Politicization of COVID-19 health-protective behaviors in the United States: Longitudinal and cross-national evidence

'Follow the science': Popular trust in scientific experts during the coronavirus pandemic

The coronavirus pandemic increased the role played by scientific advisers in counselling governments and citizens on issues around public health. This raises questions about how citizens evaluate scientists, and in particular the grounds on which they trust them. Previous studies have identified various factors associated with trust in scientists, although few have systematically explored a range of judgements and their relative effects. This study takes advantage of scientific advisers' heightened public profile during the pandemic to explore how people's trust in scientists is shaped by perceptions of their features and traits, along with evaluations of their behaviour and role within the decision-making process. The study also considers people's trust in politicians, thereby enabling us to identify whether trust in scientists reflects similar or distinctive considerations to trust in partisan actors. Data are derived from specially designed conjoint experiments and surveys of nationally representative samples in Britain and the United States.

"I just can't go back": Challenging Places for Older Americans since the COVID-19 Pandemic Onset

During the pandemic, many older adults felt 'out of place' in their home, work, and community spaces with potentially long-term consequences for health and wellbeing. Using national data from the COVID-19 Coping Study, thematic analysis of online long-answer responses (n = 1171; mean age 68 years; 71% female; 93% non-Hispanic White; 86% with at least a 4-year college degree; data collected April-June 2022) identified four themes regarding why particular places are challenging since the pandemic onset: (1) viral exposure fears, (2) frustrating regulations, (3) uncomfortable and hostile social dynamics, and (4) 'out of place' negative emotions. Participants also shared how they continuously address or adapt to place-based challenges through lifestyle adjustments and coping strategies. Novel findings may inform multi-scalar policymaking and interventions to support wellbeing in later life in times of stress and instability.

Digital Mass Hysteria during Pandemic? A Study of Twitter Communication Patterns in the US during the Stages of COVID-19 Vaccination

This study examined the public's sentiments about vaccines by analyzing Twitter data during the CDC's vaccination management planning stage in the United States. Sentiment scores were assigned to each tweet using a sentiment dictionary and the sentiment changes were analyzed over 52 weeks from November 2020 to November 2021. An interrupted time series model was used to analyze the difference in sentiment, which revealed that there was a shift. Initially, overall sentiments were negative but became positive as the stage of general vaccine supply approached. However, negative sentiments sharply rose when the vaccine supply transitioned to the phase of universalization. The results identified two dominant strategic action fields for vaccines providing polarized messages on Twitter and the negative trend was strong for most of the period. The findings highlight the importance of managing strategic action fields on social networks to prevent mass hysteria during vaccine policy implementation. This study stresses the significance of effectively managing strategic action fields on social media platforms to prevent mass hysteria while implementing vaccine policies.

Red Media vs. Blue Media: Social Distancing and Partisan News Media Use during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Political polarization surrounding the COVID-19 health crisis has been on the rise since the beginning of the pandemic. We combine prior research on motivated reasoning, selective exposure, and news framing to understand the association between partisan media use and social distancing behavior related to COVID-19. To do so, we collected media content data and national survey data during the onset of the pandemic. We employed structural topic modeling (STM), dependency parsing, word co-occurrence, and manual coding to examine the media coverage. Next, we analyzed survey data collected with a Qualtrics panel from a sample of U.S. residents for factors explaining social distancing behaviors. Results reveal coverage from the right leaning outlets downplayed the virus and highlighted the consequences of lockdowns on the economy. Our survey findings show that even after accounting for a range of demographic, political orientation, and COVID-19 awareness variables, conservative media use was linked, although modestly, with a lower likelihood of social distancing behavior. Our findings echo past research on media framing of pandemics and their association with public attitudes and behavior.

Predicting health behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal study

We investigated the social, emotional, and cognitive predictors of adherence to four health behaviors (handwashing, mask wearing, social contact limitations, and physical distancing) during one critical phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. We collected data (N = 5803, mean age = 53; 57% women) in Belgium at five time points between April and July 2021, a time during which infections evolved from high (third wave of the pandemic) to low numbers of COVID-19 cases. The results show that the social, emotional, and cognitive predictors achieved high levels of explained variance (R2 > .60). In particular, the central components of behavioral change (attitudes, intentions, control, habits, norms, and risk) were the strongest and most consistent predictors of health behaviors over time. Likewise, autonomous motivation and empathetic emotions (e.g., attentive, compassionate) had a positive impact on health behavior adherence, whereas it was the opposite for lively emotions (e.g., active, enthusiastic). These results offer policymakers actionable insights into the most potent and stable factors associated with health behaviors, equipping them with effective strategies to curtail the spread of future infectious diseases.

One size doesn't fit all: methodological reflections in conducting community-based behavioural science research to tailor COVID-19 vaccination initiatives for public health priority populations

BACKGROUND

Promoting the uptake of vaccination for infectious diseases such as COVID-19 remains a global challenge, necessitating collaborative efforts between public health units (PHUs) and communities. Applied behavioural science can play a crucial role in supporting PHUs' response by providing insights into human behaviour and informing tailored strategies to enhance vaccination uptake. Community engagement can help broaden the reach of behavioural science research by involving a more diverse range of populations and ensuring that strategies better represent the needs of specific communities. We developed and applied an approach to conducting community-based behavioural science research with ethnically and socioeconomically diverse populations to guide PHUs in tailoring their strategies to promote COVID-19 vaccination. This paper presents the community engagement methodology and the lessons learned in applying the methodology.

