ABSTRACT
Main effect models contend that perceived social support benefits mental health in the presence and the absence of stressful events, whereas stress-buffering models contend that perceived social support benefits mental health especially when individuals are facing stressful events. We tested these models of how perceived social support impacts mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic and evaluated whether characteristics of everyday social interactions statistically mediated this association - namely, (a) received support, the visible and deliberate assistance provided by others, and (b) pleasantness, the extent to which an interaction is positive, flows easily, and leads individuals to feel understood and validated. 591 United States adults completed a 3-week ecological momentary assessment protocol sampling characteristics of their everyday social interactions that was used to evaluate between-person average values and within-person daily fluctuations in everyday social interaction characteristics. Global measures of perceived social support and pandemic-related stressors were assessed at baseline. Psychiatric symptoms of depression and anxiety were assessed at baseline, at the end of each day of ecological momentary assessment, and at 3-week follow-up. Consistent with a main effect model, higher baseline perceived social support predicted decreases in psychiatric symptoms at 3-week follow-up (ß = -.09, p = .001). Contrary to a stress-buffering model, we did not find an interaction of pandemic-stressors × perceived social support. The main effect of perceived social support on mental health was mediated by the pleasantness of everyday social interactions, but not by received support in everyday social interactions. We found evidence for both main effects and stress-buffering effects of within-person fluctuations in interaction pleasantness on daily changes in mental health. Results suggest the importance of everyday social interaction characteristics, especially their pleasantness, in linking perceived social support and mental health.
ABSTRACT
Smartphone-based contact-tracing apps are a promising solution to help scale up the conventional contact-tracing process. However, low adoption rates have become a major issue that prevents these apps from achieving their full potential. In this paper, we present a national-scale survey experiment ( N = 1963 ) in the U.S. to investigate the effects of app design choices and individual differences on COVID-19 contact-tracing app adoption intentions. We found that individual differences such as prosocialness, COVID-19 risk perceptions, general privacy concerns, technology readiness, and demographic factors played a more important role than app design choices such as decentralized design vs. centralized design, location use, app providers, and the presentation of security risks. Certain app designs could exacerbate the different preferences in different sub-populations which may lead to an inequality of acceptance to certain app design choices (e.g., developed by state health authorities vs. a large tech company) among different groups of people (e.g., people living in rural areas vs. people living in urban areas). Our mediation analysis showed that one's perception of the public health benefits offered by the app and the adoption willingness of other people had a larger effect in explaining the observed effects of app design choices and individual differences than one's perception of the app's security and privacy risks. With these findings, we discuss practical implications on the design, marketing, and deployment of COVID-19 contact-tracing apps in the U.S.
