Validation of the Revised Multicultural Ideology Scale (MCI-r) in the UK

As worldwide migration continues to grow, valid and reliable instruments are needed to assess the psychological processes that influence the successful management of intercultural relations in different sociopolitical contexts. In this study, we test whether the original Multicultural Ideology Scale (MCI) required a revision to remain 'fit for purpose' in the current culturally plural context of the UK (MCI-r). Specifically, six subscales are proposed to underlie the construct of a multicultural ideology: Cultural Maintenance, Equity/Inclusion, Social interaction, Essentialistic Boundaries, Extent of Differences, and Consequences of Diversity. With data from 300 UK nationals, we tested the psychometric properties of the MCI-r using various confirmatory factor analysis techniques to estimate the scale's factor structure followed by convergent and discriminant validity tests. The results indicated that a 4-factor solution (Cultural Maintenance, Equity/Inclusion, Social interaction, and Consequences of Diversity) fitted the data best. All four subscales demonstrated adequate internal consistency as well as convergent and discriminant validity. All four subscales were also negatively correlated with a right-wing political orientation, whilst especially Social Interaction and Consequences of Diversity were positively associated with intergroup contact frequency across domains (work, family and friends and/or acquaintances). Finally, UK participants with personal migratory experiences reported a stronger belief in positive consequences of multiculturalism and more support for Social Interactions between members of different ethnic groups. Overall, findings provide first insights into the applicability of the MCI-r as a reliable and valid tool for the assessment of multiculturalism within the present UK context.

It's (a) Shame: Why Poverty Leads to Support for Authoritarianism

The literature has widely discussed and supported the relationship between poverty and support for authoritarian leaders and regimes. However, there are different claims about the mediating mechanism and a lack of empirical tests. We hypothesize that the effect of poverty on support for authoritarianism is mediated by shame: People living in poverty frequently experience social exclusion and devaluation, which is reflected in feelings of shame. Such shame, in turn, is likely to increase support for authoritarianism, mainly due to the promise of social re-inclusion. We support our hypothesis in two controlled experiments and a large-scale field study while empirically ruling out the two main alternative explanations offered in the literature: stress and anxiety. Finally, we discuss how the present findings can support policymakers in efficiently addressing the negative political consequences of poverty.

Pandemic threat and group cohesion: national identification in the wake of COVID-19 is associated with authoritarianism

Authoritarianism emerges in times of societal threat, in part driven by desires for group-based security. As such, we propose that the threat caused by the COVID-19 pandemic was associated with increased authoritarian tendencies and that this can be partially explained by increased national identification. We tested this hypothesis by collecting cross-sectional data from three different countries in April 2020. In Study 1, data from Ireland (N = 1276) showed that pandemic threat predicted increased national identification, which in turn predicted authoritarianism. In Study 2, we replicated this indirect effect in a representative UK sample (N = 506). In Study 3, we used an alternative measure of authoritarianism and conceptually replicated this effect among USA citizens (N = 429). In this US sample, the association between threat and authoritarian tendencies was stronger among progressives compared to conservatives. Findings are discussed and linked to group-based models of authoritarianism.

The role of values in coping with health and economic threats of COVID-19

The current research examined the role of values in guiding people's responses to COVID-19. Results from an international study involving 115 countries (N = 61,490) suggest that health and economic threats of COVID-19 evoke different values, with implications for controlling and coping with the pandemic. Specifically, health threats predicted prioritization of communal values related to caring for others and belonging, whereas economic threats predicted prioritization of agentic values focused on competition and achievement. Concurrently and over time, prioritizing communal values over agentic values was associated with enactment of prevention behaviors that reduce virus transmission, motivations to help others suffering from the pandemic, and positive attitudes toward outgroup members. These results, which were generally consistent across individual and national levels of analysis, suggest that COVID-19 threats may indirectly shape important responses to the pandemic through their influence on people's prioritization of communion and agency. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

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.

