Temporal reliability and stability of delay discounting: A 2-year repeated assessments study of the Monetary Choice Questionnaire.

The Monetary Choice Questionnaire (MCQ) is one of the most commonly used measures to assess delay discounting of reward. Reliable measurement by the MCQ is necessary for use in experimental settings or prognostic validity within clinical contexts. The present analysis expands prior work to evaluate temporal reliability and stability over an extended period, including repeated measurements, a larger and more broadly representative sample, and demonstrations of covariation with clinically significant health behaviors (e.g., cigarette use, COVID-19 vaccination, body mass index). Participants (N = 680; 55.6% female) were recruited through crowdsourcing and completed the MCQ approximately quarterly over 2 years. Measures of reliability, stability, and correlations with clinical constructs were determined for each timepoint and pairwise comparison. Test-retest reliabilities were high across all pairwise comparisons (all rxx > .75; range = .78-.86; mean = .83). Stability was also high with within-subject effect size differences all within a less-than-small effect size range (range dz = -0.09 to 0.19; mean = 0.04). Positive associations between smoking status and delay discounting rates were observed consistent with prior clinical studies. These findings of test durability support the use of MCQ administration for repeated measurement of delay-constrained choice as a stable respondent characteristic and illustrate its association with important health behaviors over extended time periods. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Extra-experimental scarcity impacts hypothetical operant demand: A natural SARS-CoV-2 eperiment.

Behavioral economic demand models quantify the extent to which an organism defends its consumption of a commodity. Commodity purchase tasks permit humans a quick yet psychometrically sound approach to assessing commodity demand for various retail products. Operant behavioral economic literature suggests economy type (open vs closed) can significantly alter demand, yet this effect is largely undocumented in the commodity purchase task literature. In this study, we leveraged the market pressures for retail goods (hand lotion and sanitizer; paper towels and toilet paper; soda and water) resulting from SARS-CoV-2 into a natural experiment comparing within-subject demand across two time-points during the pandemic using a crowdsourced approach. Results suggest that hypothetical commodity purchase tasks are sensitive to extra-experimental market pressures (e.g., scarcity due to the closing of economies), adding additional confidence to the self-report nature of purchase task responding and providing further construct validity to these approaches.

Behavioral and psychosocial factors associated with COVID-19 skepticism in the United States.

COVID-19 skepticism can be conceptualized as the denial of the seriousness of the illness and the perception that the pandemic is overblown or a hoax. In the current study, we examined the association between COVID-19 skepticism and frequency of engaging in COVID-19 prevention behaviors, political ideology, social norms about distancing, COVID-19 information-seeking behaviors, and COVID-19 conspiracy theories. A survey was administered from May 5th-14th. At that time, there were over 1 million COVID-19 cases in the US. Participants were recruited online through MTurk. The three outcome variables were handwashing, mask wearing, and social distancing. Injunctive and descriptive norms were assessed as well as measures of perceived risk to self and others. There were 683 participants in the analyses. In the multiple logistic regression model, those who were of younger age (aOR = 0.97, p < 0.05), better health (aOR = 0.56, p < 0.01), and more politically conservative (aOR = 1.32, p < 0.01) were more likely to endorse COVID-19 skepticism statements. People who reported higher Skepticism were also less likely to that believe people close to them would die from COVID-19 (aOR = 4.2, p < 0.01), engage in COVID-19 prevention behaviors, including spending time inside to prevent coronavirus (aOR = 0.33, p < 0.01) and frequently wear a mask outside (aOR = 0.44, p < 0.01). Those who were more skeptical about COVID-19 were also more likely to believe the conspiracy theory that China purposefully spread the virus (aOR = 6.38 p < 0.01). COVID-19 Skepticism was strongly associated with reduced engagement in COVID-19 prevention behaviors. These findings bolster the arguments for making these public health recommendations mandatory.

Behavioral economic methods predict future COVID-19 vaccination.

