Psychometric evaluation of the Trust in Science and Scientists Scale.

Reliable and valid measurement of trust in science and scientists is important. Assessing levels of such trust is important in determining attitudes and predicting behaviours in response to medical and scientific interventions targeted at managing public crises. However, trust is a complex phenomenon that has to be understood in relation to both distrust and mistrust. The Trust in Science and Scientists Scale has been adopted with increasing frequency in large-scale public health research. Detailed psychometric evaluation of the scale is overdue and makes meaningful comparisons between studies that use the scale difficult. Here, we examine the scale's dimensionality across five separate samples. We find that two factors emerge that are divided by their item polarity. Implications for scale use and trust in science measurement are discussed.

Identity resilience, science mistrust, COVID-19 risk and fear predictors of vaccine positivity and vaccination likelihood: A survey of UK and Portuguese samples.

Based on Identity Process Theory, we hypothesised that two elements of identity resilience (identity worth and identity continuity) differentially predict variance in COVID-19 fear and risk, science mistrust, vaccine positivity, and vaccination likelihood. Data from an online survey of 643 UK and 485 Portuguese adults collected during March 2021 showed the UK and Portuguese did not differ significantly on vaccination likelihood or identity resilience. UK respondents reported less science mistrust, COVID-19 risk, and fear, but higher vaccine positivity than the Portuguese. Identity worth and identity continuity differed between countries in their effects on science mistrust, COVID-19 fear, risk, vaccine positivity and vaccination likelihood. Science mistrust and COVID-19 fear proved key factors in predicting vaccine positivity and vaccination likelihood. We conclude the roles of discrete elements of identity resilience in health behaviour require further examination and action reducing prevalence of specific forms of science mistrust can improve vaccination likelihood.

The choice of response alternatives in COVID-19 social science surveys.

Social science research is key for understanding and for predicting compliance with COVID-19 guidelines, and this research relies on survey data. While much focus is on the survey question stems, less is on the response alternatives presented that both constrain responses and convey information about the assumed expectations of the survey designers. The focus here is on the choice of response alternatives for the types of behavioral frequency questions used in many COVID-19 and other health surveys. We examine issues with two types of response alternatives. The first are vague quantifiers, like "rarely" and "frequently." Using data from 30 countries from the Imperial COVID data hub, we show that the interpretation of these vague quantifiers (and their translations) depends on the norms in that country. If the mean amount of hand washing in a country is high, it is likely "frequently" corresponds to a higher numeric value for hand washing than if the mean in the country is low. The second type are sets of numeric alternatives and they can also be problematic. Using a US survey, respondents were randomly allocated to receive either response alternatives where most of the scale corresponds to low frequencies or where most of the scale corresponds to high frequencies. Those given the low frequency set provided lower estimates of the health behaviors. The choice of response alternatives for behavioral frequency questions can affect the estimates of health behaviors. How the response alternatives mold the responses should be taken into account for epidemiological modeling. We conclude with some recommendations for response alternatives for behavioral frequency questions in surveys.

Socio-economic inequalities in social network, loneliness and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, a focus on isolation and loneliness is important, especially as social distancing policies (which for some groups involve self-isolation or quarantine) are likely to accentuate these experiences and affect mental health. AIMS: This study focuses on socio-economic inequalities in social network, loneliness and mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Two-hundred and fourteen residents of Wandsworth, a South West London Borough in the United Kingdom completed an online cross-sectional survey on the impact of COVID-19 on mental health. Data were analysed using independent samples t-tests and multiple regression. RESULTS: Middle-aged people reported a less strong social network and more loneliness, anxiety and depression than younger people. People with a long-term health condition reported a less strong social network, more loneliness, more general practitioner (GP) and hospital visits, and poorer mental health than those with no long-term health conditions. People receiving State financial benefits reported less use of public spaces, a less strong social network, more loneliness, more GP and hospital visits and poorer mental health than those not receiving benefits. Greater neighbourhood identification was associated with a stronger social network and better mental health outcomes. Multiple regression analyses showed that, over and above loneliness, perceived personal risk of COVID-19 constitutes an additional precipitant for both depression and anxiety when controlling for other variables. CONCLUSION: As a novel stressor associated with the pandemic, the situational and involuntary perception of being at risk of COVID-19 may be stimulating anxiety and depressive symptomatology, which will need to be managed effectively as resurgences of the disease are predicted and communicated to the general public under growing mistrust and uncertainty.