Violent Assault on a Chinese Man: COVID-19 Psychosocial Resource Loss Diminishes Right Wing Authoritarianism Variability in Societal Reactions

We examined whether prejudice-related personality characteristics (i.e., right wing authoritarianism [RWA]) and COVID-19-driven psychological resource loss might predict perpetrator-directed punitive responding (i.e., support for criminal charges) to a COVID-19-related attack on a Chinese victim by a White male. Across two studies, participants completed an RWA measure and reported the extent they had experienced COVID-19-related psychosocial resource loss. They then read a passage describing the COVID-19-related physical assault. For both studies, at low resource loss levels, low RWA participants reported greater punitive responding toward the perpetrator than high RWA participants. This RWA-punitive responding association was mediated by greater victim-directed suffering sensitivity (i.e., empathy) for Study 1 and greater anti-perpetrator reactions (i.e., hate crime perceptions) for Study 2. The RWA association with the relevant outcome variables (i.e., suffering sensitivity, anti-perpetrator bias, and punitive responding) was eliminated at high psychological resource loss levels. Specifically, low and high RWA participants reported similar reactions. While previous research has demonstrated that high RWA individuals tend to report greater outgroup-directed prejudicial responses due to COVID-19-driven perceptions of threat, our findings demonstrate that the COVID-19 pandemic can also elicit feelings of resource loss that can diminish the egalitarian reactions typically reported by low RWA individuals. In sum, we demonstrate that experiencing difficult life circumstances such as COVID-19 psychosocial resource loss can diminish supportive reactions toward victimized minority group members even among low RWA participants who are typically expected to be more sensitive to the struggles of those who are disadvantaged.

Survival of the fittest in the pandemic age: Introducing disease-related social Darwinism

COVID-19 was a harsh reminder that diseases are an aspect of human existence and mortality. It was also a live experiment in the formation and alteration of disease-related attitudes. Not only are these attitudes relevant to an individual's self-protective behavior, but they also seem to be associated with social and political attitudes more broadly. One of these attitudes is Social Darwinism, which holds that a pandemic benefits society by enabling nature "to weed out the weak". In two countries (N = 300, N = 533), we introduce and provide evidence for the reliability, validity, and usefulness of the Disease-Related Social Darwinism (DRSD) Short Scale measuring this concept. Results indicate that DRSD is meaningful related to other central political attitudes like Social Dominance Orientation, Authoritarianism and neoliberalism. Importantly, the scale significantly predicted people's protective behavior during the Pandemic over and above general social Darwinism. Moreover, it significantly predicted conservative attitudes, even after controlling for Social Dominance Orientation.

The psychological causes and societal consequences of authoritarianism

Over the past two decades, citizens’ political rights and civil liberties have declined globally. Psychological science can play an instrumental role in both explaining and combating the authoritarian impulses that underlie these attacks on personal autonomy. In this Review, we describe the psychological processes and situational factors that foster authoritarianism, as well as the societal consequences of its apparent resurgence within the general population. First, we summarize the dual process motivational model of ideology and prejudice, which suggests that viewing the world as a dangerous, but not necessarily competitive, place plants the psychological seeds of authoritarianism. Next, we discuss the evolutionary, genetic, personality and developmental antecedents to authoritarianism and explain how contextual threats to safety and security activate authoritarian predispositions. After examining the harmful consequences of authoritarianism for intergroup relations and broader societal attitudes, we discuss the need to expand the ideological boundaries of authoritarianism and encourage future research to investigate both right-wing and left-wing variants of authoritarianism.

Authoritarianism weakens democratic institutions and fosters societal divisions. In this Review, Osborne et al. describe the psychological processes and situational factors that give rise to authoritarianism, as well as the societal consequences of its apparent resurgence within the general population.

Sociotropic and Personal Threats and Authoritarian Reactions During COVID-19

The authoritarianism literature is divided over whether perceived threats to normative social order (sociotropic threats) or threats to the individual's well-being (personal threats) activate authoritarian predispositions. In addition, while some approaches claim that perceived threats primarily trigger those high in authoritarianism, others claim that those who are low in authoritarianism are more sensitive to threats. Given the centrality of authoritarianism and threat on support for extraordinary policies in the context of COVID-19, this article sought to test to what extent different types of threats moderated the effect of authoritarianism on support for tough law and order policies and harsh punishments to contain the spread of coronavirus. Data from two preregistered survey experiments indicates that those high in authoritarianism were more willing to support tough law and order policies when primed with sociotropic threats while those low in authoritarianism became more willing to support such policies when primed with personal threats.

