Psychological outcomes and culturally relevant moderators associated with events of discrimination among Asian American adults.

OBJECTIVES: Incidents of discrimination against Asian Americans have increased in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic. The aims of this study are to (a) examine the overall psychological impact of incidents of discrimination on Asian Americans adults, (b) identify whether East Asians experience worse psychological outcomes following experiences of discrimination compared to other Asian Americans, and (c) identify culturally relevant factors that moderate the relationship between incidents of discrimination and psychological outcomes. METHOD: Two hundred eighty-nine participants who identified racially as Asian American (Mage = 33.1 years, ±10.5 SD, 57.1% male, and 54.3% East Asian) completed an online survey including measures of demographics, psychological outcomes, culturally relevant factors (e.g., acculturative stress, collective self-esteem), and racial discrimination. RESULTS: We found that, overall, experiencing increased frequency of discrimination related to more depressive symptoms and alcohol use (ps < .05). When comparing Asian subgroups (East Asian vs. other Asian), there were no significantly different relationships between discrimination frequency and attribution to race on psychological outcomes (ps > .098). Collective self-esteem (p = .041) weakened, while acculturative stress strengthened (p < .001) the relationship between discrimination frequency and alcohol use; collective self-esteem weakened the relationship between attribution to race and social anxiety (p = .021); and internalized racism weakened the relationship between discrimination frequency and depression (p = .038). CONCLUSIONS: We identified moderators of the relationship between experiences of discrimination and psychological outcomes in Asian Americans. Because the moderators held for all Asian groups under study, they are strong candidates for points of intervention to mitigate the harmful effects of discrimination for Asian Americans. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Trying is believing: A pilot study of in-vivo nicotine replacement therapy sampling in disadvantaged Black adults who smoke cigarettes.

INTRODUCTION: While nicotine replacement therapy (NRT) is a frontline tobacco treatment that doubles smoking quit rates, only about 18% of Black adults who smoke cigarettes report lifetime use of NRT. A promising approach for increasing NRT use is in-session (in-vivo) NRT sampling within cessation interventions. The present pilot study examined the effectiveness of an in-vivo NRT sampling intervention within a single-session, culturally-targeted motivational intervention trial in Black adults who smoke cigarettes. METHODS: Non-treatment-seeking disadvantaged Black adults (N = 60) were offered the choice to sample nicotine lozenge, patch, or both in-session with the counselor present. Regardless of their choice, they were offered a one-week starter kit of both products. Data were analyzed at baseline and 1-month follow-up. Primary outcomes were 1) differences in motivation to quit smoking among NRT samplers versus non-samplers, 2) in-vivo NRT sampling preferences, and 3) in-vivo sampling's association with NRT use and improved smoking outcomes at follow up. RESULTS: Almost all participants accepted a take-home NRT starter kit, and approximately half of those offered in-vivo sampling agreed to sample. Participants preferred sampling lozenges in session (75.8% lozenge only vs. 12.1% nicotine patch only or 12.1% both; p < .001). Motivation to quit smoking was not related to likelihood of in-vivo NRT sampling (p > .05). At 1-month follow-up, in-vivo samplers were more likely to use NRT (94% vs. 35%, respectively; p < .001) and report a quit attempt (81.8% vs. 53.9%, p < .05) compared to non-samplers. CONCLUSION: In-vivo NRT sampling is a promising strategy to improve NRT uptake among Black adults who smoke cigarettes, regardless of motivation to quit smoking.

Early Impact of the U.S. COVID-19 Pandemic on Drinking Motives and Alcohol Use.

Background: The goal of this study was to empirically examine the degree to which alcohol use and drinking motives changed during the first month of the pandemic and to examine individual differences associated with such changes. Methods: A U.S. nationwide survey of 500 adults was conducted; data from 201 individuals (Mage=38.98, SD=12.04, 52.2% female, 76.1% White) who endorsed current alcohol use were included in this study. Results: Paired-samples t-tests indicated that there was a significant decrease in drinking quantity [t(199)=3.74, p<.001], but no change in drinking frequency [t(198)=0.19, p=.849] overall during the first month of the U.S. pandemic. There were significant decreases in enhancement [t(201)=4.55, p<.001], social [t(201)=9.39, p<.001] and conformity [t(201)=3.58, p<.001] motives, but a significant increase in coping motives [t(201)=-3.71, p<.001]. Regression analyses showed that increases in enhancement [ß=0.46, p<.001] and coping [ß=0.27, p=.004] motives were significantly related to increases in drinking frequency, and increases in coping motives [ß=0.32, p=.002] were related to increases in drinking quantity. Riskier drinking prior to the pandemic was significantly related to greater increase in drinking quantity in the first month of the U.S. pandemic [ß=0.31, p<.001]. Conclusion: Results of this study provide initial support that changes in drinking motives were important predictors for changes in alcohol use during the first month of the U.S. pandemic. Contrary to anecdotal reports, drinking decreased overall during the first month of the U.S. pandemic; however, those with existing risky patterns of drinking prior to the start of the U.S. pandemic were at greatest risk for drinking escalation during this time.

Author Correction: Dopamine transients are sufficient and necessary for acquisition of model-based associations.

In the version of this article initially published, the laser activation at the start of cue X in experiment 1 was described in the first paragraph of the Results and in the third paragraph of the Experiment 1 section of the Methods as lasting 2 s; in fact, it lasted only 1 s. The error has been corrected in the HTML and PDF versions of the article.

Dopamine transients are sufficient and necessary for acquisition of model-based associations.

Associative learning is driven by prediction errors. Dopamine transients correlate with these errors, which current interpretations limit to endowing cues with a scalar quantity reflecting the value of future rewards. We tested whether dopamine might act more broadly to support learning of an associative model of the environment. Using sensory preconditioning, we show that prediction errors underlying stimulus-stimulus learning can be blocked behaviorally and reinstated by optogenetically activating dopamine neurons. We further show that suppressing the firing of these neurons across the transition prevents normal stimulus-stimulus learning. These results establish that the acquisition of model-based information about transitions between nonrewarding events is also driven by prediction errors and that, contrary to existing canon, dopamine transients are both sufficient and necessary to support this type of learning. Our findings open new possibilities for how these biological signals might support associative learning in the mammalian brain in these and other contexts.