Are People Optimistically Biased about the Risk of COVID-19 Infection? Lessons from the First Wave of the Pandemic in Europe

HIV Treatment Optimism Moderates the Relationship between Sexual Risk Behavior and HIV Risk Perception among Urban HIV-negative Gay, Bisexual, and Other Men who have Sex With Men

Using baseline data of the Engage Cohort Study, a Canadian study of sexually active gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBM), we evaluated the association between sexual behavior and risk perception among HIV-negative participants and whether HIV treatment optimism moderated this relationship. Participants were recruited by respondent-driven-sampling (RDS). We defined high-risk sexual behavior in the past six months as any condomless anal sex with a casual partner (i.e. not the participant's main partner) with either unknown HIV-status where neither used pre-exposure prophylaxis or with a partner living with HIV having detectable/unknown viral load. We assessed HIV treatment optimism-skepticism using a 12-item scale. RDS-II-weighted adjusted logistic regression models examined associations with risk perception measured by the question "How would you assess your current risk of getting HIV?" (response options were on a 6-point Likert-scale ranging from "very unlikely" to "very likely", dichotomized into "No Perceived Risk" (very unlikely/unlikely) and "Perceived Risk" (somewhat likely/likely/very likely/I think I already have HIV). Of 1961 participants, engagement in high-risk sexual behavior was reported by 155 (17.0%), 62 (12.4%), 128 (17.2%) of participants in Montréal, Toronto, and Vancouver, respectively. High-risk sexual behavior increased the odds of perceived HIV risk (pooled adjusted odds ratio = 2.9, 95%CI = 2.2-3.8). HIV treatment optimism-skepticism scores moderated the relationship: for GBM engaging in high-risk sexual behavior, higher HIV treatment optimism-skepticism scores increased perceived HIV risk. Promoting awareness around advances related to HIV prevention and treatment is important for appropriate risk assessment and for increased engagement in prevention interventions.

Factors associated with compliance with barrier gestures and social distancing measures in France

BACKGROUND

The COVID-19 pandemic led many countries to drastically limit social activities. The objective of this study is to describe the factors associated with compliance with protective measures and social distancing in the general adult population in France, between March and December 2020 (first and second waves of the epidemic), before vaccination began at the end of December 2020.

METHOD

The data come from the CoviPrev repeated cross-sectional descriptive survey, conducted between March 2020 and December 2022 in metropolitan France. The data collected from March to December 2020 (19 survey waves), from a panel representative of the general population, were used. Three periods were defined: the first epidemic wave (March-April), the inter-wave period (May-June) and the second epidemic wave (November-December). A compliance score was constructed to measure systematic compliance with the five main measures. The association between systematic compliance and different variables (sociodemographic, mental health, level of health literacy, perceived severity of COVID-19, confidence in government, perceived effectiveness of the measures) was described using bivariate and multivariate logistic regression models, using the statistical software R.

RESULTS

Systematic compliance with the preventive measures changed over time. Regardless of the period, being a woman, being over 50, perceiving COVID-19 as severe, having a high level of health literacy or anxiety were positively associated with compliance. Having a child under 16 years of age and perceiving the measures as effective were positively associated with compliance with the protective measures during the epidemic waves; conversely, having a high level of depression, living alone, not working were negatively associated in the first epidemic wave. Finally, during the inter-wave period, living in an area heavily affected during the first wave and having a high level of education were positively and negatively associated with systematic compliance with the preventive measures, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The factors associated with compliance with the protective measures and social distancing evolved during the epidemic. Monitoring this evolution, in order to adapt communication and awareness strategies, is essential in the context of pandemic response.

Contrasting Objective and Perceived Risk: Predicting COVID-19 Health Behaviors in a Nationally Representative U.S. Sample

BACKGROUND

Individuals confronting health threats may display an optimistic bias such that judgments of their risk for illness or death are unrealistically positive given their objective circumstances.

PURPOSE

We explored optimistic bias for health risks using k-means clustering in the context of COVID-19. We identified risk profiles using subjective and objective indicators of severity and susceptibility risk for COVID-19.

