"I Was Given Three Marks and Told to Buy a Porsche"-Supervisors' Experiences of Leading Psychosocial Safety Climate and Team Psychological Safety in a Remote Academic Setting.

This study examines leading psychosocial safety climate (PSC) within the organization and psychological safety in teams in remote work conditions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. These topical working life phenomena have an essential role in health, well-being and productivity in today's working life, but they have rarely been studied in remote work context. A total of 26 supervisors and leaders at three Finnish universities participated in semi-structured interviews. The data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis, resulting in four main categories: supportive and challenging aspects of leading psychological safety and well-being, supportive and challenging aspects of organizational psychosocial safety climate leadership, support for working as a supervisor, and characteristics specific to working in academia. The results indicate that leading psychological safety remotely requires more time, deliberation and intentionality than when working face to face, and that the role of remote interaction is underlined in it. As to PSC, it is important to improve the cohesion in leading psychological safety and health in academic organizations. How PSC is led in the organizations affects not only the general psychosocial working conditions, but also the possibilities for good leadership of psychological safety in smaller units in the organization. The study makes a novel contribution especially in understanding (1) leadership of PSC and psychological safety in remote work conditions, and (2) the reciprocal relations between leading psychological safety and well-being at the organizational level and the team level.

Loneliness and Well-Being during the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Moderating Roles of Personal, Social and Organizational Resources on Perceived Stress and Exhaustion among Finnish University Employees.

The aim of this study is to investigate whether personal, social and organizational level resources can buffer against the negative effects of perceived loneliness on stress and exhaustion. The data was collected from Finnish university employees (n = 1463) in autumn 2020 via an electronic survey. Of the respondents, about 78% were working remotely, and 64% were female. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses were used to analyze the main and moderating (i.e., buffering) effects. The results indicated that perceived loneliness was directly and positively associated with stress and exhaustion. Further, as hypothesized, personal resilience moderated the relationship between loneliness and stress and exhaustion, and organizational support moderated the relationship between loneliness and stress. Unexpectedly, organizational support did not moderate the loneliness-exhaustion relationship. Moreover, a sense of social belonging was not associated with stress and exhaustion, nor did it moderate loneliness and well-being relationships. The results demonstrate the importance of personal resilience and organizational support in enhancing well-being in organizations during the COVID-19 pandemic. Future research directions and practical ways to promote resilience and to increase organizational support are discussed.

Barriers to climate-friendly food choices among young adults in Finland.

The aim of the study was to examine how young adults in Finland perceive barriers to climate-friendly food choices and how these barriers are associated with their choices. The participants were 350 university students of the social and behavioral sciences who completed a questionnaire during class. The study found that the barriers the participants perceived as being the most relevant were different from those that were associated with the omission of climate-friendly food choices. High prices were perceived as the most relevant barrier, but were only weakly associated with the participants' food choices. Instead, habit and disbelief in the effects of food consumption on the climate were found to be the barriers that had the greatest association with climate-friendly choices. Moreover, women considered high prices and poor supply more important compared to men, whereas men considered disbelief and habit more important. In addition, vegetarians perceived fewer barriers than those who followed other diets. The findings increase our understanding of young adults' perceptions of barriers to climate-friendly food choices, as well as their effects.

Moral intensity and climate-friendly food choices.

By changing individual food consumption patterns, it might be possible to reduce greenhouse gas emissions associated with climate change. The aim of the current study was to examine how perceptions of the moral intensity of climate change are related to climate friendly-food choices. The participants were 350 Finnish university students in the social and behavioral sciences who completed a questionnaire during class. The results indicated that moral perceptions mainly affected the moral evaluation and intentions to make climate-friendly food choices. We suggest that the results can be used to promote climate-friendly food choices, for example, by increasing the recognition of climate change as a moral imperative and by combining environmental motives with other relevant food choice motives.

Ethical and unethical food. Social representations among Finnish, Danish and Italian students.

The consumption of ethical food is an area of major growth. The aim of the current study was to identify ethical concerns regarding food. University students (N=403) from Finland, Denmark and Italy completed a word association task, in which the given stimulus words were "ethical food" and "unethical food". The data was first analysed qualitatively. Next, the most relevant, core categories were identified based on the frequency, rank and contextual stability. The results indicated that fourteen categories reflect the content and nature of ethical thinking with respect to food. The identified categories were required/prohibited food, natural/unnatural, local/global, healthy/unhealthy, equality/inequality, good animal welfare/poor animal welfare, rules and descriptions. In all countries, the core categories emerging from the stimulus word "ethical food" were the required food and the natural, while the core category identified from the stimulus word "unethical food" was the prohibited food. The most prevalent differences between the countries concerned the role of health, country of origin and the descriptions. In conclusion, various ethical aspects are considered when food is evaluated in ethical terms, but the relevance of these aspects differ, even in the European context.