Belief in just deserts regarding individuals infected with COVID-19 in Japan and its associations with demographic factors and infection-related and socio-psychological characteristics: a cross-sectional study.

Prejudice related to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a social issue worldwide. A possible psychological factor that promotes prejudice is the belief in just deserts (BJD) regarding individuals infected with COVID-19 (i.e., the belief that the infected individual deserves to be infected). The BJD is based on the belief in immanent justice. It is reportedly higher in Japan than in other countries. Therefore, we conducted a cross-sectional study to investigate the BJD among Japanese individuals and clarify its associations with demographic factors or infection-related and socio-psychological characteristics. To this end, we conducted an online questionnaire survey in Japan from August 7-8, 2020, with 1,207 respondents aged 20-69 years. We performed screening to exclude inappropriate responses. We investigated the association between the BJD and demographic factors such as gender and age. We also investigated the association between the BJD and infection-related and socio-psychological characteristics, including risk perception of COVID-19 infection and human rights restrictions (i.e., the degree of agreement with government restrictions on individuals' behavior during emergencies). Among the surveyed items, human rights restrictions showed a strong association with BJD, followed by risk perception of COVID-19 infection. Men had a slightly higher BJD than women. Our study is significant in that it is the first to investigate the items associated with the BJD, thereby providing foundational information for revising individual perceptions of justice related to COVID-19 and solving prejudice-related issues.

American prejudice during the COVID-19 pandemic.

In the United States, anti-Asian sentiment has pervaded the Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Could Americans' fear of contracting the virus relate to prejudice against Asian individuals? According to intergroup threat theory, prejudice increases toward groups of people when they are perceived as a likely cause of symbolic and/or real threat, including disease threat. We tested this perspective in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic by investigating the relationship between Americans' concern about contracting COVID-19 and their feelings toward individuals from multiple countries. Between May 12-14 2020, participants residing in the United States (N = 932) completed an online survey assessing their (1) perceived threat of COVID-19 infection, (2) feelings of warmth and coldness toward people in America, China, Italy, Japan, and Greece, and (3) trait-level prejudice. Perceived threat of COVID-19 infection differentially related to feelings toward American and Chinese nationals and was unrelated to feelings toward people from other countries assessed. Specifically, greater threat of infection was associated with less warmth toward individuals from China, an effect moderated by trait-level prejudice. That is, participants high (but not medium or low) in trait prejudice showed a significant relationship between threat of COVID-19 infection and reduced warmth toward Chinese individuals. Threat of infection also related to greater warmth and less coldness toward American nationals, consistent with prior work indicating that disease threats amplify ethnocentrism. Collectively, results suggest that perceived threat of COVID-19 infection may correspond with prejudice toward the national outgroup associated with the disease's origin (i.e., China), as well as national ingroup favoritism, among Americans prone to prejudice.

Discriminatory attitudes against unvaccinated people during the pandemic.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, sizeable groups of unvaccinated people persist even in countries with high vaccine access1. As a consequence, vaccination became a controversial subject of debate and even protest2. Here we assess whether people express discriminatory attitudes in the form of negative affectivity, stereotypes and exclusionary attitudes in family and political settings across groups defined by COVID-19 vaccination status. We quantify discriminatory attitudes between vaccinated and unvaccinated citizens in 21 countries, covering a diverse set of cultures across the world. Across three conjoined experimental studies (n = 15,233), we demonstrate that vaccinated people express discriminatory attitudes towards unvaccinated individuals at a level as high as discriminatory attitudes that are commonly aimed at immigrant and minority populations3-5. By contrast, there is an absence of evidence that unvaccinated individuals display discriminatory attitudes towards vaccinated people, except for the presence of negative affectivity in Germany and the USA. We find evidence in support of discriminatory attitudes against unvaccinated individuals in all countries except for Hungary and Romania, and find that discriminatory attitudes are more strongly expressed in cultures with stronger cooperative norms. Previous research on the psychology of cooperation has shown that individuals react negatively against perceived 'free-riders'6,7, including in the domain of vaccinations8,9. Consistent with this, we find that contributors to the public good of epidemic control (that is, vaccinated individuals) react with discriminatory attitudes towards perceived free-riders (that is, unvaccinated individuals). National leaders and vaccinated members of the public appealed to moral obligations to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake10,11, but our findings suggest that discriminatory attitudes-including support for the removal of fundamental rights-simultaneously emerged.

