Delineating between scientism and science enthusiasm: Challenges in measuring scientism and the development of novel scale.

Scientism proposes science to be an all-powerful human enterprise, able to answer not only all practical but also philosophical or moral questions. We are taking a psychological approach to scientism, studying uncritical trust in science and uncritical trust in scientists as a part of a unique attitudinal tendency. Our novel measure assesses both kinds of trust through short Thurstone scales allowing us to establish a clear threshold for endorsing scientism, thus effectively delineating it from science enthusiasm, which previous instruments were unable to do. We built and refined a novel scale through five stages in which we consulted relevant literature, experts, and laypeople. We demonstrated that uncritical trust in science and scientists are interrelated, yet distinct constructs. As expected, these two subscales positively correlated with dogmatism, scientific knowledge, and overclaiming, but not with knowledge overestimation. The results suggest the new instrument is reliable, valid, and suitable for the lay public.

Prevalence of questionable health behaviours in Serbia and their psychological roots: protocol for a nationally representative survey.

INTRODUCTION: We will launch a national survey in Serbia to document the prevalence of two types of questionable health behaviours: (1) intentional non-adherence to medical recommendations and (2) use of traditional, complementary and alternative medicine practices, as well as the relation between the two. We will also investigate their psychological roots, including (a) 'distal' predictors such as HEXACO personality traits (plus Disintegration) and thinking dispositions (rational/experiential thinking and cognitive reflexivity), and (b) 'proximal' predictors under the umbrella 'irrational mindset' (set of unfounded beliefs consisting of conspiratorial thinking, superstition, magical health beliefs as well as selected cognitive biases), which have more content-wise overlap with the health behaviours. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this cross-sectional study, a research agency will collect data from a nationally representative sample (n=1043; age 18-75 years; estimated start/end-June/November 2021) recruited online (approximately, 70% of the sample, aged 18-54; 11 years) and face-to-face (approximately, 30% of the sample, aged 55-75 years). Participants will complete a battery of tests assessing questionable health behaviours, basic personality traits, thinking dispositions, irrational mindset, sociopolitical beliefs, sociodemographic and health-related variables. Prevalence rates will be calculated using descriptive statistics. To explore the relation between (psychological) predictors and questionable health behaviours, we will use hierarchical regression and partial mediation models (path analysis or full SEM models). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical Committees of the Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade (#935/1), Faculty of Special Education and Rehabilitation (#139/1) and Faculty of Media and Communications (#228) approved the protocol. Only participants who provide informed consent will participate in the study. A research report based on the study results will be submitted to peer-reviewed journals and results will be made available to stakeholders through reports on the project website https://reasonforhealth.f.bg.ac.rs/en/ and disseminated via social media. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05808660.

I trust my immunity more than your vaccines: "Appeal to nature" bias strongly predicts questionable health behaviors in the COVID-19 pandemic.

Health care policies often rely on public cooperation, especially during a health crisis. However, a crisis is also a period of uncertainty and proliferation of health-related advice: while some people adhere to the official recommendations, others tend to avoid them and resort to non-evidence based, pseudoscientific practices. People prone to the latter are often the ones endorsing a set of epistemically suspect beliefs, with two being particularly relevant: conspiratorial pandemic-related beliefs, and the appeal to nature bias regarding COVID-19 (i.e., trusting natural immunity to fight the pandemic). These in turn are rooted in trust in different epistemic authorities, seen as mutually exclusive: trust in science and trust in the "wisdom of the common man". Drawing from two nationally representative probability samples, we tested a model in which trust in science/wisdom of the common man predicted COVID-19 vaccination status (Study 1, N = 1001) or vaccination status alongside use of pseudoscientific health practices (Study 2, N = 1010), through COVID-19 conspiratorial beliefs and the appeal to nature bias regarding COVID-19. As expected, epistemically suspect beliefs were interrelated, related to vaccination status, and to both types of trust. Moreover, trust in science had both a direct and indirect effect on vaccination status through both types of epistemically suspect beliefs. Trust in the wisdom of the common man had only an indirect effect on vaccination status. Contrary to the way they are typically portrayed, the two types of trust were unrelated. These results were largely replicated in the second study, in which we added pseudoscientific practices as an outcome; trust in science and the wisdom of the common man contributed to their prediction only indirectly, through epistemically suspect beliefs. We offer recommendations on how to make use of different types of epistemic authorities and how to tackle unfounded beliefs in communication during a health crisis.

