The stigmatization of prolonged grief disorder and disenfranchised grief: A vignette-based experimental study.

People with prolonged grief disorder (PGD) are at risk of public stigma, but research has yet to examine whether stigma is shaped by different types of relationship losses. In an experimental study, we asked participants (N = 306) to read three scenarios in which targets lost their romantic partner, child, or companion animal. Targets with PGD (vs. integrated grief) elicited more negative emotional reactions and attributions, and their experiences were perceived as less legitimate. Targets who lost their companion animal (vs. other relationship losses) were perceived as the most sensitive and their grief as the least legitimate, but they also elicited the lowest prosocial and fear reactions and were perceived as the warmest. Lastly, targets with PGD who lost their companion animal (vs. other relationship losses) elicited more negative emotional reactions and attributions, and their experiences were perceived as less legitimate. Implications and suggestions for future studies are discussed.

A Narrative Review of the Dichotomy Between the Social Views of Non-Monogamy and the Experiences of Consensual Non-Monogamous People.

Monogamy is deeply rooted in most Western societies, shaping how people construe and behave in romantic relationships. These normative views facilitate the emergence of negative perceptions and evaluations when people choose not to adhere to mononormativity. Even though people in consensual non-monogamous (CNM) relationships are targets of stigmatization, research shows a dichotomy between these negative views and the relational experiences of CNM people. Indeed, people in CNM and monogamous relationships have comparable relationship functioning and quality and struggle with similar relationship problems. One of the differences is that CNM relationships afford people to explore their sexuality and fulfill their needs with multiple partners, without agreed-upon extradyadic behavior being perceived as infidelity or having deleterious consequences to relationship maintenance. These positive experiences notwithstanding, CNM people are continuously pressured by mononormativity and stigmatization, increasing the risk of internalized CNM negativity and worse personal and relational outcomes. One possible way to counteract CNM stigmatization and improve the lives of CNM people is by changing discourses surrounding non-monogamy and improving acceptance, not only in professional settings but also in the general population. Another strategy is to understand how the relationship beliefs and scripts of younger generations can help promote more inclusive and diverse societies.

Examining the Role of Mononormative Beliefs, Stigma, and Internalized Consensual Non-Monogamy Negativity for Dehumanization.

Interest in consensually non-monogamous (CNM) relationships has been increasing in the general population in recent years. However, given the cultural dominance of monogamy and the normative expectations often imposed through socialization (i.e., mononormativity), people in CNM relationships may experience negativity, which can become internalized and harm their individual and relationship health. The present study investigated if mononormativity beliefs and CNM relationship stigma were associated with more dehumanization and if internalized CNM negativity was an underlying mechanism for these associations. Results showed that participants who endorsed more mononormative beliefs and CNM relationship stigma also reported more internalized CNM negativity. In turn, participants who experienced more internalized CNM negativity attributed more negative (vs. positive) emotions to themselves and treated their partners as more immature, unrefined, exploitable, and emotionless. These results show that mononormativity and internalized negativity can shape the attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors of CNM individuals toward themselves and their partners.

The Role of Perceived Social Support in the Grief Experiences of More Anxious and Self-Compassionate People.

Past research showed that high trait anxiety and low self-compassion, along with lack of perceived social support, have been associated with experiencing stronger grief symptoms. However, research is yet to understand if and how these factors interact among grieving individuals. Results of a cross-sectional study (N = 539) showed that perceived social support interacted differently with trait anxiety and self-compassion to shape grief experiences. Unexpectedly, perceived social support did not buffer the association between higher trait anxiety and stronger grief symptoms. Instead, participants with higher trait anxiety reported stronger symptoms only when they perceived to have less social support. In contrast, participants with higher self-compassion reported less symptoms when they perceived to have more social support. These findings show that social support can emphasize the detrimental role of anxiety and the protective role of self-compassion when people are coping with a loss. Implications and suggestions for future research are discussed.

Condom Use Beliefs Differ According to Regulatory Focus: A Mixed-Methods Study in Portugal and Spain.

