Blood donation motivators and barriers reported by young, first-time whole blood donors: Examining the association of reported motivators and barriers with subsequent donation behavior and potential sex, race, and ethnic group differences.

BACKGROUND: A greater understanding of young, first-time donor motivators and barriers is needed to address the ongoing challenge of retaining these essential donors. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: Structured interviews conducted with 508 young, first-time whole blood donors [66.1% female; Mean Age = 19.4 (SD = 2.5) years] were coded to identify reported motivators and barriers. Reported motivators and barriers were then examined for their association with attempted donation behavior over a 14-month follow-up, and for potential sex, race, and ethnic group differences in the frequency of endorsement. RESULTS: Prosocial motivation (e.g., altruism) was the most commonly reported motivator and fear (e.g., fainting, needles) was the most commonly reported barrier. Donation behavior was unrelated to reported motivators, but was significantly related to four reported barriers including fear of fainting/dizziness, fear of needles/pain, having personal commitments that conflict with donating, and perceiving oneself as unsuited to donate for health reasons. Sex, racial, and ethnic differences were noted with respect to the percentages of donors reporting several donation-related motivators and barriers. CONCLUSION: The present findings identify donation-related barriers that could be important targets to address in the effort to encourage new young donors and to retain these new donors for the long term. Importantly, these data also highlight the importance of considering individual differences in donor motivation as a function of sex, race, and ethnicity.

Research participants recruited using online labor markets may feign medical conditions and overreport symptoms: Caveat emptor.

OBJECTIVE: Over the last decade, the use of online labor markets to collect data in health science has grown exponentially. However, self-identification remains the most common method for recruiting specific clinical sub-populations, and this may adversely affect data validity among respondents motivated to feign a condition for financial gain. METHODS: Online respondents who professed taking medication for a specific medical condition (sample 1: diabetes: N = 307; sample 2: pain: N = 506) were asked to upload an image of their prescribed medication. These images were then evaluated to identify authentic and inauthentic responders based on the images submitted. Authentic and inauthentic respondent groups were then compared on a series of condition-specific health measures and attention checks. RESULTS: In the diabetes sample, respondents whose photos were deemed inauthentic passed fewer attention checks and reported poorer physical (e.g., number of comorbidities) and mental health (e.g., diabetes distress) across a wide variety of measures (η2 = 0.014-0.159). Similarly in the pain sample, respondents whose photos were deemed inauthentic reported poorer physical (e.g., pain interference) and mental health (e.g., depression) across a wide variety of measures (η2 = 0.008-0.129). CONCLUSIONS: The present findings suggest that there may be substantial exaggeration of adverse health among online survey respondents who feign health conditions such as diabetes and chronic pain. Hence, in the absence of procedures to verify health status claims, the validity of data from online survey respondents should be viewed with skepticism.

Assessing motivations for non-living and living organ donation among individuals with and without a history of blood donation.

OBJECTIVES: The current study investigated relationships between a history of blood donation, registration as a non-living and living organ donor, and differential motivations. BACKGROUND: Motivational commonalities exist between blood and organ donors, but there is no prior data on the relationships between blood donation history and both living and non-living organ donor registration and motivation. METHODS/MATERIALS: Participants completed online surveys assessing blood donation history, organ donor registration and interest, and motivations related to donation behaviour. RESULTS: Blood donation history was not significantly related to registration as either a non-living organ donor (blood donors = 81.4%; non-blood donors = 76.4%) or as a living organ donor (blood donors = 14.0%; non-blood donors = 10.9%). Further, blood donation history was not related to interest in learning more about being an organ donor. Compared to those not registered as an organ donor, those who were registered reported more positive organ donation motivations, but these relationships were unrelated to prior blood donation history. CONCLUSION: The present findings are consistent with existing research on attitudes, warm glow, and identity as organ donation motivators, and provide novel information regarding the importance of independent assessment of motivations for non-living and living organ donation.

Pain resilience, pain catastrophizing, and executive functioning: performance on a short-term memory task during simultaneous ischemic pain.

Among pain researchers there is a growing interest in the relationship between psychological resilience and pain experience. Whereas much of this work has focused on individual differences in pain perception or sensitivity, an equally important dimension of resilience is the capacity to persist with goal-directed activity despite experiencing pain. Consistent with this latter focus, the current study examined how pain resilience and pain catastrophizing combine to moderate the effects of ischemic pain on short-term memory task performance. Using a within-subjects design, 121 healthy participants completed four trials of a Corsi block-tapping task with pain exposure during the second and fourth trials. Results indicated that a combination of high pain resilience and low pain catastrophizing was associated with better task performance during the second pain exposure. These findings confirm existing evidence that resilience can moderate performance during pain, and offer new evidence that resilience and catastrophizing interact to shape this effect.