METHODS

Between 3/18/2020-4/18/2020, a national probability sample of 6,514 U.S. residents reported both their subjective risk perceptions (e.g., perceived likelihood of illness or death) and objective risk indices (e.g., age, weight, pre-existing conditions) of COVID-19-related susceptibility and severity, alongside other pandemic-related experiences. Six months later, a subsample (N = 5,661) completed a follow-up survey with questions about their frequency of engagement in recommended health protective behaviors (social distancing, mask wearing, risk behaviors, vaccination intentions).

RESULTS

The k-means clustering procedure identified five risk profiles in the Wave 1 sample; two of these demonstrated aspects of optimistic bias, representing almost 44% of the sample. In OLS regression models predicting health protective behavior adoption at Wave 2, clusters representing individuals with high perceived severity risk were most likely to report engagement in social distancing, but many individuals who were objectively at high risk for illness and death did not report engaging in self-protective behaviors.

CONCLUSIONS

Objective risk of disease severity only inconsistently predicted health protective behavior. Risk profiles may help identify groups that need more targeted interventions to increase their support for public health policy and health enhancing recommendations more broadly.

Unconventional data, unprecedented insights: leveraging non-traditional data during a pandemic

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic prompted new interest in non-traditional data sources to inform response efforts and mitigate knowledge gaps. While non-traditional data offers some advantages over traditional data, it also raises concerns related to biases, representativity, informed consent and security vulnerabilities. This study focuses on three specific types of non-traditional data: mobility, social media, and participatory surveillance platform data. Qualitative results are presented on the successes, challenges, and recommendations of key informants who used these non-traditional data sources during the COVID-19 pandemic in Spain and Italy.

Methods

A qualitative semi-structured methodology was conducted through interviews with experts in artificial intelligence, data science, epidemiology, and/or policy making who utilized non-traditional data in Spain or Italy during the pandemic. Questions focused on barriers and facilitators to data use, as well as opportunities for improving utility and uptake within public health. Interviews were transcribed, coded, and analyzed using the framework analysis method.

Results

Non-traditional data proved valuable in providing rapid results and filling data gaps, especially when traditional data faced delays. Increased data access and innovative collaborative efforts across sectors facilitated its use. Challenges included unreliable access and data quality concerns, particularly the lack of comprehensive demographic and geographic information. To further leverage non-traditional data, participants recommended prioritizing data governance, establishing data brokers, and sustaining multi-institutional collaborations. The value of non-traditional data was perceived as underutilized in public health surveillance, program evaluation and policymaking. Participants saw opportunities to integrate them into public health systems with the necessary investments in data pipelines, infrastructure, and technical capacity.

Discussion

While the utility of non-traditional data was demonstrated during the pandemic, opportunities exist to enhance its impact. Challenges reveal a need for data governance frameworks to guide practices and policies of use. Despite the perceived benefit of collaborations and improved data infrastructure, efforts are needed to strengthen and sustain them beyond the pandemic. Lessons from these findings can guide research institutions, multilateral organizations, governments, and public health authorities in optimizing the use of non-traditional data.

Health protective behaviours during the COVID-19 pandemic: Risk adaptation or habituation?

Many epidemiological works show that human behaviours play a fundamental role in the spread of infectious diseases. However, we still do not know much about how people modify their Health Protective Behaviours (HPB), such as hygiene or social distancing measures, over time in response to the health threat during an epidemic. In this study, we examined the role of the epidemiological context in engagement in HPB through two possible mechanisms highlighted by research into decision-making under risk: risk adaptation and risk habituation. These two different mechanisms were assumed to explain to a large extent the temporal variations in the public's responsiveness to the health threat during the COVID-19 pandemic. To test them, we used self-reported data collected through a series of 25 cross-sectional surveys conducted in France among representative samples of the adult population, from March 2020 to September 2021 (N = 50,019). Interestingly, we found that both mechanisms accounted relatively well for the temporal variation in the adoption of social distancing during the pandemic, which is remarkable given their different assumptions about the underlying social cognitive processes involved in response to a health threat. These results suggest that strengthening the incentives to encourage people to maintain health protective behaviours and to counter risk habituation effects is crucial to disease control and prevention over time.

