Does online social support uniquely buffer effects of stress during the COVID-19 pandemic?: A natural experiment

In-person sources of social support buffer effects of stress on mental health. However, online social support inconsistently demonstrates stress-buffering effects. Highly stressful circumstances, such as the first month of COVID-19 lockdown, may be necessary to benefit from support received from online networks. We investigated whether online support demonstrated an increased stress-buffering effect on depressive symptoms during the first month of COVID-19 lockdown. We collected cross-sectional data on three distinct groups of participants from February to April 2020—preceding lockdown (pre-COVID; n = 53), up to four weeks following university closures (initial lockdown; n = 136), and the final weeks of the semester (later lockdown; n = 127). Initial lockdown participants reported significantly more stress than pre-COVID but not later lockdown participants. The online social support by stress by COVID phase interaction was only significant for the initial versus later lockdown comparison. Online support buffered stress during initial lockdown but not later lockdown. Stress-buffering effects of offline support were observed and did not depend on COVID phase. Online support may only buffer stress when stress is heightened and offline support is less available.     

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.     

“Keep them out to save our inside:” discourses on immigration by the Spanish far right

Vox is a far-right, Spanish political party that has steadily grown to become the third main party in the national congress. Immigration is a major presence in Vox's political agenda. Through Critical Discourse Analysis, we analyze the party's public speeches and Twitter communications on immigration in the last 3 years, from the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 to the Ukraine-Russia war in 2022. These contexts have provided a fertile ground for Vox's concerns with the protection of national borders, the criminalization of African and irregular immigrants, and the Spanish Government's ineffectiveness to protect the Spaniards' homes. Vox's main discursive strategies entail constructions of migrants and migration based on dichotomous binaries, culture clash, exclusionary discourses of domopolitics, and fears of imminent social and cultural changes. These constructions are based on the unproblematized belief on essential and unchangeable values that forge the identity of the homeland, which is implicitly threatened by immigrants. Against the migratory invasion, Vox constitutes itself as the ethical protector of the Spanish society and nation, “out of care for the insiders and not out of hatred for outsiders.”     

Do masks matter? Consumer perceptions of social media influencers who wear face masks amid the COVID-19 pandemic

The rapid spread of COVID-19 brought about an increased use of face masks among the general public. Focusing on disposable surgical masks in particular, this article examines consumer perceptions of and intentions toward social media influencers who wear such masks amid the pandemic. Drawing on the theory of product symbolism, this research experimentally demonstrates that masked (vs. unmasked) influencers remind consumers of highly competent healthcare professionals, leading in turn to greater competence inferences about and more favorable behavioral intentions toward these influencers. Additional analysis demonstrates that this effect might not hold for other groups of professionals who are considered relatively competent at the outset and/or whose profession is less reliant on external cues. Overall, this research suggests that apart from curtailing the spread of the pandemic, mask wearing might prove beneficial to certain groups of professionals, such as social media influencers, who have traditionally struggled to establish credibility. In a broader context, this research establishes mask wearing as a new form of nonverbal communication that warrants further examination.