Why public health framing matters: An experimental study of the effects of COVID-19 framing on prejudice and xenophobia in the United States

Effects of Scanning Health News Headlines on Trust in Science: An Emotional Framing Perspective

Rooted in the emotions-as-frames model (EFM), this research examines how hope, fear, and annoyance are evoked through health news headline scanning, and how these emotions influence perceptions of news and medical science institutions as well as health behavioral intentions. A sample of U.S. adults (N = 327) were assigned to one of four headline framing conditions expected to associate with different emotions (positive future frame-hope; threat frame-fear/anxiety; reversal frame-annoyance; and control-neutral) and then asked about their emotional states, trust in science and news, and health-related behavioral intentions. Overall, health news headlines generated more hope than any other emotion across all conditions, and positive future-framed headlines evoked more hope than other framed headlines. Felt hope, in turn, generated greater trust in news and science, higher expectations of medical breakthroughs and cures, and greater intention to engage in preventative health behaviors. Felt anxiety had marginal positive benefits whereas felt annoyance negatively impacted the outcomes of interest. Notably, felt emotion mediated the headline frame-outcome relationships in the positive future/hope condition. These findings offer some support for the EFM and demonstrate that scanning headlines imbued with specific emotional frames can influence important health-related outcomes through the emotions they evoke. We discuss both the theoretical and practical implication of these findings.

Effects of COVID-19 related economic threat on political conservatism, xenophobia, and racial bias in the United States

The uncertainty-threat model of conservatism posits that people turn to political conservatism to protect themselves from perceived threats; indeed, studies show increases in conservative ideology and outgroup bias following threat priming. The COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented threat that has had devastating effects on the health and economic lives of Americans. Concerns surrounding the threat of COVID-19 may have secondary effects on other aspects of American life, such as political and anti-Asian racial bias. The current studies explored the effects of COVID-19 related threats on expressed political conservatism, xenophobia, and racial bias under the uncertainty-threat model. Study 1 assessed the effects of priming health or economic risks of COVID-19 (vs. control), and found that economic threat led to increased xenophobia, but had no effects on overall conservatism. Study 2 then investigated whether the effects of COVID-related economic threat prime extended to racial bias, and explored moderators and mediators of effects. Results showed that the economic threat prime increased perceived group-status threat, and indirectly increased conservatism, xenophobia, and racial bias through the mechanism of perceived group-status threat. Effects were greatest for those impacted financially by the pandemic. In general, our studies provide support for the uncertainty-threat model with the novel threat of the COVID-19 pandemic. Implications for understanding potential shifts in conservatism and bias in response to future threats in the United States are discussed.

Newspaper Representation of Mandatory Vaccination Against COVID-19 for Healthcare Workers in England: A Qualitative Framing Analysis

In 2021, vaccination against COVID-19 became mandatory for healthcare workers in England. The media coverage of the mandate was extensive and became an issue of public interest. This study aimed to understand the United Kingdom (UK) debate on mandatory COVID-19 vaccination through a framing analysis of UK media coverage. Articles written between November 2021 and April 2022 were identified from UK national newspapers: The Daily (and Sunday) Telegraph, the Times (and Sunday Times), the Guardian (and the Observer), the Independent, the Daily Mail (and Mail on Sunday), the Daily Mirror, the Daily Express, and the Sun. Articles were selected using eligibility criteria before framing analysis was undertaken. The sample included 204 articles. Safe Staffing, Treatment of Staff, Change in Covid Context, and Protect Patient Safety were identified as frames used to stimulate debate on the mandatory vaccination policy. Such frames established three broader concepts in the media: civil liberty theory, duty-based ethics, and social-vulnerability theory. This study analyzed how mandatory COVID-19 vaccination for healthcare workers in England was framed in the UK national media. The broader concepts built in the media heightened debate on the policy, creating a voluminous amount of coverage and criticism that may have played a role in the mandate's reversal.

Credibility Perceptions of Information and Vaccine Intention: The Role of Collective Vs. Individual Framing Messages

After four years into the pandemic, we know that COVID-19 vaccines are effective, and it is crucial to increase public compliance with getting the COVID-19 vaccines. The current study examines the interplay of credibility perceptions, perceived benefits, and two different types of vaccine promotion messages: individual versus collective. Data was collected using an online randomized experiment. Findings demonstrated that individual versus collective frames did not influence everyone similarly. The results show a significantly moderated mediation model, such that the association between message frame and vaccine intention was mediated by the credibility of the message, and the relationship between message frame and perceived credibility was moderated by perceived benefits of the vaccine.

COVID-19 Anti-Chinese Discrimination, Current Pandemic Stress, And Adolescents' Mental Health

The current study investigated adolescents' experiences of COVID-19 anti-Chinese discrimination (i.e., vicariously witnessed, directly experienced), the consequences for mental health, and the moderating role of general pandemic stress. During Summer 2020, 106 adolescents (43% Latino/a/x, 19% Asian American, 13% Black/African American, 26% biracial/multiracial/other; 58% female) participated in a 14-day daily diary study. Path analyses revealed that more experiences of vicarious COVID-19 anti-Chinese discrimination were associated with greater anxious mood, depressed mood, and mental health stress, while direct COVID-19 anti-Chinese discrimination was unrelated to mental health outcomes. The interaction between vicarious COVID-19 anti-Chinese discrimination and general COVID-19 stress was significant for depressed mood; simple slope analyses showed that for adolescents reporting high levels of COVID-19 stress, more frequent experiences of vicarious COVID-19 anti-Chinese discrimination were associated with greater severity in depressed mood, but this link was nonsignificant for those reporting low levels of general pandemic stress. Findings from the current study underscore the pernicious effects of vicarious COVID-19 anti-Chinese discrimination on the mental health of minoritized youth beyond solely Asian Americans. Additionally, the results evince the need for future pandemic-response efforts to craft public health messaging that avoids the racialization of disease and subsequent stigmatization of ethnic-minority communities.

