The prospective relations of substance use frequency to social distancing behaviors and intentions during the COVID-19 pandemic: the role of social distancing self-efficacy.

To identify factors that increase risk for nonadherence to recommended health protective behaviors during pandemics, this study examined the prospective relations of substance use frequency to both adherence to social distancing recommendations and social distancing intentions during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as the role of social distancing self-efficacy in these relations. A U.S. community sample of 377 adults completed a prospective online study, including an initial assessment between March 27 and April 5, 2020, and a follow-up assessment one-month later. Results revealed a significant direct relation of baseline substance use frequency to lower adherence to social distancing recommendations one-month later. Results also revealed significant indirect relations of greater substance use frequency to lower levels of both social distancing behaviors and intentions one-month later through lower social distancing self-efficacy. Results highlight the relevance of substance use and social distancing self-efficacy to lower adherence to social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The impact of stay-at-home orders on vulnerability assessments and precautionary intentions during a pandemic.

In 2020, a novel emerging infectious disease - COVID-19 - became a global pandemic and prompted unprecedented social distancing measures. We examined the associations of voluntary stay-at-home (SAH) orders during the COVID-19 pandemic with vulnerability assessments and precautionary intentions (e.g. social distancing, hand washing). A quasi-experimental study using an online adult sample was conducted in U.S. states with and without voluntary SAH orders during the COVID-19 pandemic. Self-report surveys assessed vulnerability assessments and precautionary intentions. Participants living in states with SAH orders showed inflated vulnerability assessments for contracting COVID-19, and this association was stronger for affect-laden than cognitively-based assessments. Moreover, only affect-laden vulnerability assessments were uniquely associated with precautionary intentions and accounted for the relationship between SAH orders and precautionary intentions. Our study was among the first to explore the impact of voluntary SAH orders on vulnerability assessments and precautionary intentions. Results are discussed in terms of their implications for health behavioral models and applications for promoting self-protective actions during a pandemic.

Social comparisons for following health recommendations and their relation to worry and intentions during COVID-19

Background: During uncertain threatening situations, people make social comparisons that influence self-evaluations, inform decisions, and guide behavior. In 2019, an emerging infectious disease (COVID-19) became a pandemic and resulted in unparalleled public health recommendations (e.g., social distancing, wear masks in public). Aims: The current research examined people's beliefs about how their own compliance to recommendations compared to others and explored the unique associations between social comparisons, worry, risk perceptions, and intentions for health-protective action. Method: An adult sample of US residents (N = 452) completed an online, cross-sectional survey about their thoughts, feelings, and behaviors in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: First, participants reported better-than-average compliance beliefs. Second, comparative beliefs were positively (and uniquely) associated with intentions for future compliance-related behaviors and general risk-reduction behaviors (e.g., information seeking) - particularly for participants who viewed COVID-19 as threatening. Finally, the relation between comparative beliefs and intentions was indirect through worry (but not risk), though alternative models also achieved support. Limitations: Our findings are limited by our use of a cross-sectional design, methodological choices, and our lack of behavioral measures. Conclusions: Overall, results demonstrate that people are attentive to their comparative levels of compliance behaviors during an infectious disease pandemic. Results are discussed in terms of their theoretical implications and the relevance of social comparisons for self-protective action during a pandemic. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved)

The prospective influence of COVID-19 affective risk assessments and intolerance of uncertainty on later dimensions of health anxiety.

The COVID-19 pandemic is likely to increase risk for the development of health anxiety. Given that elevated health anxiety can contribute to maladaptive health behaviors, there is a need to identify individual difference factors that may increase health anxiety risk. This study examined the unique and interactive relations of COVID-19 affective risk assessments (worry about risk for contracting/dying from COVID-19) and intolerance of uncertainty to later health anxiety dimensions. A U.S. community sample of 364 participants completed online self-report measures at a baseline assessment (Time 1) and one month later (Time 2). Time 1 intolerance of uncertainty was uniquely associated with the Time 2 health anxiety dimension of body vigilance. Time 1 affective risk assessments and intolerance of uncertainty were uniquely associated with later perceived likelihood that an illness would be acquired and anticipated negative consequences of an illness. The latter finding was qualified by a significant interaction, such that affective risk assessments were positively associated with anticipated negative consequences of having an illness only among participants with mean and low levels of intolerance of uncertainty. Results speak to the relevance of different risk factors for health anxiety during the COVID-19 pandemic and highlight targets for reducing health anxiety risk.

Thwarted belongingness and perceived burdensomeness explain the associations of COVID-19 social and economic consequences to suicide risk.

OBJECTIVE: The social and economic consequences of COVID-19 and related public health interventions aimed at slowing the spread of the virus have been proposed to increase suicide risk. However, no research has examined these relations. This study examined the relations of two COVID-19 consequences (i.e., stay-at-home orders and job loss) to suicide risk through thwarted belongingness, perceived burdensomeness, and loneliness. METHOD: Online data from a nationwide community sample of 500 adults (mean age = 40) from 45 states were collected between March 27 and April 5, 2020. Participants completed measures assessing thwarted belongingness, perceived burdensomeness, loneliness, and suicide risk, as well as whether they (a) were currently under a stay-at-home order and (b) had experienced a recent job loss due to the pandemic. RESULTS: Results revealed a significant indirect relation of stay-at-home order status to suicide risk through thwarted belongingness. Further, whereas recent job loss was significantly correlated with suicide risk, neither the direct relation of job loss to suicide risk (when accounting for their shared relations to perceived burdensomeness) nor the indirect relation through perceived burdensomeness was significant. CONCLUSIONS: Results highlight the potential benefits of interventions targeting thwarted belongingness and perceived burdensomeness to offset suicide risk during this pandemic.