Exploring the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on energy literacy and conservation behavior in academic buildings of Kuwait

This study investigates the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on energy literacy and conservation behavior among occupant groups in academic buildings in Kuwait. It explores influential factors, focusing on the pandemic's effect on attitudes, intentions, and behaviors related to energy conservation. The research adopts a mixed-methods approach, incorporating quantitative and qualitative data collection methods. Participants, including students, faculty, and staff, completed surveys, participated in questionnaires, focus groups, and took part in interviews. Statistical tests are used to validate the survey data, while thematic analysis is applied to the qualitative data. The findings of the research showed that COVID-19 had a significant impact on participants' attitudes, intentions, and behavior regarding energy literacy and conservation. Specifically, the student group experienced a significant increase in the relationship between their intentions and behavior, while the faculty group exhibited a strong correlation between intention and behavior. The study also found that education, awareness, personal motivation, values, religiosity, and culture were all crucial factors in promoting energy literacy and conservation behavior. The study recommends specific educational interventions, fostering a culture of conservation, providing access to information and resources, promoting community engagement, incorporating religiosity, and improving policies and infrastructure to enhance energy literacy in academic buildings. Additionally, the study highlights the importance of tailored educational interventions that consider the specific needs and challenges of different occupant groups and suggests incorporating religious perspectives to align with the cultural and religious context of the Kuwaiti population. The study's findings offer comprehensive insights into the impact of unforeseen events, such as pandemics, on energy literacy and conservation behavior. These insights have practical implications for policymaking and implementation. Future research could explore the effectiveness of various educational interventions and examine the role of social and cultural factors in shaping energy literacy and behavior.

Emerging data inputs for infectious diseases surveillance and decision making

Infectious diseases create a significant health and social burden globally and can lead to outbreaks and epidemics. Timely surveillance for infectious diseases is required to inform both short and long term public responses and health policies. Novel data inputs for infectious disease surveillance and public health decision making are emerging, accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic. These include the use of technology-enabled physiological measurements, crowd sourcing, field experiments, and artificial intelligence (AI). These technologies may provide benefits in relation to improved timeliness and reduced resource requirements in comparison to traditional methods. In this review paper, we describe current and emerging data inputs being used for infectious disease surveillance and summarize key benefits and limitations.

Attitudes towards booster, testing and isolation, and their impact on COVID-19 response in winter 2022/2023 in France, Belgium, and Italy: a cross-sectional survey and modelling study

Background

European countries are focusing on testing, isolation, and boosting strategies to counter the 2022/2023 winter surge due to SARS-CoV-2 Omicron subvariants. However, widespread pandemic fatigue and limited compliance potentially undermine mitigation efforts.

Methods

To establish a baseline for interventions, we ran a multicountry survey to assess respondents’ willingness to receive booster vaccination and comply with testing and isolation mandates. Integrating survey and estimated immunity data in a branching process epidemic spreading model, we evaluated the effectiveness and costs of current protocols in France, Belgium, and Italy to manage the winter wave.

Findings

The vast majority of survey participants (N = 4594) was willing to adhere to testing (>91%) and rapid isolation (>88%) across the three countries. Pronounced differences emerged in the declared senior adherence to booster vaccination (73% in France, 94% in Belgium, 86% in Italy). Epidemic model results estimate that testing and isolation protocols would confer significant benefit in reducing transmission (17–24% reduction, from R = 1.6 to R = 1.3 in France and Belgium, to R = 1.2 in Italy) with declared adherence. Achieving a mitigating level similar to the French protocol, the Belgian protocol would require 35% fewer tests (from 1 test to 0.65 test per infected person) and avoid the long isolation periods of the Italian protocol (average of 6 days vs. 11). A cost barrier to test would significantly decrease adherence in France and Belgium, undermining protocols’ effectiveness.

Interpretation

Simpler mandates for isolation may increase awareness and actual compliance, reducing testing costs, without compromising mitigation. High booster vaccination uptake remains key for the control of the winter wave.

Funding

The 10.13039/501100000780European Commission, ANRS–Maladies Infectieuses Émergentes, the Agence Nationale de la Recherche, the Chaires Blaise Pascal Program of the Île-de-France region.