Negativity in online news coverage of vaccination rates in Serbia: a content analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This content analysis study explored how online news media communicates and frames vaccination rates and herd immunity (the effect where enough people are immune, the virus is contained). METHODS: We analyzed 160 vaccination-related news stories by nine highest-trafficked news websites in Serbia, published July-December 2017, around the start of the measles outbreak. We coded both the news story as a whole and every vaccination-rate mention (N = 339). RESULTS: News stories framed current vaccination rates and changes in them in a predominantly negative way (175/241 and 67/98 mentions, respectively) (e.g., "only 50% vaccinated", "fewer parents vaccinating their children"), especially when referring to the measles vaccine (202/262 mentions). A total of 23/86 of news stories mentioning vaccination rates did not provide any numerical values. Reference groups for vaccination rates were rarely specified. Out of the 32 news stories mentioning herd immunity, 11 explained the effect. CONCLUSIONS: Even routine communication of vaccination rates can be biased through negative frames and imprecise descriptions. Lamenting low immunization rates could activate a negative descriptive social norm ("many people are not getting vaccinated"), which may be especially ill-advised in the absence of an explanation of the social benefit of achieving herd immunity through vaccination.

Experimental and cross-cultural evidence that parenthood and parental care motives increase social conservatism.

Differences in attitudes on social issues such as abortion, immigration and sex are hugely divisive, and understanding their origins is among the most important tasks facing human behavioural sciences. Despite the clear psychological importance of parenthood and the motivation to provide care for children, researchers have only recently begun investigating their influence on social and political attitudes. Because socially conservative values ostensibly prioritize safety, stability and family values, we hypothesized that being more invested in parental care might make socially conservative policies more appealing. Studies 1 (preregistered; n = 376) and 2 (n = 1924) find novel evidence of conditional experimental effects of a parenthood prime, such that people who engaged strongly with a childcare manipulation showed an increase in social conservatism. Studies 3 (n = 2610, novel data from 10 countries) and 4 (n = 426 444, World Values Survey data) find evidence that both parenthood and parental care motivation are associated with increased social conservatism around the globe. Further, most of the positive association globally between age and social conservatism is accounted for by parenthood. These findings support the hypothesis that parenthood and parental care motivation increase social conservatism.

Antecedents and consequences of COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs: A systematic review.

RATIONALE: Belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories can have severe consequences; it is therefore crucial to understand this phenomenon, in its similarities with general conspiracy belief, but also in how it is context-dependent. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review is to provide a comprehensive overview of the available research on COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs and to synthesise this research to make it widely accessible. METHODS: We present a synthesis of COVID-19 conspiracy belief research from 85 international articles, identified and appraised through a systematic review, in line with contemporary protocols and guidelines for systematic reviews. RESULTS: We identify a number of potential antecedents of COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs (individual differences, personality traits, demographic variables, attitudes, thinking styles and biases, group identity, trust in authorities, and social media use), their consequences (protective behaviours, self-centred and misguided behaviours such as hoarding and pseudoscientific health practices, vaccination intentions, psychological wellbeing, and other negative social consequences such as discrimination and violence), and the effect sizes of their relations with the conspiracy beliefs. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that understanding both the potential antecedents and consequences of conspiracy beliefs and how they are context-dependent is highly important to tackle them, whether in the COVID-19 pandemic or future threats, such as that of climate change.

Conspiracy mentality and political orientation across 26 countries.