METHODS

The community engagement methodology was developed based on integrated knowledge translation (iKT) and community-based participatory research (CBPR) principles. The study involved collaboration with PHUs and local communities in Ontario, Canada to identify priority groups for COVID-19 vaccination, understand factors influencing vaccine uptake and co-design strategies tailored to each community to promote vaccination. Community engagement was conducted across three large urban regions with individuals from Eastern European communities, African, Black, and Caribbean communities and low socioeconomic neighbourhoods.

RESULTS

We developed and applied a seven-step methodology for conducting community-based behavioural science research: (1) aligning goals with system-level partners; (2) engaging with PHUs to understand priorities; (3) understanding community strengths and dynamics; (4) building relationships with each community; (5) establishing partnerships (community advisory groups); (6) involving community members in the research process; and (7) feeding back and interpreting research findings. Research partnerships were successfully established with members of prioritized communities, enabling recruitment of participants for theory-informed behavioural science interviews, interpretation of findings, and co-design of targeted recommendations for each PHU to improve COVID-19 vaccination uptake. Lessons learned include the importance of cultural sensitivity and awareness of sociopolitical context in tailoring community engagement, being agile to address the diverse and evolving priorities of PHUs, and building trust to achieve effective community engagement.

CONCLUSION

Effective community engagement in behavioural science research can lead to more inclusive and representative research. The community engagement approach developed and applied in this study acknowledges the diversity of communities, recognizes the central role of PHUs, and can help in addressing complex public health challenges.

Hurt on Both Sides: Political Differences in Health and Well-Being during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Republicans and conservatives report better self-rated health and well-being compared to Democrats and liberals, yet they are more likely to reside in geographic areas with heavy COVID-19 morbidity and mortality. This harmed health on "both sides" of political divides, occurring in a time of rapid sociopolitical upheaval, warrants the revisiting of psychosocial mechanisms linked to political health differences. Drawing on national Gallup data (early 2021), we find that predicted differences in health or well-being vary substantially by ideology, party, voting behavior, and policy beliefs, with model fit depending on how politics are measured. Differences in self-rated health, psychological distress, happiness, trouble sleeping, and delayed health care tend to reveal worse outcomes for Democrats or liberals. Such differences often are reduced to insignificance by some combination of mastery, meritocratic beliefs, perceived social support, and COVID-19-related exposures and attitudes. Policy beliefs predict health differences most robustly across outcomes and mechanism adjustments.

Associations between forgiveness and physical and mental health in the context of long COVID

OBJECTIVE

Forgiveness has been positively associated with health in those with functional disorders. This cross-sectional study examined the relationships among dimensions of forgiveness and physical and mental health in individuals with and without long COVID.

METHODS

Adults (N = 4316) in the United States took part in an online survey study detailing long COVID presence, physical and mental health, and trait forgiveness. T-tests were performed to assess differences in types of trait forgiveness between individuals with and without long COVID. Linear regression models assessed the contribution of demographic covariates and forgiveness subscales to the physical and mental health of individuals with and without long COVID.

RESULTS

Of 4316 participants, 379 (8.8%) reported current long COVID. Participants were an average age of 43.7, and most identified as female (51.9%), white (87.8%), and non-Hispanic/Latino (86.6%). Individuals with long COVID reported significantly less forgiveness of self (p < 0.001, d = 0.33), forgiveness of others (p = 0.004, d = 0.16), and forgiveness of situations (p < 0.001, d = 0.34) than those without long COVID. Among the long COVID sample, forgiveness of self and situations were positively associated with mental health (p < 0.05), but not physical health (p > 0.05). Forgiveness of others was negatively associated with both physical and mental health (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Forgiveness may be an important consideration in understanding health among individuals with long COVID, emphasizing the importance of developing a multifaceted understanding of the condition.

Moral injury and mental health among health-care workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: meta-analysis

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, health-care workers (HCWs) may have been confronted with situations that may culminate in moral injury (MI). MI is the psychological distress that may result from perpetrating or witnessing actions that violate one's moral codes. Literature suggests that MI can be associated with mental health problems.Objective: We aimed to meta-analytically review the literature to investigate whether MI is associated with symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety, depression, burnout, and suicidal ideation among active HCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic.Method: We searched eight databases for studies conducted after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic up to 18 July 2023, and performed random-effects meta-analyses to examine the relationship between MI and various mental health outcomes.Results: We retrieved 33 studies from 13 countries, representing 31,849 individuals, and pooled 79 effect sizes. We found a positive association between MI and all investigated mental health problems (rs = .30-.41, all ps < .0001). Between-studies heterogeneity was significant. A higher percentage of nurses in the samples was associated with a stronger relationship between MI and depressive and anxiety symptoms. Samples with a higher percentage of HCWs providing direct care to patients with COVID-19 exhibited a smaller effect between MI and depressive and anxiety symptoms. We observed a stronger effect between MI and PTSD symptoms in US samples compared to non-US samples.Conclusion: We found that higher MI is moderately associated with symptoms of PTSD, anxiety, depression, burnout, and suicidal ideation among HCWs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our findings carry limitations due to the array of MI scales employed, several of which were not specifically designed for HCWs, but underscore the need to mitigate the effect of potentially morally injurious events on the mental health of HCWs.

Social Cognitive Theory and Willingness to Perform Recommended Health Behavior: The Moderating Role of Misperceptions

More than 6 million people have died due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In order to slow down the spread of COVID-19, health authorities have created numerous guidelines. In the current study, we use survey data from the U.S. and social cognitive theory (SCT) to examine the associations among self-efficacy, outcome expectancies, and willingness to perform recommended COVID-19 related health behavior. Considering the misinformation-filled information ecology during the pandemic, we also examine the moderating role of misperceptions in these relationships. Our findings show that in general the SCT hypotheses hold for COVID-19 related behavior willingness. The interaction effects with COVID-19 misperceptions show that self-efficacy is not enough to understand people's health behavior. Higher outcome expectancies are important and may be able to overcome even if people held high misperceptions. Our findings have direct implications for communication theory and for health organizations in the contemporary information ecology.