The role of the COVID-19 impersonal threat strengthening the associations of right-wing attitudes, nationalism and anti-immigrant sentiments

Literature showed that the link between right-wing attitudes and ethnocentric attitudes gets stronger under existential threats, but the role exerted by an impersonal threat - as COVID-19 - on right-wing attitudes is still unclear. This study aimed to highlight the role of anxiety exerted by the impersonal COVID-19 threat on the relationship between right-wing attitudes and ethnocentric attitudes, as nationalism and anti-immigrants' sentiments. As part of an international project to evaluate the impact of COVID-19, this study administered an online survey to a representative sample (n 1038). The anxiety generated by an impersonal threat as COVID-19 - thus not exerted by any outgroup - can moderate the relationship among personal Right-Wing Authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and ethnocentric attitudes. This is the first study demonstrating that existential threat is effective also when exerted by an impersonal agent (as COVID-19) rather than by an outgroup. Second, these findings disclose useful implications for preventive psychological interventions and for social policy makers.

Supplementary information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-023-04305-w.

Typologies of people's preexisting political ideology and values would determine their post-pandemic mental health and political behaviors: Evidence from China

The pandemic of COVID-19 has caused economic and social crisis across the world. Existing studies have shown that the uncertain social context has profoundly affected people's life, triggering a variety of social psychological phenomena including the deterioration of mental health and the change of political behavioral patterns. However, little has been known about the differences in people's pre-pandemic political ideology and their influences on people's mental health and political behaviors after the pandemic. Using the secondary data from the 2018 and 2020 China Family Panel Studies, we measured nationalism tendencies, state performance ratings, social justice evaluation and life satisfaction of 29,629 adults before the pandemic. Using latent profile analysis (LPA), we examined the typologies of respondents' political ideology and values. Five types emerged to identify respondents with different political ideology and values: (Class-1) High nationalism tendency, country evaluation, social justice perception, and life satisfaction; (Class-2) Low life satisfaction; (Class-3) Moderate ratings; (Class-4) Low nationalism tendency; and (Class-5) Low country evaluation, low social justice perception. We further explored the predicting roles of those typologies on people's depressive symptoms and political engagement behaviors after the pandemic. We found that, after the pandemic, although the depressive symptoms of people with low life satisfaction (Class-2) and low country and society ratings (Class-5) eased, they still tended to have more severe depressive symptoms than the Moderate ratings group (Class-3). People with low life satisfaction (Class-2) were also less likely to follow political information than the moderate group (Class-3). Our research revealed how the psychology and behaviors of Chinese people with different political views changed when faced with uncertainty in social context. Further research needs to be carried out to depict how these changes occur.

Is a disease leader attractive? Six tests of whether the COVID-19 pandemic affected follower preferences for attractiveness, health and other traits in political and non-political leaders

Attractive political candidates receive more votes on Election Day compared to their less attractive competitors. One well-cited theoretical account for this attractiveness effect (White et al., 2013) holds that it reflects an adaptive psychological response to disease threats. Voters are predicted to upregulate preferences for attractiveness because it constitutes a cue to health. The global COVID-19 pandemic constitutes an ecologically relevant and realistic setting for further testing this prediction. Here, we report the results from six tests of the prediction based on two large and nationally representative surveys conducted in Denmark (n = 3297) at the outbreak of the pandemic and one year later. Utilizing experimental techniques, validated individual difference measures of perceived disease threat and geographic data on COVID-19 severity, we do not find that disease threats like the COVID-19 pandemic upregulate preferences for attractive and healthy political or non-political leaders. Instead, respondents display heightened preferences for health in socially proximate relations (i.e. colleagues). Moreover, individuals who react aversively to situations involving risks of pathogen transmission (scoring high in Germ Aversion) report higher importance of a wide range of leadership traits, rather than for health and attractiveness in particular. Results are discussed in relation to evolutionary accounts of leadership and followership.