People differ in their general tendency to endorse conspiracy theories (that is, conspiracy mentality). Previous research yielded inconsistent findings on the relationship between conspiracy mentality and political orientation, showing a greater conspiracy mentality either among the political right (a linear relation) or amongst both the left and right extremes (a curvilinear relation). We revisited this relationship across two studies spanning 26 countries (combined N = 104,253) and found overall evidence for both linear and quadratic relations, albeit small and heterogeneous across countries. We also observed stronger support for conspiracy mentality among voters of opposition parties (that is, those deprived of political control). Nonetheless, the quadratic effect of political orientation remained significant when adjusting for political control deprivation. We conclude that conspiracy mentality is associated with extreme left- and especially extreme right-wing beliefs, and that this non-linear relation may be strengthened by, but is not reducible to, deprivation of political control.

Can 'we' share the contested territory with 'them'? Shared territorial ownership perceptions and reconciliation intentions in Kosovo.

Territorial ownership claims are central to many interethnic conflicts and can constitute an obstacle to conflict resolution and reconciliation. However, people in conflict areas might also have a perception that the territory simultaneously belongs to one's ingroup and the rival outgroup. We expected such perceptions of shared ownership to be related to higher reconciliation intentions. We examined this expectation in relation to the territory of Kosovo among random national samples of Albanians and Serbs from Kosovo, and Serbs from Serbia (Study 1, total N = 995). In general, participants perceived low levels of shared ownership, however, shared ownership perceptions were positively related to reconciliation intentions in Kosovo. In Study 2 (total N = 375), we experimentally manipulated shared ownership (vs. ingroup ownership) and found that shared ownership elicited stronger reconciliation intentions. It is concluded that fostering a sense of shared ownership can be important for improving intergroup relations in post-conflict settings.

Need satisfaction in intergroup contact: A multinational study of pathways toward social change.

What role does intergroup contact play in promoting support for social change toward greater social equality? Drawing on the needs-based model of reconciliation, we theorized that when inequality between groups is perceived as illegitimate, disadvantaged group members will experience a need for empowerment and advantaged group members a need for acceptance. When intergroup contact satisfies each group's needs, it should result in more mutual support for social change. Using four sets of survey data collected through the Zurich Intergroup Project in 23 countries, we tested several preregistered predictions, derived from the above reasoning, across a large variety of operationalizations. Two studies of disadvantaged groups (Ns = 689 ethnic minority members in Study 1 and 3,382 sexual/gender minorities in Study 2) support the hypothesis that, after accounting for the effects of intergroup contact and perceived illegitimacy, satisfying the need for empowerment (but not acceptance) during contact is positively related to support for social change. Two studies with advantaged groups (Ns = 2,937 ethnic majority members in Study 3 and 4,203 cis-heterosexual individuals in Study 4) showed that, after accounting for illegitimacy and intergroup contact, satisfying the need for acceptance (but also empowerment) is positively related to support for social change. Overall, findings suggest that intergroup contact is compatible with efforts to promote social change when group-specific needs are met. Thus, to encourage support for social change among both disadvantaged and advantaged group members, it is essential that, besides promoting mutual acceptance, intergroup contact interventions also give voice to and empower members of disadvantaged groups. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

A systematic review of narrative interventions: Lessons for countering anti-vaccination conspiracy theories and misinformation.

Even if a small portion of the population refuses vaccination due to anti-vaccination conspiracy theories or misinformation, this poses a threat to public health. We argue that addressing conspiracy theories with only corrective information is not enough. Instead, considering that they are complex narratives embedded in personal and cultural worldviews, they should be encountered with counternarratives. To identify existing narrative interventions aimed at countering anti-vaccination conspiracy theories and, more generally, map prerequisites for a narrative intervention to be successful, we present a systematic review of experimental effects of exposure to pro-vaccine narratives on a range of vaccination outcomes, based on 17 studies and 97 comparisons. We did not find any narrative interventions aimed directly at conspiracy theories. However, the review allowed us to make evidence-based recommendations for future research and for public communicators. This might help pro-vaccine communication match anti-vaccine communication in its potential to spread and go viral.

