A dataset on survey designs and quality of social and behavioral science surveys during the COVID-19 pandemic.

In the social and behavioral sciences, surveys are frequently used to collect data. During the COVID-19 pandemic, surveys provided political actors and public health professionals with timely insights on the attitudes and behaviors of the general population. These insights were key in guiding actions to fight the pandemic. However, the data quality of these surveys remains unclear because systematic knowledge about how the survey data were collected during the COVID-19 pandemic is lacking. This is unfortunate, since decades of survey research have shown that survey design impacts data. Our Survey Data Collection and the COVID-19 Pandemic (SDCCP) project deals with this research gap. We collected rich metadata on survey design for 717 social and behavioral science surveys carried out in Germany during the first two years of the COVID-19 pandemic. In this data descriptor, we present a unique resource for a systematic assessment of the survey data collection practices and quality of surveys conducted in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Where exactly do the social and behavioural sciences fit in One Health?

At its core, One Health promotes multidisciplinary cooperation amongst researchers and practitioners to improve the effectiveness and management of complex problems raised by the interplay of human, animal and environment interactions. Contemporary One Health literature has identified reducing disciplinary barriers as key to progress in the field, along with addressing the notable absence of social sciences from One Health frameworks, among other priorities. Efforts to position social scientists as experts on behaviour change and health decision-making has helped to articulate a concrete role for progressing One Health collaborations. Yet, there are other equally valuable functions the social scientist has in understanding complex systems, like One Health. We make explicit the multiple and diverse knowledge contributions the social sciences and humanities can make to progressing the One Health agenda. Articulating these more clearly invites a broader set of interdisciplinary perspectives to One Health discussions, allowing for stronger connections between sectors, actors, disciplines, and sub-systems. This perspective piece identifies a range of entry points for researchers and practitioners to better utilize the potential contributions social sciences and humanities scholars can make to One Health goals.

The Influence of Behavioral Sciences on Adherence to Physical Activity and Weight Loss in Overweight and Obese Patients: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials.

In recent years, weight gain and reduced physical activity in the general population have contributed to the development of obesity and other health problems; on the other hand, studies in behavioral sciences have been used to modify behaviors for a healthier life, so the objective of this study was to identify the evidence of interventions in behavioral sciences on adherence to physical activity and weight loss in obese patients. This systematic review study is based on a search of the electronic databases PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane. Studies assessed the evidence from intervention studies that assessed the influence of intervention studies of behavioral sciences on public health. The articles were published between 2013 and 2023. The systematic search of the databases identified 2951 articles. The review analyzed 10 studies. Behavioral science interventions presented evidence through strategies such as multicomponent interventions, lottery and financial incentives, message framing, message framing with financial incentive and physical activity, and psychological satisfaction, demonstrating results in weight loss and maintenance and increased physical activity. This study presents scientific evidence through healthy behavior change methodologies, and future studies can explore these strategies in conjunction with public health technologies in the search for public-private partnerships to promote physical activity in adults.

A practical guide to cross-cultural and multi-sited data collection in the biological and behavioural sciences.

Researchers in the biological and behavioural sciences are increasingly conducting collaborative, multi-sited projects to address how phenomena vary across ecologies. These types of projects, however, pose additional workflow challenges beyond those typically encountered in single-sited projects. Through specific attention to cross-cultural research projects, we highlight four key aspects of multi-sited projects that must be considered during the design phase to ensure success: (1) project and team management; (2) protocol and instrument development; (3) data management and documentation; and (4) equitable and collaborative practices. Our recommendations are supported by examples from our experiences collaborating on the Evolutionary Demography of Religion project, a mixed-methods project collecting data across five countries in collaboration with research partners in each host country. To existing discourse, we contribute new recommendations around team and project management, introduce practical recommendations for exploring the validity of instruments through qualitative techniques during piloting, highlight the importance of good documentation at all steps of the project, and demonstrate how data management workflows can be strengthened through open science practices. While this project was rooted in cross-cultural human behavioural ecology and evolutionary anthropology, lessons learned from this project are applicable to multi-sited research across the biological and behavioural sciences.

Field testing the transferability of behavioural science knowledge on promoting vaccinations.