How Do Pandemic Policies and Communication Shape Intergroup Outcomes? Initial Findings From the COVID-19 Pandemic and Open Questions for Research and Policy

Government policies can be productive tools for protecting citizens while simultaneously forging more egalitarian societies. At the same time, history has shown that well-intentioned governmental actions, such as those meant to quell pandemics (e.g., blood-donation restrictions), can single out members of marginalized groups (e.g., men who have sex with men). How did government actions shape intergroup outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic? Here, we draw from emerging research to provide informed conjectures regarding whether and how government actions affected stereotypes (e.g., beliefs about gender), prejudice (e.g., anti-Asian bias), and intergroup violence (e.g., hate crimes against Asian individuals) during the COVID-19 pandemic. We discuss research examining the impact of policies intended to curb the spread of the disease, and we consider possible effects of the strategies used to communicate about the virus. Furthermore, we highlight open questions regarding how and why pandemic policies and communication shape intergroup outcomes, propose key directions for future research, and note possible implications for future development of policy and communication strategies.

Discrimination Experiences among Asian American and Pacific Islander Adults during the COVID-19 Pandemic and Their Association with Mental Health Outcomes: Updated Findings from the COMPASS Study

BACKGROUND

Reports of escalated discrimination experiences among Asian American and Native Hawaiian Pacific Islanders (AANHPI) continue.

METHODS

Using the original and follow-up surveys of the COVID-19 Effects on the Mental and Physical Health of AAPI (Asian American and Pacific Islanders) Survey Study (COMPASS I and COMPASS II) (n = 3177), we examined changes over approximately a 1-year period in discrimination experiences attributable to being AAPI and factors associated with worse mental health outcomes.

RESULTS

Experiences of discrimination remained high in COMPASS II with 60.6% (of participants (compared to 60.2% among the same people in COMPASS I) reporting one or more discrimination experiences, and 28.6% reporting worse mental health outcomes. Experiences of discrimination were associated with modest but significant increase in the odds of worse mental health: adjusted OR 1.02 (95% CI 1.01-1.04). Being younger, being of Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander or Hmong descent (relative to Asian Indian), and having spent 50% or less of their lifetime in the US (vs. US born), were significantly associated with worse mental health.

CONCLUSIONS

The fall-out from the pandemic continues to adversely impact AANHPI communities. These findings may help influence policy initiatives to mitigate its effects and support interventions designed to improve mental health outcomes.

Advocating for Mask-Wearing Across the Aisle: Applying Moral Reframing in Health Communication

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the United States public polarized along political lines in their willingness to adopt various health-protective measures. To bridge these political divides, we tested moral reframing as a tool for advocating for wearing face masks when audiences vary in their moral priorities. We additionally address a gap in prior moral reframing research by comparing responses to a topic-relevant non-moral appeal. Across two studies, we examined effects on perceived message effectiveness, intentions to wear masks, support for a nationwide mask mandate, and willingness to share messages on social media. We find support for the efficacy of ideology-matched moral arguments and generally find support for the boomerang effect of ideology-mismatched moral arguments. However, these effects were restricted to relatively liberal audiences; politically conservative message recipients did not differentiate between message conditions. We discuss these asymmetric effects and their implications for theory in moral rhetoric.

The shared psychological roots of prejudice and conspiracy theory belief

The psychological literature on prejudice and conspiracy theory belief have generally remained distinct, implicitly treating the two as unrelated phenomena. In this brief review, I demonstrate that the two phenomena share at least three dispositional precursors: ingroup bias, right-wing ideology (specifically right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation), and need for closure. The evidence I present suggests that prejudice and conspiracy beliefs may be more closely related both conceptually and normatively than existing research has indicated. In particular, they may appear in the same individuals, cause similar kinds of harms in adherents as well as target populations, and respond to similar counteractive interventions.

Projecting the long-term effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on U.S. population structure

The immediate, direct effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the United States population are substantial. Millions of people were affected by the pandemic: many died, others did not give birth, and still others could not migrate. Research that has examined these individual phenomena is important, but fragmented. The disruption of mortality, fertility, and migration jointly affected U.S. population counts and, consequently, future population structure. We use data from the United Nations World Population Prospects and the cohort component projection method to isolate the effect of the pandemic on U.S. population estimates until 2060. If the pandemic had not occurred, we project that the population of the U.S. would have 2.1 million (0.63%) more people in 2025, and 1.7 million (0.44%) more people in 2060. Pandemic-induced migration changes are projected to have a larger long-term effect on future population size than mortality, despite comparable short-term effects.

Disease, Scapegoating, and Social Contexts: Examining Social Contexts of the Support for Racist Naming of COVID-19 on Twitter

In early 2020, when COVID-19 began to spread in the United States, many Twitter users called it the "Chinese virus," blaming racial outgroups for the pandemic. I collected tweets containing the "Chinese virus" derivatives posted from March to August 2020 by users within the United States and created a data set with 141,290 tweets published by 50,695 users. I calculated the ratio of users who supported the racist naming of COVID-19 per county and merged Twitter data with the county-level census. Multilevel regression models show that counties with higher COVID-19 mortality or infection rates have more support for the racist naming. Second, the mortality and infection rates effects are stronger in counties with faster minority growth. Moreover, it is mainly in poor counties that minority growth enlarges the effects of infection and mortality rates. These findings relate to the theories on disease-induced xenophobia and the debate between conflict and contact theories.

Does social empathy moderate fear-induced minority blaming during the COVID-19 pandemic?

This study investigated the minority-blaming phenomenon in South Korea during the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic amplified fear, discrimination, and structural inequalities among minoritized groups during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study identified who was blamed for the spread of COVID-19 and the sociodemographic characteristics associated with this blame. Additionally, it examines the roles of individual and interpersonal fear and social empathy in minority blaming. We measured the fear of COVID-19 at both individual and interpersonal levels. Individual fear was assessed through personal health concerns, while the fear of transmitting the virus to others was measured as interpersonal fear. Social empathy was defined by macro perspective-taking, cognitive empathy, self-other awareness, and affective responses. The study was conducted through an online survey involving a quota sample of 1,500 South Korean participants aged 19-69 years, based on age, gender, and residential area. The response was collected in December 2020, when mass infections in specific communities received attention from mass and social media before the national spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. Analytical strategies, including OLS and hierarchical regression models, were employed to examine the roles of socioeconomic factors, individual and interpersonal fear, and social empathy in minority blaming. This study found varying correlations between sociodemographic factors and attitudes toward ethnic, religious, sexual, economic, and age-minority groups. Individual fear of contracting COVID-19 was associated with increased blame across all minority groups. In contrast, interpersonal fear was associated with increased blame only for ethnic and religious minority groups. Similarly, social empathy presented mixed associations, as it displayed a buffering role on blaming ethnic, religious, and sexual minorities when considered alongside interpersonal fear, yet mildly intensified blame for economic and age minorities. These findings provide an understanding on fear-induced minority blaming during the pandemic and the potential role of social empathy in mitigating blame.

