With or without the Mask: Age Differences in Perceived Trustworthiness and Health during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic and the obligation to wear surgical face masks have affected social interactions. Wearing a mask can cause impairments in face identification, emotion recognition, and trait impressions. The present study investigated, during the COVID-19 period, age-related differences in perceived trustworthiness (Study 1) and health (Study 2) when viewing faces with or without masks. Younger (YAs, 18-35 years) and older (OAs, over 65 years) adults' ratings were compared. Through a web-based platform, a series of neutral younger and older faces (YFs vs. OFs) were presented, on a computer screen, with or without a mask (Mask vs. No-Mask), and participants were asked to rate them on a 7-point scale. Furthermore, data collected during the pandemic (Mask and No-Mask conditions) were compared with ratings obtained before it (Pre-COVID condition). Perceived trustworthiness was lower in the No-Mask condition for both age groups compared to Mask and Pre-COVID conditions, which did not differ. For health ratings, no differences emerged for OAs between the conditions, whereas YAs' ratings were lower in both the Mask and No-Mask conditions compared to the Pre-COVID condition. The fear of contracting COVID-19 affected both trustworthiness and health ratings. Wearing a surgical face mask affects trait impressions for YAs and OAs, partly due to the fear of COVID-19. Trait impressions are also influenced by the age of the face to be evaluated.

Public opinion in vaccine allocation priority: who comes first?

OBJECTIVE: We investigated people's preferences in COVID-19 vaccine allocation priority, comparing different social categories based on age and occupation. Vaccine allocation preferences were related to perceived health vulnerability and economic backlash (economic negative consequences) endured by the different social groups during the pandemic. In-group favoritism in vaccine allocation preferences was analyzed. DESIGN: Data were collected through an online survey in Italy (n = 506) before the start of the vaccination campaign. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Vaccine allocation preferences, health vulnerability, and economic backlash due to COVID-19, measured through ranking tasks. RESULTS: The healthcare workers category was placed at the top of the ranking in vaccine allocation priority by 65% of the respondents. Vaccine allocation priority was related to perceived health vulnerability and not economic difficulties. Limited self-preference effects emerged. People who did not consider healthcare workers a priority (1/5 of the sample) had a lower education level, were more worried about COVID-19 infection risk, and did not trust vaccines. CONCLUSIONS: A consensus emerged on who should be vaccinated first. Governments and policymakers should be aware of these preferences when designing and communicating vaccine allocation plans to predict and foster the public's acceptance of the COVID-19 vaccination programs created by experts.

Psychological factors and consumer behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic is far more than a health crisis: it has unpredictably changed our whole way of life. As suggested by the analysis of economic data on sales, this dramatic scenario has also heavily impacted individuals' spending levels. To better understand these changes, the present study focused on consumer behavior and its psychological antecedents. Previous studies found that crises differently affect people's willingness to buy necessities products (i.e., utilitarian shopping) and non-necessities products (i.e., hedonic shopping). Therefore, in examining whether changes in spending levels were associated with changes in consumer behavior, we adopted a fine-grained approach disentangling between necessities and non-necessities. We administered an online survey to 3833 participants (age range 18-64) during the first peak period of the contagion in Italy. Consumer behavior toward necessities was predicted by anxiety and COVID-related fear, whereas consumer behavior toward non-necessities was predicted by depression. Furthermore, consumer behavior toward necessities and non-necessities was predicted by personality traits, perceived economic stability, and self-justifications for purchasing. The present study extended our understanding of consumer behavior changes during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results could be helpful to develop marketing strategies that consider psychological factors to meet actual consumers' needs and feelings.

Data on the effects of COVID-19 pandemic on people's expectations about their future.

