The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on college students in USA: Two years later.

Coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19) has posed an unprecedented public health challenge for most countries, and the repeated outbreaks of this disease have created a largest disruption of education systems. The intent of this work was to examine the intersection of COVID-19 fear and mental health consequences among college students in Northern Michigan, a region of the U.S. severely affected by the pandemic. This study was conducted from January 17 to February 25, 2022, two years later since the outbreak of the pandemic, and 151 college students (female, 76) were involved. Participants' potential psychological symptoms, anxiety, happiness, learning difficulty, and demographic information were surveyed. We have three main findings. First, 60.3% of students had tested positive for COVID-19, and more female than male students were affected (female, 69.7%; male, 50.7%). Second, there was a high prevalence of mental problems among college students, with 95.7% of the sample experiencing moderate or severe mood disorders. Third, respondents' education was severely affected by the pandemic, averaging a score of 7.6 on a scale of 10 when asked how much their learning quality was affected. They showed increased fear, stress, and decreased happiness, and these were associated with their learning quality change. Given the impact would be far-reaching, not only college students' mental health but also their learning difficulties should be monitored during the pandemic. These findings are alarming and timely, and their implications are discussed.

Social comparisons differentially affect fair and unfair processing in ultimatum bargaining.

Several theoretical frameworks have attempted to illustrate the influence of social contexts on decision-making and well-being. Traditional economic models assume that absolute income is the crucial determinant of one's well-being, while the comparative models state that social comparisons influence and even determine well-being and decisions. Here we investigated the impact of social comparisons on decision-making using a modified three-player Ultimatum Game and ERP technique. We found two independent effects: First, social comparisons did not affect decision-making when a fair norm was enforced. Second, social comparisons affected fairness consideration for unfair offers only-responders were less likely to accept unfair offers in upward comparisons but more likely to accept unfair offers in downward comparisons. These results revealed that people were envy-free of fair offers while affected mainly by social comparisons when the equality norm was broken. Event-related brain potentials showed that in the early time window (260-320 ms), compared to fair offers, unfair offers elicited a larger negative-going medial frontal negativity (MFN) in upward than parallel and downward comparisons, and in the late stage (320-650 ms), compared to fair offers, unfair offers led to equally less positive-going P300 in upward and downward comparisons relative to parallel comparison. Although partly consistent with the relative standing assumption, both traditional economic models and comparative models require revision to account for the results.