Political ideology shapes risk and benefit judgments of COVID-19 vaccines

In April 2021, the use of the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine was paused to investigate whether it had caused serious blood clots to a small number of women (six out of 6.8 million Americans who had been administered that vaccine). As these events were unfolding, we surveyed a sample of Americans (N = 625) to assess their reactions to this news, whether they supported the pausing of the vaccine, and potential psychological factors underlying their decision. In addition, we employed automated text analyses as a supporting method to more classical quantitative measures. Results showed that political ideology influenced the support for the pausing of the vaccine; liberals were more likely to oppose it than conservatives. In addition, the effect of political ideology was mediated by the difference between perceived benefit and risk and the language style used to produce reasons in support (or against) the decision to pause the vaccine. Liberals perceived the benefit of vaccines higher than the risk, used a more analytic language style when stating their reasons, and had a more positive attitude toward the vaccine. We discuss the implications of our findings considering vaccine hesitancy and risk perception during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Fight COVID Milwaukee protective behaviors and risk communications associated with the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has had a major impact on society, causing significant disruptions to everyday life. Risk communication strategies can play an important role in risk management as they allow individuals to prepare for and respond to public health emergencies appropriately. The aim of this study is to investigate public risk behaviors, perceptions of risk and risk communication, and experiences with COVID-19 to better understand the impact of COVID-19 on our community and to better inform public health decisions about communicating and reducing personal risk. Nine virtual focus groups were conducted with 79 residents of Milwaukee County. Audio transcripts of focus group recordings were qualitatively analyzed using MAXQDA. Predominant themes identified include public risk protective behaviors, the emotional toll associated with lockdown measures, and risk communication. Our findings provide a better understanding of how adults, African American and Hispanic groups in particular, viewed the risk communications and protective behaviors associated with COVID-19, how their lives were impacted by the pandemic, and how to effectively communicate public information about personal risk. These findings can help guide risk communication efforts and public health policy interventions for potential infection outbreaks in the future.

Breakthrough COVID-19 infections and perceived vaccine effectiveness

INTRODUCTION

While SARS-CoV-2 vaccines provide significant protection against severe COVID-19 illness, breakthrough infections have sparked confusion among patients about the effectiveness of vaccination. It's unclear if (or to what extent) breakthrough infection experiences impact public perceptions of COVID-vaccine effectiveness, though the answer may have significant implications for public health communications and ongoing vaccine acceptance.

METHODS

We conducted a survey of 2,500 adults in the United States (February 27 - March 9, 2023) in order to better understand the relationship between breakthrough COVID-19 infections and perceived vaccine effectiveness. Survey respondents were selected using a stratified, quota sampling approach to ensure representativeness; analysis was conducted on responses from 1,928 participants who received a COVID-19 vaccine.

FINDINGS

Among those who tested positive for COVID-19 after being vaccinated, 21.18 % said that COVID-19 vaccines had been "less effective" than they initially expected, compared with 10.0 % of those who did not experience any breakthrough infections (X2 = 75.551; φ = 0.198; p ≤ 0.001). Those who experienced their own breakthrough infection were 1.37 times less likely to report perceived vaccine efficacy, while those whose family members experienced a breakthrough infection were 1.64 times less likely to report the same, ceteris paribus. The largest effect was observed among those who experienced both a personal and familial breakthrough infection. This group was almost two times less likely to describe COVID-19 vaccines as "very effective".

DISCUSSION

Breakthrough infections correlated with lower overall levels of perceived vaccine effectiveness, even after accounting for demographic and political considerations. Moving forward, public officials and health professionals should work proactively to ensure that breakthrough infections are understood in the broader context of overall vaccine effectiveness.

Perceived Threat of Disaster, Efficacy, and Psychological Distress Among Individuals with a Physical Disability: A Longitudinal Model

OBJECTIVE

Individuals with physical disabilities experience distress when faced with the threat of human-made and natural disasters, yet little is known about how to reduce that distress. This study used Protection Motivation Theory to longitudinally test the relationships between psychological distress and disaster-related cognitive appraisals, including perceived threat, emergency preparedness self-efficacy, and response efficacy, in a sample of individuals with physical disabilities.

METHODS

A nationwide convenience sample of 106 adults completed 2 surveys approximately 5 years apart. Structural equation modeling was used to assess effects of perceived threat, self-efficacy, and response efficacy on psychological distress across the 2 waves.

RESULTS

Our results suggest that the associations of proximal perceived threat and self-efficacy with psychological distress remain stable across time, while the effect of response efficacy is variable and may be more context-specific. Importantly, individuals who reported an increase in self-efficacy over time also reported (on average) a decrease in psychological distress.

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to broadening our understanding of factors related to psychological distress, these results have potentially important intervention implications; for example, to the extent that self-efficacy is a malleable construct, one way of reducing disaster-related psychological distress may be to increase an individual's self-efficacy.

People's political views, perceived social norms, and individualism shape their privacy concerns for and acceptance of pandemic control measures that use individual-level georeferenced data

BACKGROUND

As the COVID-19 pandemic became a major global health crisis, many COVID-19 control measures that use individual-level georeferenced data (e.g., the locations of people's residences and activities) have been used in different countries around the world. Because these measures involve some disclosure risk and have the potential for privacy violations, people's concerns for geoprivacy (locational privacy) have recently heightened as a result, leading to an urgent need to understand and address the geoprivacy issues associated with COVID-19 control measures that use data on people's private locations.