Assessing the Reasons and Adverse Effects of Self-Medication in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Sierra Leone. A Case Study of Moriba Town Section

Background

The impact of COVID-19 pandemic on healthcare resources has led to an increase in self-medication as a coping mechanism. The purpose of the study is to investigate the prevalence of self-medication, the reasons behind it, and its potential consequences during the pandemic.

Methods

A community-based cross-sectional study was conducted in Moriba Town, Bo City, Southern Sierra Leone. Using a multistage systematic sampling technique, 246 adult participants were selected. Data were collected using Kobo collect electronic platform and analyzed using SPSS version 26.0.

Results

Out of the 246 adult residents who were sampled, 63 (26%) practiced self-medication. Among them, females (33 or 52%) were more prevalent than males (30 or 48%). The most dominant age groups for self-medication were 38-47 (22 or 35%) and 28-37 (18 or 29%). The major reasons for self-medication were fear of infection (189 or 77%), fear of quarantine (199 or 81%), and stigma (189 or 77%). Delays in treatment (113 or 46%) and unavailability of Covid-19 medications (92 or 37%) were also cited. However, a majority of respondents (162 or 66%) denied the influence of friends or media (168 or 68%) on their decision to self-medicate. Reasons like "delay in receiving treatment" and "influence of friends" showed significant association with self-medication (pValue <0.05). More than half of the respondents 177 (72%) did not practice self-medication before the pandemic. Adverse reactions due to self-medication included skin rashes and blisters 29 (45%) and drowsiness 24 (38%).

Conclusion

The prevalence of unsupervised medication before and after the pandemic was minimal suggesting little impact of the pandemic. Fear and social stigma were the main drivers for self-medication. To promote safety and informed health decisions, regulatory measures, and awareness campaigns are essential to control unsupervised medication sales, improve drug labeling, and educate the public about the dangers of self-medication.

Asian American University Students' Experiences during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Study

In addition to the unprecedented challenges and stressors that university students faced during the COVID-19 pandemic, Asian American students experienced specific hardships due to COVID-19-associated xenophobic attitudes, harassment, and assault against people of Asian complexions. This qualitative study aimed to explore the ways in which Asian American university students' experiences during the pandemic changed their views of their identities as Asian Americans by analyzing in-depth interviews of four case study participants. Secondary analysis of two waves of interviews, which were conducted during the initial outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic and during a six-month follow-up, and primary analysis of a newly conducted third wave one year after the initial outbreak yielded 12 themes that captured the essence of the Asian American university students' experience and redefining of their identity during the pandemic. The four participants identified these themes across four categories: Experiences and Events during the Pandemic; Categorization of Asians in America; Confronting Asian Discrimination; and Renewed Sense of Identity. The longitudinal findings revealed direct experiences and perspectives regarding the influence of the COVID-19 pandemic on Asian communities, as well as the impact of the various social and political events during this time period, such as the Black Lives Matter Movement (2020) and the 2020 US presidential election. The implications, limitations, and future directions are discussed.

Meaning and lived experience of Iranian COVID-19 survivors: A phenomenological study

BACKGROUND

The Coronavirus (COVID-19) is among the most contagious diseases worldwide. During the first peak of the illness, COVID-19 was considered a considerable crisis for survivors. This qualitative study explored the meaning and lived experience of Iranian COVID-19 survivors. This qualitative study was conducted in Iran sometime after the onset of the coronavirus in 2020.

METHODS

This interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) was performed on twenty survivors of COVID-19 disease, recruited through the purposeful sampling method via in-depth semistructured interviews. The interviews were recorded and transcribed, and several codes were extracted. Data were analyzed using the MAXQDA software (v. 12).

RESULTS

The main themes and subthemes obtained from the data analysis included (1) Taboo and stigma: COVID-19 as a monster, feelings of social exclusion and loneliness, an obvious sign of shamelessness and maltreatment, (2) God's predestination: God's will and test, COVID-19 as a wake-up call to remind low human power, (3) Shadow of death: The fear of death after positive test results, death is closer than the jugular vein, the mourning of a loved one's death, and mourning for an untimely death, (4) Caregivers as an angel: Family as an unrepentant supportive, know the level of family love and attention, and (5) Rebirth and new life: understand the higher value of health and pay more attention to self-care behavior, and God gives us a golden chance to experience a better life.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the results of this study, COVID-19 survivors experience various issues regarding the nature of the disease, coping with the illness, and their social and psychological status affected by COVID-19. Considering the multidimensional supportive programs, increasing public awareness and changing negative attitudes toward the patients and survivors of the pandemic for better rehabilitation and adjustment is essential.

It's the Thoughts That Count: How Psychological Distance and Affect Heuristic Influence Support for Aid Response Measures During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Guided by construal level-theory, this research seeks to understand the effect of perceived psychological distance on emotions and risk perception associated with the COVID-19 pandemic in its early stage. Survey data were collected from a nationally representative U.S. adult sample (N = 1009) in April 2020. Results reveal that social distance was negatively related to emotions and risk perception. However, hypothetical distance was not significantly related to these variables. Emotions and risk perception also mediated the relationship between social distance and support for aid response measures; theoretically, we demonstrate that people evaluate risks contingent on their emotions when making decisions. This research contributes to extant literature on psychological distance and its utility in communication messaging design during public health crises.

COVID-19 health information trust and prejudicial attitudes predict healthcare disruptions in the first year of COVID-19 among people living with HIV

Cross-sectional studies have reported that people living with HIV experienced disruptions to social relationships and healthcare during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Furthermore, individuals with less trust in public health sources of COVID-19 information as well as those who held greater COVID-19 prejudicial attitudes experienced greater healthcare disruptions in the early months of COVID-19. To examine changes in trust and prejudicial attitudes in relation to healthcare disruptions during the first year of COVID-19, we followed a closed cohort of 115 men and 26 women ages 18 to 36 living with HIV over the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Findings confirmed that a majority of individuals continued to experience disruptions to their social relationships and healthcare over the course of the first year of COVID-19. In addition, trust in COVID-19 information from the CDC and state health department diminished over the year as did COVID-19 prejudicial attitudes. Regression models showed that lower trust in the CDC and health department and greater prejudicial attitudes toward COVID-19 early in the pandemic predicted greater healthcare disruptions over the year. In addition, greater trust in the CDC and health department early in COVID-19 predicted better antiretroviral therapy adherence later in the year. Results support an urgent need to regain and sustain trust in public health authorities among vulnerable populations.

