Majority world successes and European and American failure to contain COVID‐19: Cultural collectivism and global leadership

United Nations and World Health Organization data show a positive correlation, r = .53, p < .0001, N = 189, between COVID‐19 infection rates and the human development index (HDI). Less wealthy, less educated countries with lower life spans were also more successful in maintaining lower fatality rates, r = .46, p < .0001, N = 189 whereas 9 of the top‐10 countries in the world in per capita fatalities due to COVID‐19 were Western societies high in HDI. Similar positive correlations were found between COVID‐19 infection and fatality rates and a smaller sample of 76 countries measured on Schwartz intellectual autonomy (or individualism), and negative correlations of similar magnitude were found for embeddedness (or collectivism). East Asia was a global leader in preventing the spread of COVID‐19 because of a vigilant public concerned for public safety and compliant with public safety measures. African Union leaders coordinated their responses, and bought into a continent‐wide African Medical Supplies Platform that prevented panicked competition for scare supplies. Western global media and scholars have not paid attention to the successes of East Asia, Africa, and the South Pacific in fighting the pandemic. It is worth asking why this should be the case; understand the weaknesses of extreme individualism in fighting a pandemic requiring coordinated and unified public response, and consider the lessons for global scholars from the pandemic for doing research in the future.     

Effects of containment and closure policies on controlling the COVID‐19 pandemic in East Asia

Growing efforts have been made to pool coronavirus data and control measures from countries and regions to compare the effectiveness of government policies. We examine whether these strategies can explain East Asia’s effective control of the COVID‐19 pandemic based on time‐series data with cross‐correlations between the Stringency Index and number of confirmed cases during the early period of outbreaks. We suggest that multidisciplinary empirical research in healthcare and social sciences, personality, and social psychology is needed for a clear understanding of how cultural values, social norms, and individual predispositions interact with policy to affect life‐saving behavioural changes in different societies.     

Selfish power and unselfish status in Chinese work situations

The present research explored the selfishness of power and status as well as the mechanism in Chinese work situations. By using experimental and survey methods, two studies were designed to investigate the relationships among power, status, and self‐interested behaviour (SIB) as well as the mediating effect of perspective‐taking (PT). Results of the two studies consistently indicated that power increases whereas status reduces SIB. These opposing behavioural effects are partially attributed to the fact that power reduces whereas status increases PT. In addition, our results showed an interaction between power and status on SIB in Study 1 (interaction as a mental function), and a positive correlation between perceived power and status in Study 2 (correlation as a mental perception). Through the discussion from the perspective of the self/other‐orientation trait, as well as the stable effects of power and status on SIB in the two studies, we conclude that power is selfish and status is unselfish in Chinese work situations.     

Research in counselling and psychotherapy Post‐COVID‐19

The COVID‐19 pandemic brings to light many areas the field of counselling and psychotherapy may need to address in future research. We outline several issues stemming from or exacerbated by the pandemic and offer suggestions for future research to address the mental health needs of those impacted. Our suggestions focus on five domains: (a) the health and well‐being of helping professionals, (b) the infodemic, (c) discrimination and minority stress, (d) spiritual and existential dynamics in mental health and (e) couple and family stress and resilience. We aim to provide a multi‐systemic perspective of mental health and well‐being in the time of COVID‐19, as well as encourage current and future studies to incorporate these suggestions to advance the health and well‐being of our communities through evidence‐based treatment approaches.     

多时点结果跨期选择的决策效应及其心理机制

多时点结果跨期选择涉及两个及两个以上多个时点结果的权衡, 正日益成为跨期选择的研究重点。现有研究主要从两时点结果和序列结果两方面深入探讨了多时点结果跨期选择中的诸多决策效应, 包括：隐藏的零效应、象征效应、额外金额效应、前端金额效应以及序列效应, 并运用序列模型和权衡模型对上述决策效应进行阐释。未来还应深入探索同时涉及损益结果混合的多时点结果跨期选择, 运用决策过程追踪技术揭示决策效应的过程机制。     

One Roof,Three Generations: Grandparental Co-residence and Child Outcomes in China

This study examined the association between grandparental co-residence and child academic and behavioral outcomes using a sample from Shanghai, China (n = 1,763), and was built on two theoretical perspectives: intergenerational solidarity theory and the contextual model of family stress. These models integrate the impact of residential and relational proximity to grandparents on child well-being and underscore the importance of family context. This study also explored the moderating effects of family resources using proxies that prior theoretical and empirical studies have found to be important to such associations: family income, parental education, hukou status, and subjective social status. Results indicated that among families without co-residing grandparents, rural and low-income parents reported their children to have more externalizing behavioral issues than their respective urban and non-low-income counterparts. In addition, children who resided in poorly resourced families (i.e., low family income, low parental education, low subjective social status, or rural hukou status) tended to benefit from living with grandparents compared to their well-resourced counterparts in terms of lower externalizing and internalizing behaviors reported by teachers. These results do not negate the potential beneficial effects of living with grandparents for children in well-resourced environments. Implications for practice and policy, as well as future research directions, are discussed.     

Explaining the Asian American Youth Paradox: Universal Factors versus Asian American Family Process Among Filipino and Korean American Youth

This study used longitudinal survey data of Filipino American and Korean American youth to examine ways in which universal factors (e.g., peer antisocial behaviors and parent–child conflict) and Asian American (AA) family process variables (e.g., gendered norms) independently and collectively predict grade point average (GPA), externalizing, and internalizing problems. We aimed to explain the “Asian American youth paradox” in which low externalizing problems and high GPA coexist with high internalizing problems. We found that universal factors were extensively predictive of youth problems and remained robust when AA family process was accounted for. AA family process also independently explained youth development and, in part, the AA youth paradox. For example, gendered norms increased mental distress. Academic controls did the opposite of what it is intended, that is, had a negative impact on GPA as well as other developmental domains. Family obligation, assessed by family-centered activities and helping out, was beneficial to both externalizing and internalizing youth outcomes. Parental implicit affection, one of the distinct traits of AA parenting, was beneficial, particularly for GPA. This study provided important empirical evidence that can guide cross-cultural parenting and meaningfully inform intervention programs for AA youth.     

Belief in a Just World and Employee Voice Behavior: The Mediating Roles of Perceived Efficacy and Risk

Abstract

In this research, we hypothesized that employees’ belief in a just world (BJW) would be positively related to their voice behavior, i.e., the expression of ideas or opinions with the intention of engendering organizational improvement or change, and that this relation would be mediated by perceived voice efficacy and perceived voice risk. To test these hypotheses, we collected self-reported data from employees in two different countries: China (N?=?313) and Germany (N?=?190). The results revealed a positive association between BJW and employee voice behavior in both samples. The two-mediator model was confirmed in the Chinese sample, while only perceived voice efficacy played a mediating role in the German sample. Possible reasons for these differences may be related to differences in cultural dimensions and education levels between the samples. The findings emphasize the importance of bolstering employees’ belief in justice and the organizational climate, which influence perceived voice efficacy and risk, as means to increase organizational voice behavior.