Do unbiased people act more rationally?-The case of comparative realism and vaccine intention

Within different populations and at various stages of the pandemic, it has been demonstrated that individuals believe they are less likely to become infected than their average peer. This is known as comparative optimism and it has been one of the reproducible effects in social psychology. However, in previous and even the most recent studies, researchers often neglected to consider unbiased individuals and inspect the differences between biased and unbiased individuals. In a mini meta-analysis of six studies (Study 1), we discovered that unbiased individuals have lower vaccine intention than biased ones. In two pre-registered, follow-up studies, we aimed at testing the reproducibility of this phenomenon and its explanations. In Study 2 we replicated the main effect and found no evidence for differences in psychological control between biased and unbiased groups. In Study 3 we also replicated the effect and found that realists hold more centric views on the trade-offs between threats from getting vaccinated and getting ill. We discuss the interpretation and implication of our results in the context of the academic and lay-persons' views on rationality. We also put forward empirical and theoretical arguments for considering unbiased individuals as a separate phenomenon in the domain of self-others comparisons.

It Matters to Whom You Compare Yourself: The Case of Unrealistic Optimism and Gender-Specific Comparisons

Unrealistic Optimism (UO) appears when comparing participants' risk estimates for themselves with an average peer, which typically results in lower risk estimates for the self. This article reports nuanced effects when comparison varies in terms of the gender of the peer. In three studies (total N = 2,468, representative sample), we assessed people's risk estimates for COVID-19 infections for peers with the same or other gender. If a peer's gender is not taken into account, previous studies were replicated: Compared with others, participants perceived themselves as less likely to get infected with COVID-19. Interestingly, this effect was qualified by gender: Respondents perceived women as less threatened than men because women are perceived as more cautious and compliant with medical guidelines.

Are College Students Interested in Family Health History Education? A Large Needs Assessment Survey Study

Family health history (FHH) is an essential foundation for personalized disease prevention. As the incidence of early-onset chronic diseases is increasing among college students, it is important to provide them with the education required to learn about their FHH. This study aimed to assess college students' interest in receiving FHH education, preferred topics, and desired learning methods. We invited college students to complete an online survey from a large research-intensive university. A total of 2276 college students completed the survey. Nearly half of the participants self-identified as non-Hispanic white (45.5%). Slightly more than half of the sample (53.9%) were not interested in receiving FHH education mainly due to low prioritization. Among those who expressed interest in obtaining FHH education, the three most desired learning topics were the ability to interpret FHH information (76.1%), the application of FHH in disease prevention (72.0%), and FHH information collection strategies (63.6%). Computer-based learning (51.1%) was the most preferred educational method. Moreover, females, older individuals, those who have FHH in first-degree relatives, and participants who were members of racial and ethnic groups showed greater interests in receiving FHH education (ps < 0.05). Strategies to promote college students' awareness, collection, and use of FHH are needed.

Greater knowledge about COVID-19, more negative emotions. Research in adult Poles after 2nd and 5th waves of the pandemic

Introduction: The study investigated the dynamics of cognitive and emotional representation of COVID-19 in adult Poles, following the second (2021) and the fifth (2022) wave of the pandemic. Material and methods: The study involved a total of 303 subjects (N = 198 in Survey 1 in 2021, and N = 105 in Survey 2 in 2022). The following measures were used: a questionnaire covering demographic data and general opinions about COVID-19 as well as the Revised Illness Perception Questionnaire (IPQ-R). Results: After the fifth wave, significantly more respondents were convinced that COVID-19 was a real and dangerous disease. Cognitive deficits were more commonly recognised among symptoms of the viremia. Vaccination against COVID-19 was recognised as an essential preventive measure. Both surveys showed that COVID-19 representation was characterised by negative emotions and low sense of illness coherence. However, there was increased belief that the disease can be controlled through medical interventions. The age of the respondents in Survey 1 and Survey 2 was differently related to beliefs about COVID-19. Conclusions: 1. After 2.5 years of the pandemic, the awareness of Poles about the causes, symptoms and methods of preventing the disease has increased. 2. Failure to vaccinate against COVID-19 has been identified as a significant cause of viremia. 3. Negative emotions and a sense of serious consequences were predominant in both Surveys, but after the fifth wave of the pandemic the scores reflect increased perception of the chronic nature of the disease and belief that the illness can be treated with medication, whereas the sense of personal control was found to decrease. 4. After the fifth wave of the pandemic, older age corresponded to increased belief in the relevance of some preventive measures, and to greater awareness of the viral origin, increased belief in the feasibility of controlling the disease through one's behaviours and a greater sense of illness coherence. 5. The intensification of negative emotions related to the pandemic can be treated as a predictor of the increase in adjustment disorders and risk of mental health deterioration among adult Poles in the following years. Keywords: cognitive and emotional representation of illness, COVID-19 pandemic, Polish adults

