The distinct associations of ingroup attachment and glorification with responses to the coronavirus pandemic: Evidence from a multilevel investigation in 21 countries.

While public health crises such as the coronavirus pandemic transcend national borders, practical efforts to combat them are often instantiated at the national level. Thus, national group identities may play key roles in shaping compliance with and support for preventative measures (e.g., hygiene and lockdowns). Using data from 25,159 participants across representative samples from 21 nations, we investigated how different modalities of ingroup identification (attachment and glorification) are linked with reactions to the coronavirus pandemic (compliance and support for lockdown restrictions). We also examined the extent to which the associations of attachment and glorification with responses to the coronavirus pandemic are mediated through trust in information about the coronavirus pandemic from scientific and government sources. Multilevel models suggested that attachment, but not glorification, was associated with increased trust in science and compliance with federal COVID-19 guidelines. However, while both attachment and glorification were associated with trust in government and support for lockdown restrictions, glorification was more strongly associated with trust in government information than attachment. These results suggest that both attachment and glorification can be useful for promoting public health, although glorification's role, while potentially stronger, is restricted to pathways through trust in government information.

Trust in scientific information mediates associations between conservatism and coronavirus responses in the U.S., but few other nations.

U.S.-based research suggests conservatism is linked with less concern about contracting coronavirus and less preventative behaviors to avoid infection. Here, we investigate whether these tendencies are partly attributable to distrust in scientific information, and evaluate whether they generalize outside the U.S., using public data and recruited representative samples across three studies (Ntotal = 34,710). In Studies 1 and 2, we examine these relationships in the U.S., yielding converging evidence for a sequential indirect effect of conservatism on compliance through scientific (dis)trust and infection concern. In Study 3, we compare these relationships across 19 distinct countries. Although the relationships between trust in scientific information about the coronavirus, concern about coronavirus infection, and compliance are consistent cross-nationally, the relationships between conservatism and trust in scientific information are not. These relationships are strongest in North America. Consequently, the indirect effects observed in Studies 1-2 only replicate in North America (the U.S. and Canada) and in Indonesia. Study 3 also found parallel direct and indirect effects on support for lockdown restrictions. These associations suggest not only that relationships between conservatism and compliance are not universal, but localized to particular countries where conservatism is more strongly related to trust in scientific information about the coronavirus pandemic.

Psychology Doctoral Program Experiences and Student Well-Being, Mental Health, and Optimism During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

In a sample of 916 doctoral students from 144 universities across the United States, we examined psychology graduate students' experiences in their programs, as well as their mental health, well-being, and optimism during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. In a path model, we found that students' psychological experiences in their programs (i.e., social belonging, threat, and challenge) were associated with better mental health and well-being, which in turn was associated with greater optimism about the future during the COVID-19 pandemic. These findings were also corroborated in students' open-ended responses regarding how COVID-19 has impacted their lives. Findings varied by racial, gender, and sexual identities, as racial minorities, LGBTQ+ students, and women expressed more negative psychological experiences in their programs. We outline suggestions for graduate programs to support their graduate students, which include facilitating social connection, providing encouragement, and emphasizing students' well-being over their productivity as the current pandemic persists.

Positive and Negative Peace as Predictors of Pandemic Preparedness: Evidence from a Micro- and Macro-Level Investigation During the Onset of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has generated unprecedented human loss and financial difficulties worldwide. In line with recent calls for social sciences to help collective efforts to address COVID-19, we investigated the link between peace and pandemic preparedness, advancing the literatures on negative (i.e., absence of direct violence) and positive peace (i.e., absence of structural violence and presence of equality) and governments' crisis preparedness as well as crisis relief efforts. Two studies tested whether both positive and negative peace predict pandemic preparedness, operationalized as COVID-19 tests, cases, and positivity rates, during the onset of the pandemic. Study 1 did so at the national level across 155 countries; Study 2 did so at a local level, across 3144 counties within the United States. Even after controlling for population size, population density, GDP, and amount of air travel, higher levels of both negative and positive peace predicted a greater number of COVID-19 tests per one million people, fewer overall COVID-19 cases, and a lower positivity rate. These findings point to the possibility that by promoting peace, governments and the international community could potentially become better prepared to handle future pandemics and other crises.

Prosocial responses to COVID-19: Examining the role of gratitude, fairness and legacy motives.

The COVID-19 pandemic has produced an unprecedented collective action problem. Individuals must make a variety of decisions that influence both their own well-being and the health of those around them. Achieving the collective best-interest depends on most individuals responding in socially optimal ways, which includes remaining familiar with the current status of the pandemic, adhering to health guidelines relevant to the pandemic, and having a constructive emotional response to the pandemic. We sought to examine how individual differences in core moral motivators of collective action (i.e., fairness and gratitude) relate to individuals' COVID-19 responses. In a two-wave study (T1: N = 254; T2: N = 135) conducted in May and June 2020, we find that individual differences in fairness and gratitude were associated with more adaptive (i.e. positive emotions) and prosocial (i.e. remaining familiar with the pandemic, adhering to public health guidelines, prioritizing saving lives) responses to the pandemic. These effects are mediated through differences in impact legacy motives (i.e. being concerned about the impact one leaves behind once they have passed). Understanding the links between gratitude, fairness and legacy motives, and their impact on prosociality, could promote both current and intergenerational prosocial decision making.