Behavioral Immune System Responses to Coronavirus: A Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory Explanation of Conformity, Warmth Toward Others and Attitudes Toward Lockdown

Reinforcement sensitivity theory may predict COVID-19 infection outcome and vulnerability

Research suggests that specific behavior patterns may be related with the outcome and vulnerability of a COVID-19 infection; nevertheless, much of this information has been obtained by means of psychological paradigms that are not based on research conducted using experimental designs. Thus, the purpose of the present study was to identify behavior patterns associated with COVID-19 outcome and vulnerability from the point of view of the Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory. A total of 464 college students from Mexico-City participated in the study. Participants answered the Behavior Inhibition, Behavior Activation scales (Carver & White, 1994), the Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory Personality Questionnaire (Corr & Cooper, 2016) and a COVID-19 symptom checklist. Data showed that those individuals who respond in an enthusiastic way to rewards develop less symptoms of COVID-19. Additionally, individuals who are keen in the exploration and identification of new rewarding opportunities are less likely to develop a COVID-19 infection. Both findings suggest that a potent Behavior Activation System could protect individuals during the present pandemic. These results are in general agreement with others produced within the same framework.

Responses to COVID-19 Threats: an Evolutionary Psychological Analysis

Responses to COVID-19 public health interventions have been lukewarm. For example, only 64% of the US population has received at least two vaccinations. Because most public health interventions require people to behave in ways that are evolutionarily novel, evolutionary psychological theory and research on mismatch theory, the behavioral immune system, and individual differences can help us gain a better understanding of how people respond to public health information. Primary sources of threat information during the pandemic (particularly in early phases) were geographic differences in morbidity and mortality statistics. We argue that people are unlikely to respond to this type of evolutionarily novel information, particularly under conditions of high uncertainty. However, because individual differences affect threat perceptions, some individual differences will be associated with threat responses. We conducted two studies (during Phase 1 and 2 years later), using data from primarily public sources. We found that state-level COVID-19 morbidity and mortality rates had no relationship with mental health symptoms (an early indicator of how people were responding to the pandemic), suggesting that people-in general-were not attending to this type of information. This result is consistent with the evolutionary psychological explanation that statistical information is likely to have a weak effect on the behavioral immune system. We also found that individual differences (neuroticism, IQ, age, and political ideology) affected how people responded to COVID-19 threats, supporting a niche-picking explanation. We conclude with suggestions for future research and suggestions for improving interventions and promoting greater compliance.

Heightened religiosity proactively and reactively responds to the COVID-19 pandemic across the globe: Novel insights from the parasite-stress theory of sociality and the behavioral immune system theory

According to the parasite-stress theory of sociality and the behavioral immune system theory, heightened religiosity serves an anti-pathogen function by promoting in-group assortative sociality. Thus, highly religious countries/territories could have better control of the COVID-19 (proactively avoids disease-threat), and heightened COVID-19 threat could increase religiosity (reactively responds to disease-threat). As expected, country-level religiosity (religion-related online searches (Allah, Buddhism, Jesus, etc.) and number of total religions/ethnoreligions) negatively and significantly predicted COVID-19 severity (a composite index of COVID-19 susceptibility, reproductive rate, morbidity, and mortality rates) (Study 1a), after accounting for covariates (e.g., socioeconomic factors, ecological factors, collectivism index, cultural tightness-looseness index, COVID-19 policy response, test-to-case ratio). Moreover, multilevel analysis accounting for daily- (e.g., time-trend effect, season) and macro-level (same as in Study 1a) covariates showed that country-level religious searches, compared with the number of total religions/ethnoreligions, were more robust in negatively and significantly predicting daily-level COVID-19 severity during early pandemic stages (Study 1b). At weekly level, perceived coronavirus threat measured with coronavirus-related searches (corona, covid, covid-19, etc.), compared with actual COVID-19 threat measured with epidemiological data, showed larger effects in positively predicting religious searches (Study 2), after accounting for weekly- (e.g., autocorrelation, time-trend effect, season, religious holidays, major-illness-related searches) and macro-level (e.g., Christian-majority country/territory and all country-level variables in Study 1) covariates. Accordingly, heightened religiosity could proactively and reactively respond to the COVID-19 pandemic across the globe.