The COVID-19 Own Risk Appraisal Scale (CORAS): Development and validation in two samples from the United Kingdom.

Perceived risk is an important determinant of the adoption of preventive behaviours. In this article, the psychometric properties of the COVID-19 Own Risk Appraisal Scale (CORAS), including its development and validation in two samples in the United Kingdom, are described. The CORAS is a measure of perceived personal risk of contracting the disease, incorporating primarily intuitive with some analytic risk estimates. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were performed on data from 470 participants in the United Kingdom who completed the CORAS, the Fear of COVID-19 Scale and the COVID-19 Preventive Behaviours Index. Results showed that a unidimensional, six-item model fits the data well, with satisfactory fit indices, internal consistency and high item loadings onto the factor. We found no statistically significant differences by age, gender or ethnicity. The CORAS correlated positively with the Fear of COVID-19 Scale and the COVID-19 Preventive Behaviours Index, suggesting good concurrent validity.

Social support, perceived risk and the likelihood of COVID-19 testing and vaccination: cross-sectional data from the United Kingdom.

Two samples of 227 and 214 adults completed surveys of social support, perceived risk of COVID-19 and COVID-19 preventive activity - in Study 1 likelihood of testing was examined and in Study 2 likelihood of both testing and vaccination were examined during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom. Path analysis showed, in Study 1, that access to help (as an indicator of social support) had a direct effect on likelihood of testing and indirect effects through self-efficacy, perceived risk and preventive behavior; and, in Study 2, that neighborhood identification (as an indicator of social support) had a direct effect on likelihood of testing and indirect effects on likelihood of both testing and vaccination through the mediators of strength of social network, loneliness, perceived risk of COVID-19, and preventive activity. Both studies suggest that level of social support (conceptualized in different ways) is an important determinant of COVID-19 testing and Study 2 shows it is also a determinant of likelihood of vaccination. As resurgences of COVID-19 occur, it will be necessary to monitor the likelihood of COVID-19 testing and vaccination behaviors and, especially, to promote confidence in the latter in individuals with decreased access to social support.

COVID-19 preventive behaviours in White British and Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) people in the UK.

A model of the effects of ethnicity, political trust, trust in science, perceived ingroup power, COVID-19 risk and fear of COVID-19 upon likelihood of COVID-19 preventive behaviour (CPB) is presented. The structural equation model was a good fit for survey data from 478 White British and Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) people. Ethnicity had a direct effect on CPB (BAME reported higher CPB) and an indirect effect on it through political trust, ingroup power, COVID-19 risk and trust in science. Ethnicity was not significantly related to COVID-19 fear. COVID-19 fear and trust in science were positively associated with CPB.

The COVID-19 Preventive Behaviors Index: Development and Validation in Two Samples From the United Kingdom.

Monitoring compliance with, and understanding the factors affecting, COVID-19 preventive behaviors requires a robust index of the level of subjective likelihood that the individual will engage in key COVID-19 preventive behaviors. In this article, the psychometric properties of the COVID-19 Preventive Behaviors Index (CPBI), including its development and validation in two samples in the United Kingdom, are described. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were performed on data from 470 participants in the United Kingdom who provided demographic information and completed the Fear of COVID-19 Scale, the COVID-19 Own Risk Appraisal Scale (CORAS) and the CPBI. Results showed that a unidimensional, 10-item model fits the data well, with satisfactory fit indices, internal consistency and high item loadings onto the factor. The CPBI correlated positively with both fear and perceived risk of COVID-19, suggesting good concurrent validity. The CPBI is a measure of the likelihood of engaging in preventive activity, rather than one of intention or actual action. It is adaptable enough to be used over time as a monitoring instrument by policy makers and a modeling tool by researchers.