METHODS

We conducted an international cross-sectional survey in six study areas (n = 4260) to examine how people's political views, perceived social norms, and individualism shape their privacy concerns, perceived social benefits, and acceptance of ten COVID-19 control measures that use individual-level georeferenced data. Multilevel linear regression models were used to examine these effects. We also applied multilevel structure equation models (SEMs) to explore the direct, indirect, and mediating effects among the variables.

RESULTS

We observed a tradeoff relationship between people's privacy concerns and the acceptance (and perceived social benefits) of the control measures. People's perceived social tightness and vertical individualism are positively associated with their acceptance and perceived social benefits of the control measures, while horizontal individualism has a negative association. Further, people with conservative political views and high levels of individualism (both vertical and horizontal) have high levels of privacy concerns.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results first suggest that people's privacy concerns significantly affect their perceived social benefits and acceptance of the COVID-19 control measures. Besides, our results also imply that strengthening social norms may increase people's acceptance and perceived social benefits of the control measures but may not reduce people's privacy concerns, which could be an obstacle to the implementation of similar control measures during future pandemics. Lastly, people's privacy concerns tend to increase with their conservatism and individualism.

Correlation between coronavirus conspiracism and antisemitism: a cross-sectional study in the United Kingdom

This article presents the findings of a survey of UK-resident adults ([Formula: see text] = 1790) carried out in December 2021 and designed to test for a relationship between antisemitism and coronavirus conspiracism. Antisemitism was measured using the Generalised Antisemitism (GeAs) scale, and coronavirus conspiracism was measured using a version of the Flexible Inventory of Conspiracy Suspicions (FICS). Hypotheses and methodology were pre-registered, and all data and code are open. There was found to be a positive correlation between coronavirus conspiracy suspicions and Generalised Antisemitism, robust to demographic controls. This correlation appears to be entirely accounted for by older forms of antisemitism: antisemitism as expressed in relation to Israel and its supporters was found to be associated with coronavirus conspiracism only because both of these variables were associated with antisemitism as expressed in relation to Jews identified as Jews. Statistical analysis suggests that these findings may be generalised from the sample to the UK adult population with some confidence, although no data were collected in other national contexts, such that generalisation to other national contexts must remain speculative.

The one with the rumour: COVID-19-related conversations on Pakistani Twitter

OBJECTIVES

The COVID-19 pandemic has been a massive crisis exacerbated by the spread of misinformation on social media. Twitter is a highly popular microblogging platform in Pakistan, and the large population there lacks digital literacy, making them vulnerable to various forms of online and digital propaganda. This study aims to analyse the content of COVID-19-related tweets from Pakistan.

STUDY DESIGN

The current study is a content analysis of COVID-19-related tweets in Pakistani Twitter during the early stages of the pandemic, with a particular emphasis on misinformation, political content, health-related content, risk framing, and rumours.

METHODS

The Twitter data were obtained and anonymised by a third party for this study. The selected tweets were manually coded, and the following thematic tweet categories were identified: Science, Data, Pseudoscience, Healthcare, Conspiracies, Policies and Politics, Humour, and Pandemic life.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

Results indicated that the Policies and Politics category contained the majority of tweets (46.3%). Most science-based tweets focussed on nonpharmaceutical interventions (68.8%). As anticipated, the categories of Pseudoscience and Conspiracies were found to contain the most misinformation. Additionally, the number of likes and retweets for different tweet categories were compared, and no significant differences were found.

Promoting Adolescents' Social Responsibility through Parent-Adolescent Conversations about the COVID-19 Pandemic

PURPOSE

This longitudinal mixed-method study examined the content and qualities of parent-adolescent conversations about the COVID-19 pandemic, and whether discourse about social responsibility (i.e., care for others and health protective behaviors [HPBs]) within conversations predicted changes in adolescents' socially responsible behavior across the first year of the pandemic.

METHODS

Participants were 122 ethnically/racially diverse parent-adolescent dyads from Southern California. In spring 2020 (Time 1), adolescents completed an online survey measuring their engagement in HPBs (e.g., social distancing) and prosociality (both pandemic-specific and global). A few months following survey completion (Time 2), parent-adolescent dyads engaged in an audio-recorded conversation about the pandemic. In winter 2020 (Time 3), adolescents' engagement in HPBs and prosociality were reassessed via an online survey.

RESULTS

Dyads spent 25% of conversational turns, on average, discussing social responsibility (4% and 21% of turns discussing care for others and HPBs, respectively). Internal state language reflecting emotion terms was positively correlated with the proportion of conversational turns spent discussing care for others and negatively associated with conversational turns spent discussing HPBs. Regression analyses revealed that both care for others and HPB conversation themes uniquely predicted increases in adolescents' engagement in HPBs over time; however, care for others was a stronger predictor (β = 0.24 vs. β = 0.16). Discussions about care for others (but not HPBs) predicted increases in pandemic-specific prosociality, but not global prosocial behavior.

DISCUSSION

Parent-adolescent conversations may be rich ground for the socialization of adolescents' social responsibility during crises and can inform best practices for engaging adolescents in current and future community health initiatives.