As behavioural science is increasingly adopted by organizations, there is a growing need to assess the robustness and transferability of empirical findings. Here, we investigate the transferability of insights from various sources of behavioural science knowledge to field settings. Across three pre-registered randomized controlled trials (RCTs, N = 314,824) involving a critical policy domain-COVID-19 booster uptake-we field tested text-based interventions that either increased vaccinations in prior field work (RCT1, NCT05586204), elevated vaccination intentions in an online study (RCT2, NCT05586178) or were favoured by scientists and non-experts (RCT3, NCT05586165). Despite repeated exposure to COVID-19 vaccination messaging in our population, reminders and psychological ownership language increased booster uptake, replicating prior findings. However, strategies deemed effective by prediction or intention surveys, such as encouraging the bundling of COVID-19 boosters and flu shots or addressing misconceptions, yielded no detectable benefits over simple reminders. These findings underscore the importance of testing interventions' transferability to real-world settings.

Exposing omitted moderators: Explaining why effect sizes differ in the social sciences.

Policymakers increasingly rely on behavioral science in response to global challenges, such as climate change or global health crises. But applications of behavioral science face an important problem: Interventions often exert substantially different effects across contexts and individuals. We examine this heterogeneity for different paradigms that underlie many behavioral interventions. We study the paradigms in a series of five preregistered studies across one in-person and 10 online panels, with over 11,000 respondents in total. We find substantial heterogeneity across settings and paradigms, apply techniques for modeling the heterogeneity, and introduce a framework that measures typically omitted moderators. The framework's factors (Fluid Intelligence, Attentiveness, Crystallized Intelligence, and Experience) affect the effectiveness of many text-based interventions, producing different observed effect sizes and explaining variations across samples. Moderators are associated with effect sizes through two paths, with the intensity of the manipulation and with the effect of the manipulation directly. Our results motivate observing these moderators and provide a theoretical and empirical framework for understanding and predicting varying effect sizes in the social sciences.

Using behavioral science to increase core outcome set use in trials.

OBJECTIVES: Core outcome sets (COS) are agreed sets of outcomes for use in clinical trials, which can increase standardization and reduce heterogeneity of outcomes in research. Using a COS, or not, is a behavior that can potentially be increased using behavioral strategies. The aim of this study was to identify behavioral intervention components to potentially increase use of COS in trials. METHODS: This project was informed by the Behavior Change Wheel framework. Two reviewers extracted barriers and facilitators to COS use from four recently published studies examining COS use in trials. Barriers and facilitators were coded to the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behavior (COM-B) model, which forms part of the Behavior Change Wheel. COM-B findings were mapped to intervention functions by two reviewers, and then mapped to behavior change techniques (BCTs). Full-team Affordability, Practicability, Effectiveness/Cost-effectiveness, Acceptability, Side effects/Safety, Equity ratings were used to reach consensus on intervention functions and BCTs. BCTs were operationalized using examples of tangible potential applications and were categorized based on similarity. RESULTS: Barriers and facilitators were identified for all capability, opportunity and motivation aspects of the COM-B model. Five intervention functions (education, training, enablement, persuasion, and modeling) and 15 BCTs were identified. Thirty-six BCT examples were developed, including providing information on benefits of COS for health research, and information choosing COS. BCT examples are categorized by approaches related to "workshops," "guidance," "audio/visual resources," and "other resources." CONCLUSION: Study findings represent diverse ways to potentially increase COS use in trials. Future work is needed to examine effects of these behavioral intervention components on COS use. If effective, increased use of COS can improve outcome reporting and minimize outcome heterogeneity and research waste.

Addressing climate change with behavioral science: A global intervention tournament in 63 countries.

Effectively reducing climate change requires marked, global behavior change. However, it is unclear which strategies are most likely to motivate people to change their climate beliefs and behaviors. Here, we tested 11 expert-crowdsourced interventions on four climate mitigation outcomes: beliefs, policy support, information sharing intention, and an effortful tree-planting behavioral task. Across 59,440 participants from 63 countries, the interventions' effectiveness was small, largely limited to nonclimate skeptics, and differed across outcomes: Beliefs were strengthened mostly by decreasing psychological distance (by 2.3%), policy support by writing a letter to a future-generation member (2.6%), information sharing by negative emotion induction (12.1%), and no intervention increased the more effortful behavior-several interventions even reduced tree planting. Last, the effects of each intervention differed depending on people's initial climate beliefs. These findings suggest that the impact of behavioral climate interventions varies across audiences and target behaviors.