Does public health policy quality foster state innovation capacity? Evidence from a global panel data

The design and implementation of public health policy may shape state innovation capacity with governance effectiveness, political stability, and government integrity. Previous studies, however, failed to incorporate these relationships simultaneously. This study aims to combine two distinct scholarships to examine whether the quality of policies in the public health sector contributes to state innovation capacity. We extracted data from the WHO international health regulatory dataset covering the WHO Member States between 2010 and 2017 to investigate the relationship (N = 145). Our fixed-effects models and regression discontinuity design (RDD) suggest a positive impact of public health policy quality on state innovation capacity. There are several contributions to the study of the relationship between public health and innovation in this study. Firstly, it fills a theoretical void concerning the relationship between policy development and implementation in the public health sector and country-specific innovations. Second, it provides an empirical quantitative analysis of policy quality in the public health sector. Third, this study contributes evidence that public health plays an important role in fostering state innovation beyond urbanization, investment in science and technology, and foreign trade. Furthermore, our quasi-experimental evidence found that this mechanism may be significant only between the more politically stable countries and the most politically stable countries. These contributions have empirical implications for governments across the world that seek to balance public health and innovation capacity in the context of the post-pandemic era.

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.

Reductions in perceived COVID-19 threat amid UK's mass public vaccination programme coincide with reductions in outgroup avoidance (but not prejudice)

It has long been proposed that perceptions of threat contribute to greater outgroup negativity. Much of the existing evidence on the threat-prejudice association in the real world, however, is cross-sectional in nature. Such designs do not adequately capture individual-level changes in constructs, and how changes in constructs relate to changes in other theoretically relevant constructs. The current research exploited the unique opportunity afforded by the mass COVID-19 vaccination programme in the United Kingdom to explore whether reductions in pathogen threat coincide with reductions in outgroup prejudice and avoidance. A two-wave longitudinal study (N1  = 912, N2  = 738) measured British adult's perceptions of COVID-19 threat and anti-immigrant bias before and during mass vaccine rollout in the United Kingdom. Tests of latent change models demonstrated that perceived COVID-19 threat significantly declined as the vaccine programme progressed, as did measures of outgroup avoidance tendencies, but not prejudiced attitudes. Critically, change in threat was systematically correlated with change in outgroup avoidance: those with greater reductions in perceived COVID-19 threat were, on average, those with greater reductions in outgroup avoidance. Findings provide important and novel insights into the implications of disease protection strategies for intergroup relations during an actual pandemic context, as it unfolds over time.

COVID-19-related anxieties do not decrease support for liberal democracy

The COVID-19 pandemic led to widespread fear among the population. Early studies suggested that this resulted in exclusionary attitudes and increased support for discriminatory policy measures. We still lack an understanding of the longer-term, potentially erosive consequences that COVID-19-specific anxieties may carry for citizens' commitment to liberal democratic norms. In this research note, we present evidence from an original experiment in which we manipulate individuals' cognitive accessibility of their fears related to COVID-19. We implemented this experiment in Hungary and Romania - two cases where illiberal attitudes are most likely to amplify under conditions of fear - a year and a half after the outbreak of the pandemic. The results show that our intervention is successful in elevating respondents' levels of worry, anxiety and fear when thinking about infectious diseases like COVID-19. However, these emotions do not carry secondary effects on individuals' levels of right-wing authoritarianism, nationalism or outgroup hostility, nor do they affect preferences for specific discriminatory policy measures aimed to fight a potential resurgence of COVID-19. We discuss these findings in light of the literature on the demand-side determinants of democratic backsliding and the consequences of emotions on political behaviour.

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.

Perceived Discrimination and Mental Health: The Role of Immigrant Social Connectedness during the COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 public health emergency has led to changes in people's attitudes towards minority groups, increasing prejudice and discriminatory behaviors, especially towards migrants. These prejudicial attitudes and discrimination negatively influence migrants' mental health increasing anxiety and depression and loneliness. However, the sense of belonging can be beneficial in mitigating these mental health issues especially in adverse social situations. Within this context, the aim of the study was to examine to what extent overall social connectedness plays a role in immigrant mental health during the COVID-19 crisis, hypothesizing that reduced sense of belonging to the social world will be part of the pathway from the negative effects of perceived discrimination on mental health during the pandemic. We recruited 104 immigrants from Greece who completed online self-report measures of perceived discrimination, social connectedness, depression, anxiety, paranoia, and loneliness, and conducted mediation analyses to test our predictions. Mediation models indicated that perceived discrimination has a negative impact on sense of belonging, which in turn increases anxiety and paranoia symptoms. Findings suggest that while perceived discrimination has a negative impact on mental health, this effect is less severe if participants remain socially connected. Results are discussed with regard to the need for social inclusion practices.