Reports worldwide have been showing increasing rates of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and condomless sex in recent years. Research has identified several individual and situational variables that can determine the decision to use condoms or forgo their use. We argue that such a decision can also be shaped by motives related to pleasure and safety (i.e., regulatory focus in sexuality). Using open ended questions, we asked 742 Portuguese and Spanish adults to indicate situations and reasons that could inform the decision making process with casual partners and the functions/attributes related to condoms. Using thematic analyses, we coded the drivers of condomless sex and condom use into themes and subthemes, and computed their frequencies. Using quantitative measures, we also asked participants to indicate their condom use expectancies and perceived barriers. Comparing participants according to regulatory focus revealed some differences. Pleasure promotion participants were more likely to consider that condom use decision making is driven by unexpectedness, pleasure, and intimacy pursuit, attached more pleasure reduction functions to condoms, expected more negative outcomes in condom use, and endorsed more sensation and partner barriers in condom use. In contrast, disease prevention participants were more likely to consider that condom use decision making is driven by adequate sexual education, responsibility, and behavioral control, and attached more health protective functions to condoms. These differences can inform the development of tailored intervention and awareness campaigns aimed at helping people to use condoms more consistently with casual partners and to avoid behaviors that put them at risk of STI transmission.

Relationship and Sexual Quality in the Wake of COVID-19: Effects of Individual Regulatory Focus and Shared Concerns over the Pandemic.

Research has shown mixed findings regarding the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on relationship and sexual quality and activity. We argue that some of these findings might be understood considering people's predisposition to maintain safety (i.e., prevention focus) or take risks (i.e., promotion focus), and sharing concerns with one's partner about the pandemic. A longitudinal study (N = 153) tested if regulatory focus before the pandemic (November 2019) was associated with relationship quality, sexual quality, and joint sexual activity later on (June 2020) and whether these effects were moderated by shared concerns over the pandemic. Results showed that participants more focused on prevention experienced higher relationship quality later on, but also less sexual quality and less frequent joint sexual activity, when they shared fewer (vs. more) concerns with their partner. In contrast, participants more focused on promotion experienced higher relationship quality later on when they shared more (vs. less) concerns with their partner. These results indicate how individuals' regulatory focus and shared concerns in times of crisis, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, can have downstream consequences on people's relational and sexual dynamics. We offer insights for mental health professionals to improve psychosocial health and well-being when people are faced with critical events.

Prevent2Protect Project: Regulatory Focus Differences in Sexual Health Knowledge and Practices.

The way people perceive risks and make decisions about their health is regulated by two motivational systems-prevention of harm or promotion of pleasure. People more focused on prevention strive to avoid negative outcomes and enact more health-protective behaviors. In contrast, people more focused on promotion strive to attain positive outcomes and take more risks with their health. Building upon recent evidence extending this framework to sexual behaviors and health, we conducted a pre-registered online survey ( OSF ) with Portuguese and Spanish adults (N = 742; Mage = 31.42, SD = 9.16) to examine whether self-reported STI knowledge and sexual health practices differ based on predominant regulatory focus. This study was part of the Prevent2Protect project ( OSF ). Results showed that prevention-focused participants had heard about more STIs and retrieved more of their knowledge from scientific sources but had been tested for fewer STIs in the past. In contrast, promotion-focused participants indicated they had specific knowledge about more STIs, retrieved more of their knowledge from medical and peer sources, and had been tested for more STIs in the past. They also reported more frequent STI testing, using free testing facilities or asking their family practice doctor to get tested, more routine sexual health check-ups, and more use of other contraceptive methods, such as birth control pills. These results remained unchanged after controlling for demographic differences. Overall, our findings showed that different motives in sexuality shape sexual health knowledge and sexual health practices.

Reliability and Validity of the Colombian Version of the Revised Sociosexual Orientation Inventory.

Sociosexuality refers to an individual's disposition to have casual sex without establishing affective bonds and has been widely studied worldwide using the Revised Sociosexual Orientation Inventory (SOI-R; Penke & Asendorpf, 2008). Despite its many validations in different cultural contexts, no psychometric analyses of this instrument have been conducted in Spanish-speaking Latin American countries. To address this gap in the literature, we examined the psychometric properties of the SOI-R in Colombia. In a cross-sectional study with a large sample of participants (N = 812; 64% women), we conducted exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses to identify different factor structures and determine which had the best fit for our sample and examined the reliability of the scale. Results showed that a three-factor structure, with sociosexual behaviors, attitudes, and desire as first-order factors, and global sociosexuality as a second-order factor, had the best fit indexes. Each factor presented good reliability indexes. Replicating already established gender differences, we also found that men scored higher on each factor when compared to women. These findings show that the SOI-R is a reliable and valid instrument to assess sociosexuality in countries where sociosexuality research is underrepresented.

Focusing on Safety or Pleasure Determine Condom Use Intentions Differently Depending on Condom Availability and STI Risk.

