Self-compassion,coping strategies and gender differences in psychology,counselling and psychotherapy practitioners during COVID-19: Lessons learnt

Effective coping strategies can protect against the adverse effects of stress. This study investigated self-compassion's ability to predict approach and avoidance coping in psychology, counselling and psychotherapy practitioners (PCPPs) during COVID-19, and whether this differed between genders. To date, no research has investigated this relationship, despite positive associations being drawn in other populations. Three hundred and nineteen PCPPs completed an online survey including the Brief COPE and Self-Compassion Short Form. Self-compassion significantly predicted greater use of approach coping and reduced use of avoidance coping. The predictive ability of self-compassion was slightly better in female practitioners. Self-judgement arose as a prominent subscale of self-compassion across genders, increasing both approach and avoidance coping. Implications for future research and practice are discussed, concerning barriers to self-compassion and the requirement of therapeutic programmes and psychoeducation as a prerequisite for effective coping strategies in the PCPP population.     

论公共卫生领域个人隐私保护

新型冠状病毒肺炎疫情已成为全球重大突发公共卫生事件。防疫工作中,既要维护公共利益,又要保护个人隐私。从公共卫生伦理学角度,认为保护个人隐私是实现社会公平正义的需要,是实现个人安全需要、尊重需要、情感需要、生活需要的前提;而隐私保护不足的表现主要为个人信息的泄露和网络人肉搜索。其原因是法律规范不足、公开界限模糊、道德规范滞后、隐私意识薄弱、群体存在利己心理和偏颇的推理心理。由此提出合理利用《个人信息保护法》保护个人隐私权益、拓宽隐私保护意识培育途径、给予弱势群体人文关怀的对策。

     

COVID-19防控的责任伦理考量

在积极应对疫情防控引发的法律及现实问题的同时,应该更加关注其责任伦理问题。如个人自由与公共责任冲突的问题,特殊从业者与职业责任冲突的问题,政府公权力的行使主体与个人知情同意的冲突问题。针对上述问题,基于责任伦理原则,提出培养个人责任伦理意识,形成群体认知共识、制定特殊人员免责条款,约束集体无意识的责任迷失、政府明确社会组织主体行使公权力的权利及限度等具体对策完善COVID-19防控机制,以保护人民的生命健康权益,促进当前及未来社会的稳定发展。

     

There are higher levels of conspiracy beliefs in more corrupt countries

In four studies, I found evidence that people living in countries with higher levels of corruption have a greater tendency for conspiracy ideation. In Study 1 (21 countries, N = 20,207), participants living in more corrupt countries reported having higher COVID-19 and generic conspiracy beliefs. Study 2 (25 countries, N = 4935), Study 3 (25 countries, N = 24,424), and Study 4 (24 countries, N = 5973) replicated the same finding. Internal meta-analysis suggested that this association remained significant after adjusting for other relevant cross-country differences. Studies 1 and 2, but not 3 and 4, also showed that corruption moderated the association between individuals’ gullibility (i.e., lack of education) and their conspiracy beliefs, and this association was significant only in low-corruption countries. The findings suggest that country-level corruption breeds conspiracy beliefs and moderates the effect of individuals’ gullibility on conspiracy beliefs.     

“What's going on?” Racism,COVID-19, and centering the voices of Black youth

This study examined the impact of COVID-19 stress and experiences of racism on COVID-19 adaptability and activism among Black youth. The protective role of perceived peer and adult social support were examined. Data were analyzed from 123 Black youth (M_age = 15.44, 63% girls) from a school district in the Midwest. The findings revealed that more social support from adults increased Black youth adaptability (e.g., “ability to think through possible options to assist in the COVID-19 pandemic”). Perceived lower social support from adults predicted higher engagement in high-risk activism, and higher levels of peer social support were associated with higher levels of high-risk activism. Further, Black youth reporting higher levels of racism and adult social support were more likely to report higher levels of COVID-19 adaptability. Black youth reporting higher racism and peer social support engaged in high-risk activism. Black youth who reported high levels of racism and low perceived adult social support reported higher engagement in high-risk activism. Research and practice implications that support Black youth during the COVID-19 pandemic and the impact of racism and COVID-19 stress on well-being and activism are discussed.     