The worldwide spread of the COVID-19 pandemic has unpredictably changed the way people live, by influencing their behaviors and beliefs. This article presents the raw data that have been used to investigate how the pandemic affected people's beliefs and expectations about their future. A total of 3991 participants (18-85 years old) were recruited through an online survey using the Qualtrics platform. The data collection was carried out during the Italian lockdown, between April 1st and April 20th, 2020. This survey collected information about psychological and socioeconomic variables related to the COVID-19 emergency. Respondents filled out a battery of questionnaires that included five measures. Three of the measures were specifically developed by the authors: 1. Expected repercussions of COVID-19; 2. Forethought scale; and 3. Perceived financial resources. The two other measures were standardized questionnaires: the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory Short Version (ZTPI-short) and the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS). Data from tailored measures on the COVID-19 pandemic reflect people's beliefs about the future, in terms of expectation about the pandemic's effect, estimation of the time needed for the pandemic to resolve, and estimation of how long people could endure the lockdown situation from a financial perspective. The ZTPI questionnaire was administered to measure people's differences in terms of Deviation from Balanced Time Perspective (DBTP). The PANAS questionnaire, instead, was administered to investigate people's differences in terms of emotional mood states. The provided dataset could be useful to other researchers, considering that the data were collected during the lockdown imposed on Italian citizens to face the unprecedented emergency due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, the collected data may help to understand how people coped with the pandemic, both from a psychological and socioeconomic perspective. Finally, this dataset can be included in the broad context of data, procedures, and experimental materials that have been used to expand our knowledge in the study of time perspective, beliefs, and emotions.

"What's next?" Individual differences in expected repercussions of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the future are hardly predictable, and people differ in terms of expected repercussions on their future. This study investigated individual differences in the pandemic's expected repercussions, with particular attention to a Balanced Time Perspective (BTP). BTP reflects an individual profile with optimal temporal orientations, it is positively associated with mental health, and it has proven to promote successful coping with unexpected crises. We analyzed data from 3991 adults from 18 to 85 years old participating in an online survey conducted during the Italian lockdown. Participants provided information on BTP, affective states, financial resources, and expectations for the future. Multi-group path analysis was used to test the hypothesized model and to explore gender differences. Results showed that people with a more BTP had fewer negative beliefs about COVID-19's consequences on their future life. BTP affected expected repercussions also indirectly, via affects and beliefs. Finally, gender emerged as a significant moderator of some of the relationships highlighted. The present study contributes to the understanding of the psychological reactions to the current health emergency by confirming its impact on several life domains besides health, not only in the present but also in the anticipated future.

Age-related differences in the perception of COVID-19 emergency during the Italian outbreak.

OBJECTIVES: Older adults have been identified as a high-risk population for COVID-19, therefore it is crucial to understand how they perceived and reacted to the emergency. We examined age-related differences in emotions, cognitive attitudes, and behavioral responses to the COVID-19 crisis. Based on the Socioemotional Selectivity Theory, we expected to find a positive approach in older adults, which may translate into lower compliance with restrictive measures.Methods: We analyzed data (n = 306) from a nation-wide online survey conducted between April 1st and April 16th, 2020. We compared young (18-29 years), middle-aged (30-50 years), and older (65-85 years) adults' self-reported emotions, attitudes toward the emergency, and compliance with governmental rules.Results: Older adults showed lower negative emotions than young and middle-aged adults. Also, older adults were more confident about COVID-related information received, more favorable toward the restrictive measures, and perceived lower underestimation of the emergency compared to the other age groups. However, older people anticipated a longer time for the emergency to resolve. No age-related differences in compliance with the rules emerged.Conclusion: Older people showed a positive attitude toward the emergency. This attitude was confined in the here and now and did not extend to expectations for the future. Compliance with rules was high across our sample. However, less compliant individuals were also less confident in COVID-related information received by the media and official sources, suggesting the importance of providing precise and reliable information to promote adherence to restrictive measures.

Individual Differences, Economic Stability, and Fear of Contagion as Risk Factors for PTSD Symptoms in the COVID-19 Emergency.

On January 30th 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared the COVID-19 pandemic a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC). Italy has been one of the most affected countries in the world. To contain further spread of the virus, the Italian government has imposed an unprecedented long-period lockdown for the entire country. This dramatic scenario may have caused a strong psychological distress, with potential negative long-term mental health consequences. The aim of the present study is to report the prevalence of high psychological distress due to the COVID-19 pandemic on the general population, especially considering that this aspect is consistently associated with PTSD symptoms. Furthermore, the present study aims to identify the risk factors for high PTSD symptoms, including individual differences and subjective perception of both economic and psychological aspects. We administered an online survey to 1253 participants during the peak period of the contagion in Italy. A logistic regression on the Impact of Event Scale - Revised (IES-R) scores was used to test the risk factors that predict the possibility to develop PTSD symptoms due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Gender (female), lower perceived economic stability, higher neuroticism, and fear and consequences of contagion were predictors of high PTSD symptomatology. The results, highlighted in the present study, extend our understanding of the COVID-19 pandemic's impact on the population's mental health, by identifying individuals at high-risk of developing PTSD. This may help with the implementation of specific protocols to prevent the possibility of developing symptoms of PTSD in target populations.