Increasing vaccine utilization is critical for numerous diseases, including COVID-19, necessitating novel methods to forecast uptake. Behavioral economic methods have been developed as rapid, scalable means of identifying mechanisms of health behavior engagement. However, most research using these procedures is cross-sectional and evaluates prediction of behaviors with already well-established repertories. Evaluation of the validity of hypothetical tasks that measure behaviors not yet experienced is important for the use of these procedures in behavioral health. We use vaccination during the COVID-19 pandemic to test whether responses regarding a novel, hypothetical behavior (COVID-19 vaccination) are predictive of later real-world response. Participants (N = 333) completed a behavioral economic hypothetical purchase task to evaluate willingness to receive a hypothetical COVID-19 vaccine based on efficacy. This was completed in August 2020, before clinical trial data on COVID-19 vaccines. Participants completed follow-up assessments approximately 1 year later when the COVID-19 vaccines were widely available in June 2021 and November 2021 with vaccination status measured. Prediction of vaccination was made based on data collected in August 2020. Vaccine demand was a significant predictor of vaccination after controlling for other significant predictors including political orientation, delay discounting, history of flu vaccination, and a single-item intent to vaccinate. These findings show predictive validity of a behavioral economic procedure explicitly designed to measure a behavior for which a participant has limited-to-no direct prior experience or exposure. Positive correspondence supports the validity of these hypothetical arrangements for predicting vaccination utilization and advances behavioral economic methods.

A goal of behavioral science is to develop methods that can predict future behavior to inform preventive health efforts and identify ways people engage in positive health behaviors. Behavioral economic methods apply easy to use and rapid assessment tools to evaluate these mechanisms of health behavior engagement. Here, we show how similar methods can be applied to novel behaviors yet experienced like intentions to vaccinate against COVID-19. We find that responses on a behavioral economic task designed to measure vaccination likelihood closely corresponded to the likelihood of being vaccinated 1 year later. This prediction was above and beyond common predictors of vaccination including demographics like political orientation and age. These findings provide support for these novel methods in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, specifically, and behavioral health, broadly.

Crowdsourcing methods in addiction science: Emerging research and best practices.

Crowdsourcing platforms such as Amazon Mechanical Turk, Prolific, and Qualtrics Panels have become a dominant form of sampling in recent years. Crowdsourcing enables researchers to effectively and efficiently sample research participants with greater geographic variability, access to hard-to-reach populations, and reduced costs. These methods have been increasingly used across varied areas of psychological science and essential for research during the COVID-19 pandemic due to their facilitation of remote research. Recent work documents methods for improving data quality, emerging crowdsourcing platforms, and how crowdsourcing data fit within broader research programs. Addiction scientists will benefit from the adoption of best practice guidelines in crowdsourcing as well as developing novel approaches, venues, and applications to advance the field. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Social vulnerability, COVID-19 impact, and decision making among adults in a low-resource community.

Socially vulnerable individuals, including those with greater exposure to adversity and social instability, are at greater risk for a variety of negative outcomes following exposure to public health crises. One hypothesized mechanism linking social vulnerability to poor health outcomes is delay discounting, the behavioral tendency to select smaller immediately available rewards relative to larger delayed rewards. However, little research has examined the impact of real-world disease outbreaks, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, on the relation between social vulnerability and delay discounting. This study examined whether the severity of COVID-19 impact moderated the association between social vulnerability and delay discounting in a diverse sample of 72 human adults (Mage = 42.4; 69% Black; 87% female) drawn from two low-resource urban areas. Contrary to hypotheses, results indicated that exposure to more severe COVID-19 impacts did not affect decision making among individuals with higher levels of social vulnerability. Conversely, findings suggest that individuals with lower levels of social vulnerability who reported more significant impacts of COVID-19 evidenced a greater tendency to select larger, delayed rewards relative to individuals with greater social vulnerability. Findings suggest the recent pandemic may influence the relation between social vulnerability and behavioral processes underlying health decision-making.

Applied behavioral economics and public health policies: Historical precedence and translational promise.

Behavioral economics is an approach to understanding behavior though integrating behavioral psychology and microeconomic principles. Advances in behavioral economics have resulted in quick-to-administer tasks to assess discounting (i.e., decrements in the subjective value of a commodity due to delayed or probabilistic receipt) and demand (i.e., effort exerted to defend baseline consumption of a commodity amidst increasing constraints)-these tasks are built upon decades of foundational work from the experimental analysis of behavior and exhibit adequate psychometric properties. We propose that the behavioral economic approach is particularly well suited, then, for experimentally evaluating potential public policy decisions, particularly during urgent times or crises. Using examples from our collaborations (e.g., cannabis legalization, happy hour alcohol pricing, severe weather alerts, COVID-19 vaccine marketing), we demonstrate how behavioral economic approaches have rendered novel insights to guide policy development and garnered widespread attention outside of academia. We conclude with implications on multidisciplinary work and other areas in need of behavioral economic investigations.