Understanding the audience in framing research: empirical evidence from three studies examining HIV framing in China

Guided by framing theory, this three-phase mixed-methods study explored (a) how Chinese government-sponsored newspapers frame HIV and (b) framing effects on people's HIV beliefs. A content analysis of two government-sponsored newspapers and a survey of 210 readers showed discrepancies in frame and frame valence. In-depth follow-up interviews with 15 media and public health experts revealed that the discrepancies were related to people's attitudes toward the media and beliefs about HIV, which could further be explained by the political environment, media ecology, historical framing, and cultural identities in China. We discuss theoretical implications for framing theory and practical implications for HIV media coverage.

Public Attitudes to Immigration in the Aftermath of COVID-19: Little Change in Policy Preferences, Big Drops in Issue Salience

How has the COVID-19 pandemic affected public attitudes toward immigration? Long-term evidence in Europe and the United States suggests attitudes to immigration are relatively stable and, in some cases, becoming more favorable with high volatility instead of the perceived importance of the issue. However, theoretically a global pandemic could exacerbate people's fears of outsiders or that migration may contribute to the disease. By contrast, attitudes could remain stable if their distal drivers prove to be robust enough to withstand the shock of COVID-19. We draw from Eurobarometer data from 2014 to 2021 across 28 European countries, weekly national survey data during the outbreak from the United States and individual panel data from the United Kingdom and Germany to find little systematic change in immigration preferences and no country-level correlation between the observed changes and the outbreak's severity. Instead, the perceived importance of immigration has consistently and significantly decreased. These findings suggest that, if COVID-19 is to have an impact on attitudes to migration, it is likely to emerge via longer-term means, such as early-life socialization and value change, rather than reactions to the immediate pandemic shock.

The cost of anti-Asian racism during the COVID-19 pandemic

Anti-Chinese sentiment increased during the COVID-19 pandemic, presenting as a considerable spike in overt violence and hatred directed at Asian American individuals. However, it is less clear how subtle patterns of consumer discrimination, which are difficult to directly observe yet greatly impact Asian American livelihoods, changed through the pandemic. Here we examine this in the context of restaurants-ubiquitous small businesses that sell goods that are closely entwined with ethnicity. Using a series of surveys, online search trends and consumer traffic data, we find that Asian restaurants experienced an 18.4% decrease in traffic (estimated US$7.42 billion lost revenue in 2020) relative to comparable non-Asian restaurants, with greater decreases in areas with higher levels of support for Donald Trump. Our findings are consistent with the roles of collective blame, out-group homogeneity and ethnic misidentification in explaining how anti-China rhetoric can harm the Asian American community, underlining the importance of avoiding racism and stigmatization in political and public health communications.

Framing the virus: The political, economic, biomedical and social understandings of the COVID-19 in Taiwan

The purpose of this paper is to study how people use texts and languages to interpret or make sense of the COVID-19 pandemic. We draw on the theoretical literature of framing perspectives to formulate our arguments that consider the virus a socially constructed reality. We use Taiwan as an empirical case study, using topic modeling analysis of newspaper articles. Our findings show that the language of the COVID-19 coverage combines the four frames of political evaluation, economic impact, biomedical science and social life in varying proportions. These frames are subject to changes in pandemic conditions. Implications for theory and practice are presented.

The scar that takes time to heal: A systematic review of COVID-19-related stigma targets, antecedents, and outcomes

COVID-19, as a crucial public health crisis, has affected our lives in nearly every aspect. Besides its major health threats, COVID-19 brings severe secondary impacts, one of which is the rise of social stigma. Although numerous studies have examined the antecedents and outcomes of COVID-19-related stigma, we still lack a systematic understanding of who is being stigmatized during the COVID-19 pandemic, what exacerbates COVID-19-related stigma, and what impacts COVID-19-related stigma has on victims. Therefore, this review aims to provide a systematic overview of COVID-19-related stigma. With 93 papers conducted with 126,371 individuals in more than 150 countries and territories spanning five continents, we identify three targets that have received the most research: Chinese/Asian people, (suspected) patients and survivors, and healthcare workers. Furthermore, we find that for each stigma target, characteristics of the stigmatized, stigmatizer, and context contribute to COVID-19-related stigma and that this stigma negatively influences victims' health and non-health outcomes. We call for future research to provide a more integrative, balanced, and rigorous picture of COVID-19-related stigma via conducting research on neglected topics (e.g., contextual factors that contribute to stigma toward HCWs) and stigma interventions and using a longitudinal design. In practice, we urge governments and institutions (e.g., ministries of public health, hospitals) to pay close attention to stigma issues and to promote safe and inclusive societies.

A three-timepoint network analysis of Covid-19's impact on schizotypal traits, paranoia and mental health through loneliness

The 2019 coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic has impacted people's mental wellbeing. Studies to date have examined the prevalence of mental health symptoms (anxiety and depression), yet fewer longitudinal studies have compared across background factors and other psychological variables to identify vulnerable subgroups in the general population. This study tests to what extent higher levels of schizotypal traits and paranoia are associated with mental health variables 6- and 12-months since April 2020. Over 2300 adult volunteers (18-89 years, female = 74.9%) with access to the study link online were recruited from the UK, the USA, Greece and Italy. Self-reported levels of schizotypy, paranoia, anxiety, depression, aggression, loneliness and stress from three timepoints (17 April to 13 July 2020, N₁ = 1599; 17 October to 31 January 2021, N₂ = 774; and 17 April to 31 July 2021, N₃ = 586) were mapped using network analysis and compared across time and background variables (sex, age, income, country). Schizotypal traits and paranoia were positively associated with poorer mental health through loneliness, with no effect of age, sex, income levels, countries and timepoints. Loneliness was the most influential variable across all networks, despite overall reductions in levels of loneliness, schizotypy, paranoia and aggression during the easing of lockdown (time 3). Individuals with higher levels of schizotypal traits/paranoia reported poorer mental health outcomes than individuals in the low-trait groups. Schizotypal traits and paranoia are associated with poor mental health outcomes through self-perceived feelings of loneliness, suggesting that increasing social/community cohesion may improve individuals' mental wellbeing in the long run.