Not so motivated after all? Three replication attempts and a theoretical challenge to a morally motivated belief in free will.

Free will is often appraised as a necessary input to for holding others morally or legally responsible for misdeeds. Recently, however, Clark and colleagues (2014) argued for the opposite causal relationship. They assert that moral judgments and the desire to punish motivate people's belief in free will. Three replication experiments (Studies 1-2b) attempt to reproduce these findings. Additionally, a novel experiment (Study 3) tests a theoretical challenge derived from attribution theory, which suggests that immoral behaviors do not uniquely influence free will judgments. Instead, our nonviolation model argues that norm deviations of any kind-good, bad, or strange-cause people to attribute more free will to agents. Across replication experiments we found no consistent evidence for the claim that witnessing immoral behavior causes people to increase their general belief in free will. By contrast, we replicated the finding that people attribute more free will to agents who behave immorally compared to a neutral control (Studies 2a and 3). Finally, our novel experiment demonstrated broad support for our norm-violation account, suggesting that people's willingness to attribute free will to others is malleable, but not because people are motivated to blame. Instead, this experiment shows that attributions of free will are best explained by people's expectations for norm adherence, and when these expectations are violated, people infer that an agent expressed their free will to do so. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Pain Acceptance Partially Mediates the Relationship Between Perceived Injustice and Pain Outcomes Over 3 Months.

OBJECTIVES: Perceived injustice is a maladaptive cognitive appraisal of pain or injury, characterized by attributions of blame, unfairness, severity of loss, and irreparability of loss. Research suggests that perceived injustice may negatively affect pain outcomes by inhibiting the development of pain-related acceptance. The current study aimed to extend cross-sectional research by testing whether pain acceptance mediates the effects of perceived injustice on pain-related outcomes longitudinally. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data was analyzed from a prospective study to examine the potential mediating role of pain acceptance on recovery 3 months after an episode of low back pain. Using Mechanical Turk, we recruited participants who experienced an episode of back pain within the preceding 2 weeks, 343 of whom completed measures of perceived injustice, pain acceptance, pain ratings, and quality of life at each of 3 timepoints (recruitment, 1 mo later, and 3 mo later). Path analyses were conducted to examine pain acceptance at 1 month as a potential mediator of the relationship between perceived injustice at recruitment and pain intensity, disability, and depressive symptoms at 3 months. RESULTS: Results indicated that perceived injustice at recruitment was directly related to pain intensity, disability, and depressive symptoms 3 months later, and that pain acceptance partially mediated these relationships. DISCUSSION: Although these findings provide further support for pain acceptance as a buffer for the deleterious effects of perceived injustice, they also highlight that adjunctive mechanisms should be investigated to provide more comprehensive clinical insight.

Pain resilience and catastrophizing combine to predict functional restoration program outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Whereas decades of research have been devoted to psychological factors that confer vulnerability to disability and other negative outcomes in the face of chronic pain, recent studies have begun to emphasize psychological characteristics that contribute to enhanced adaptation and better clinical outcomes. Accordingly, the present study was conducted as a longitudinal assessment of the predictive utility of pain resilience and pain catastrophizing as indicators of clinical outcomes among patients receiving a standardized treatment for chronic pain. METHOD: Using an observational design, analyses were conducted on measures of pain resilience, pain catastrophizing, quality of life, and clinical pain administered to 149 patients upon admission and prior to discharge from an 8-week outpatient functional restoration program. Hierarchical linear regressions were conducted to predict improvement in physical and mental health quality of life and clinical pain intensity at discharge based on individual differences in admission levels of pain-related catastrophizing and resilience. RESULTS: Results of the primary analyses indicated that pain catastrophizing and pain resilience independently predicted physical and mental health quality-of-life outcomes at discharge but did not significantly predict clinical pain intensity. Specifically, higher baseline pain resilience was associated with better quality-of-life outcomes, whereas higher baseline catastrophizing was associated with poorer outcomes. CONCLUSION: This study provides additional support for the notion that pain resilience assessment may help identify those most likely to benefit from targeted efforts to bolster resilience resources during treatment. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).