When the "satisficing" is the new "fittest": how a proscriptive definition of adaptation can change our view of cognition and culture

Since Darwin's theory of evolution, adaptationism is frequently invoked to explain cognition and cultural processes. Adaptationism can be described as a prescriptive view, as phenotypes that do not optimize fitness should not be selected by natural selection. From an epistemological perspective, the principle of a prescriptive definition of adaptation seems incompatible with recent advances in epigenetics, evolutionary developmental biology, ethology, and genomics. From these challenges, a proscriptive view of adaptation has emerged, postulating that phenotypes that are not deleterious will be evolutionary maintained. In this epistemological investigation, we examine how the shift from adaptationism to a proscriptive view changes our view of cognition and culture. We argue that, while adaptationism leads to cognitivism and a view of culture as strategies to optimize overall fitness, the proscriptive definition favors embodied theories of cognition and a view of culture as the cumulative diffusion of behaviors allowed by the constraints of reproduction.

Vaccination Hesitancy and Conspiracy Beliefs in the UK During the SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19) Pandemic

BACKGROUND

Conspiracy beliefs about vaccination along with vaccination hesitancy are threats to achieving population immunity during the SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic. This longitudinal study aimed to clarify the association between these and non-monetary incentives to vaccination in the UK.

METHOD

Data were collected at three points: (1) before and (2) after the development of a vaccine and (3) after the vaccination programme was underway. At Time 1, participants completed measures of general and COVID-19-specific concerns about vaccination and belief in conspiracy theories. At times 2 and 3, participants reported their intentions whether or not to have the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Those who were hesitant provided qualitative comments about what might change their decision.

RESULTS

Vaccination hesitancy decreased between times 1 (54%) and 3 (13%). There were small effects of conspiracy beliefs on vaccine hesitancy, but only at time 1. Most concerns and reported incentives were related to safety, although at time 2, incentives included endorsement by trusted public figures. By time 3, only a minority of participants (N = 18) were adamantly against vaccination, stating that nothing would change their minds.

CONCLUSION

Vaccination hesitancy declined in the UK during the course of the study. However, concerns about vaccine safety remained and could jeopardise the vaccination programme should any adverse effects be reported. Conspiracy beliefs seem to play only a minor role in hesitancy and may continue to decrease in importance with a successful vaccination programme. Understanding motivations behind vaccination hesitancy is vital if we are to achieve population immunity.

Preventive and Avoidant Behaviors Followed by Jordanians During COVID-19 Pandemic

OBJECTIVE

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), individuals' compliance with protective behaviors was the most effective strategy to break the infection chain and prevent disease spread, even with vaccine availability and use. Understanding protective behaviors within the Jordanian context will shape health promotion campaigns and guide decision-makers to facilitate required resources and support Jordanian citizens. The objective of this study was to identify personal protective (preventive and avoidant) measures used by the Jordanian population during the COVID-19 pandemic to protect themselves from infection.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study with an exploratory, descriptive design was used to collect data using an online self-reported questionnaire from Jordanian people. The survey included the Protection from Infection Scale and the Infection Avoidance Scale.

RESULTS

A total sample of 1053 Jordanian citizens was included in the study. The participants exhibited a moderate level of self-care behaviors and high levels of protective and infection avoidance behaviors. Their most common behaviors were getting enough sleep, wearing masks, washing hands, and avoiding travel to infected areas. Contrariwise, the least adopted behaviors were exercising, wearing gloves, and leaving their jobs or schools.

CONCLUSIONS

During pandemics, policy-makers must understand public concerns and protective behaviors, then provide them with tailored education through health promotion campaigns to enhance healthy behaviors.