Dimensional versus conceptual incommensurability in the social and behavioral sciences.

This commentary analyzes the extent to which the incommensurability problem can be resolved through the proposed alternative method of integrative experiment design. We suggest that, although one aspect of incommensurability is successfully addressed (dimensional incommensurability), the proposed design space method does not yet alleviate another major source of discontinuity, which we call conceptual incommensurability.

Explore your experimental designs and theories before you exploit them!

In many areas of the social and behavioral sciences, the nature of the experiments and theories that best capture the underlying constructs are themselves areas of active inquiry. Integrative experiment design risks being prematurely exploitative, hindering exploration of experimental paradigms and of diverse theoretical accounts for target phenomena.

Neuroadaptive Bayesian optimisation can allow integrative design spaces at the individual level in the social and behavioural sciences and beyond.

Almaatouq et al. propose an integrative experiment design space combined with large samples for scientific advancement. We argue recent innovative designs combining closed-loop experiment designs and Bayesian optimisation allow for integrative experiments at an individual level during a single session, circumventing the necessity for large samples. This method can be applied across disciplines, including developmental and clinical research.

Behavioral sciences applied to acute care teams: a research agenda for the years ahead by a European research network.

BACKGROUND: Multi-disciplinary behavioral research on acute care teams has focused on understanding how teams work and on identifying behaviors characteristic of efficient and effective team performance. We aimed to define important knowledge gaps and establish a research agenda for the years ahead of prioritized research questions in this field of applied health research. METHODS: In the first step, high-priority research questions were generated by a small highly specialized group of 29 experts in the field, recruited from the multinational and multidisciplinary "Behavioral Sciences applied to Acute care teams and Surgery (BSAS)" research network - a cross-European, interdisciplinary network of researchers from social sciences as well as from the medical field committed to understanding the role of behavioral sciences in the context of acute care teams. A consolidated list of 59 research questions was established. In the second step, 19 experts attending the 2020 BSAS annual conference quantitatively rated the importance of each research question based on four criteria - usefulness, answerability, effectiveness, and translation into practice. In the third step, during half a day of the BSAS conference, the same group of 19 experts discussed the prioritization of the research questions in three online focus group meetings and established recommendations. RESULTS: Research priorities identified were categorized into six topics: (1) interventions to improve team process; (2) dealing with and implementing new technologies; (3) understanding and measuring team processes; (4) organizational aspects impacting teamwork; (5) training and health professions education; and (6) organizational and patient safety culture in the healthcare domain. Experts rated the first three topics as particularly relevant in terms of research priorities; the focus groups identified specific research needs within each topic. CONCLUSIONS: Based on research priorities within the BSAS community and the broader field of applied health sciences identified through this work, we advocate for the prioritization for funding in these areas.

Changing the guard: Organizational science and social psychology in the US army.

The US Army employed organizational and behavioral sciences in the context of the emerging Postindustrial political economy to shape its new strategic thought in the 1980s. This article examines how a group of military intellectuals in the Army applied ideas from these sciences to promote officer decision-making and decentralization while maintaining the Army's culture and ethics. They had significant reservations about bringing new ideas from the social sciences into the Army because Robert McNamara's modern cybernetic strategy had scarred the Army's morale and sense of self during the Vietnam War. Instead, the intellectuals carefully adapted ideas into the Army with an unsentimental attitude as it emerged from its post-Vietnam decline so it could fight complex maneuver warfare. Their strategic thought in the late Cold War made the Army a flexible global-spanning force for the unipolar moment in the 1990s and early 2000s.

A synthesis of evidence for policy from behavioural science during COVID-19.

Scientific evidence regularly guides policy decisions1, with behavioural science increasingly part of this process2. In April 2020, an influential paper3 proposed 19 policy recommendations ('claims') detailing how evidence from behavioural science could contribute to efforts to reduce impacts and end the COVID-19 pandemic. Here we assess 747 pandemic-related research articles that empirically investigated those claims. We report the scale of evidence and whether evidence supports them to indicate applicability for policymaking. Two independent teams, involving 72 reviewers, found evidence for 18 of 19 claims, with both teams finding evidence supporting 16 (89%) of those 18 claims. The strongest evidence supported claims that anticipated culture, polarization and misinformation would be associated with policy effectiveness. Claims suggesting trusted leaders and positive social norms increased adherence to behavioural interventions also had strong empirical support, as did appealing to social consensus or bipartisan agreement. Targeted language in messaging yielded mixed effects and there were no effects for highlighting individual benefits or protecting others. No available evidence existed to assess any distinct differences in effects between using the terms 'physical distancing' and 'social distancing'. Analysis of 463 papers containing data showed generally large samples; 418 involved human participants with a mean of 16,848 (median of 1,699). That statistical power underscored improved suitability of behavioural science research for informing policy decisions. Furthermore, by implementing a standardized approach to evidence selection and synthesis, we amplify broader implications for advancing scientific evidence in policy formulation and prioritization.