Irrational beliefs differentially predict adherence to guidelines and pseudoscientific practices during the COVID-19 pandemic.

In the coronavirus "infodemic," people are exposed to official recommendations but also to potentially dangerous pseudoscientific advice claimed to protect against COVID-19. We examined whether irrational beliefs predict adherence to COVID-19 guidelines as well as susceptibility to such misinformation. Irrational beliefs were indexed by belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories, COVID-19 knowledge overestimation, type I error cognitive biases, and cognitive intuition. Participants (N = 407) reported (1) how often they followed guidelines (e.g., handwashing, physical distancing), (2) how often they engaged in pseudoscientific practices (e.g., consuming garlic, colloidal silver), and (3) their intention to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Conspiratorial beliefs predicted all three outcomes in line with our expectations. Cognitive intuition and knowledge overestimation predicted lesser adherence to guidelines, while cognitive biases predicted greater adherence, but also greater use of pseudoscientific practices. Our results suggest an important relation between irrational beliefs and health behaviors, with conspiracy theories being the most detrimental.

Author Correction: A large-scale test of the link between intergroup contact and support for social change.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via a link at the top of the paper.

A large-scale test of the link between intergroup contact and support for social change.

Guided by the early findings of social scientists, practitioners have long advocated for greater contact between groups to reduce prejudice and increase social cohesion. Recent work, however, suggests that intergroup contact can undermine support for social change towards greater equality, especially among disadvantaged group members. Using a large and heterogeneous dataset (12,997 individuals from 69 countries), we demonstrate that intergroup contact and support for social change towards greater equality are positively associated among members of advantaged groups (ethnic majorities and cis-heterosexuals) but negatively associated among disadvantaged groups (ethnic minorities and sexual and gender minorities). Specification-curve analysis revealed important variation in the size-and at times, direction-of correlations, depending on how contact and support for social change were measured. This allowed us to identify one type of support for change-willingness to work in solidarity- that is positively associated with intergroup contact among both advantaged and disadvantaged group members.

How to address the caveat of avoiding direct contact: Reducing prejudice towards gay and lesbian people in five Balkan countries.

In the Balkans, contact with gays and lesbians is typically hostile or avoided. Drawing from probability samples of young people from five Balkan countries (N = 1046), we examined whether it is possible to transfer the effects of contact with other marginalized outgroups (largest ethnic minority in every country, Roma, the extremely poor and physically disabled) to acceptance of gays and lesbians (secondary outgroup), and whether this relationship could be explained by attitude generalization and increased intergroup trust. Path analyses supported the secondary transfer effect: it confirmed that, while controlling for direct contact, contact with other marginalized groups was related to more acceptance of a secondary group; this relationship was mediated by trust. This was found across all primary groups in the combined samples, while the effect varied for different groups in country samples. The results add to the value of intergroup contact as a mean of prejudice-reduction.

Irrational Beliefs.

Irrational beliefs are often used as an umbrella term that comprises a variety of psychological constructs: from specific cognitive biases to a wider class of epistemologically suspect beliefs (superstitions, paranormal and pseudoscientific beliefs, conspiracy theories etc.) or cognitive styles (analytical versus intuitive thinking), but also unsubstantiated self-related beliefs. This collection of papers illustrates this diversity well. Apart from the descriptive portion of the data, which has merit on its own, the authors provide important methodological innovations in the way these beliefs are measured, but also look deeper in their functionality and consequences.

How (Ir)rational Is it to Believe in Contradictory Conspiracy Theories?