Health-Promoting Quality of Life at Work during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A 12-Month Longitudinal Study on the Work-Related Sense of Coherence in Acute Care Healthcare Professionals

(1) Background: During a pandemic, the wellbeing of healthcare professionals is crucial. We investigated the long-term association of the Work-related Sense of Coherence (Work-SoC) and the evolution of psychological health symptoms of acute care healthcare professionals during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. (2) Methods: This longitudinal observational study enrolled 520 multinational healthcare professionals, who completed an online survey every three months from April 2020 to April 2021. Mixed linear models examined the associations between Work-SOC and COVID-19-related anxiety, perceived vulnerability, depressiveness, and psychological trauma symptomatology. (3) Results: Healthcare professionals with a higher Work-SoC reported lower levels of COVID-19-related anxiety, perceived vulnerability, depressiveness, and psychological trauma symptomatology in April 2020 than healthcare professionals with an average or lower Work-SoC, but the levels increased to higher values in April 2021. Healthcare professionals with a lower Work-SoC reported higher levels of depressiveness and psychological trauma symptomatology in April 2020 but lower levels in April 2021. (4) Conclusions: Healthcare professionals with higher levels of Work-related Sense of Coherence might be protected against variations in psychological symptoms for about three months, but this protection seems to decrease as the pandemic continues, resulting in mental health deterioration. In contrast, healthcare professionals with a lower Work-SoC might be protected at later stages of the pandemic.

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

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

Sentiment Analysis of Comments of American Birders during Two Waves of the COVID-19 Pandemic Reveal More Negative Sentiments in the Context of Birding

Human-nature relationships are an important aspect of leisure research. Previous studies also reported that nature-related activities have a health benefit. In this study, we surveyed US-American birdwatchers at two time points during the COVID pandemic (independent samples). During the beginning of the COVID pandemic in spring 2020, we analyzed their comments with an AI sentiment analysis. Approximately one year later (winter 2020/21), during the second wave, the study was repeated, and a second data set was analyzed. Here we show that during the ongoing pandemic, the sentiments became more negative. This is an important result because it shows that despite the positive impact of nature on mental health, the sentiments become more negative in the enduring pandemic.

Emotional and Behavioral Responses to COVID-19

Abstract. This review appraises evidence for the role of personality in COVID-19 related emotions and behaviors. Three key models of personality are considered: the Five-factor Model, HEXACO model, and Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST). In line with personality research, more generally, most studies focus on the Five-Factor model. Key findings are that neuroticism is most associated with poor mental health, and extraversion is associated with a reluctance to socially isolate. Conscientiousness predicts compliance with safety guidelines but also with fewer prosocial behaviors, particularly stockpiling. Research within the HEXACO framework largely confirms these findings, especially for emotionality and mental health. The additional HEXACO Honesty-Humility factor is found to be associated with prosocial views and abstention from panic buying. Studies based on the Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory of personality indicate emotional conflict as people wish to stay safe while maintaining a sense of normality. Behavioral compliance is driven by activation in the Fight-Flight-Freeze System (FFFS; fear-related) and the Behavioral Inhibition System (BIS; anxiety-related). The Behavioral Approach System (BAS) is implicated in approach-driven behaviors such as avoiding infection. These findings have implications for health communications and post-pandemic support.

Social distancing from foreign individuals as a disease-avoidance mechanism: Testing the assumptions of the behavioral immune system theory during the COVID-19 pandemic

Topics of prejudice, discrimination, and negative attitudes toward outgroups have attracted much attention of social scientists during the COVID-19 pandemic, as the preference for social distancing can originate from the perception of threat. One of the theoretical approaches that offers an explanation for avoidance tendencies is the behavioral immune system theory. As a motivational system that aims to identify and avoid pathogens, the behavioral immune system has been shown to be triggered by various cues of a potential disease threat (e.g., the risk of contracting a virus), which further leads to negative social consequences such as xenophobia, negative attitudes toward various social groups, and distancing tendencies. We present a correlational study (N = 588; Polish sample) that was designed to test mediational models derived from the behavioral immune system theory, using the COVID-19 pandemic as a source of natural disease threat. In serial mediation analyses we show that the perceived threat of COVID-19 translates into greater preferred social distance from foreign individuals, and that this occurs in two ways: 1) via pathogen disgust (but not sexual or moral disgust), and 2) via germ aversion (but not perceived infectability). Both pathogen disgust and germ aversion further predict general feelings toward foreign individuals, which finally determine the preferred social distance from these individuals. The results support the behavioral immune system theory as an important concept for understanding social distancing tendencies.

