Family still matters: Human social motivation across 42 countries during a global pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic caused drastic social changes for many people, including separation from friends and coworkers, enforced close contact with family, and reductions in mobility. Here we assess the extent to which people's evolutionarily-relevant basic motivations and goals-fundamental social motives such as Affiliation and Kin Care-might have been affected. To address this question, we gathered data on fundamental social motives in 42 countries (N = 15,915) across two waves, including 19 countries (N = 10,907) for which data were gathered both before and during the pandemic (pre-pandemic wave: 32 countries, N = 8998; 3302 male, 5585 female; M age  = 24.43, SD = 7.91; mid-pandemic wave: 29 countries, N = 6917; 2249 male, 4218 female; M age  = 28.59, SD = 11.31). Samples include data collected online (e.g., Prolific, MTurk), at universities, and via community sampling. We found that Disease Avoidance motivation was substantially higher during the pandemic, and that most of the other fundamental social motives showed small, yet significant, differences across waves. Most sensibly, concern with caring for one's children was higher during the pandemic, and concerns with Mate Seeking and Status were lower. Earlier findings showing the prioritization of family motives over mating motives (and even over Disease Avoidance motives) were replicated during the pandemic. Finally, well-being remained positively associated with family-related motives and negatively associated with mating motives during the pandemic, as in the pre-pandemic samples. Our results provide further evidence for the robust primacy of family-related motivations even during this unique disruption of social life.

How are you holding up? Personality, cognitive and social predictors of a perceived shift in subjective well-being during COVID-19 pandemic.

While well-being is known to be mainly predicted by relatively stable personality traits and demographic factors, under circumstances of the current COVID-19 pandemic, the role of these predictors may be attenuated, and more situational factors may come into play. In the present study, we examined those relatively stable predictors of well-being along with COVID-19 specific factors, such as the perception of health and economic threat, unrealistic optimism, lack of control, trust in government regulations, and the endorsement of conspiracy beliefs. The data collection took place in early November 2020, when the second wave in Slovakia started to gain momentum and a strict lockdown was issued. Slovak adults (N = 1020) reported their current positive and negative affect and current, as well as estimated pre-pandemic and predicted future life satisfaction. The results showed that positive and negative affect was predicted mainly by extraversion and negative emotionality. On the other hand, life satisfaction, and its perceived change from before the pandemic and in three months, was predicted mainly by COVID-19 factors, especially perceived economic threat, unrealistic optimism, and trust in governmental regulations. We discuss the importance of these factors when considering the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on peoples' well-being.

Big Five predictors of pandemic-related behavior and emotions in the first and second COVID-19 pandemic wave in Slovakia.

This study explores the effect of Big Five personality traits on behavioral and emotional responses to the COVID-19 pandemic. Personality traits of 248 Slovak persons were assessed twice before the pandemic using the Big Five Inventory 2. Behavioral and emotional responses to the pandemic were collected during the first and second pandemic wave (April and September 2020). The results showed a statistically significant decrease in all response domains and in COVID-19 fear between the first and the second pandemic wave, suggesting that psychological adaptation to the pandemic occurred during the interim period. The results identified several meaningful links between the traits and pandemic-related behavior and emotions, especially for neuroticism, extraversion, and conscientiousness. However, the effects of personality were higher for the first pandemic wave, suggesting that these effects vary across time probably because of changes in pandemic perception in the society.

Conspire to one's own detriment: Strengthening HPV Program Support Through Debunking Epistemically Suspect Beliefs.

The study experimentally tested an intervention that debunks epistemically suspect beliefs about vaccines. After answering questions about pre-existing epistemically suspect beliefs (irrational health beliefs and conspiracy mentality), 565 participants were randomly assigned into one of three conditions and exposed either to neutral information about domestic animals, salient epistemically suspect content about vaccination or an intervention that debunks epistemically suspect beliefs about vaccination. Afterwards, the participants answered questions about vaccination-related conspiracy narratives (manipulation check), vaccination attitudes, intentions to vaccinate against HPV, support for an HPV vaccination programme and intentions to seek health guidance. Although the intervention demonstrated the potential to inhibit the endorsement of conspiracy narratives, we found no differences in the other outcome variables. Nevertheless, across the conditions, pre-existing epistemically suspect beliefs were associated with less favourable attitudes towards vaccination, lower intentions to vaccinate against HPV, less support for the vaccination programme and lower intentions to seek health guidance. The results indicate that debunking may be futile in curbing long-term negative impacts associated with epistemically suspect beliefs, and they contribute to the debate about assessing the effectiveness of interventions related to highly controversial topics such as vaccination. The study enhances understanding of persistent adverse impacts that epistemically suspect beliefs may have on public health outcomes.

On the relationship between valence and arousal in samples across the globe.

Affect is involved in many psychological phenomena, but a descriptive structure, long sought, has been elusive. Valence and arousal are fundamental, and a key question-the focus of the present study-is the relationship between them. Valence is sometimes thought to be independent of arousal, but, in some studies (representing too few societies in the world) arousal was found to vary with valence. One common finding is that arousal is lowest at neutral valence and increases with both positive and negative valence: a symmetric V-shaped relationship. In the study reported here of self-reported affect during a remembered moment (N = 8,590), we tested the valence-arousal relationship in 33 societies with 25 different languages. The two most common hypotheses in the literature-independence and a symmetric V-shaped relationship-were not supported. With data of all samples pooled, arousal increased with positive but not negative valence. Valence accounted for between 5% (Finland) and 43% (China Beijing) of the variance in arousal. Although there is evidence for a structural relationship between the two, there is also a large amount of variability in this relation. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Fundamental social motives measured across forty-two cultures in two waves.

How does psychology vary across human societies? The fundamental social motives framework adopts an evolutionary approach to capture the broad range of human social goals within a taxonomy of ancestrally recurring threats and opportunities. These motives-self-protection, disease avoidance, affiliation, status, mate acquisition, mate retention, and kin care-are high in fitness relevance and everyday salience, yet understudied cross-culturally. Here, we gathered data on these motives in 42 countries (N = 15,915) in two cross-sectional waves, including 19 countries (N = 10,907) for which data were gathered in both waves. Wave 1 was collected from mid-2016 through late 2019 (32 countries, N = 8,998; 3,302 male, 5,585 female; Mage = 24.43, SD = 7.91). Wave 2 was collected from April through November 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic (29 countries, N = 6,917; 2,249 male, 4,218 female; Mage = 28.59, SD = 11.31). These data can be used to assess differences and similarities in people's fundamental social motives both across and within cultures, at different time points, and in relation to other commonly studied cultural indicators and outcomes.