Individual and generational value change in an adult population, a 12-year longitudinal panel study.

A long-standing conundrum is whether age differences in personality are due to generation, or internal change with age. Using a representative sample from The Netherlands (N = 1599; aged 16-84 at the start), the current research focuses on human values (an important aspect of personality), following the same individuals for 12 years. We distinguish four generations, Silent-generation, Baby-boomers, Generation-X and Millennials. We found clear differences across generations in human values, with Millennials, e.g., valuing hedonism more than all other generations. Furthermore, value change over time was mainly evident in Millennials. Some values (achievement and conformity) were stable within individuals and between generations. Change over time across most values occurred mainly in Millennials, but not for all values. Some values were stable in adults (e.g., hedonism, conformity) while other values still increased (e.g., security, self-direction) or decreased (e.g., power, stimulation) in importance. In adults older than Millennials change decreased and change was absent in the oldest generation. Hence, age differences in values seem both due to generation, as well as internal change, although the latter mainly in young adults. These value changes over time may have implications for developments in societal values in the long run.

Resilience of people with chronic medical conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic: a 1-year longitudinal prospective survey.

BACKGROUNDS: Individuals with chronic medical conditions are considered highly exposed to COVID-19 pandemic stress, but emerging evidence is demonstrating that resilience is common even among them. We aimed at identifying sustained resilient outcomes and their predictors in chronically ill people during the first year of the pandemic. METHODS: This international 4-wave 1-year longitudinal online survey included items on socio-demographic characteristics, economic and living situation, lifestyle and habits, pandemic-related issues, and history of mental disorders. Adherence to and approval of imposed restrictions, trust in governments and in scientific community during the pandemic were also investigated. The following tools were administered: the Patient Health Questionnaire, the Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale, the PTSD Checklist DSM-5, the Oslo Social Support Scale, the Padua Inventory, and the Portrait Values Questionnaire. RESULTS: One thousand fifty-two individuals reporting a chronic condition out of 8011 total participants from 13 countries were included in the study, and 965 had data available for the final model. The estimated probability of being "sustained-resilient" was 34%. Older male individuals, participants employed before and during the pandemic or with perceived social support were more likely to belong to the sustained-resilience group. Loneliness, a previous mental disorder, high hedonism, fear of COVID-19 contamination, concern for the health of loved ones, and non-approving pandemic restrictions were predictors of not-resilient outcomes in our sample. CONCLUSIONS: We found similarities and differences from established predictors of resilience and identified some new ones specific to pandemics. Further investigation is warranted and could inform the design of resilience-building interventions in people with chronic diseases.

Health and Culture: The Association between Healthcare Preferences for Non-Acute Conditions, Human Values and Social Norms.

Preference for professional vs. non-professional or informal healthcare for non-acute medical situations influences healthcare use and varies strongly across countries. Important individual and country-level drivers of these preferences may be human values (the fundamental values that individuals hold and guide their behavior) and country-level characteristics such as social tightness (societal pressure for "acceptable" behavior). The aim of this study was to examine the relation of these individual and country-level characteristics with healthcare preferences. We examined European Social Survey data from 23,312 individuals in 16 European countries, using a multi-level, random effect approach, including individual and country-level factors. Healthcare preferences were explained by both human values (i.e., Schwartz values) and societal tightness (i.e., tightness-looseness scores by Gelfand). Stronger conservation increased, whereas self-transcendence and openness to change decreased preference for professional healthcare. In socially tight countries, we found a higher preference for professional healthcare. Furthermore, we found interactions between social tightness and human values. These results suggest that professional healthcare preference is related to both people's values and societal tightness. This improved understanding is useful for both predicting and channeling healthcare seeking behavior across and within nations.