were highest among unvaccinated parents after exposure to cautious (vs. risky) comparison models, whereas intentions were highest among vaccinated parents after exposure to risky (vs. cautious) comparison models (but only when induced to feel content). Overall, our findings highlight the importance of understanding the additive and interactive impact of psychological and situational factors in shaping parental vaccine hesitancy.     

Psychological impact of coronavirus-related social isolation in Colombia after a year of lockdown

Several repercussions of the COVID-19 pandemic and its subsequent isolation period have been reported worldwide. In this paper, we analyze the behavioral and emotional effects of 1 year of coronavirus-related lockdown in Colombia. A cross-sectional correlational design was used on a sample of 1853 participants from different regions, and with different levels of education, income, and employment situations. We applied the fear of coronavirus scale, the use of preventive behaviors scale, and a scale to measure pleasant and unpleasant emotions based on the circumplex model of affect. Our data shows that women, participants who were unemployed during the lockdown, and participants that study or work in legal, computational, or related fields, have been more affected in terms of unpleasant emotions. In addition, we observed a trend towards a relation between higher income and educational levels with lower degrees of fear, higher degrees of pleasant emotions, and a greater use of preventive behaviors related to the pandemic.     

Public emotional responses to crisis: The COVID-19 pandemic in Wuhan and London

Online public responses during crises provide a window into how people emotionally react to them. Capitalizing on the international nature of the COVID-19 pandemic, we performed cross-cultural examination of group and individual differences in public emotional responses. We collected 1,106,395 Weibo posts in Wuhan from July 2019 to June 2020 and 6,564,014 tweets in London from October 2019 to July 2020, and found that the public mood in both cities followed a similar pattern during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic: a stage of plunging mood followed by a period of recovery. We further examined the relationship between individuals' personality and mood changes. Our results showed that in Wuhan, emotionally stable people experienced more dramatic mood changes, while in London, people high in agreeableness and conscientiousness were more negatively affected during the lockdown period. Based on our findings, we suggest effective crisis management strategies for both policymakers and individuals.     

Psychopathy and COVID-19: Callousness,impulsivity, and motivational reasons for engaging in prevention behavior

Two direct replication studies were conducted to investigate the associations of psychopathic traits with engagement in COVID-19 prevention behavior and motivational reasons for engaging in such behavior. College undergraduate students completed two self-report measures of psychopathic traits based on the four-factor conceptualization of psychopathy (callous affect, manipulative tendency, erratic lifestyle, criminal tendency) and the triarchic conceptualization of psychopathy (meanness, disinhibition, boldness). Participants then reported the degree to which they engaged in COVID-19 prevention behavior currently and in the past, and reported their self-focused and other-focused motivational reasons for doing so. Results aggregated across both studies (N = 292) revealed that traits reflecting emotional callousness and impulsivity independently predicted lower levels of other-focused reasons for engaging in prevention behavior. Moreover, controlling for other-focused reasons appreciably reduced negative associations of emotional callousness and impulsivity with prevention behavior. The results provide insight into points of convergence in conceptualization and measurement of psychopathy from multiple theoretical perspectives and the importance of considering the impact of divisive personality traits on motivation to protect others during pandemics.     

COVID-19 non-death loss and acceptance coping: A 3-wave cross-lagged panel analysis

Numerous individuals have lost loved ones during the COVID-19 pandemic while millions of others have also experienced ongoing pervasive non-death loss. The understanding of how people deal with non-death loss is still relatively limited. Incorporating theory of coping and loss, this study examines the reciprocal relationship between non-death loss and acceptance coping. Based on the results of a cross-lagged panel model involving 314 participants in China, we found that before the end of the zero-Covid policy, non-death loss at Time 1 predicted less acceptance coping at Time 2, but in the opening up stage in late 2022, non-death loss at time 2 did not predict acceptance coping at time 3. The findings have significant implications for understanding the interplay between non-death loss and acceptance coping and highlights abrupt psychological changes during the COVID-19 pandemic.     

Do face masks undermine social connection?

Mask mandates were commonplace around the world during the COVID-19 pandemic and essential to slowing the spread of SARS-CoV-2. However, it is still unclear whether and how masks impact social bonding. Building on past research examining the effects of masking on emotion recognition and social perception, the current research examines the effect of masking on feelings of social connectedness. Three studies (total N = 177) using videotaped introductions of masked and unmasked peers and varied assessments of desire for social connectedness yielded no differences as a function of masking. Although participants reported more difficulty hearing masked (vs. unmasked) peers, masking did not significantly impact other facets of communication or perception related to social bonding. When participants filmed their own introductory videos (Study 3), results showed increased expressivity within the masked (vs. unmasked) conditions, perhaps as a compensatory measure to aid bonding. These findings speak to the resiliency of the human need to belong and belonging-maintenance processes.     

Cultural influence on COVID-19 cognitions and growth speed: The role of collectivism

Major challenges faced by humans often require large-scale cooperation for communal benefits. We examined what motivates such cooperation in the context of social distancing and mask wearing to reduce the transmission intensity of the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19). We hypothesized that collectivism, a cultural variable characterizing the extent that individuals see themselves in relation to others, contributes to people's willingness to engage in these behaviors. Consistent with preregistered predictions, across three studies (n = 2864), including a U.S. nationally representative sample, collectivist orientation was positively associated with intentions, positive beliefs, norm perceptions, and policy support for the preventive behaviors. Further, at a country level, more collectivist countries showed lower growth rates in both COVID-19 confirmed cases and deaths. Together, these studies demonstrate the role of collectivism in reducing COVID-19 transmission, and highlight the value of considering culture in public health policies and communications.