Objective: Regulatory Focus Theory suggests that goal pursuit is driven by two separate and fundamental motives. Being more focused on prevention motivates people to enact safer behaviors and avoid negative outcomes (e.g., to prevent diseases), whereas being more focused on promotion motivates people to take risks and pursue pleasurable experiences (e.g., condomless sex). Methods: A quasi-experimental study (N = 476) examined if differences in regulatory focus (i.e., prevention vs. promotion) determined condom use intentions with a prospective casual partner, depending on condom availability delay and STI risk cues. Results: Participants focused on prevention (vs. promotion) were less likely to consider having condomless sex across condom availability delays conditions. However, STI risk cues changed condom use intentions. When STI risk was lower, condom use intentions decreased as condom availability delays increased (particularly for participants focused on promotion). When STI risk was higher, condom use intentions were stronger and consistent across condom availability delays (particularly for participants focused on prevention). Conclusions: These findings highlight the importance of distinct sexual motives when examining sexual health practices.

Relationship difficulties and "technoference" during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has touched many aspects of people's lives around the world, including their romantic relationships. While media outlets have reported that the pandemic is difficult for couples, empirical evidence is needed to test these claims and understand why this may be. In two highly powered studies (N = 3271) using repeated measure and longitudinal approaches, we found that people who experienced COVID-19 related challenges (i.e., lockdown, reduced face-to-face interactions, boredom, or worry) also reported greater self and partner phone use (Study 1) and time spent on social media (Study 2), and subsequently experienced more conflict and less satisfaction in their romantic relationship. The findings provide insight into the struggles people faced in their relationships during the pandemic and suggest that the increase in screen time - a rising phenomenon due to the migration of many parts of life online - may be a challenge for couples.

Stigmatization of Consensual Non-Monogamous Partners: Perceived Endorsement of Conservation or Openness to Change Values Vary According to Personal Attitudes.

Studies have shown that romantic partners in consensual non-monogamous (CNM) relationships are targets of stigmatization. However, little is known about the underlying mechanisms and the conditions under which such stigmatization occurs. In two experimental studies (combined N = 772), we asked participants to read the description of two partners in a relationship (monogamous vs. open relationship vs. polyamorous) and make a series of judgments about those partners. Overall results showed that CNM (vs. monogamous) partners were perceived as less trustworthy and as having more sexual health concerns (Studies 1 and 2), and as being less committed and less sexually satisfied (Study 2). Results from a conditional mediation analysis (Study 2) further showed that participants with negative attitudes toward consensual non-monogamy perceived CNM (vs. monogamous) partners as having less conservation and more openness to change values, which was then associated with more stigmatization. In contrast, participants with positive attitudes toward consensual non-monogamy perceived CNM (vs. monogamous) partners as having more openness to change values, which was then associated with less stigmatization. Taken together, these results extended the literature focused on prejudice, discrimination, and stigmatization of minority groups and highlighted key elements that can be used to buffer stigmatization.

Security motives and negative affective experiences during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: Self-regulation can help individuals cope during stressful events, but little is known about why and when this might occur. We examined if being more focused on prevention was linked to negative affective experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic. We also examined possible underlying mechanisms for this association, and whether social support buffered it. DESIGN: Pre-registered longitudinal study, with surveys every 2 weeks over one month (N = 1269). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Regulatory focus and worry for health (T1), adherence to self-isolation and preventive health behaviours (T2), negative affective experiences, positive affect, frequency of online interactions, and perceived social support (T3). RESULTS: Prevention focus was associated with health worries at baseline and linked to greater adherence to preventive health behaviours (T2). Only adherence to self-isolation was linked to more negative affective experiences (T3). Exploratory analyses showed that prevention focus was linked to more negative affective experiences (T3), but only for participants with fewer online interactions with their family and less perceived social support from family and friends. CONCLUSIONS: Prevention motives in threatening times can be a double-edged sword, with benefits for health behaviours and consequences for negative affective experiences. Having a strong social network during these times can alleviate these consequences.

Perceived Associations between Excessive Sugar Intake and Health Conditions.