Prevalence of questionable health behaviours in Serbia and their psychological roots: protocol for a nationally representative survey

INTRODUCTION

We will launch a national survey in Serbia to document the prevalence of two types of questionable health behaviours: (1) intentional non-adherence to medical recommendations and (2) use of traditional, complementary and alternative medicine practices, as well as the relation between the two. We will also investigate their psychological roots, including (a) 'distal' predictors such as HEXACO personality traits (plus Disintegration) and thinking dispositions (rational/experiential thinking and cognitive reflexivity), and (b) 'proximal' predictors under the umbrella 'irrational mindset' (set of unfounded beliefs consisting of conspiratorial thinking, superstition, magical health beliefs as well as selected cognitive biases), which have more content-wise overlap with the health behaviours.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

In this cross-sectional study, a research agency will collect data from a nationally representative sample (n=1043; age 18-75 years; estimated start/end-June/November 2021) recruited online (approximately, 70% of the sample, aged 18-54; 11 years) and face-to-face (approximately, 30% of the sample, aged 55-75 years). Participants will complete a battery of tests assessing questionable health behaviours, basic personality traits, thinking dispositions, irrational mindset, sociopolitical beliefs, sociodemographic and health-related variables. Prevalence rates will be calculated using descriptive statistics. To explore the relation between (psychological) predictors and questionable health behaviours, we will use hierarchical regression and partial mediation models (path analysis or full SEM models).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical Committees of the Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade (#935/1), Faculty of Special Education and Rehabilitation (#139/1) and Faculty of Media and Communications (#228) approved the protocol. Only participants who provide informed consent will participate in the study. A research report based on the study results will be submitted to peer-reviewed journals and results will be made available to stakeholders through reports on the project website https://reasonforhealth.f.bg.ac.rs/en/ and disseminated via social media.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05808660.

Far-right political ideology and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy: Multilevel analysis of 21 European countries

BACKGROUND

Far-right political parties across the EU have downplayed the risk of COVID-19 and have expressed skepticism toward the safety of the COVID-19 vaccine. This may affect the risk perception of people who support far-right parties and may be associated with an elevated risk of vaccine hesitancy. We aimed to explore if voting far-right is associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and if the association varies by individual and country-level factors.

METHODS

We used cross-sectional data from 28,057 individuals nested in 21 countries who participated in the tenth round of the European Social Survey (ESS). COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy was assessed by asking respondents whether they will get vaccinated against COVID-19. Voting behavior was measured by asking respondents which party they voted for in the last election. To test the association between far-right voting and COVID-19 hesitancy, we applied a series of multilevel regression models. We additionally ran models including interaction terms to test if the association differs by sociodemographic characteristics (e.g., institutional trust) or contextual factors (e.g., income inequality).

RESULTS

We found that far-right voters were 2.7 times more likely to be COVID-19 vaccine hesitant compared to center voters (PR: 2.69, 95% CI: 1.46-4.94). The association persisted even after controlling for institutional trust and social participation (adjusted PR: 2.15, 95% CI: 1.35-3.42). None of the tested interaction terms were significant suggesting that the association between political ideology and COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy does not differ by sociodemographic characteristics or contextual factors.

CONCLUSION

Voting for far-right parties is associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. The association is similar among European countries, regardless of how stringent the public health measures were and magnitude of income inequality in each country. Our findings call for a more in-depth investigation of why, how and under which conditions political ideology affects vaccination behavior.

When thinking you are better leads to feeling worse: Self-other asymmetries in pro-social behavior and increased anxiety during Covid-19

Self-serving biases (e.g., beliefs that one tends to perform better than peers) are generally associated with positive psychological outcomes like increased self-esteem and resilience. However, this tendency may be problematic in the context of collective action problems, wherein individuals are reliant on others' pro-social behaviors to achieve larger goals. We examined this question in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic, and recruited participants for an online study (n = 1023) from a university community in Spring 2020. We found evidence for self-peer asymmetries in Covid-related knowledge and restriction behavior, such that participants reported that they knew more about Covid-related symptoms, were doing more to stop the spread of the disease, and were more pro-socially motivated in doing so than peers. Actual peer reports indicated that these were overestimations. This self-enhancement comes with a cost: the perceived self-peer restriction behavior asymmetry had an indirect effect on the positive relationships both from Covid-specific worry and from perceived stress to general anxiety symptom intensity during the early lockdown period. People tended to have more severe symptoms of anxiety when they were more worried about Covid-19 and when they reported greater perceived stress, especially when they underestimated others' contributions to public health action relative to their own. This suggests that lack of trust in others' pro-sociality may be personally maladaptive for mental health.

Diagnosis Disclosure and Peer-to-Peer Information Seeking Among COVID-19-Infected Social Media Users: Survey of US-Based Adults

BACKGROUND

Research examining online health communities suggests that individuals affected by chronic health conditions can obtain valuable information and social support through participation in peer-to-peer web-based information exchanges, including information sharing and seeking behaviors. The risks and rewards of these same behaviors in the case of acute illnesses, such as COVID-19, are less well understood, though there is reason to believe that individuals with COVID-19 and other acute illnesses may accrue similar benefits.

OBJECTIVE

This study examines the propensity of American adults to disclose and discuss their COVID-19 diagnosis and symptoms on social media while actively infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, as well as to engage in peer-to-peer information seeking in order to better understand the illness that they are experiencing. Additionally, this study seeks to identify the motivations for these behaviors as well as their subsequent impacts on perceived social connectedness and health anxiety in patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

We conducted a representative survey of 2500 US-based adults using a sample purchased through an industry-leading market research provider. Participants were selected through a stratified quota sampling approach to ensure a representative sample of the US population. Balanced quotas were determined (by region of the country) for gender, age, race, ethnicity, and political affiliation. Responses were analyzed from 946 participants who reported having an active social media account and testing positive for COVID-19 at least once since the start of the pandemic.