COVID-19 vaccination at a mosque with multilingual and religious considerations for ethnic minorities: A case study in Kanagawa, Japan

During a disaster, such as a pandemic, ethnic minorities tend to be left behind due to linguistic and religious differences. In the COVID-19 vaccination process, measures to include them are necessary, including the utilization of their resources and networks. The functions and challenges of such measures should be explored in real-world cases. We targeted a case in Ebina, Kanagawa, Japan, where a mosque, being a hub of foreign Muslims, was used as a vaccination site. This was the first, and the only, case in Japan with the involvement of the local government. We aimed to detail (1) the linguistic and religious responses at the mosque, (2) the perceptions of vaccine recipients regarding linguistic and religious issues and considerations, and (3) the problems that arose when using the mosque. We conducted an e-mail survey of the local government and a field survey-field observations and interviews with relevant stakeholders (e.g., mosque managers and female vaccinees). The surveys found various linguistic (e.g., interpretation by mosque-related volunteers) and religious (i.e., separating vaccination spaces based on gender) considerations provided at the mosque, which the vaccinees favorably accepted. The measure likely promoted vaccination by increasing the intention to vaccinate and closing the intention-behavior gap. If some identified problems (e.g., complaints from the Japanese) are mitigated, the function of the mosque as a vaccination site would be further enhanced. The results also support the significant potential of mosques in Muslim-minority societies to approach ethnic minorities in disasters, including pandemics.

Impact of National Pandemic Lockdowns on Perceived Threat of Immigrants: A Natural Quasi-Experiment Across 23 Countries

Xenophobia and anti-immigrant attacks rose during the COVID-19 pandemic, yet this may not be solely due to the disease threat. According to theories of frustration and scapegoating, situational obstructions and deprivation can motivate prejudice against outgroups. Using a global natural quasi-experimental design, this study tests whether the restrictiveness of national lockdowns can explain higher individual-level perceptions of immigrant threat. Data of 45,894 participants from 23 countries were analyzed. Both lockdown duration and lockdown severity were positively associated with individuals’ perceived threat of immigrants. The lockdown effects were independent of objective and subjective measures of disease threat, and there was no evidence that disease threat drives people’s prejudice toward immigrants. Subgroup analysis suggested the lockdown effects were reliable in Europe and the Americas, but not in Asia. These findings suggest a need to mitigate frustration and scapegoating when implementing lockdowns, and to distinguish the influence of societal restrictions from disease threat.

COVID-19, economic threat and identity status: Stability and change in prejudice against Chinese people within the Canadian population

Objectives

Previous studies found a general increase in prejudice against Chinese people during the first months of the pandemic. The present study aims to consider inter-individual heterogeneity in stability and change regarding prejudice involving Chinese people during the pandemic. The first objective is to identify and describe different trajectories of prejudice over a seven-month period during the pandemic. The second and third objectives are to test the association between trajectory group membership and antecedent variables such as: socio-demographic factors (i.e., age, gender, political affiliation) and two psychological mechanisms, namely economic threat and global citizenship identification.

Methods

A representative Canadian sample (N = 3,617) according to age, gender and province of residence, was recruited for a 10-wave survey starting from April 2020 to December 2020. First, a group-based modeling approach was used to identify trajectories of prejudice. Second, a multinomial logistic regression model was used to test associations between membership in trajectories and antecedents.

Results

Four trajectories were identified. The first three trajectories have a low (71.4% of the sample), high (18.5%) or very high (5.3%) level of prejudice against Chinese people which is relatively stable over time. The fourth trajectory (4.9%) reports low levels of prejudice in favor of Chinese people which become more positive throughout 2020. Regarding socio-demographic factors: gender is not associated with trajectory group membership, younger people are more likely to follow the trajectory in favor of Chinese people and conservatives are more likely to follow the highest trajectories against Chinese people. Regarding some psychological mechanisms: personal but not collective economic threat is associated with the trajectory in favor of Chinese people. Finally, the highest levels of prejudice are found when the strategy of identification is more local rather than global.

Conclusion

The present study shows that Canadians differ in terms of both their level and change in prejudice against Chinese people throughout the pandemic with some socio-demographic groups being more likely than others to be associated with prejudice. The results also suggest that a promising way to tackle the major social issue of prejudice is to highlight a vision of the world where individuals are all "global citizens" facing the same challenge.

Experiencing, anticipating, and witnessing discrimination during the COVID-19 pandemic: Implications for health and wellbeing among Asian Americans

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic spurred increased racial animus toward Asians and Asian Americans (A/AA) who have since been contending with increased racism and violence. While some of the harm associated with this increased prejudice may derive from personally experienced discrimination, the COVID-19 pandemic has also been marked by an increase in vicarious exposure to discrimination as well as increased anticipation of discrimination, both of which may be taxing for the mental and physical health of A/AA. The goal of this study, accordingly, was to examine the effects of personal experiences of discrimination, vicarious exposure to discrimination, and anticipated discrimination on depressive symptoms, physical health symptoms, sleep quality, and sleep disturbances among A/AA. Results from our two-wave field survey demonstrated that experiencing and anticipating discrimination were associated with mental and physical health symptoms as well as sleep disturbances. Further, personal experiences of discrimination interacted with vicarious discrimination to determine physical health symptoms such that greater vicarious exposure weakened the relationship between experienced discrimination and physical health symptoms. These findings demonstrate the need to mobilize resources to combat the multipronged, negative implications of the recent rise in anti-Asian prejudice during the COVID-19 pandemic.