Excessive sugar intake represents an increased risk of developing non-communicable diseases (e.g., obesity, cardiometabolic diseases, and dental diseases). Still, it is unclear whether people are aware of these adverse health outcomes. The current study systematically examined the extent to which people associate health conditions with excessive sugar intake. Participants (N = 1010 Portuguese volunteers) freely reported all health conditions they associated with excessive sugar consumption and rated the strength of these associations for eight specific health conditions. All participants reported health conditions associated with excessive sugar intake, with the most frequent being risk factors for cardiometabolic diseases (e.g., diabetes), cardiovascular diseases, oral problems, oncological and mental health conditions. Moreover, participants considered diabetes, overweight/obesity, and oral problems as being the conditions most related to excessive sugar intake. Women, participants with children in the household, and experts in health/nutrition rated excessive sugar intake as being more strongly linked to some of the health conditions. The identification of the health conditions that people associate with excessive sugar consumption may inform policymakers, educators, and health professionals and support interventions targeting the general public or specific groups (e.g., overweight people) in raising awareness of potential adverse health outcomes and, ultimately, contribute to reducing sugar intake.

Sexuality, Sexual Behavior, and Relationships of Asexual Individuals: Differences Between Aromantic and Romantic Orientation.

Asexuality is a complex construct with a considerable lack of research until recently. Building upon available findings, we examined the extent to which romantic orientation shapes individual and relationship experiences, and expectations of asexual individuals. Specifically, our research focused on the distinction between romantic asexual individuals, who experience romantic attraction, and aromantic asexual individuals, who do not experience romantic attraction. A cross-sectional study with members of different asexual online communities (N = 447, 55.02% women; Mage = 24.77 years, SD = 7.21) aimed at examining how both groups differ in their identification with the asexuality construct as measured by the Asexuality Identification Scale (Yule et al., 2017), individual perspectives on sexuality, sexual behavior and relationships, concerns about commitment and sexual performance in a relationship, and attachment style. Results showed that aromantic asexual individuals identified more with asexuality, reported a more avoidant attachment style, and were more concerned with relationship commitment. In contrast, romantic asexual individuals reported less sex aversion, more sexual experiences (both past and current), and more sexual partners in the past. These individuals also engaged in romantic relationships more frequently in the past, had a stronger desire to engage in a romantic relationship in future (either with or without sexual intimacy), and were more concerned with sexual performance. Overall, our findings contribute to the literature by highlighting the need to consider romantic orientation when examining asexuality and its interpersonal outcomes.

Having a prevention regulatory focus longitudinally predicted distress and health-protective behaviours during the COVID-19 pandemic.

People focussed on prevention (vs. promotion) are motivated by safety and are less inclined to take risks. We tested if having a prevention (vs. promotion) focus before the COVID-19 pandemic outbreak predicted threat perceptions and health outcomes throughout the pandemic. Participants (N = 161) took part in a longitudinal study. Measures were assessed before the pandemic was declared (on November 2019, T1) and after a global pandemic was declared (on June 2020, T2). Participants who were more focussed on prevention prior to the onset of the pandemic (at T1) perceived greater risk and were more worried about contracting COVID-19, and engaged in more preventive behaviours during the pandemic (at T2). They also reported less anxiety and felt healthier later on (at T2). Exploratory analyses revealed that enacting preventive behaviours helped people cope with pandemic-related anxiety. Being motivated by security and enacting preventive behaviours seems to have helped people reduce anxiety over risk even during the pandemic.

Evaluating the Adequacy of Emoji Use in Positive and Negative Messages from Close and Distant Senders.

Computer-mediated communication allows people to communicate across several contexts (e.g., friends, professional settings) by using video-based or text-based channels. In the latter case, communication lacks nonverbal cues (e.g., tone of voice) that are critical to message interpretation. Including emoji can help express emotion and reinforce or clarify the meaning of a message. However, the benefits of using emoji are likely to depend on the context (e.g., the relationship between interlocutors) and the messages' features (e.g., the valence of the message). To date, studies have not systematically and empirically examined how the use of emoji is perceived across different communication scenarios. In the current study, we asked 175 participants (49.5 percent women; Mage = 36.32, SD = 12.22) to imagine receiving either a negative or a positive message from 22 senders (e.g., friend; bank manager) and to indicate, for each case, how much they would like to receive an emoji and how useful and appropriate they considered the use of emoji. These ratings were combined into a single index of emoji use adequacy. Based on factor analysis, the 22 scenarios were aggregated in distant and close scenarios. Overall, results showed that participants considered emoji use more inadequate in distant (vs. close) scenarios and for negative (vs. positive) messages. These findings suggest that the perceived benefits of emoji use for text-based communication may not be generalized to all text-based communication contexts, such that relationship proximity and message valence should not be overlooked. Implications for the fields of consumer psychology and communication are discussed.

Regulatory Focus and Sexual Health: Motives for Security and Pleasure in Sexuality are Associated with Distinct Protective Behaviors.