RESULTS

The results show that only a small portion of social media users (166/946, 18%) chose to disclose and discuss their COVID-19 diagnosis while infected with the virus. However, among those who did, an overwhelming majority (206/251, 82%) said that doing so helped them feel more connected and supported while infected with the virus. A larger percentage of the 946 respondents (n=319, 34%) engaged in peer-to-peer information seeking while infected with COVID-19. Among those who did, a large majority (301/319, 94%) said that doing so was "helpful," but more than one-third (115/319, 36%) said that reading about other people's experiences made them "more worried" about having COVID-19, while 33% (108/319) said that it made them "less worried." Illness severity and political affiliation were significant predictors of both information sharing and seeking.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that the benefits (and risks) associated with online health communities are germane to patients with acute illnesses such as COVID-19. It is recommended that public health officials and health care providers take a proactive approach to cultivating professionally moderated forums supporting peer-to-peer engagement during future outbreaks of COVID-19 and other acute illnesses in order to improve patient outcomes and promote social support and connectedness among infected patients.

COVID-19 vaccination willingness and uptake among rural Black/African American, Latino, and White adults

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to assess differences in COVID-19 vaccine willingness and uptake between rural and nonrural adults, and within rural racial-ethnic groups.

METHODS

We utilized data from the COVID-19's Unequal Racial Burden online survey, which included 1,500 Black/African American, Latino, and White rural adults (n = 500 each). Baseline (12/2020-2/2021) and 6-month follow-up (8/2021-9/2021) surveys were administered. A cohort of nonrural Black/African American, Latino, and White adults (n = 2,277) was created to compare differences between rural and nonrural communities. Multinomial logistic regression was used to assess associations between rurality, race-ethnicity, and vaccine willingness and uptake.

FINDINGS

At baseline, only 24.9% of rural adults were extremely willing to be vaccinated and 28.4% were not at all willing. Rural White adults were least willing to be vaccinated, compared to nonrural White adults (extremely willing: aOR = 0.44, 95% CI = 0.30-0.64). At follow-up, 69.3% of rural adults were vaccinated; however, only 25.3% of rural adults who reported being unwilling to vaccinate were vaccinated at follow-up, compared to 95.6% of adults who were extremely willing to be vaccinated and 76.3% who were unsure. Among those unwilling to vaccinate at follow-up, almost half reported distrust in the government (52.3%) and drug companies (46.2%); 80% reported that nothing would change their minds regarding vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

By August 2021, almost 70% of rural adults were vaccinated. However, distrust and misinformation were prevalent among those unwilling to vaccinate at follow-up. To continue to effectively combat COVID-19 in rural communities, we need to address misinformation to increase COVID-19 vaccination rates.

Why some people do not get vaccinated against COVID-19: Social-cognitive determinants of vaccination behavior

It is puzzling that a sizeable percentage of people refuse to get vaccinated against COVID-19. This study aimed to examine social psychological factors influencing their vaccine hesitancy. This longitudinal study traced a cohort of 2663 individuals in 25 countries from the time before COVID-19 vaccines became available (March 2020) to July 2021, when vaccination was widely available. Multilevel logistic regressions were used to examine determinants of actual COVID-19 vaccination behavior by July 2021, with country-level intercept as random effect. Of the 2663 participants, 2186 (82.1%) had been vaccinated by July 2021. Participants' attitude toward COVID-19 vaccines was the strongest predictor of both vaccination intention and subsequent vaccination behavior (p < .001). Perceived risk of getting infected and perceived personal disturbance of infection were also associated with higher likelihood of getting vaccinated (p < .001). However, religiosity, right-wing political orientation, conspiracy beliefs, and low trust in government regarding COVID-19 were negative predictors of vaccination intention and behavior (p < .05). Our findings highlight the importance of attitude toward COVID-19 vaccines and also suggest that certain life-long held convictions that predate the pandemic make people distrustful of their government and likely to accept conspiracy beliefs and therefore less likely to adopt the vaccination behavior.

An investigation of media reports of digital surveillance within the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic prompted a surge in digital public health surveillance worldwide, with limited opportunities to consider the effectiveness or impact of digital surveillance. The news media shape public understanding of topics of importance, contributing to our perception of priority issues. This study investigated news media reports published during the first year of the pandemic to understand how the use and consequences of digital surveillance technologies were reported on.

Methods

A media content analysis of 34 high- to low-income countries was completed. The terms "COVID-19," "surveillance," "technologies," and "public health" were used to retrieve and inductively code media reports.

Results

Of the 1,001 reports, most were web-based or newspaper sources on the development and deployment of technologies directed at contact tracing, enforcing quarantine, predicting disease spread, and allocating resources. Technology types included mobile apps, wearable devices, "smart" thermometers, GPS/Bluetooth, facial recognition, and security cameras. Repurposed data from social media, travel cards/passports, and consumer purchases also provided surveillance insight. Media reports focused on factors impacting surveillance success (public participation and data validity) and the emerging consequences of digital surveillance on human rights, function creep, data security, and trust.

Discussion

Diverse digital technologies were developed and used for public health surveillance during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. The use of these technologies and witnessed or anticipated consequences were reported by a variety of media sources worldwide. The news media are an important public health information resource, as media outlets contribute to directing public understanding and shaping priority public health surveillance issues. Our findings raise important questions around how journalists decide which aspects of public health crises to report on and how these issues are discussed.