COVID-19 health certification reduces outgroup bias: evidence from a conjoint experiment in Japan

The psychological theory argues that serious threats cause negative attitudes from ingroups to outgroups. However, the factors that can reduce such outgroup bias caused by the health threats of a pandemic are unknown. Here, we provide evidence that health certifications to prove immunity or negative test result for COVID-19 reduce outgroup bias. Using a discrete choice experiment with a randomized conjoint design in Japan, we investigated public attitudes towards inbound travelers entering the country, including foreigners, immigrants, and tourists. We found that travelers carrying a vaccination certificate or a negative test result for COVID-19 have a higher probability or rating of being admitted to the country. These effects are the same size as those for travelers undergoing self-isolation. Thus, our results demonstrate that health certification can mitigate outgroup bias among ingroup members experiencing threats to health due to the COVID-19 pandemic. We anticipate that the findings would support the combined usage of vaccine passports and negative certificates to reopen the international borders.

Racial Bias Beliefs Related to COVID-19 Among Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians, and Pacific Islanders: Findings From the COVID-19 Effects on the Mental and Physical Health of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders Survey Study (COMPASS)

BACKGROUND

During the COVID-19 pandemic, there have been increased reports of racial biases against Asian American and Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander individuals. However, the extent to which different Asian American and Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander groups perceive and experience (firsthand or as a witness to such experiences) how COVID-19 has negatively affected people of their race has not received much attention.

OBJECTIVE

This study used data from the COVID-19 Effects on the Mental and Physical Health of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders Survey Study (COMPASS), a nationwide, multilingual survey, to empirically examine COVID-19-related racial bias beliefs among Asian American and Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander individuals and the factors associated with these beliefs.

METHODS

COMPASS participants were Asian American and Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander adults who were able to speak English, Chinese (Cantonese or Mandarin), Korean, Samoan, or Vietnamese and who resided in the United States during the time of the survey (October 2020 to May 2021). Participants completed the survey on the web, via phone, or in person. The Coronavirus Racial Bias Scale (CRBS) was used to assess COVID-19-related racial bias beliefs toward Asian American and Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander individuals. Participants were asked to rate the degree to which they agreed with 9 statements on a 5-point Likert scale (ie, 1=strongly disagree to 5=strongly agree). Multivariable linear regression was used to examine the associations between demographic, health, and COVID-19-related characteristics and perceived racial bias.

RESULTS

A total of 5068 participants completed the survey (mean age 45.4, SD 16.4 years; range 18-97 years). Overall, 73.97% (3749/5068) agreed or strongly agreed with ≥1 COVID-19-related racial bias belief in the past 6 months (during the COVID-19 pandemic). Across the 9 racial bias beliefs, participants scored an average of 2.59 (SD 0.96, range 1-5). Adjusted analyses revealed that compared with Asian Indians, those who were ethnic Chinese, Filipino, Hmong, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese, and other or multicultural had significantly higher mean CRBS scores, whereas no significant differences were found among Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander individuals. Nonheterosexual participants had statistically significant and higher mean CRBS scores than heterosexual participants. Compared with participants aged ≥60 years, those who were younger (aged <30, 30-39, 40-49, and 50-59 years) had significantly higher mean CRBS scores. US-born participants had significantly higher mean CRBS scores than foreign-born participants, whereas those with limited English proficiency (relative to those reporting no limitation) had lower mean CRBS scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Many COMPASS participants reported racial bias beliefs because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Relevant sociodemographic contexts and pre-existing and COVID-19-specific factors across individual, community, and society levels were associated with the perceived racial bias of being Asian during the pandemic. The findings underscore the importance of addressing the burden of racial bias on Asian American and Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander communities among other COVID-19-related sequelae.

COVID-19 Pandemic and Im/migrants' Elevated Health Concerns in Canada: Vaccine Hesitancy, Anticipated Stigma, and Risk Perception of Accessing Care

Vaccine hesitancy has taken a toll on COVID-19 immunization globally. This study aims to characterize three COVID-19-related health concerns (i.e., vaccine hesitancy, anticipated stigma, and risk perception) in Canada and how they differ based on im/migration status and other social determinants. Data were obtained from a nationwide probability sample of the Canadian Perspective Survey Series 3 (June 15 to 21, 2020). Multivariable binary logistic regression analysis was performed to investigate the association between each COVID-19 concern and nativity status, while controlling for socio-demographics. Of 3522 participants aged ≥ 25 years, the estimated overall prevalence of vaccine hesitancy was 16.9%, with im/migrants being greater than non-immigrants (21.5% vs. 15.5%, p < 0.001). After controlling for all covariates, im/migrants had around two-fold greater odds of all three health concerns, including risk perception of accessing care (aOR 2.44, 95% CI 1.89-3.15), anticipated stigma of being targeted (aOR 2.24, 95% CI 1.81, 2.78) and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy (aOR 1.99, 95% CI 1.57-2.52), compared to their Canadian-born peers. Among vaccine-hesitant individuals (n = 596), im/migrants reported higher concerns, than non-immigrants, on vaccine safety (71.3% vs. 49.5%), side effects (66.4% vs 47.3%) and mistrust in vaccinations (12.5% vs 6.6%) as possible reasons of vaccine refusal. For migrant justice, health authorities should ensure equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines and other health-enhancing resources for im/migrants to mitigate their heightened fear, stigma, and mistrust of new vaccines amidst turbulent times.

Hardships & Resilience: Families in a Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic created unique hardships for families with school-aged children. To better understand these hardships, we asked the question: How did family units of various racial and socioeconomic backgrounds experience the pandemic? Qualitative phenomenology was the methodological basis for this study, and the Double ABC-X Model of Family Behavior was applied to analyze how the pandemic and racial tensions that occurred in the past 18 months affected families. We specifically focused on including the voices of minoritized populations as they are less often represented in phenomenological research. Semi-structured virtual interviews were conducted with families from Minnesota and Illinois. NViVo was used to code and analyze the interviews. Five themes were identified which demonstrated family strength and experience of hardship: resilience, boundaries, community support, fear, and communication.

Getting through a COVID-19 winter: Physical coldness increases the perceived risk of coronavirus disease

What factors influence how people perceive the risk of getting COVID-19? Extending beyond features of general health conditions, media coverage, and genetic susceptibility to disease, the present research investigates whether the immediacy of experience with temperature, a subtle yet pervasive environmental factor, can affect people's estimation of contagion probability. According to the attribute substitution model, people may rely on the visceral experience of coldness, a far easier quantity to evaluate, to estimate the contagion probability of the new coronavirus disease. Study 1 found that Chinese university students who perceived the indoor temperature to be lower believed that the coronavirus was more infectious. To provide causal evidence for the effect, Study 2 randomly assigned participants to different conditions. The results showed that participants in the cold condition reported a higher likelihood of contracting the coronavirus than participants in the control condition. Overall, these findings are consistent with the attribute substitution model: people tend to recruit simpler and more accessible information (e.g., local temperature) in place of more diagnostic but less tangible information (e.g., scientific data) in assessing the risk of disease transmission. Theoretical contributions and the significance of this research for policy makers are discussed.