Linking the behavioral immune system to COVID-19 vaccination intention: The mediating role of the need for cognitive closure and vaccine hesitancy

Vaccination has become one of the most effective ways of controlling the spread of COVID-19. Consequently, revealing the evolutionary and cognitive antecedents of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and vaccination intention has become crucial. Drawing on the theory of behavioral immune system (BIS), we investigate whether perceived vulnerability to disease (PVD) is associated with vaccination intentions through the need for cognitive closure (NCC) and vaccine hesitancy. The data was collected from 525 adults from Turkey. The structural equation modeling results indicate that of the two dimensions of PVD, germ aversion predicts COVID-19 vaccination intention through sequential mediation of NCC and vaccine hesitancy. Perceived infectability, on the other hand, is directly and positively related to vaccination intention. By showing the mediating role of NCC, our results offer an insight as to why germ aversion translates into vaccine hesitancy, and low vaccination intention. We discuss the potential benefits of considering the roles of BIS and NCC in campaigns and policies targeted at increasing COVID-19 vaccine uptake and suggest implications for such practices.

Testing the Disgust-Based Mechanism of Homonegative Attitudes in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Negative attitudes and stigmatization can originate from the perception of a disease-related threat. Following the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is often suggested that incidents of discriminatory behavior are the result of defense mechanisms aimed at avoiding pathogens. According to the behavioral immune system theory, people are motivated to distance themselves from individuals who show signs of infection, or who are only heuristically associated with a disease, primarily because of the disgust they evoke. In this paper we focus on negative attitudes toward gay men and lesbians who are among social groups that have been persistently framed as "unclean." In our correlational study (N = 500 heterosexual participants; Polish sample data collected during the first COVID-19 lockdown in Poland, in March/April 2020) we tested moderation models derived from the behavioral immune system theory. Specifically, we investigated whether perceived vulnerability to disease and perceived threat of contracting COVID-19 moderate the relation between disgust and homonegativity. We found that sexual disgust (but not pathogen nor moral disgust) predicted homonegative attitudes. This effect was stronger for participants expressing higher levels of perceived vulnerability to disease but was not dependent on the perception of the COVID-19 threat. The results reaffirm previous evidence indicating a pivotal role of disgust in disease-avoidance mechanisms. They also point to functional flexibility of the behavioral immune system by demonstrating the moderating role of perceived vulnerability to disease in shaping homonegative attitudes. Finally, they show that the threat of COVID-19 does not strengthen the relationship between disgust and homonegativity.

Trust in Science, Perceived Vulnerability to Disease, and Adherence to Pharmacological and Non-pharmacological COVID-19 Recommendations

Protection motivation theory (PMT) is a theoretical framework informative for understanding behavioral intentions and choices during exceptional and uncommon circumstances, such as a pandemic of respiratory infectious disease. PMT postulates both the threat appraisal and the coping appraisal as predictors of health behaviors. Recent advances in the field of behavioral immune system (BIS) research suggest that humans are equipped with a set of psychological adaptations enabling them to detect the disease-threat and activate behavioral avoidance of pathogens. The present study, set within PMT framework and informed by the BIS research, aimed to explain and predict voluntary adherence to COVID-19 guidelines by perceived personal risk and vulnerability to disease as threat appraisal variables, and trust in science as the response efficacy element of coping appraisal. Gender, age, belief in the second wave, perceived personal risk, germ aversion, and trust in science were all found to be significant positive predictors of the intent to adhere to non-pharmacological COVID-19 recommendations, with the belief in the second wave, germ aversion, and trust in science being the most important ones. On the other hand, only the belief in the second wave and trust in science were significant positive predictors of the intent to adhere to pharmacological COVID-19 recommendations (i.e., to vaccinate). Interventions aimed at enhancing preventative measures adherence should take into account that the psychological mechanisms underlying adherence to these two types of recommendations are not identical.