The "Self" under COVID-19: Social role disruptions, self-authenticity and present-focused coping.

Social role disruption is a state involving upheaval of social identities, routines and responsibilities. Such disruption is presently occurring at a global scale due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which poses a threat not only to health and security but also to the social roles that underlie people's daily lives. Our collective response to combat the virus entails, for example, parents homeschooling children, friends socializing online, and employees working from home. While these collective efforts serve the greater good, people's social roles now lack continuity from what was authentic to the roles before the pandemic began. This, we argue, takes a psychological toll. Individuals feel inauthentic, or alienated and out-of-touch from their "true" selves, to the extent their social roles undergo change. As evidence, we report survey (Studies 1 & 4) and experimental (Studies 2 & 3) evidence that COVID-19-related role changes indeed increase inauthenticity. This effect occurs independent of (a) how positively/negatively people feel about COVID-19 (Study 2) and (b) how positively/negatively people feel about the role change itself (Studies 3 & 4). Moreover, we identify two moderators of this effect. First, this effect occurs when (and ostensibly because) the social roles undergoing change are central to an individual's sense of self (Study 2). Second, this effect depends on an individual's temporal perspective. People can safeguard their self-authenticity in the face of changing social roles if they stay focused on the here-and-now (the present and immediate future), rather than focusing on the past (pre-COVID-19) or future (post-COVID-19) (Studies 3 & 4). This advantage for present-focused coping is observed in both the U.S.A. (Study 3) and Hong Kong (Study 4). We suggest that the reason people feel more authentically themselves when they maintain a present focus is because doing so makes the discontinuity of their social roles less salient.

The schema-driven chameleon: how mimicry affects executive and self-regulatory resources.

The authors propose that behavioral mimicry is guided by schemas that enable efficient social coordination. If mimicry is schema driven, then the operation of these schemas should be disrupted if partners behave in counternormative ways, such as mimicking people they generally would not or vice versa, rendering social interaction inefficient and demanding more executive and self-regulatory resources. To test this hypothesis, Experiments 1-3 used a resource-depletion paradigm in which participants performed a resource-demanding task after interacting with a confederate who mimicked them or did not mimic them. Experiment 1 demonstrated impaired task performance among participants who were not mimicked by a peer. Experiments 2 and 3 replicated this effect and also demonstrated a significant reversal in social contexts where mimicry is counternormative, suggesting that inefficiency emerges from schema inconsistency, not from the absence of mimicry per se. Experiment 4 used a divided attention paradigm and found that resources are taxed throughout schema-inconsistent interactions. These findings suggest that much-needed resources are preserved when the amount of mimicry displayed by interacting individuals adheres to norms, whereas resources are depleted when mimicry norms are violated.

High-maintenance interaction: inefficient social coordination impairs self-regulation.

Tasks requiring interpersonal coordination permeate all spheres of life. Although social coordination is sometimes efficient and effortless (low maintenance), at other times it is inefficient and effortful (high maintenance). Across 5 studies, participants experienced either a high- or a low-maintenance interaction with a confederate before engaging in an individual-level task requiring self-regulation. Self-regulation was operationalized with measures of (a) preferences for a challenging task with high reward potential over an easy task with low reward potential (Study 1) and (b) task performance (anagram performance in Study 1, Graduate Record Exam performance in Studies 2 and 3, physical stamina in Study 4, and fine motor control in Study 5). Results uniformly supported the hypothesis that experiencing high-maintenance interaction impairs one's self-regulatory success on subsequent, unrelated tasks. These effects were not mediated through participants' conscious processes and emerged even with a nonconscious manipulation of high-maintenance interaction.