How Has COVID-19 Impacted Our Language Use?

The COVID-19 pandemic has led to severe consequences for people's mental health. The pandemic has also influenced our language use, shaping our word formation habits. The overuse of new metaphorical meanings has received particular attention from the media. Here, we wanted to investigate whether these metaphors have led to the formation of new semantic associations in memory. A sample of 120 university students was asked to decide whether a target word was or was not related to a prime stimulus. Responses for pandemic pairs in which the target referred to the newly acquired metaphorical meaning of the prime (i.e., "trench"-"hospital") were compared to pre-existing semantically related pairs (i.e., "trench"-"soldier") and neutral pairs (i.e., "trench"-"response"). Results revealed greater accuracy and faster response times for pandemic pairs than for semantic pairs and for semantic pairs compared to neutral ones. These findings suggest that the newly learned pandemic associations have created stronger semantic links in our memory compared to the pre-existing ones. Thus, this work confirms the adaptive nature of human language, and it underlines how the overuse of metaphors evoking dramatic images has been, in part, responsible for many psychological disorders still reported among people nowadays.

Web-Based Independent Versus Laboratory-Based Stop-Signal Task Performance: Within-Subjects Counterbalanced Comparison Study.

BACKGROUND: Considered a facet of behavioral impulsivity, response inhibition facilitates adaptive and goal-directed behavior. It is often assessed using the Stop-Signal Task (SST), which is presented on stand-alone computers under controlled laboratory conditions. Sample size may consequently be a function of cost or time and sample diversity constrained to those willing or able to attend the laboratory. Statistical power and generalizability of results might, in turn, be impacted. Such limitations may potentially be overcome via the implementation of web-based testing. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate if there were differences between variables derived from a web-based SST when it was undertaken independently-that is, outside the laboratory, on any computer, and in the absence of researchers-versus when it was performed under laboratory conditions. METHODS: We programmed a web-based SST in HTML and JavaScript and employed a counterbalanced design. A total of 166 individuals (mean age 19.72, SD 1.85, range 18-36 years; 146/166, 88% female) were recruited. Of them, 79 undertook the independent task prior to visiting the laboratory and 78 completed the independent task following their laboratory visit. The average time between SST testing was 3.72 (SD 2.86) days. Dependent samples and Bayesian paired samples t tests were used to examine differences between laboratory-based and independent SST variables. Correlational analyses were conducted on stop-signal reaction times (SSRT). RESULTS: After exclusions, 123 participants (mean age 19.73, SD 1.97 years) completed the SST both in the laboratory and independently. While participants were less accurate on go trials and exhibited reduced inhibitory control when undertaking the independent-compared to the laboratory-based-SST, there was a positive association between the SSRT of each condition (r=.48; P<.001; 95% CI 0.33-0.61). CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest a web-based SST, which participants undertake on any computer, at any location, and in the absence of the researcher, is a suitable measure of response inhibition.

Attention profile of physically recovered COVID-19 inpatients on the day of discharge.

Few studies have reported specific attention deficits in post-COVID-19 patients. Attention consists of different subdomains. Disruptions to specific attention subdomains might impair a wide range of everyday tasks, including road safety. As there are millions of COVID-19 patients with different socio-economic backgrounds, screening of attentional performance less dependent on education is needed. Here, we verified if physically recovered COVID-19 inpatients showed specific attention decrements at discharge. The Continuous Visual Attention Test (CVAT) is a Go/No-go task which is independent of participants' schooling. It detects visuomotor reaction time (RT = intrinsic alertness), variability of reaction time (VRT = sustained attention), omission (focused-attention), and commission errors (response-inhibition). Thirty physically functional COVID-19 inpatients at discharge and 30 non-infected controls underwent the CVAT. A MANCOVA was performed to examine differences between controls and patients, followed by post-hoc ANCOVAs. Then, we identified the percentile score for each patient within the distribution of the CVAT performance of 211 subjects mentally capable of driving (reference group). COVID-19 patients at discharge showed greater RT and VRT, and more omission errors than controls. Twenty-two patients (73%) had performance below the 5th percentile of the reference group in one or more subdomains. As slow visuomotor RT, deficits in focusing and difficulties in keeping visual attention are associated with traffic accidents, we concluded that most COVID-19 patients at discharge had deficits that may increase the risk of road injuries. As these deficits will probably affect other daily activities, a routine assessment with the CVAT could provide useful information on whom to send to post-COVID centers.