There is evidence that not only believing in one conspiracy theory (CT) makes a person more probable to believe in others, however unrelated their content is, but that people can even believe in contradictory CTs about a single event. After piloting locally relevant conspiracy theories on a convenient Serbian speaking sample (N = 152), we sought to replicate this finding on a larger sample (N = 252), but introduced several changes. We differentiated necessarily and probably mutually exclusive CTs, and interviewed the participants who answered contradictory to understand the reasoning behind it. The participants were more prone to endorse probably than necessarily exclusive items (we registered positive correlations in former and no correlation or negative correlation in later). Two strategies enabled them to overcome the contradiction: (a) distilling the crucial content and downplaying other information and (b) treating the contradictory scenarios as possible versions of events. Taken together, these results indicate that participants are not as irrational as sometimes portrayed.

Support for collective action against refugees: The role of national, European, and global identifications, and autochthony beliefs.

To understand recent anti-refugee protests in Europe, we examined how different levels of inclusiveness of group identities (national, European, and global) are related to intentions to protest among native Europeans. We focused on the mediating role of autochthony (a belief that the first inhabitants of a territory are more entitled) and the moderating role of threat. Survey data from 11 European countries (N = 1,909) showed that national identification was positively associated with autochthony, and therefore, with the intention to protest against refugees. In contrast, global identification was related to lower protest intentions via lower autochthony. These paths were found only among Europeans who perceived refugees as a threat. European identification was not related to the endorsement of autochthony or to collective action. These findings indicate why and when majority members are willing to participate in collective action against refugees, and underscore the importance of global identification in the acceptance of refugees.

Not Only When Feeling Down: The Relationship Between Mood Intensity and Smoking Behavior.

BACKGROUND: There is substantial empirical evidence that negative mood triggers smoking behavior, and less support for the similar effect of positive mood. However, the relationship between the intensity of mood and smoking remains relatively under-researched. OBJECTIVES: The present study explored the association between mood intensity and smoking behavior. METHODS: Seventy-three ad libitum smokers recorded their mood and concurrent number of smoked cigarettes three times daily for one week using electronic diary application. Real time assessment in natural environment enabled greater reliability, validity and generalizability of the collected data. RESULTS: We analyzed results using within-subjects approach and obtained significant growth trend in smoking behavior that concurred with the increase of mood intensity-smokers tended to increase their consumption of cigarettes when they were feeling either happy or sad in comparison to the situation when they were in neutral mood. IMPORTANCE: These findings raise implications regarding the role of mood intensity in initiating smoking behavior.

Parasite stress and pathogen avoidance relate to distinct dimensions of political ideology across 30 nations.

People who are more avoidant of pathogens are more politically conservative, as are nations with greater parasite stress. In the current research, we test two prominent hypotheses that have been proposed as explanations for these relationships. The first, which is an intragroup account, holds that these relationships between pathogens and politics are based on motivations to adhere to local norms, which are sometimes shaped by cultural evolution to have pathogen-neutralizing properties. The second, which is an intergroup account, holds that these same relationships are based on motivations to avoid contact with outgroups, who might pose greater infectious disease threats than ingroup members. Results from a study surveying 11,501 participants across 30 nations are more consistent with the intragroup account than with the intergroup account. National parasite stress relates to traditionalism (an aspect of conservatism especially related to adherence to group norms) but not to social dominance orientation (SDO; an aspect of conservatism especially related to endorsements of intergroup barriers and negativity toward ethnic and racial outgroups). Further, individual differences in pathogen-avoidance motives (i.e., disgust sensitivity) relate more strongly to traditionalism than to SDO within the 30 nations.

When are support and opposition not opposites? Depth of processing as a moderator of the valence-framing effect.

Prior research has demonstrated the valence-framing effect, in which leading people to frame a preference negatively (e.g., 'I oppose Romney') yields stronger attitudes than does leading people to frame that same preference positively (e.g., 'I support Obama'). Three studies tested whether or not depth of processing (as operationalized by manipulations of motivation and ability to cognitively process) moderate the effect. The valence-framing effect was replicated, such that opposers manifested stronger attitudes than did supporters, but only when attitudes were relevant to the participants (Experiments 1 and 3), and when participants were not under cognitive load (Experiment 2). Our results thus identify depth of processing as an important moderator of the valence-framing effect and provide potential insight into the effect's mechanism.