Changes in authoritarianism before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: Comparisons of latent means across East and West Germany, gender, age, and education

Modern theories of authoritarianism have stressed the importance of threat to the expression of authoritarian attitudes and intolerance. Arguably, authoritarian tendencies may have increased during COVID-19 pandemic, a major threat to life and security. One issue arising when comparing mean scores is that of measurement invariance. Meaningful comparisons are only possible, if latent constructs are similar between groups and/or across time. This prerequisite is rarely ever tested in research on authoritarianism. In this study, we aim to analyze the short scale for authoritarianism KSA-3 by investigating its measurement invariance on two levels (three first-order and one second-order factors) and latent mean changes using two German representative samples (N = 4,905). Specifically, we look at differences before and during the pandemic (2017 vs. 2020). While measurement invariance holds across both levels in all conditions, we find a decrease in latent means in 2020, contrary to expectations and established theories. Moreover, latent means differ with regard to gender, education, and east–west Germany. We conclude that analyses of latent means and measurement invariance instead of mean comparisons with composites should become the standard. Future studies should focus on threat as a moderator between authoritarianism and intolerance, and on possible interactions with context variables.

Authoritarianism and perceived threat from the novel coronavirus

The threat of COVID-19 has triggered nationalism, prejudice and support for anti-democratic political systems around the world. Authoritarianism-an individual's orientation toward social conformity and individual autonomy-shapes interpretations of and responses to threat. We drew on theories of authoritarianism and threat to propose that authoritarians and libertarians will interpret the threat of COVID-19 in distinct ways. An online survey of 368 Scottish nationals was administered via the Prolific platform. Original measures of realistic and symbolic threat from COVID-19 were included, along with an established measure of the authoritarian predisposition. Linear regression analyses showed that COVID-19 was perceived primarily as a realistic threat to physical and material well-being; however, authoritarians were more likely than others to interpret the novel coronavirus as a symbolic threat to their prevailing values. Our findings contribute to understanding the psychology of pandemic-era attitudes and behaviours and provide insight into possible political consequences of the coronavirus threat. The results also demonstrate how considering authoritarians' subjective construal of threats can resolve questions in the authoritarianism and threat literature and advance theory.

Discourse and Social Cohesion in and After the Covid-19 Pandemic

This conceptual article argues that class is a major factor in the social division and polarisation after the Covid-19 pandemic. Current discourse and communication analyses of phenomena such as compliance with measures and vaccine hesitancy seek explanations mainly in opposing ideological stances, ignoring existing structural inequalities and class relations and their effects on people’s decisions. I approach social cohesion in the Covid-19 pandemic through the theories of epidemic psychology, which sees language as fundamental in social conflicts during pandemics, and progressive neoliberalism, which critiques a post-industrial social class whose assumed moral superiority and talking down to working-class people is argued to be an explanation of many current social conflicts. I argue that these theories construct a valuable theoretical framework for explaining and analysing the social division and polarisation that has resulted from the pandemic. Reducing non-compliance with mitigating measures and vaccine hesitancy to an ideological issue implies that it can be countered by combatting misinformation and anti-vaccination thinking and shutting down particular discourses, which grossly simplifies the problem. The impact that class relations and inequality have on political and health issues, coupled with the characteristics of progressive neoliberalism, may partially explain the rise of populist and nativist movements. I conclude that if social cohesion is to be maintained through the ongoing climate emergency, understanding the impacts of progressive neoliberalism and the role of contempt in exclusionary discursive practices is of utmost importance.

Concerns over COVID-19 and prejudice: Pre- and during-pandemic in Italy

While at first the fear of COVID-19 disease spread was limited by the fact that the pandemic appeared to be confined to China, the growing emergency in Italy and the rapid escalation in positive cases and deaths have made the threat of this disease a national as well as global phenomenon. In the present research, a questionnaire was collected both before (n = 396) and during (n = 250) the outbreak of the pandemic in Italy. The aim of the research was to analyze the possible mediation of binding moral foundations on the relationship between concerns over COVID-19 and prejudice vis-à-vis immigrants. As hypothesized, the results show that concerns over COVID-19 increased greatly after the start of the Italian pandemic. Moreover, both before and during the pandemic, the relationship between concerns over COVID-19 and prejudice toward immigrants is mediated by binding moral foundations.