We examined if motives for security (i.e., prevention focus) or pleasure (i.e., promotion focus) were uniquely associated with intentions to get tested for STIs and behavioral control over condom use, over and above variables already identified in theoretical models. We conducted an online survey with Portuguese adults (N = 836; Mage = 22.27, SD = 5.14). Overall, 99.4% of the participants knew at least one of eight STIs, but only 25.2% got tested in the last six months. Participants more focused on prevention had condomless sex less frequently, whereas participants more focused on promotion knew more STIs and got tested for more STIs. Furthermore, participants had stronger intentions to get tested for STIs if they got tested for more STIs in the past, were more concerned about STIs, perceived greater susceptibility to STI acquisition, and were more focused on promotion (but not prevention). Participants had greater behavioral control over condom use if they had condomless sex less often and were more focused on prevention (but not promotion). These findings suggest that promotion-focused people are more likely to consider the consequences of having condomless sex. In contrast, prevention-focused people are more likely to take control of their sexual health.

COVID-19 and Sexual Desire: Perceived Fear Is Associated with Enhanced Relationship Functioning.

Lifestyle changes caused by the COVID-19 pandemic had mostly negative consequences for individual, relationship, and sexual functioning. However, some individuals have reported increases in sexual desire and made new additions to their sex lives. Given that stress-provoking situations can sometimes make mortality more salient and heighten sexual desire, it is possible that lifestyle changes and fear of COVID-19 infection may have benefited some relationships. We conducted a cross-sectional study with 303 romantically involved adults (58.1% men) and found that lifestyle changes were associated with negative changes in one's sex life, unrelated to wanting to spend time with one's partner, and positively associated with relationship quality. Lifestyle changes were also positively associated with sexual desire, but only for participants with high (vs. low) fear of COVID-19 infection. For these participants, sexual desire was associated with positive changes in one's sex life and wanting to spend time with one's partner, but not with overall relationship quality. Results were consistent after controlling for pandemic-related anxiety and demographic variables. This study advances literature focused on the importance of romantic relationships in stress-provoking situations such as the COVID-19 pandemic by shedding light on the association between sexual desire and personal and relational well-being.

What Drives the Dehumanization of Consensual Non-Monogamous Partners?

We built upon a recent study by Rodrigues, Fasoli, Huic, and Lopes (2018) by investigating potential mechanisms driving the dehumanization of consensual non-monogamous (CNM) partners. Using a between-subjects experimental design, we asked 202 Portuguese individuals (158 women; Mage = 29.17, SD = 9.97) to read the description of two partners in a monogamous, open, or polyamorous relationship, and to make a series of judgments about both partners. Results showed the expected dehumanization effect, such that both groups of CNM partners (open and polyamorous) were attributed more primary (vs. secondary) emotions, whereas the reverse was true for monogamous partners. Moreover, results showed that the dehumanization effect was driven by the perception of CNM partners as less moral and less committed to their relationship. However, these findings were observed only for individuals with unfavorable (vs. favorable) attitudes toward CNM relationship. Overall, this study replicated the original findings and extended our understanding of why people in CNM relationships are stigmatized.

A qualitative study about college students' attitudes, knowledge and perceptions regarding sugar intake.

Excessive sugar intake has been associated with multiple health conditions (e.g., higher risk for non-communicable diseases). Hence, health organizations have issued guidelines defining the maximum daily intake of free or added sugars. However, data from several countries suggests that these guidelines are rarely met, particularly by young adults. For example, almost half of Portuguese adolescents and young adults exceed the recommended sugar intake. In this work, we aim to further explore college students' attitudes, knowledge, and perceptions about sugar intake, as well as about sugar intake guidelines. A thematic analysis on data from five focus groups (N = 40) indicated that participants reported difficulty in the comprehension of added/free sugars definition and sugar intake recommendations. Overall, attitudes toward sugar were ambivalent. Sugar was simultaneously perceived as pleasurable and needed, but also as addictive and harmful. Although aware of the potential negative health outcomes associated with excessive sugar intake, most participants did not perceive being at risk due to their youth, exercise habits, or type of diet. The few concerns expressed were mostly associated with the negative impact of high sugar intake on body image (e.g., weight gain). The main barriers to reducing sugar intake identified were environmental (e.g., time restrictions, food available at the university). Still, participants could identify several individual strategies to effectively regulate sugar intake. By identifying knowledge gaps and sources of bias related to sugar consumption, our findings are useful to inform future interventions aiming to address the problem of high sugar intake among university students.