Prevalence and Factors of Postpartum Depression During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Review

The COVID-19 (Coronavirus Disease 2019) pandemic has led to several mandatory prevention regulations, changes in healthcare services, unprecedented unemployment rates, financial stress, and emotional worries. Given the increasing cases of COVID-19, coupled with the drastic physical and psychological changes within postpartum mothers during the postpartum period, this paper aims to present an overview of the postpartum depression (PPD) among postpartum women during the COVID-19 pandemic. The postpartum period is characterized by drastic physical changes and substantial demands on parental role adjustment, and it places enormous stress on the mothers and makes them vulnerable to mental health problems. A literature search was conducted in four electronic databases (ScienceDirect, Scopus, Wiley, and SAGE) with different combinations of keywords were used. As the result, 25 articles that involved 10,515 postpartum women from 14 countries were extracted. Results have recorded PPD prevalence ranged from 6.4% to 56.9% during the COVID-19 pandemic. Limited social support, social isolation, fear of COVID-19 exposure, or infection for themselves, newborns, have worsening PPD symptoms among postpartum women. In brief, early detection, appropriate and timely intervention is needed to prevent and identify PPD among postpartum women during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-022-04181-w.

Self-uniqueness beliefs and adherence to recommended precautions. A 5-wave longitudinal COVID-19 study

RATIONALE

Research on health-related self-uniqueness beliefs suggested that these beliefs might predict adherence to precautions against COVID-19.

OBJECTIVE

We examined if comparative optimism (believing that one is less at less than others), self-superiority (believing that one already adheres better to precautions than others), and egocentric impact perception (believing that adverse events affect oneself more than others) predicted intended adherence to precautions.

METHOD

We measured self-reported intentions, optimism for self and others, perceived past adherence by self and others, and perceived impact of the measures and the disease on self and others in a 5-wave longitudinal study in December 2020-May 2021 (N ≈ 5000/wave). The sample was in key respects representative for the Belgian population. We used joint models to examine the relationship between self-uniqueness beliefs and intended adherence to the precautions.

RESULTS

Believing that COVID-19 would affect one's own life more than average (egocentric impact perception) was associated with higher intentions to adhere to precautions, as was believing that the precautions affected one's life less than average (allocentric impact perception). Self-superiority concerning past adherence to precautions and comparative optimism concerning infection with COVID-19 were associated with higher intended adherence, regardless of whether their non-comparative counterparts (descriptive norm, i.e., perceived adherence to precautions by others, and personal optimism, respectively) were controlled for. Comparative optimism for severe disease and for good outcome were associated with lower intended adherence if personal optimism was not controlled for, but with higher intended adherence if it was controlled for.

CONCLUSION

Self-uniqueness beliefs predict intended adherence to precautions against COVID-19, but do so in different directions.