Discriminatory attitudes against unvaccinated people during the pandemic.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, sizeable groups of unvaccinated people persist even in countries with high vaccine access1. As a consequence, vaccination became a controversial subject of debate and even protest2. Here we assess whether people express discriminatory attitudes in the form of negative affectivity, stereotypes and exclusionary attitudes in family and political settings across groups defined by COVID-19 vaccination status. We quantify discriminatory attitudes between vaccinated and unvaccinated citizens in 21 countries, covering a diverse set of cultures across the world. Across three conjoined experimental studies (n = 15,233), we demonstrate that vaccinated people express discriminatory attitudes towards unvaccinated individuals at a level as high as discriminatory attitudes that are commonly aimed at immigrant and minority populations3-5. By contrast, there is an absence of evidence that unvaccinated individuals display discriminatory attitudes towards vaccinated people, except for the presence of negative affectivity in Germany and the USA. We find evidence in support of discriminatory attitudes against unvaccinated individuals in all countries except for Hungary and Romania, and find that discriminatory attitudes are more strongly expressed in cultures with stronger cooperative norms. Previous research on the psychology of cooperation has shown that individuals react negatively against perceived 'free-riders'6,7, including in the domain of vaccinations8,9. Consistent with this, we find that contributors to the public good of epidemic control (that is, vaccinated individuals) react with discriminatory attitudes towards perceived free-riders (that is, unvaccinated individuals). National leaders and vaccinated members of the public appealed to moral obligations to increase COVID-19 vaccine uptake10,11, but our findings suggest that discriminatory attitudes-including support for the removal of fundamental rights-simultaneously emerged.

The moral filter of patriotic prejudice: How Americans view Chinese in the COVID-19 era.

About one in six Asian Americans have fallen victim to anti-Asian racism during the COVID-19 pandemic [J. Lee, K. Ramakrishnan, aapidata.com/blog/discrimination-survey-2022/]. By examining anti-Asian racism in the United States primarily as a domestic issue, most prior studies have overlooked the connections between shifting US-China relations and Americans' prejudices against the Chinese in China and, by extension, East Asian Americans. This study investigates the patterns and perceptual bases of nationality-based prejudices against Chinese amid the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. Our nationally representative online survey experiment reveals that Americans assess a hypothetical Chinese person in China as inferior in multiple social and psychological characteristics to an otherwise identical Japanese person in Japan or East Asian American. Furthermore, subjects who perceive China as more threatening to America's national interests assess Chinese more negatively, especially in terms of trustworthiness and morality, suggesting that perceived China threats propel Americans' negative stereotypes about Chinese. A contextual analysis further indicates that counties with a higher share of Trump voters in 2016 tend to perceive all East Asian-origin groups similarly as a racial outgroup. By contrast, residents in predominantly Democrat-voting counties tend to perceive Chinese in China more negatively relative to Asian Americans, despite broadly viewing East Asians more favorably. Overall, this study underscores the often-overlooked relationships between the prevailing anti-Asian sentiments in the United States and the US-China geopolitical tensions and America's domestic political polarization.

Workplace health surveillance and COVID-19: algorithmic health discrimination and cancer survivors.

PURPOSE: This article examines ways COVID-19 health surveillance and algorithmic decision-making ("ADM") are creating and exacerbating workplace inequalities that impact post-treatment cancer survivors. Cancer survivors' ability to exercise their right to work often is limited by prejudice and health concerns. While cancer survivors can ostensibly elect not to disclose to their employers when they are receiving treatments or if they have a history of treatment, the use of ADM increases the chances that employers will learn of their situation regardless of their preferences. Moreover, absent significant change, inequalities may persist or even expand. METHODS: We analyze how COVID-19 health surveillance is creating an unprecedented amount of health data on all people. These data are increasingly collected and used by employers as part of COVID-19 regulatory interventions. RESULTS: The increase in data, combined with the health and economic crisis, means algorithm-driven health inequalities will be experienced by a larger percentage of the population. Post-treatment cancer survivors, as for people with disabilities generally, are at greater risk of experiencing negative outcomes from algorithmic health discrimination. CONCLUSIONS: Updated and revised workplace policy and practice requirements, as well as collaboration across impacted groups, are critical in helping to control the inequalities that flow from the interaction between COVID-19, ADM, and the experience of cancer survivorship in the workplace. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: The interaction among COVID-19, health surveillance, and ADM increases exposure to algorithmic health discrimination in the workplace.

Pandemic and prejudice: Results from a national survey experiment.

Do health and economic shocks exacerbate prejudice towards racial/ethnic minority groups? We investigate this question in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic by collecting nationally representative survey data with an embedded experiment. Results show that priming COVID-19 salience has an immediate impact: compared to the control group, respondents in the treatment group reported increased prejudice towards East Asian and Hispanic colleagues. East Asians in the treatment group faced higher prejudicial responses from Americans living in counties with higher COVID-19 infections and those who lost jobs due to COVID-19, and fewer prejudicial responses in counties with a higher concentration of Asians. These results point to the salience of COVID-19 fueled health and economic insecurities in shaping prejudicial attitudes, specifically towards East Asians. County-level socioeconomic factors did not moderate the increased prejudicial attitudes toward Hispanics in the workplace. These findings highlight a dimension of prejudice, intensified during the pandemic, which has been largely underreported and therefore missing from the current discourse on this important topic.

Association between maternity harassment and depression during pregnancy amid the COVID-19 state of emergency.