Behavioral economic methods to inform infectious disease response: Prevention, testing, and vaccination in the COVID-19 pandemic.

The role of human behavior to thwart transmission of infectious diseases like COVID-19 is evident. Psychological and behavioral science are key areas to understand decision-making processes underlying engagement in preventive health behaviors. Here we adapt well validated methods from behavioral economic discounting and demand frameworks to evaluate variables (e.g., delay, cost, probability) known to impact health behavior engagement. We examine the contribution of these mechanisms within a broader response class of behaviors reflecting adherence to public health recommendations made during the COVID-19 pandemic. Four crowdsourced samples (total N = 1,366) completed individual experiments probing a response class including social (physical) distancing, facemask wearing, COVID-19 testing, and COVID-19 vaccination. We also measure the extent to which choice architecture manipulations (e.g., framing, opt-in/opt-out) may promote (or discourage) behavior engagement. We find that people are more likely to socially distance when specified activities are framed as high risk, that facemask use during social interaction decreases systematically with greater social relationship, that describing delay until testing (rather than delay until results) increases testing likelihood, and that framing vaccine safety in a positive valence improves vaccine acceptance. These findings collectively emphasize the flexibility of methods from diverse areas of behavioral science for informing public health crisis management.

Changes in alcohol use during COVID-19 and associations with contextual and individual difference variables: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The present study meta-analyzed studies examining changes in alcohol consumption during the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic and systematically reviewed contextual and individual difference factors related to these changes. METHOD: Following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) protocol, studies were gathered via PsycINFO, PubMed/MEDLINE, and preprint databases (published April 29, 2021) that examined individual-level changes in consumption during the initial COVID-19 mitigation measures (before October 2020). Next, sample proportion increases and decreases in consumption, in addition to mean change in consumption variables from pre- to during-COVID, were meta-analyzed, and contextual and individual difference variables related to consumption changes during the pandemic were summarized. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-eight studies provided data from 58 countries (M n = 3,876; Mdn n = 1,092; aggregate sample n = 492,235). The average mean change in alcohol consumption was nonsignificant (Cohen's d = -0.01, p = .68); however, meta-analysis revealed that 23% of participants reported increases in consumption and 23% reported decreases. These changes were moderated by per capita gross domestic product and country. Narrative synthesis revealed multiple predictors of increased drinking, including contextual changes (e.g., children at home, income loss, working remotely), individual difference variables (being female, a young-to-middle aged adult, or Black), and mental health/alcohol-related risk factors (e.g., depression). CONCLUSIONS: The identified factors associated with increased alcohol consumption should be considered in planning behavioral health services during future crisis events that abruptly alter everyday environments in ways that increase stress and decrease access to naturally occurring rewards. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Social norms and prevention behaviors in the United States early in the COVID-19 pandemic.

The current study assessed how social norms were associated with the three effective Covid-19 prevention behaviors of social distancing, handwashing, and wearing protective face masks during the early stages of the pandemic in the US. Study participants were recruited online. Data from the present study was from a baseline quantitative survey administered from March 25th-27th, 2020. The 808 study participants were recruited for a longitudinal study online. Eligibility requirements included age 18 or older, living in the United States, English speaking and reading had heard of the Coronavirus or Covid-19, and provided informed consent. The three outcome variables were handwashing, mask wearing, and social distancing. Injunctive and descriptive norms were assessed. The injunctive norm of perceiving friends would find them rude if they did not affiliate with them because Covid-19 was associated with all three outcomes in both the bivariate and multivariate logistic regression models with adjusted odds ratios ranging from (aOR) = .80 for handwashing to aOR = .63 for social distancing and aOR = .77 for mask wearing. The descriptive cognitive norm of friends worrying about becoming infected was associated with all three outcomes in the bivariate analysis but only mask wearing in the multivariate models (aOR = 1.74). The study findings suggest there are strong social factors that correlate with behaviors to prevent the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. These findings also suggest that public health communication campaigns should focus on more than heightening risk perceptions. They should include attention to social norms and perceptions of social risks to significant others.

