Longitudinal study of an emerging COVID-19 stigma: Media exposure, danger appraisal, and stress

Media coverage of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has played a critical role throughout the pandemic: sharing news about the novel virus, policies and practices to mitigate it, and the race to create and distribute vaccines. The media coverage, however, has been critiqued as stigmatizing. Although this critique is not new, there is limited understanding of how and why new stigmas emerge from exposure to media coverage. Drawing upon the model of stigma communication (Smith et al., 2019) and the attribution model of stigma (Corrigan et al., 2003), we investigated a novel model of stigma emergence that delineates two kinds of longitudinal processes: (a) a message-effects process, in which exposure to mediated messages about COVID-19 leads to public stigma through danger appraisal and (b) a coping process in which stress and rumination shape later perceptions of public stigma. To test the model, we tracked an emerging COVID-19 stigma with a two-wave survey of a prospective, longitudinal cohort living in one county in a mid-Atlantic state (N = 883). The results supported this model. The longitudinal processes of stigma emergence and implications for COVID-19 stigma are discussed. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

Cultivating Compassion for Self and Others: A School-Based Pilot Study for Peer-Nominated Caring Adolescents.

Many have called for school-based student programs that teach skills related to self-care and caring for others. Here, such a program for peer-nominated adolescents was developed and piloted virtually at one high school during the COVID-19 pandemic. Results of a longitudinal, quasi-experimental evaluation of the program showed high-quality program implementation and promising program impacts. Effect sizes indicated moderate to large program impacts on improvements in adolescents' self-compassion, sense of interdependence, and perspective-taking, and female adolescents' interoceptive awareness, compared to controls. No group differences in compassion for others were found. The need for more research on programs that help adolescents balance compassion for the self and for others is discussed.

Extending the Theory of Normative Social Behavior: Collective Norms, Opinion Leadership, and Masking During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Novel, public behaviors, such as masking, should be susceptible to normative influence. This paper advances the theory of normative social behavior by considering a new set of moderators of normative influence - superdiffuser traits - and by clarifying the antecedents and consequences of exposure to collective norms. We use data from a two-wave survey of a cohort living in one U.S. county during the pandemic (N = 913) to assess normative effects on masking. We also used a bipartite network (based on people shopping for food in the same stores) to examine exposure to collective norms. The results show different superdiffuser traits have distinct effects on the relationship between perceived injunctive norms and masking intentions. Exposure to collective norms influences masking, but this influence depends on how people interact with their social environments. Network analysis shows that behavioral homophily is a significant predictor of selective exposure to collective norms earlier (but not later) in the pandemic. Implications for understanding normative influence in a context where opinion leadership matters are discussed.

Essential and non-essential US workers' health behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic.

We seek to quantify the relationship between health behaviors and work-related experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic by predicting health behaviors as a function of essential worker status, job loss, change in work hours, and COVID-19 experiences. We use multivariate models and survey data from 913 employed adults in a semi-rural mid-Atlantic US county, and test whether essential worker results vary by gender, parenthood, and/or university employment. Multivariate models indicate that essential workers used tobacco on more days (4.5; p <.01) and were less likely to sleep 8 h (odds ratio [OR] 0.6; p <.01) than non-essential workers. The risk of sleeping less than 8 h is concentrated among essential workers in the service industry (OR 0.5; p <.05) and non-parents (OR 0.5; p <.05). Feminine essential workers exercised on fewer days (-0.8; p <.05) than feminine non-essential workers. Workers with reduced work hours consumed more alcoholic drinks (0.3; p <.05), while workers with increased work hours consumed alcohol (0.3; p <.05) and exercised (0.6; p <.05) on more days. Essential worker status and changes in work hours are correlated with unhealthy behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic.

College students' COVID-19 vaccine beliefs and intentions: Implications for interventions.

On college campuses, effective management of vaccine-preventable transmissible pathogens requires understanding student vaccination intentions. This is necessary for developing and tailoring health messaging to maximize uptake of health information and vaccines. The current study explored students' beliefs and attitudes about vaccines in general, and the new COVID-19 vaccines specifically. This study provides insights into effective health messaging needed to rapidly increase COVID-19 vaccination on college campuses-information that will continue to be informative in future academic years across a broad scope of pathogens. Data were collected from 696 undergraduate students ages 18-29 years old enrolled in a large public university in the Northeast during fall 2020. Data were collected via an online survey. Overall, we found COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy in college students correlated strongly with some concerns about vaccines in general as well as with concerns specific to COVID-19 vaccines. Taken together, these results provide further insight for message development and delivery and can inform more effective interventions to advance critical public health outcomes on college campuses beyond the current pandemic.

