Does disseminating (mis)information restore social connection during a global pandemic?

The COVID-19 pandemic impeded social interaction, negatively affecting well-being worldwide. To slow virus spread, practices were enacted to minimize face-to-face contact, leading to increased social disconnection. As people turned increasingly to online environments (e.g., social media) to fulfill needs for inclusion and belonging, misinformation regarding COVID-19 simultaneously ran rampant. The purpose of the current study was to examine whether impeded social inclusion may have contributed to the spread of misinformation. We recruited a sample of adult social media users in the United States (N = 431) and randomly assigned them to be either included, ostracized (i.e., ignored), or rejected (i.e., to receive explicitly negative attention). Participants subsequently rated their willingness to share COVID-19 claims via social media (in fact, all claims were false). Participants learned that sharing some claims would likely lead to high expected engagement from others on social media (e.g., “likes”), whereas some claims would likely lead to little expected engagement. While information sharing was low in our sample, participants were more willing to share claims that they believed would lead to higher levels of engagement—consistent with the idea that sharing information is motivated not only by the desire to educate others but also to elicit social connection. However, this behavioral intention was no more common among participants who had been momentarily ostracized or rejected online than among participants who had been included. Future research should continue to explore the link between social exclusion and the motivation to disseminate (mis)information beyond a pandemic-related context.     

Why Have We Been More Successful in Reducing Tobacco Use Than Violent Crime?

Tobacco control efforts have been associated with a significant reduction in the prevalence of tobacco use in the United States. Efforts to reduce the incidence of violent crime have been much less successful. This paper argues that progress on tobacco control stems from the existence of a clear, empirically based, and widely understood analysis of the tobacco problem that articulates (a) the harms associated with its use, (b) the causes of tobacco use, and (c) the programs and policies that could reduce tobacco use. This analysis has guided the development of a network of social organizations that have been advocating for policies and programs that are reducing tobacco use. In contrast, there is not a widely shared, cogent, and empirically based analysis of the problem of violent crime. As a result, efforts to combat violent crime are fragmented and it has proven difficult to generate support for preventive programs and policies. Substantial empirical progress has been made, however, on how violent crime could be prevented. That evidence is reviewed. It is argued that the articulation of this evidence is a critical first step for achieving widespread reduction in the incidence of violent crime. Communication of that evidence to audiences that matter will require that behavioral scientists become better organized to advocate for the adoption of empirically supported practices.     

Predictors of champion behaviors in an evidence-based parenting program: A structural equation modeling approach

The importance of champions in the implementation of evidence-based public health programs has been well established. Champions perform a range of behaviors which can have significant influence on the adoption and sustainability of interventions. This study investigates champion behaviors in parenting practitioners with the aim to provide insight into the range and extent that practitioners engage in champion behaviors and to examine predictors of practitioners' champion behaviors using structural equation modeling. Data were collected during a large international implementation survey of 1606 practitioners trained to deliver an evidence-based parenting program, the triple P—Positive Parenting Program. We developed a 13-item Champion Behaviors Scale which was administered alongside other measures of predictors of implementation outcomes. Perceived usefulness of the program was the most important facilitator of both public and personal champion behaviors. Certain desirable features of the program tended to not only be positively associated with the perceived usefulness of the program, but also had a unique impact on practitioners' personal champion behaviors. Higher positions within organizations were linked with more public champion behaviors. Although organizational support was found to be unrelated to champion behaviors in the structural model, it facilitated other predictors of champion behaviors.     

Is hostile attributional bias associated with negative urgency and impulsive behaviors? A social-cognitive conceptualization of impulsivity

The aim of this study was to verify the relevance of social information-processing (SIP) models in the study of impulsivity. 170 undergraduates completed the UPPS Impulsive Behavior Scale relevant to negative urgency, the SIP–AEQ and control measures. The SIP–AEQ consists of eight vignettes featuring a social situation measuring hostile attributional bias (HAB), emotional responses and impulsive behaviors in response to an ambiguous social provocation. Regression analyses showed negative urgency’s unique contribution to indirect HAB after controlling for the effects of aggressiveness, negative emotions and lack of perseverance, another UPPS dimension of impulsivity. Analyses also revealed that indirect HAB mediates the relationship between negative urgency and impulsive behaviors, after controlling for the effects of aggressiveness and negative emotions. Results suggest that SIP models are relevant to study the active social cognitive processes in impulsive behaviors of high-urgency individuals.     

Preschoolers’ distress and regulatory behaviors vary as a function of infant–mother attachment security

Children (N = 98) with higher attachment security scores, and lower resistance and avoidance scores during the Strange Situation at 16 months demonstrated somewhat more adaptive observed and mother-reported emotion regulation as preschoolers independent of maternal behavior.     

Distinguishing among disruptive behaviors to help predict high school graduation: Does gender matter?

This study examined unique predictive associations of aggressive and hyperactive–inattentive behaviors in elementary school with high school graduation. The current study also investigated whether these associations were moderated by gender. At Time 1, 745 children in the 3rd through 5th grades completed peer ratings on their classmates’ disruptive behaviors. At Time 2, school records were reviewed to determine whether students graduated within four years of entering high school. Results showed that gender and hyperactivity-inattention are uniquely associated with high school graduation, but childhood aggression is not. Results also indicated that gender moderated associations between hyperactivity–inattention and graduation. Among boys, hyperactive–inattentive behaviors were not significantly associated with graduation, above and beyond aggression. In contrast, among girls, hyperactive–inattentive behaviors in childhood were significantly associated with graduation even after controlling for aggression. These findings suggest that in middle childhood, hyperactive–inattentive behaviors may be a more meaningful predictor of high school graduation than other forms of early disruptive behavior (e.g., aggression), especially for girls. Such findings could have significant implications for prevention and intervention programs designed to target children at risk for dropping out of school.     

Ideology and Gender: Observers’ System Justification and Targets’ Gender as Interactive Predictors of Citizenship Expectations

We integrate system justification and social role theory to explain how observers’ system justification and target employees’ gender interact to predict observers’ expectations of targets’ sportsmanship citizenship behaviors. In contrast with social role theory predictions, observers did not expect greater levels of sportsmanship from women compared to men. Yet observers expected more sportsmanship from women (a) when observers were ideologically motivated by gender-specific beliefs (gender-specific system justification; Study 1) and (b) when system justification was cued experimentally (Study 2). A heretofore-unexamined aspect, observers’ ideology, modifies their expectations of sportsmanship citizenship across target genders. This has implications for system justification, social role, and organizational citizenship theoretical perspectives.