When blame avoidance backfires: Responses to performance framing and outgroup scapegoating during the COVID-19 pandemic

Public officials use blame avoidance strategies when communicating performance information. While such strategies typically involve shifting blame to political opponents or other governments, we examine how they might direct blame to ethnic groups. We focus on the COVID-19 pandemic, where the Trump administration sought to shift blame by scapegoating (using the term "Chinese virus") and mitigate blame by positively framing performance information on COVID-19 testing. Using a novel experimental design that leverages machine learning techniques, we find scapegoating outgroups backfired, leading to greater blame of political leadership for the poor administrative response, especially among conservatives. Backlash was strongest for negatively framed performance data, demonstrating that performance framing shapes blame avoidance outcomes. We discuss how divisive blame avoidance strategies may alienate even supporters.

COVID-19-Related Discrimination Among Racial/Ethnic Minorities and Other Marginalized Communities in the United States

Objectives. To determine the prevalence of COVID-19-related discrimination among major US racial/ethnic groups and estimate associations between discrimination, race/ethnicity, and other sociodemographic characteristics. Methods. We conducted a nationally representative online survey of 5500 American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, Black/African American, Hawaiian/Pacific Islander, Latino (English and Spanish speaking), White, and multiracial adults from December 2020 to February 2021. Associations between sociodemographic characteristics and COVID-19-related discrimination were estimated via multinomial logistic regression. Results. A total of 22.1% of the participants reported experiencing discriminatory behaviors, and 42.7% reported that people acted afraid of them. All racial/ethnic minorities were more likely than White adults to experience COVID-19-related discrimination, with Asian and American Indian/Alaska Native adults being most likely to experience such discrimination (discriminatory behaviors: adjusted odd ratio [AOR] = 2.59; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.73, 3.89; and AOR = 2.67; 95% CI = 1.76, 4.04; people acting afraid: AOR = 1.54; 95% CI = 1.15, 2.07; and AOR = 1.84; 95% CI = 1.34, 2.51). Limited English proficiency, lower education, lower income, and residing in a big city or the East South Central census division also increased the prevalence of discrimination. Conclusions. COVID-19-related discrimination is common, and it appears that the pandemic has exacerbated preexisting resentment against racial/ethnic minorities and marginalized communities. Efforts are needed to minimize and discredit racially driven language and discrimination around COVID-19 and future epidemics. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(3):453-466. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306594).

Morbid Polarization: Exposure to COVID-19 and Partisan Disagreement about Pandemic Response

The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the lives of all Americans, but the severity of the pandemic has been experienced unevenly across space and time. Some states saw sharp rises in COVID-19 cases in early March, whereas case counts rose much later in the rest of the country. In this article, we examine the relationship between exposure to COVID-19 and citizens' views on what type of measures are required to deal with the crises and how experience with and exposure to COVID-19 is associated with greater partisan polarization. We find consistent evidence of partisan divergence in pandemic-response policy preferences across the first six months of the COVID-19 pandemic: Republicans support national control measures whereas Democrats support welfare policies, and interparty differences grow over time. We find only limited evidence that exposure or experience moderates these partisan differences. Our findings are consistent with the view that Americans interpret the COVID-19 pandemic in fundamentally partisan manner, and that objective pandemic conditions play at most a minor role in shaping mass preferences.

The Pandemic and the "Perpetual Foreigner": How Threats Posed by the COVID-19 Pandemic Relate to Stereotyping of Asian Americans

We examined the "othering" of Asian Americans in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Given past evidence that pathogen-related threat perceptions can exacerbate intergroup biases, as well as salient public narratives blaming the Chinese for the pandemic, we assessed whether individuals experiencing a greater sense of threat during the pandemic were more likely to apply the "perpetual foreigner" stereotype to Asian Americans. Over a seven-week period, we recruited 1,323 White Americans to complete a measure of the perceived Americanness of Asian, Black, and White targets. Asian targets were consistently perceived as less American than White targets, across variations in subjective health threat and regional case counts. The direct and indirect connections of political ideology to the observed patterns were examined, revealing that White participants who blamed China for the pandemic were more likely to apply the perpetual foreigner stereotype to Asian Americans. These results indicate that the othering of Asian Americans is pervasive among White Americans and that variables related to social conditions surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic can predict the potency of this association.

COVID‐19 pandemic, vaccine nationalism and counterfeit products: Discourse and emerging research themes

Although “vaccine nationalism” and vaccine diplomacy have thus far typified the COVID‐19 vaccine rollouts around the globe, there remain limited scholarly insights on global vaccine distribution strategies. This research note (RN) examines the global vaccine distribution strategies and implications for public policy and governments. In conceptualizing the global vaccine distribution strategies into three competing perspectives (i.e., “vaccine nationalism,” vaccine diplomacy, and global initiative), this article highlights the divergent effects of different approaches in terms of ushering elements of nationalism and ethnocentrism. By contextualizing the discourse on the COVID‐19 pandemic into the three competing perspectives and highlighting the role of pharmaceutical companies and COVID‐19 vaccine passport, the study also offers pathways for further examination of the subject incorporating the contextual conditions.

A social virus: Intergroup dehumanization and unwillingness to aid amidst COVID-19 - Who are the main targets?

Previous studies have shown that external threats, such as financial crises and natural disasters, might fuel negative attitudes, emotions, and behaviors towards outgroup members. However, it is unclear what types of outgroups are likely to be targeted when an external threat is taking its toll. In this study, we examine two types of outgroups that might be at risk of becoming victims of intergroup hostility. The first is the "ultimate scapegoat" outgroup which has a long history of negative relations with the ingroup. The second is the "context-dependent" outgroup which is viewed as an outgroup only in certain contexts. We utilized the COVID-19 crisis and the highly diverse social makeup of Israeli society to explore the extent to which each type of outgroup would be targeted. Results from our study (N = 664), conducted during the first peak of COVID-19 in Israel, show that higher levels of exposure to COVID-19 predicted lower willingness to aid outgroups and that outgroup dehumanization mediated this association. However, this held true only when the target outgroup was a context-dependent outgroup. When the target group was the ultimate scapegoat, exposure to COVID-19 did not predict ingroup willingness to aid them. Our findings contribute to our theoretical and practical knowledge on how intergroup hostility proliferates during external threats and, as such, are valuable to scholars, practitioners, and policymakers working to reduce intergroup tensions during large-scale crises.