Self-Assessed Personality Traits and Adherence to the COVID-19 Lockdown

Introduction: The COVID-19 pandemic, caused by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus, has forced all countries affected by it to introduce quarantine and isolation to prevent the spread of the virus, as well as masking and distancing. Not everyone is equally willing to follow the rules related to limit the extent of the coronavirus epidemic. This might be connected with personality traits, especially openness, positive attitude, and optimism. Materials and Methods: An online survey was created and completed by participants in April-May 2020. Self-assessment of personality traits and adherence to lockdown recommendations were assessed. A total of 7404 participants took part in the study, mainly from Poland (83.6%) and Italy (12.7%). Univariate and multivariate regression analysis was performed. Results: The participants were divided into groups depending on the degree of compliance with the lockdown rules. In the multivariate analysis, variables that increased the odds for stricter lockdown compliance were temporary work suspension OR 1.27 (95% CI 1.10-1.48), income level "we can't handle this situation" OR 1.67 (95%CI 1.20-2.33), and junior high school education OR 1.68 (95% CI 1.13-2.50). Other significant factors included age and place of residence. Each point of self-assessed sociability OR 1.07 (95% CI 1.00-1.13) also increased the likelihood of adhering to lockdown rules. Conclusions: Taking the basic demographic characteristics as well as working and health environment conditions traits into account may be helpful when forecasting epidemiological compliance during a pandemic, as well as in other public health tasks. The key role of self-assessed personality traits was not confirmed in this study. Reliability of the results is limited by significant disproportions in the size of the study groups.

Temporal aspects of unrealistic optimism and robustness of this bias: A longitudinal study in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic

Numerous studies on unrealistic optimism (UO) have shown that people claim they are less exposed to COVID-19 infection than others. Yet, it has not been assessed if this bias evolves; does it escalate or diminish when the information about the threat changes? The present paper fills this gap. For 12 months 120 participants estimated their own and their peers' risk of COVID-19 infection. Results show that UO regarding COVID-19 infection is an enduring phenomenon-It was the dominant tendency throughout almost the entire study and was never substituted by Unrealistic Pessimism. While the presence of UO-bias was constant, its magnitude changed. We tested possible predictors of these changes: the daily new cases/deaths, the changes in governmental restrictions and the mobility of participants' community. Out of these predictors, only changes in governmental restrictions proved to be significant- when the restrictions tightened, UO increased.

Emotional profiling and cognitive networks unravel how mainstream and alternative press framed AstraZeneca, Pfizer and COVID-19 vaccination campaigns

COVID-19 vaccines have been largely debated by the press. To understand how mainstream and alternative media debated vaccines, we introduce a paradigm reconstructing time-evolving narrative frames via cognitive networks and natural language processing. We study Italian news articles massively re-shared on Facebook/Twitter (up to 5 million times), covering 5745 vaccine-related news from 17 news outlets over 8 months. We find consistently high trust/anticipation and low disgust in the way mainstream sources framed “vaccine/vaccino”. These emotions were crucially missing in alternative outlets. News titles from alternative sources framed “AstraZeneca” with sadness, absent in mainstream titles. Initially, mainstream news linked mostly “Pfizer” with side effects (e.g. “allergy”, “reaction”, “fever”). With the temporary suspension of “AstraZeneca”, negative associations shifted: Mainstream titles prominently linked “AstraZeneca” with side effects, while “Pfizer” underwent a positive valence shift, linked to its higher efficacy. Simultaneously, thrombosis and fearful conceptual associations entered the frame of vaccines, while death changed context, i.e. rather than hopefully preventing deaths, vaccines could be reported as potential causes of death, increasing fear. Our findings expose crucial aspects of the emotional narratives around COVID-19 vaccines adopted by the press, highlighting the need to understand how alternative and mainstream media report vaccination news.

Relationship between Preventive Health Behavior, Optimistic Bias, Hypochondria, and Mass Psychology in Relation to the Coronavirus Pandemic among Young Adults in Korea

The great challenge to global public health caused by the coronavirus pandemic has lasted for two years in Korea. However, Korean young adults seem less compliant with preventive health behaviors than older adults. This study aims to explore the relationship between risk perception variables of optimistic bias, hypochondriasis, and mass psychology, and preventive health behavior in relation to the coronavirus pandemic through a cross-sectional online survey. The participants are 91 Korean young adults aged 19–30. The results show that mass psychology has a positive relationship with preventive health behavior, whereas optimistic bias and hypochondriasis do not. In detail, people with high or middle levels of mass psychology displayed higher preventive health behavior compared with those who had low levels of mass psychology, and the highest compliance was for wearing a mask, followed by COVID-19 vaccination, whereas the lowest compliance was for influenza vaccination. These findings could be explained by the Korean culture of strong collectivism and the characteristics of COVID-19, which evoked extreme fear globally. The results of this study can be useful for policy establishment in the ongoing prevention of COVID-19 and suggest that mass psychology should be used effectively in planning preventive communication campaigns.

