Meaning in stressful experiences and coping across cultures

We report three studies to examine how culture may influence people's tendency to see meaning in stressful experiences (MISE), as well as their coping responses. Using a newly developed MISE scale with established measurement invariance across both cultures, we found that Chinese participants were more likely than Euro-Canadians to see meaning in stressful experiences (Studies 1 and 2), to adopt acceptance and positive reframing coping styles (Study 1), and to respond more positively to the COVID-19 pandemic (Study 2). To establish a causal link between MISE and coping, we primed MISE in Study 3 with Chinese participants and found an increase in resilient coping. The research highlights the important roles of culture and meaning making in coping. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Cultural differences in the construal of suffering and the COVID-19 pandemic

The present research examines how suffering is construed across cultures. Study 1 (N1 = 264;N2 = 745) asked participants to provide free associations for suffering. Chinese individuals generated more positive associations than did Euro-Canadians. Study 2 (N = 522) had participants create a hypothetical potion of suffering to represent what people would experience while suffering. Chinese participants added more positive ingredients and fewer negative ingredients than Euro-Canadians did. How would cultural differences in the construal of suffering matter in a real-life negative situation? Study 3 (N = 608) showed that Chinese participants generated a greater proportion of potential positive outcomes for the COVID-19 outbreak and reported more positive affect during the pandemic than did Euro-Canadians. Thus, Chinese construe suffering more positively than Euro-Canadians. These findings are consistent with previous research on cultural differences in dialectical thinking and lay theory of change and have implications for coping and resilience. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Religiosity and the Naturalness Bias in Drug and Vaccine Choices.

Research reveals a bias for natural versus synthetic drugs. We sought to determine if this bias is associated with religiosity. Three cross-sectional studies (N = 1399 U.S. participants) were conducted to examine the impact of religiosity on the naturalness bias in the drug and vaccine domains. We assessed measures of religiosity, preferences for natural versus synthetic drugs and vaccines in hypothetical scenarios, and a health-related behavior (COVID-19 vaccination status). The results revealed that participants high versus low in religiosity had stronger preferences for natural versus synthetic drugs and vaccines. Furthermore, participants high versus low in religiosity were less likely to have taken the COVID-19 vaccine, and the natural drug bias was a mediator of this effect. Overall, participants higher in religiosity had a stronger preference for natural versus synthetic drugs and vaccines, and this preference had implications for health behavior.

Meaning in Stressful Experiences and Coping Across Cultures

We report three studies to examine how culture may influence people?s tendency to see meaning in stressful experiences (MISE), as well as their coping responses. Using a newly developed MISE scale with established measurement invariance across both cultures, we found that Chinese participants were more likely than Euro-Canadians to see meaning in stressful experiences (Studies 1 and 2), to adopt acceptance and positive reframing coping styles (Study 1), and to respond more positively to the COVID-19 pandemic (Study 2). To establish a causal link between MISE and coping, we primed MISE in Study 3 with Chinese participants and found an increase in resilient coping. The research highlights the important roles of culture and meaning making in coping.

Cultural Differences in People's Psychological Response to COVID-19.

The present research studied Chinese and Euro-Canadian students during the COVID-19 pandemic, focusing on their affect, optimism, well-being, and meaning in life. The results revealed both differences and similarities across cultures. As predicted, Chinese participants reported more positive affect and less negative affect, higher optimism, higher state psychological well-being, and higher meaning presence, compared to Euro-Canadian participants. The findings were replicated after a week's delay. Analyses on longitudinal data showed that state optimism, state well-being, and meaning presence influenced one another over time. These variables also mediated the cultural differences in one another. These results are consistent with cultural work on naïve dialecticism and non-linear lay theory of change. Results also demonstrate underlying relationships among the constructs that are common to both cultural groups. Broadly, the present research highlights the impact of culture on people's response to challenging life situations and the mechanisms underlying these cultural differences.

Meaning making helps cope with COVID-19: A longitudinal study.

Meaning making is a useful coping strategy in negative situations. We investigated whether making meaning in negative experiences (MINE) would help people cope with COVID-19. We conducted a three-wave longitudinal study (N = 2364) three months before, during, and after the COVID-19 outbreak in China. Results showed that participants reported increased tendency of MINE during the COVID-19 outbreak than three months before the outbreak. Moreover, both initial MINE and the increased MINE predicted less psychological distress including depression, anxiety and stress, during and three months after the outbreak. Perceived benefits and costs of the COVID-19 mediated the long-term effect of MINE. These findings not only provide novel evidence for meaning making model but also shed light on the underlying mechanism, suggesting an effective strategy to cope with stressful events such as the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.

Cultural Differences in the Construal of Suffering and the COVID-19 Pandemic

The present research examines how suffering is construed across cultures. Study 1 (N 1 = 264;N 2 = 745) asked participants to provide free associations for suffering. Chinese individuals generated more positive associations than did Euro-Canadians. Study 2 (N = 522) had participants create a hypothetical potion of suffering to represent what people would experience while suffering. Chinese participants added more positive ingredients and fewer negative ingredients than Euro-Canadians did. How would cultural differences in the construal of suffering matter in a real-life negative situation? Study 3 (N = 608) showed that Chinese participants generated a greater proportion of potential positive outcomes for the COVID-19 outbreak and reported more positive affect during the pandemic than did Euro-Canadians. Thus, Chinese construe suffering more positively than Euro-Canadians. These findings are consistent with previous research on cultural differences in dialectical thinking and lay theory of change and have implications for coping and resilience.