COVID-Related Victimization, Racial Bias and Employment and Housing Disruption Increase Mental Health Risk Among U.S. Asian, Black and Latinx Adults

Background: The mental health of racial/ethnic minorities in the U.S. has been disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic. This study examined the extent to which disruptions in employment and housing, coronavirus-specific forms of victimization and racial bias independently and conjointly contributed to mental health risk among Asian, Black, and Latinx adults in the United States during the pandemic. Methods: This study reports on data from 401 Asian, Black, and Latinx adults (age 18-72) who participated in a larger national online survey conducted from October 2020-June 2021, Measures included financial and health information, housing disruptions and distress in response to employment changes, coronavirus related victimization distress and perceived increases in racial bias, depression and anxiety. Results: Asian participants had significantly higher levels of COVID-related victimization distress and perceived increases in racial bias than Black and Latinx. Young adults (<26 years old) were more vulnerable to depression, anxiety, and coronavirus victimization distress than older respondents. Having at least one COVID-related health risk, distress in response to changes in employment and housing disruptions, pandemic related victimization distress and perceived increases in racial bias were positively and significantly related to depression and anxiety. Structural equation modeling indicated COVID-related increases in racial bias mediated the effect of COVID-19 related victimization distress on depression and anxiety. Conclusions: COVID-19 has created new pathways to mental health disparities among racial/ethnic minorities in the U.S. by exacerbating existing structural and societal inequities linked to race. Findings highlight the necessity of mental health services sensitive to specific challenges in employment and housing and social bias experienced by people of color during the current and future health crises.

Neural basis of in-group bias and prejudices: A systematic meta-analysis

In-group favoritism and prejudices relate to discriminatory behaviors but, despite decades of research, understanding of their neural correlates has been limited. A systematic coordinate-based meta-analysis of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies (altogether 87 original datasets, n = 2328) was conducted to investigate neural inter-group biases, i.e., responses toward in-group vs. out-group in different contexts. We found inter-group biases in some previously identified brain regions (e.g., the medial prefrontal cortex, insula) but also in many previously non-identified brain regions (e.g., the cerebellum, precentral gyrus). Sub-group analyses indicated that neural correlates of inter-group biases may be mostly context-specific. Regarding different types of group memberships, inter-group bias toward trivial groups was evident only in the cingulate cortex, while inter-group biases toward "real" groups (ethnic, national, or political groups) involved broader sets of brain regions. Additionally, there were heightened neural threat responses toward out-groups' faces and stronger neural empathic responses toward in-groups' suffering. We did not obtain significant publication bias. Overall, the findings provide novel implications for theory and prejudice-reduction interventions.

The Impact of COVID-19 on the Majority Population, Ethno-Racial Minorities, and Immigrants

Abstract. The COVID-19 pandemic constitutes an unprecedented threat for individuals and societies, revealing stark inequalities in preparedness, exposure, and consequences. The present systematic literature review complements extant knowledge on disasters and pandemic diseases with programmatic research on the COVID-19 pandemic. Building upon an integrative definition of threat, we merge intra-personal threat regulation with group dynamics and inter-group relations. Via streamlined methods of knowledge synthesis, we first map out a broad taxonomy of threats, as appraised by the majority population and ethno-racial and immigrant minorities. Second, we delve into research linking threat appraisals with either conflict or prosociality within and across group boundaries. To conclude, we propose some guidelines for researchers to involve ethno-racial and immigrant minorities actively and for societies to cope cohesively with the impact of COVID-19.

Internet of Things and Other E-Solutions in Supply Chain Management May Generate Threats in the Energy Sector—The Quest for Preventive Measures

Energy firms are the beneficiaries and initiators of innovation, and energy investments are a crucial area of business activity that is specially protected in any country. This is no wonder, as energy security is the basis for the functioning of states and economies. The Internet of Things and Big Data create both new challenges and new threats. This study aimed to identify the potential threats and determine preventive measures, as well as to establish the agile principles related to energy firms’ logistics. The method of the narrative summary in combination with the literature searching method was used. Two conclusions emerged: first, research serves to develop the discipline of management science; second, the identification of risks associated with innovation serves practitioners. In addition, the study defined further research directions.

What Is “This” a Case of? Generative Theorizing for Disruptive Times

In this essay, I examine how different strands of process theorizing might be applied to the phenomenon of the COVID-19 pandemic, offering different answers to the question “What is ‘this’ a case of?” I further argue that the question “What is this a case of?” captures the spirit of intellectual curiosity that can bridge phenomena and theory, making phenomena understandable and theories meaningful for action. For me, this is what Organization and Management Theory, seen as both a discipline within the broader field of management and as a community of scholars is and should be fundamentally about.

COVID-19 and children's health in the United States: Consideration of physical and social environments during the pandemic

Public health measures necessary to counteract the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic have resulted in dramatic changes in the physical and social environments within which children grow and develop. As our understanding of the pathways for viral exposure and associated health outcomes in children evolves, it is critical to consider how changes in the social, cultural, economic, and physical environments resulting from the pandemic could affect the development of children. This review article considers the environments and settings that create the backdrop for children's health in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic, including current threats to child development that stem from: A) change in exposures to environmental contaminants such as heavy metals, pesticides, disinfectants, air pollution and the built environment; B) changes in food environments resulting from adverse economic repercussion of the pandemic and limited reach of existing safety nets; C) limited access to children's educational and developmental resources; D) changes in the social environments at the individual and household levels, and their interplay with family stressors and mental health; E) social injustice and racism. The environmental changes due to COVID-19 are overlaid onto existing environmental and social disparities. This results in disproportionate effects among children in low-income settings and among populations experiencing the effects of structural racism. This article draws attention to many environments that should be considered in current and future policy responses to protect children's health amid pandemics.