Spatial Dependencies and the Relationship between Subjective Perception and Objective Environmental Risks in Lithuania

The effects of objective environmental indicators on subjective risk perceptions are under-researched and bring new frontiers to environmental risk perception research. The aim of this article is to analyze the spatial distribution of environmental risks in Lithuania, to identify social-psychological factors that determine variances of risk perception, and to contrast perception data with objective environmental data. This article is based on the representative national survey of 2007 respondents conducted from September to October of 2020 in Lithuania, and on the objective indicators of flood risk, air quality, water pollution, and forest fires. Analytical methods used in this article include spatial autocorrelation as well as spatial and linear regressions. Spatial analysis of objective environmental risk indicators reveal that the five biggest cities in Lithuania experience higher levels of environmental risks. Flood risk perceptions are spatially related to objective flood risks, and the relation is not significant for other types of risks. Place of residence, gender, education, and income are significant factors explaining risk perceptions. Place of residence is negatively moderating the effect of objective environmental risks on perceptions, as people in the biggest cities underestimate risks, especially from air pollution.

Unrealistic pessimism and obsessive-compulsive symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic: Two longitudinal studies

Objective

Unrealistic pessimism (UP) is an aspect of overestimation of threat (OET) that has been associated with obsessive‐compulsive disorder/symptoms (OCD/OCS). During the COVID‐19 pandemic, UP may have played an important role in the course of OCD. To investigate the relationship, we conducted two longitudinal studies assuming that higher UP predicts an increase in OCS.

Method

In Study 1, we investigated UP in the general population (N = 1,184) at the start of the pandemic asking about overall vulnerability to infection with SARS‐CoV‐2 and UP regarding infection and outcome of severe illness. Further, OCS status (OCS+/−) was assessed at the start of the pandemic and 3 months later. In Study 2, we investigated UP in individuals with OCD (N = 268) regarding the likelihood of getting infected, recovering, or dying from an infection with SARS‐CoV‐2 at the start of the pandemic and re‐assessed OCS 3 months later.

Results

In Study 1, UP was higher in the OCS+ compared to the OCS− group, and estimates of a higher overall vulnerability for an infection predicted a decrease in OCS over time. UP regarding severe illness predicted an increase in symptoms over time. In Study 2, UP was found for a recovery and death after an infection with SARS‐CoV‐2, but not for infection itself.

Conclusions

Exaggeration of one’s personal vulnerability rather than OET per se seems pivotal in OCD, with UP being associated with OCD/OCS+ as well as a more negative course of symptomatology over the pandemic in a nonclinical sample.

Practitioner points

Unrealistic optimism, a bias common in healthy individuals, is thought to be a coping mechanism promoting well‐being in the face of danger or uncertainty.

The current study extends findings that its inversion, unrealistic pessimism, may play an important role in obsessive‐compulsive disorder and may also be involved in the development of the disorder.

This study highlights the importance that prevention programs during a pandemic should include targeting unrealistic pessimism.

COVID-19 and a biased public mentality toward infection and vaccination: A case of unrealistic optimism and social comparisons between the vaccinated and unvaccinated

Unrealistic Optimism in the context of COVID-19 is described as the tendency to perceive peers as being more at risk of infection. To date, however, no research has proposed more specific comparisons. The present article not only replicates the most recent body of literature showing that people perceive themselves as less prone to COVID-19 infection than their peers, but fills the aforementioned gap by providing additional and more specific comparisons between those vaccinated and unvaccinated against COVID-19. Such comparisons may be crucial to curb the possibility of resurgence of COVID-19 by assessing how unvaccinated individuals perceive the probability of being infected by coronavirus. Some 622 Prolific—(un)vaccinated against COVID-19—users participated in an online quasi-experiment. Participants estimated the risk of COVID-19 infection for themselves, their peers or the average (un)vaccinated peer, which is a new addition to the literature. Results showed that there was an unrealistic optimism effect. Participants estimated their risk for infection as lower in comparison to others. Surprisingly, results showed that for unvaccinated people, vaccines seem to be an effective tool to reduce the risk of infection, but not for themselves.