Has Pandemic Threat Stoked Xenophobia? How COVID-19 Influences California Voters' Attitudes toward Diversity and Immigration

Sociological theory and historical precedent suggest that pandemics engender scapegoating of outgroups, but fail to specify how the ethnoracial boundaries defining outgroups are drawn. Using a survey experiment that primed half of the respondents (California registered voters) with questions about COVID-19 during April 2020, we ask how the pandemic influenced attitudes toward immigration, diversity and affect toward Asian Americans. In the aggregate, the COVID prime did not affect attitudes toward immigrants, but did reduce support for policies opening a pathway to citizenship for undocumented immigrants and reduced appreciation of California's diversity. Respondents reported rarely feeling anger or fear toward Asian Americans, and rates were unaffected by the COVID prime. A non-experimental comparison between attitudes toward immigrants in September 2019 and April 2020 found a positive change, driven by change among Asian-American and Latino respondents. The results provide selective support for the proposition that pandemics engender xenophobia. At least in April 2020 in California, increased bias crimes against Asian Americans more likely reflected politicians' authorization of scapegoating than broad-based racial antagonism.

Iron fists and velvet gloves: Investigating the associations between the stringency of governments' responses to COVID-19, stress, and compliance in the early stages of the pandemic

To tackle the spread of COVID-19, governments worldwide have implemented restrictive public health behavioural measures. Whether and when these measures lead to positive or negative psychological outcomes is still debated. In this study, drawing on a large sample of individuals (N_total  = 89,798) from 45 nations, we investigated whether the stringency of public health measures implemented at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic in March-May 2020 was associated with individuals' levels of stress and compliance. Moreover, we addressed the question of how these associations may be moderated by the measures' implementation lag, nations' tolerance for unequal distributions of power (i.e., power distance), and individuals' institutional trust. Linear mixed models suggested that slower implementation of less stringent measures was associated with higher stress and lower compliance. Also, rapid implementation of stricter measures was associated with a mild increase in stress. Such effects were especially pronounced in countries with less tolerance for inequality. Albeit significant, the moderating effect of institutional trust was very small. The results suggest that it may be important to consider the measures' implementation lag when tackling the spread of COVID-19, but findings should be interpreted in relation to the data collection period.

Optimizing Research Output: How Can Psychological Research Methods Be Improved?

Recent evidence suggests that research practices in psychology and many other disciplines are far less effective than previously assumed, which has led to what has been called a "crisis of confidence" in psychological research (e.g., Pashler & Wagenmakers 2012). In response to the perceived crisis, standard research practices have come under intense scrutiny, and various changes have been suggested to improve them. The burgeoning field of metascience seeks to use standard quantitative data-gathering and modeling techniques to understand the reasons for inefficiency, to assess the likely effects of suggested changes, and ultimately to tell psychologists how to do better science. We review the pros and cons of suggested changes, highlighting the many complex research trade-offs that must be addressed to identify better methods. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Psychology, Volume 73 is January 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.

The Lasting Effects of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Support for Anti-Democratic Political Systems: A Six-Month Longitudinal Study

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to analyze the enduring effects exerted by COVID-19 exposure and subjective economic threats on support for anti-democratic political systems.

METHOD

We performed a two-wave longitudinal study on a quota panel of the Italian adult population (N  =  1,073), surveyed first in April 2020, during the first peak of the pandemic (T ₁) and the first lockdown, and second in October 2020, at the onset of the second peak of the pandemic and of the second lockdown (T ₂).

RESULTS

A mediation model showed that COVID-19 exposure and subjective economic threats, measured at T ₁, fostered a negative evaluation of how the government managed the pandemic, which, in turn, had a positive association with support for anti-democratic political systems, both measured at T ₂.

CONCLUSION

The existential threats related to the COVID-19 pandemic have enduring political consequences, undermining people's support for democracy, even six months after their onset.

Under the spell of SARS-CoV-2: A closer look at the sociopolitical dynamics

Sitting on the fine line between pathogen 'transmissibility' and 'severity', the Behavioural Immune System (BIS) is responsible for activating behaviours that minimise infection risks and maximise fitness. To achieve self-preservation, the BIS also fuels social and political attitudes. We aim to explain societal changes that may be sparked by COVID-19 by highlighting links between human evolutionary history and our psychological faculties mediated by the BIS.