Putting the power of behavior analysis in the hands of nonbehavioral professionals: Toward a blueprint for dissemination†.

Behavior analysts have much to offer nonbehavioral professionals who work with the communities that we serve. Successful dissemination of behavior-analytic technologies to these professionals could potentially improve their practice. Although the literature contains some exemplary examples of successful dissemination, our discipline would benefit from a blueprint for conducting this important work. In this article, I share our experiences disseminating behavioral technologies to educators, law enforcement officers, and health care providers who engage with neurodiverse individuals. These experiences form the basis of a recommended blueprint for dissemination, which awaits empirical support. After describing this tentative blueprint, I provide suggestions for future research on how best to disseminate our technologies to nonbehavioral professionals, the ideal content of those dissemination activities, and the conditions under which professionals may be more likely to embed our technologies into their best practices.

Annual progress report 2023: Behavioural and cultural insights at the WHO Regional Office for Europe

This document reports highlights related to behavioural and cultural insights (BCI) at the WHO Regional Office for Europe in 2023. In September 2022, Member States of the WHO European Region unanimously adopted a regional resolution and 5-year action framework for BCI for health, highlighting five strategic commitments. In 2023, for the first time, countries1 reported on their use of BCI in health across the five commitments, and throughout the year the WHO Regional Office for Europe collaborated closely with Member States and partners to advance the implementation of these commitments. This involved the planning and initiating of BCI research and interventions together with several countries with the aim of creating more people-centred health policies, services and communication, and improving health outcomes. Several trainings and in-country workshops were organized to build capacity and strengthen advocacy for BCI implementation across the Region. This work was delivered by the BCI Unit and other technical units in close collaboration with country experts, stakeholders, partner organizations and colleagues in WHO country and field offices, geographically dispersed offices and headquarters.

Руководство по адаптации программ здравоохранения: использование анализа поведенческих и культурных факторов с целью адаптации мер политики, услуг и коммуникации, связанных со здоровьем, к потребностям и условиям жизни людей и сообществ

Некоторые из наиболее актуальных проблем в области здравоохранения напрямую связаны с поведением людей.К таким проблемам относятся в том числе чрезмерное использование антибиотиков, употребление алкогольной и табачной продукции, недостаточно высокий охват вакцинацией и скринингами на онкологические заболевания, отказ от безопасного поведению в условиях пандемии или в области репродуктивного здоровья, а также низкая приверженность режимам лечения диабета и сердечно-сосудистых заболеваний. Все перечисленное создает существенную нагрузку на системы здравоохранения,а также негативно влияет на здоровье и благополучие людей. Для решения этих проблем требуется принятие мер, основанных на фактических данныхи учитывающих понимание как поведениялюдей в указанных ситуациях, связанных со здоровьем, так и культурных особенностей, и взаимодействие со всеми вовлеченными в процесс людьми. Связанные со здоровьем услуги, меры политики и коммуникациямогут быть адаптированы за счет применения фактических данных, моделей и методов из таких областей знания, как поведенческие науки и культурология,что позволяет улучшить результаты осуществления таких мер. В качестве способа достижения этой цели в настоящем руководстве представлен метод адаптации программ здравоохранения (АПЗ), который предназначен для органов здравоохраненияи для экспертов, планирующих применение анализа поведенческих и культурных факторов (АПКФ) в области здравоохранения. Метод АПЗ состоит из четырех этапов, предусматривающих осуществление ряда шагов, и опирается на специальную теоретическую модель и концептуальную основу. Прилагаемое к настоящему документу практическое руководство содержит полезные идеи и упражнения, дополняющие собой предлагаемый материал. Метод АПЗ может применяться к любым моделям поведения в отношении здоровья и любым группам населения.