An Assessment of the Rapid Decline of Trust in US Sources of Public Information about COVID-19.

We conducted a longitidinal assessment of 806 respondents in March, 2020 in the US to examine the trustworthiness of sources of information about COVID-19. Respondents were recontacted after four months. Information sources included mainstream media, state health departments, the CDC, the White House, and a well-known university. We also examined how demographics, political partisanship, and skepticism about COVID-19 were associated with the perceived trustworthiness of information sources and decreased trustworthiness over time. At baseline, the majority of respondants reported high trust in COVID-19 information from state health departments (75.6%), the CDC (80.9%), and a university (Johns Hopkins, 81.1%). Mainstream media was trusted by less than half the respondents (41.2%), and the White House was the least trusted source (30.9%). At the 4-month follow-up, a significant decrease in trustworthiness in all five sources of COVID-19 information was observed. The most pronounced reductions were from the CDC and the White House. In multivariate analyses, factors associated with rating the CDC, state health department, and a university as trustworthy sources of COVID-19 information were political party affiliation, level of education, and skepticism about COVID-19. The most consistent predictor of decreased trust was political party affiliation, with Democrats as compared to Republicans less likely to report decreased trust across all sources.

Determinants of worry using the SARS-CoV-19 worry (CoV-Wo) scale among United States residents.

We sought to develop a brief Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2-related worry (CoV-Wo) scale to understand COVID-19-related worry among adults in the United States. We also aimed to model key determinants of worry in the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. A total of 806 participants completed an online survey in late March 2020. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses assessed scale structure. Factor analysis stratified by depression was used to assess measurement invariance. Linear regression models examined COVID-19-related worry determinants. The CoV-Wo scale exhibited good reliability (α = 0.80) and a two-factor structure: health (α = 0.83) and resources (α = 0.71). The full scale and both subscales were higher among participants who stopped working due to COVID-19 and those with depression. Perception of quality medical care if infected with COVID-19 was associated with reduced worry. The CoV-Wo scale is a low burden assessment of COVID-19-related worry, that captures common worries in domains affected by COVID-19 and can be used to develop psychosocial resources.

Quantifying the Impact of Public Perceptions on Vaccine Acceptance Using Behavioral Economics.

This study was conducted to evaluate the impact of public perceptions of vaccine safety and efficacy on intent to seek COVID-19 vaccination using hypothetical vaccine acceptance scenarios. The behavioral economic methodology could be used to inform future public health vaccination campaigns designed to influence public perceptions and improve public acceptance of the vaccine. In June 2020, 534 respondents completed online validated behavioral economic procedures adapted to evaluate COVID-19 vaccine demand in relation to a hypothetical development process and efficacy. An exponential demand function was used to describe the proportion of participants accepting the vaccine at each efficacy. Linear mixed effect models evaluated development process and individual characteristic effects on minimum required vaccine efficacy required for vaccine acceptance. The rapid development process scenario increased the rate of decline in acceptance with reductions in efficacy. At 50% efficacy, 68.8% of respondents would seek the standard vaccine, and 58.8% would seek the rapid developed vaccine. Rapid vaccine development increased the minimum required efficacy for vaccine acceptance by over 9 percentage points, γ = 9.36, p < 0.001. Past-3-year flu vaccination, γ = -23.00, p < 0.001, and male respondents, γ = -4.98, p = 0.037, accepted lower efficacy. Respondents reporting greater conspiracy beliefs, γ = 0.39, p < 0.001, and political conservatism, γ = 0.32, p < 0.001, required higher efficacy. Male, γ = -4.43, p = 0.013, and more conservative, γ = -0.09, p = 0.039, respondents showed smaller changes in minimum required efficacy by development process. Information on the vaccine development process, vaccine efficacy, and individual differences impact the proportion of respondents reporting COVID-19 vaccination intentions. Behavioral economics provides an empirical method to estimate vaccine demand to target subpopulations resistant to vaccination.