OBJECTIVES: Maternity harassment, known in English as pregnancy discrimination, remains prevalent in developed countries. However, research examining the mental health effects of maternity harassment is lacking. We aimed to examine the association between maternity harassment and depression during pregnancy in Japan. METHODS: A cross-sectional Internet survey was conducted on 359 pregnant employees (including women who were working at the time their pregnancy was confirmed) from May 22 to May 31, 2020, during which time a COVID-19 state of emergency was declared. Maternity harassment was defined as being subjected to any of the 16 adverse treatments prohibited by national guidelines. Depression was defined as a score of ≥9 on the Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale (Japanese version). Logistic regression analysis was performed. RESULTS: Overall, 24.8% of the pregnant employees had experienced maternity harassment by supervisors and/or colleagues. After adjusting for demographics, pregnancy status, work status, and fear of COVID-19, pregnant employees who experienced maternity harassment were more likely to have depression than those who did not (odds ratio 2.48, 95% confidential interval 1.34-4.60). This association was not influenced by whether they were teleworking or not as a COVID-19 measure. CONCLUSIONS: One quarter of pregnant employees experienced maternity harassment and had a higher prevalence of depression than those who did not. Being physically away from the office through teleworking may not reduce the effect of maternal harassment on depression. To protect the mental health and employment of pregnant women, employers should comply with the laws and take measures to prevent maternity harassment.

How the Coronavirus Lockdown Impacts the Impoverished in India.

In response to the coronavirus pandemic, several countries have imposed curfews, quarantines, and lockdowns to restrict the spread of the infection among people. India had initiated a nationwide lockdown to combat the pandemic starting from the last week of March until the end of May 2020. But, the lockdown had continued subsequently in several red zones across parts of the country for few months. However, scientists have criticized the government's abrupt lockdown since it prevented people from preparing for the worst aftermath. Besides, the curfews have blocked millions of impoverished migrant workers from leaving cities to return to their homes in distant rural villages. As a result, the destitute workers have endured enormous hardship and outright discrimination desolately leading to their added physical and mental distress, pain, suffering, and death. Most of the victims of the lockdown have belonged to the economically distressed lower social classes of the Indian caste hierarchy. This article outlines their sufferings triggered by the long drawn-out lockdown episode.

What COVID-19 Teaches Us About Implicit Bias in Pediatric Health Care.

OBJECTIVES: To highlight the role of implicit bias in contributing to existing health disparities among pediatric populations during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and recommend strategies to reduce its impact. METHODS: A topical review of the recent literature on implicit bias describing its potential impact in key areas of pediatric health care within the context of COVID-19 was conducted. RESULTS: Pediatric provider implicit bias has been found to be similar to the general population and can negatively influence clinical decision-making and outcomes for marginalized youth and families, particularly under stressful conditions such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Implicit bias can be mitigated through strategies proposed at the individual, institutional/organizational, educational, and scientific/research levels. CONCLUSIONS: The additional strain on provider resources, staff, and supplies created by COVID-19 may exacerbate providers' susceptibility to implicit bias and contribute to health disparities. Pediatric psychologists are encouraged to recognize implicit biases in themselves and colleagues and promote identified strategies to reduce the impact of implicit bias on perpetuating health disparities in marginalized youth and families.

The Relationships among Media Usage Regarding COVID-19, Knowledge about Infection, and Anxiety: Structural Model Analysis.

BACKGROUND: We examined the effects of mass media usage on people's level of knowledge about coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), fear of infection, prejudice towards infected people, and anxiety level. In addition, we investigated whether knowledge about COVID-19 can reduce fear, prejudice, and anxiety. METHODS: We performed an anonymous online survey in 1,500 residents aged 19-65 years between April 24 and May 5 of 2020. Anxiety level was assessed using the generalized anxiety disorder-7 scale. We used a questionnaire to investigate COVID-19-related media use, knowledge about COVID-19, fear of infection, and prejudice towards infected people. We analyzed the relationships among the variables using the structural equation model. RESULTS: Media use had significant effects on fear of infection, prejudice against infected people, and anxiety. Knowledge about COVID-19 had a significant protective effect on fear of infection, prejudice against infected people, and anxiety. However, the effect of media use on knowledge about COVID-19 was not statistically significant. There was a partial mediating effect of prejudice against infected people and fear of infection on media usage and anxiety. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated significant effects of mass media coverage regarding COVID-19 on fear, prejudice, and anxiety. While knowledge about COVID-19 could decrease fear, prejudice, and anxiety, the use of mass media did not enhance this knowledge. Medical societies should guide mass media reporting of COVID-19 and provide appropriate public education.

How the Coronavirus Lockdown Impacts the Impoverished in India.

In response to the coronavirus pandemic, several countries have imposed curfews, quarantines, and lockdowns to restrict the spread of the infection among people. India had initiated a nationwide lockdown to combat the pandemic starting from the last week of March until the end of May 2020. But, the lockdown had continued subsequently in several red zones across parts of the country for few months. However, scientists have criticized the government's abrupt lockdown since it prevented people from preparing for the worst aftermath. Besides, the curfews have blocked millions of impoverished migrant workers from leaving cities to return to their homes in distant rural villages. As a result, the destitute workers have endured enormous hardship and outright discrimination desolately leading to their added physical and mental distress, pain, suffering, and death. Most of the victims of the lockdown have belonged to the economically distressed lower social classes of the Indian caste hierarchy. This article outlines their sufferings triggered by the long drawn-out lockdown episode.