Political orientation predicts the use of conventional and complementary/alternative medicine: A survey study of 19 European countries

BACKGROUND

People align their beliefs and behaviors, including those related to health, increasingly along politically ideological lines.

OBJECTIVE

We investigated whether individual political orientation (PO) predicts the use of conventional (CM) and complementary/alternative medicine (CAM) across Europe.

METHODS

We used cross-sectional samples representative of persons aged 15 and over from 19 European countries (ESS 2015; round 7; N = 35,572). We assessed PO based on participants' vote choice in the most recent national election, using expert ratings of party positioning along five political-ideological dimensions: left-right general; left-right economic; Green/alternative/libertarian vs. Traditional/authoritarian/nationalist; anti-elite; and anti-corruption. Use of CM was defined as having consulted a general practitioner or specialist, and use of CAM as having used acupuncture, acupressure, Chinese medicine, homeopathy, herbal treatment, hypnotherapy, or spiritual healing.

RESULTS

Participants with an anti-corruption PO were less likely to use CM and more likely to use CAM than other Europeans. Participants with a Green/alternative/libertarian PO were more likely to use CAM than others. Poorer health moderated the association between anti-corruption PO and CM, such that people in poor health tended to use CM regardless of their political leanings, but health status did not moderate the association between PO and CAM use.

CONCLUSIONS

The results show that political and socio-cultural views are associated with how the European lay public engages with healthcare and complementary/alternative services, but the relevant boundary lines do not lie along the left-right dimension. People who preferred parties favoring expanded freedoms were more likely to use complementary/alternative services, but likely for other reasons than to seek cures for diseases in a traditional biomedical sense. Concerns about corruption among the lay public may be more relevant for conventional healthcare than has been recognized.

The politicized pandemic: Ideological polarization and the behavioral response to COVID-19

In a representative sample of the U.S. population during the first summer of the COVID-19 pandemic, we investigate how prosociality and ideology interact in their relationship with health-protecting behavior and trust in the government to handle the crisis. We find that an experimental measure of prosociality based on standard economic games positively relates to protective behavior. Conservatives are less compliant with COVID-19-related behavioral restrictions than liberals and evaluate the government's handling of the crisis significantly more positively. We show that prosociality does not mediate the impact of political ideology. This finding means that conservatives are less compliant with protective health guidelines - independent of differences in prosociality between both ideological camps. Behavioral differences between liberals and conservatives are roughly only one-fourth of the size of their differences in judging the government's crisis management. This result suggests that Americans were more polarized in their political views than in their acceptance of public health advice.

Why we should care about moral foundations when preparing for the next pandemic: Insights from Canada, the UK and the US

Health behaviors that do not effectively prevent disease can negatively impact psychological wellbeing and potentially drain motivations to engage in more effective behavior, potentially creating higher health risk. Despite this, studies linking "moral foundations" (i.e., concerns about harm, fairness, purity, authority, ingroup, and/or liberty) to health behaviors have generally been limited to a narrow range of behaviors, specifically effective ones. We therefore explored the degree to which moral foundations predicted a wider range of not only effective but ineffective (overreactive) preventative behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic. In Study 1, participants from Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States reported their engagement in these preventative behaviors and completed a COVID-specific adaptation of the Moral Foundations Questionnaire during the pandemic peak. While differences occurred across countries, authority considerations consistently predicted increased engagement in both effective preventative behaviors but also ineffective overreactions, even when controlling for political ideology. By contrast, purity and liberty considerations reduced intentions to engage in effective behaviors like vaccination but had no effect on ineffective behaviors. Study 2 revealed that the influence of moral foundations on U.S participants' behavior remained stable 5-months later, after the pandemic peak. These findings demonstrate that the impact of moral foundations on preventative behaviors is similar across a range of western democracies, and that recommendations by authorities can have unexpected consequences in terms of promoting ineffective-and potentially damaging-overreactive behaviors. The findings underscore the importance of moral concerns for the design of health interventions that selectively promote effective preventative behavior.

Race, masks, residency and concern regarding COVID-19 transmission

To explore sociodemographic predictors for concern regarding COVID-19 transmission and how these factors interact with the identities of others, we conducted a web-based survey where we asked 568 respondents in the United States to indicate their level of COVID-19 concern in response to a series of images with short vignettes of masked and unmasked individuals of different racial/ethnic backgrounds. Using a linear mixed effects model, we found that regardless of the race of the image being presented in the vignette, concern regarding COVID-19 transmission was associated with respondents' older age (b = 0.029, p < 0.001), residing in NYC (b = 0.556, p = 0.009), being heterosexual (b = 1.075, p < 0.001), having higher levels of education, that is, completion of a Bachelor's degree (b = 1.10, p = 0.033) or graduate degree (b = 1.78, p < 0.001), and the person in the vignette being unmasked (b = 0.822, p < 0.001). Asian respondents were more likely than White respondents to be concerned regarding COVID-19. Individuals who self-reported themselves to be at high risk for COVID-19 were more likely to be concerned about COVID-19 over those who considered themselves to be low risk. These findings highlight the importance of acknowledging interactions between race, mask status, and residency in predicting COVID-19 concern.

Resistance to Change

Advances in medical technology do not follow a smooth process and are highly variable. Implementation can occasionally be rapid, but often faces varying degrees of resistance resulting at the very least in delayed implementation. Using qualitative comparative analysis, we have evaluated numerous technological advances from the perspective of how they were introduced, implemented, and opposed. Resistance varies from benign - often happening because of inertia or lack of resources to more active forms, including outright opposition using both appropriate and inappropriate methods to resist/delay changes in care. Today, even public health has become politicized, having nothing to do with the underlying science, but having catastrophic results. Two other corroding influences are marketing pressure from the private sector and vested interests in favor of one outcome or another. This also applies to governmental agencies. There are a number of ways in which papers have been buried including putting the thumb on the scale where reviewers can sabotage new ideas. Unless we learn to harness new technologies earlier in their life course and understand how to maneuver around the pillars of obstruction to their implementation, we will not be able to provide medical care at the forefront of technological capabilities.