Métodos de pesquisa em psicologia

Prefácio Como Usar este Livro PARTE 1 - As bases da Pesquisa Capítulo 1. Teoria, Método e Delineamento de Pesquisa Capítulo 2. Questões Práticas e Éticas do Projeto de Pesquisa Capítulo 3. Níveis de Mensuração Capítulo 4. O Método Experimental em Psicologia Capítulo 5. Modelos Quasi-Experimentais Capítulo 6. Levantamento e Amostragem PARTE 2 - Coleta de Dados Capítulo 7. Métodos Observacionais Capítulo 8. Métodos Psicofisiológicos Capítulo 9. Métodos Psicofísicos Capítulo 10. Utilizando Testes Psicométricos Capítulo 11. Delineamento de Questionário Capítulo 12. Métodos de Entrevista Capítulo 13. O Uso do Autorregistro: Métodos de Diário e de Narrativa Capítulo 14. Grupos Focais Capítulo 15. Pesquisa Etnográfica e Pesquisa-Ação PARTE 3 - Tratamento dos Dados Capítulo 16. Análise Fenomenológica Interpretativa Capítulo 17. A Teoria Fundamentada Capítulo 18. Análise do Discurso Capítulo 19. Princípios de Estatística Inferencial Capítulo 20. Introdução à Análise Multivariada de Dados Capítulo 21. Introdução à Modelagem de Equação Estrutural Capítulo 22. Metanálise Referências Índice

Métodos de pesquisa em psicologia / Research methods in psychology

Prefácio Como Usar este Livro PARTE 1 - As bases da Pesquisa Capítulo 1. Teoria, Método e Delineamento de Pesquisa Capítulo 2. Questões Práticas e Éticas do Projeto de Pesquisa Capítulo 3. Níveis de Mensuração Capítulo 4. O Método Experimental em Psicologia Capítulo 5. Modelos Quasi-Experimentais Capítulo 6. Levantamento e Amostragem PARTE 2 - Coleta de Dados Capítulo 7. Métodos Observacionais Capítulo 8. Métodos Psicofisiológicos Capítulo 9. Métodos Psicofísicos Capítulo 10. Utilizando Testes Psicométricos Capítulo 11. Delineamento de Questionário Capítulo 12. Métodos de Entrevista Capítulo 13. O Uso do Autorregistro: Métodos de Diário e de Narrativa Capítulo 14. Grupos Focais Capítulo 15. Pesquisa Etnográfica e Pesquisa-Ação PARTE 3 - Tratamento dos Dados Capítulo 16. Análise Fenomenológica Interpretativa Capítulo 17. A Teoria Fundamentada Capítulo 18. Análise do Discurso Capítulo 19. Princípios de Estatística Inferencial Capítulo 20. Introdução à Análise Multivariada de Dados Capítulo 21. Introdução à Modelagem de Equação Estrutural Capítulo 22. Metanálise Referências Índice.

Genetic testing and the relationship between specific and general self-efficacy.

The study examined the extent to which variations in health-specific self-efficacy could affect general self-efficacy. In a repeated measures design, 300 participants were administered an efficacy questionnaire, before and after an alleged news report, aimed at increasing or decreasing self-efficacy over genetic-testing decision making. The results found that self-efficacy over testing was significantly reduced after reading the negative news report in those participants who felt personal efficacy over testing decisions was important. Levels of general self-efficacy were also significantly decreased. The findings suggest that being denied control over a specific area of self-efficacy can have a wider impact, with a lack of perceived efficacy over testing decision making adversely impacting on levels of general well-being. The wider implications of this generalization effect and the processes involved in efficacy generalization are discussed.

Combining individuality and relatedness: representations of the person among the Anglican clergy.

Representations of the person and their significance for identity and action were studied in an interpretative phenomenological analysis of interviews with 42 Anglican clergymen and clergywomen. Participants portrayed the person as having an individual relationship with God and being essentially both unique and related to others; the latter themes supported the coexistence among these participants of both individualistic and relational values, which might be portrayed as either opposing or complementary. The analysis supported theorizing concepts of the person as socially constructed themata with broad implications for identity, values and action, but did not reflect common assumptions in cross-cultural psychology: cultural orientations vary within as well as between nations, and individualism and collectivism are not necessarily opposites. We argue for a more finely grained approach to the study of culture and personhood.

Stereotypes and crossed-category evaluations: the case of gender and science education.

A sample of UK adolescents (n = 1140), grouped by sex and liking of science, evaluated themselves, and girl and boy targets who did or did not like science, on masculine, feminine and gender non-specific traits. Contrary to sociological concerns about the masculine image and appeal of science, those who liked science more rated themselves more positively on feminine and gender non-specific-but not masculine-traits. The girl target was rated lower on feminine traits if she liked science, but the boy was rated higher on feminine traits if he liked science. Target ratings also showed in-group enhancement based on liking of science, and a 'black sheep' effect: those who liked science less discriminated against the same-sex target who liked science, especially on gender in-group relevant traits. We argue that gender differences in science education should be attributed partly to subjective group dynamics and not solely to images of science.