COVID-19 Mitigation Among College Students: Social Influences, Behavioral Spillover, and Antibody Results.

By fall 2020, students returning to U.S. university campuses were mandated to engage in COVID-19 mitigation behaviors, including masking, which was a relatively novel prevention behavior in the U.S. Masking became a target of university mandates and campaigns, and it became politicized. Critical questions are whether the influences of injunctive norms and response efficacy on one behavior (i.e. masking) spill over to other mitigation behaviors (e.g. hand-washing), and how patterns of mitigation behaviors are associated with clinical outcomes. We conducted a cross-sectional survey of college students who returned to campus (N = 837) to explore these questions, and conducted COVID-19 antibody testing on a subset of participants to identify correlations between behaviors and disease burden. The results showed that college students were more likely to intend to wear face masks as they experienced more positive injunctive norms, liberal political views, stronger response efficacy for masks, and less pessimism. Latent class analysis revealed four mitigation classes: Adherents who intended to wear face masks and engage in the other COVID-19 mitigation behaviors; Hygiene Stewards and Masked Symptom Managers who intended to wear masks but only some other behaviors, and Refusers who intended to engage in no mitigation behaviors. Importantly, the Hygiene Stewards and Refusers had the highest likelihood of positive antibodies; these two classes differed in their masking intentions, but shared very low likelihoods of physical distancing from others and avoiding crowds or mass gatherings. The implications for theories of normative influences on novel behaviors, spillover effects, and future messaging are discussed.

Exploring Behavioral Typologies to Inform COVID-19 Health Campaigns: A Person-Centered Approach.

As the United States continues to be ravaged by COVID-19, it becomes increasingly important to implement effective public health campaigns to improve personal behaviors that help control the spread of the virus. To design effective campaigns, research is needed to understand the current mitigation intentions of the general public, diversity in those intentions, and theoretical predictors of them. COVID-19 campaigns will be particularly challenging because mitigation involves myriad, diverse behaviors. This study takes a person-centered approach to investigate data from a survey (N = 976) of Pennsylvania adults. Latent class analysis revealed five classes of mitigation: one marked by complete adherence with health recommendations (34% of the sample), one by complete refusal (9% of the sample), and three by a mixture of adherence and refusal. Statistically significant covariates of class membership included relatively positive injunctive norms, risk due to essential workers in the household, personal knowledge of someone who became infected with COVID-19, and belief that COVID-19 was a leaked biological weapon. Additionally, trait reactance was associated with non-adherence while health mavenism was associated with adherence. These findings may be used to good effect by local healthcare providers and institutions, and also inform broader policy-making decisions regarding public health campaigns to mitigate COVID-19.

Unique Predictors of Intended Uptake of a COVID-19 Vaccine in Adults Living in a Rural College Town in the United States.

PURPOSE: To explore public confidence in a COVID-19 vaccine. DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey. SETTING: A rural college town in central Pennsylvania. SUBJECTS: Adult residents without minor children. MEASURES: The primary outcome was COVID-19 vaccination intention. Secondary measures included vaccination attitudes, norms, efficacy, past behavior, trust in the vaccination process, and sociodemographic variables of education, financial standing, political viewpoint, and religiosity. ANALYSIS: Descriptive statistics were used to describe quantitative data. Multivariate ordinal regression was used to model predictors of vaccine intention. RESULTS: Of 950 respondents, 55% were "very likely" and 20% "somewhat likely" to take a coronavirus vaccine, even though 70% had taken the flu vaccine since September 2019. The strongest predictors of vaccine acceptance were trust in the system evaluating vaccines and perceptions of local COVID-19 vaccination norms. The strongest predictors of negative vaccine intentions were worries about unknown side-effects and positive attitudes toward natural infection. Sociodemographic factors, political views, and religiosity did not predict vaccine intentions. CONCLUSION: Fewer adults intend to take a coronavirus vaccine than currently take the flu vaccine. Traditional sociodemographic factors may not be effective predictors of COVID-19 vaccine uptake. Although based on a small sample, the study adds to our limited understanding of COVID-19-specific vaccine confidence among some rural Americans and suggests that traditional public health vaccination campaigns based on sociodemographic characteristics may not be effective.