Belief in COVID-19 misinformation: Hopeful claims are rated as truer

Misinformation surrounding COVID-19 spread rapidly and widely, posing a significant threat to public health. Here, we examined whether some types of misinformation are more believable than others, to the extent that they offer people hope in uncertain times. An initial group of subjects rated a series of COVID-19 misinformation statements for whether each made them feel more or less hopeful (if true). Based on these ratings, we selected two sets of misinformation that differed in their average rated hopefulness; the two sets did not differ in word length or reading ease. In two studies, people rated their belief in each statement. Results from both studies revealed that people rated the more hopeful misinformation (e.g., COVID cures and prevention methods) as truer than less hopeful misinformation (e.g., transmission vectors). These findings are consistent with a motivated reasoning account of misinformation acceptance.     

No relevant spectator impact on home advantage in male and female professional volleyball – A longitudinal multilevel logistic model analysis over 25 years

Home advantage (HA) regularly occurs in volleyball (Pollard et al., 2017: men: 56.62%, women: 55.26%). Research to date has investigated primarily small samples of mostly female matches and not looked into the potential impact of spectators on HA. This archival analysis uses multilevel modelling to examine HA in professional German volleyball (men & women) over 25 seasons in all regular and play-off matches (N = 6,833). We analyze how spectators drive HA and whether this projects to the COVID-19 season 2020/21.When intercepts varied between teams (2-level model, ICC = 27%), the winning probability increased when playing at home (men: 57.01%, OR_men = 2.39, d = 0.48; women: 55.39%, OR_women = 2.19, d = 0.43), while controlling for team strength, interaction with gender, and travelling distance. More spectators had a negligible effect on the men’s and women’s chances (|d| < 0.07). Similar trends were observed for the probability of winning sets. Contrary to other team sports (e.g., soccer), there is no HA-development over the last decades.     

Does partisan media make a pawn of mistrust? Institutional trust and preventive COVID-19 health behaviors in a polarized pandemic

In a rapidly developing crisis such as the COVID-19 pandemic, people are often faced with contradictory or changing information and must determine what sources to trust. Across five time points (N = 5902) we examine how trust in various sources predicts COVID-19 health behaviors. Trust in experts and national news predicted more engagement with most health behaviors from April 2020 to March 2022 and trust in Fox news, which often positioned itself as counter to the mainstream on COVID-19, predicted less engagement. However, we also examined a particular public health behavior (masking) before and after the CDC announcement recommending masks on 3 April 2020 (which reversed earlier expert advice discouraging masks for the general public). Prior to the announcement, trust in experts predicted less mask-wearing while trust in Fox News predicted more. These relationships disappeared in the next 4 days following the announcement and reversed in the 2 years that follow, and emerged for vaccination in the later time points. We also examine how the media trusted by Democrats and Republicans predicts trust in experts and in turn health behaviors. Broadly we consider how the increasingly fragmented epistemic environment has implications for polarization on matters of public health.     

Openness relates to COVID-19 vaccination rates across 48 United States but politics trump personality

Does geographic variation in personality across the United States relate to COVID-19 vaccination rates? To answer this question, we combined multiple state-level datasets: (a) Big Five personality averages (i.e., extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and openness; Rentfrow et al., 2008), (b) COVID-19 full-vaccination rates (CDC, 2021a), (c) health-relevant demographic covariates (population density, per capita gross domestic product, and racial/ethnic data; Webster et al., 2021), and (d) political and religiosity data. Analyses showed openness as the strongest correlate of full-vaccination rates (r = 0.51). Controlling for other traits, demographic covariates, and spatial dependence, openness remained significantly related to full-vaccination rates (r_p = 0.55). Adding political and religiosity data to this model diminished openness effects for full-vaccination rates to non-significance (r_p = 0.26); however, extraversion emerged as a significant correlate of full-vaccination rates (r_p = 0.37). Although politics are paramount, we suspect that states with higher average openness scores are more conducive to novel thinking and behavior—dispositions that may be crucial in motivating people to take newly-developed vaccines based on new technologies to confront a novel coronavirus.     

Collective views of vaccination predict vaccine hesitancy and willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine

We examined the association between sociodemographic factors, views of vaccines as being an individual choice to protect oneself versus a collective choice to protect others, general vaccine hesitancy, and willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. In a sample of adults (N = 619; 33% non-white), we showed that demographic factors explain significant variance in both vaccine hesitancy and willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Viewing vaccines as an individual choice to protect oneself explained additional variance in vaccine hesitancy. However, people who viewed vaccines as a collective choice to protect others showed both less vaccine hesitancy and greater willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. These findings suggest that promoting prosocial attitudes about vaccinations may decrease vaccine hesitancy and increase vaccine uptake.