Transforming global health education during the COVID-19 era: perspectives from a transnational collective of global health students and recent graduates

Inspired by the 2021 BMJ Global Health Editorial by Atkinset alon global health (GH) teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic, a group of GH students and recent graduates from around the world convened to discuss our experiences in GH education during multiple global crises. Through weekly meetings over the course of several months, we reflected on the impact the COVID-19 pandemic and broader systemic inequities and injustices in GH education and practice have had on us over the past 2 years. Despite our geographical and disciplinary diversity, our collective experience suggests that while the pandemic provided an opportunity for changing GH education, that opportunity was not seized by most of our institutions. In light of the mounting health crises that loom over our generation, emerging GH professionals have a unique role in critiquing, deconstructing and reconstructing GH education to better address the needs of our time. By using our experiences learning GH during the pandemic as an entry point, and by using this collective as an incubator for dialogue and re-imagination, we offer our insights outlining successes and barriers we have faced with GH and its education and training. Furthermore, we identify autonomous collectives as a potential viable alternative to encourage pluriversality of knowledge and action systems and to move beyond Western universalism that frames most of traditional academia.

“Masks do not work”: COVID-19 misperceptions and theory-driven corrective strategies on Facebook

Purpose

One of the most prolific areas of misinformation research is examining corrective strategies in messaging. The main purposes of the current study are to examine the effects of (1) partisan media (2) credibility perceptions and emotional reactions and (3) theory driven corrective messages on people's misperceptions about COVID-19 mask wearing behaviors.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors used a randomized experimental design to test the hypotheses. The data were collected via the survey firm Lucid. The number of participants was 485. The study was conducted using Qualtrics after the research project was exempt by the Institutional Research Board of a large University in the US. The authors conducted an online experiment with four conditions, narrative versus statistics and individual versus collective. The manipulation messages were constructed as screenshots from Facebook.

Findings

The findings of this study show that higher exposure to liberal media was associated with lower misperceptions, whereas higher credibility perceptions of and positive reactions toward the misinformation post and negative emotions toward the correction comment were associated with higher misperceptions. Moreover, the findings showed that participants in the narrative and collective-frame condition had the lowest misperceptions.

Originality/value

The authors tested theory driven misinformation corrective messages to understand the impact of these messages and multiple related variables on misperceptions about COVID-19 mask wearing. This study contributes to the existing misinformation correction literature by investigating the explanatory power of the two well-established media effects theories on misinformation correction messaging and by identifying essential individual characteristics that should be considered when evaluating how misperceptions about the COVID-19 crisis works and gets reduced.

Peer review

The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-11-2021-0600

COVID-19 Related Shifts in Social Interaction, Connection, and Cohesion Impact Psychosocial Health: Longitudinal Qualitative Findings from COVID-19 Treatment Trial Engaged Participants

While effective for slowing the transmission of SARS-CoV-2, public health measures, such as physical distancing and stay-at-home orders, have significantly shifted the way people interact and maintain social connections. To better understand how people sought social and psychological support amid the pandemic, we conducted a longitudinal qualitative evaluation of participants enrolled in a COVID-19 treatment trial (N = 30). All participants from the parent trial who consented to being contacted for future research studies were recruited electronically via email, and first-round virtual interviews were conducted between December 2020 and March 2021. Participants who participated in first-round interviews were contacted again, and follow-up interviews were conducted in January-February 2022. The results reported significant shifts in how participants connected to social support, including changes from physical to virtual modalities, and using different social networks for distinct purposes (i.e., Reddit/Facebook for information, WhatsApp for community connection). While having COVID-19, profound loneliness during isolation was described; yet, to mitigate effects, virtual support (i.e., emotional, knowledge-seeking) as well as in-person material support (e.g., groceries, snow-shoveling), were key. Public health efforts are needed to develop interventions that will improve the narratives about mental health challenges related to COVID-19 isolation, and to provide opportunities to share challenges in a supportive manner among social networks. Supporting social cohesion, despite the everchanging nature of COVID-19, will necessitate innovative multimodal strategies that learn from lived experiences across various stages of the pandemic.

Local TV News Coverage of Racial Disparities in COVID-19 During the First Wave of the Pandemic, March-June 2020

The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately impacted health and social outcomes for people of color in the United States. This study examined how local TV news stories attributed causes and solutions for COVID-19-related racial health and social disparities, and whether coverage of such disparities changed after George Floyd's murder, during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. We systematically validated keywords to extract relevant news content and conducted a content analysis of 169 discrete local TV news stories aired between March and June 2020 from 80 broadcast networks within 22 purposefully selected media markets. We found that social determinants of COVID-19 related racial disparities have been part of the discussion in local TV news, but racism as a public health crisis was rarely mentioned. Coverage of racial disparities focused far more attention on physical health outcomes than broader social impacts. Stories cited more structural factors than individual factors, as causes of these disparities. After the murder of George Floyd, stories were more likely to mention Black and Latinx people than other populations impacted by COVID-19. Only 9% of local news stories referenced racism, and stories referenced politicians more frequently than public health experts.

Determinants of adoption and rejection of protective measures during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic: A longitudinal study in Germany’s second wave