Motivated reasoning: Election integrity beliefs, outcome acceptance, and polarization before, during, and after the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election.

The 2020 U.S. Presidential Election required voters to not only form opinions of leading candidates, Donald Trump and Joe Biden, but also to make judgments about the integrity of the election itself and what-if anything-to do about it. However, partisan motivated reasoning theory (Leeper and Slothuus, Political Psychology, 35(Suppl 1): 129-156; Lodge and Taber, The rationalizing voter, Cambridge University Press, 2013) suggests judgments are often strongly influenced toward affectively desirable conclusions. Before, during, and after election projections were announced, partisan supporters of Trump and Biden rated: judgments about voter fraud and foreign interference, their acceptance of the results, and their support for recourse against the outcome (e.g., legal challenges, legislative overhauls, violence). Before the election, partisans were mildly concerned about election integrity but willing to accept the outcome without recourse. However, during vote counting, and especially after Biden was projected to be the winner, partisans dramatically changed their judgments in opposite directions, consistent with the affectively desirable conclusions relevant to each group. Biden supporters affirmed the election's integrity and accepted the results whereas Trump supporters disputed the integrity, rejected the results, and began to support recourse against the outcome. Data are consistent with partisan motivated reasoning. Discussion highlights the practical implications. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11031-022-09983-w.

Predictors of posttraumatic stress symptoms, COVID-related functional impairment, and burnout among medical professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Physicians are particularly vulnerable to mental health symptoms during global stressors such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Such stressors can increase death anxiety, which is a vulnerability factor for psychological dysfunction. Thus, exposure to COVID-related death may play a unique role in physicians' mental health during the pandemic. This cross-sectional study collected self-reported data from 485 resident physicians and fellows. Participants reported mental health symptoms, including posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS), burnout, and functional impairment due to the pandemic. Participants also reported death anxiety, COVID-19 anxiety, cognitive accessibility of death-related thoughts (DTA), and workplace exposure to COVID-19. Death anxiety, COVID-19 anxiety, DTA, and workplace COVID-19 exposure all independently predicted PTSS. Furthermore, COVID-19 anxiety and DTA interacted to predict PTSS, such that high levels of COVID-19 anxiety predicted higher PTSS, regardless of DTA level. Death anxiety and COVID-19 workplace exposure interacted to predict PTSS as well, such that death anxiety predicted PTSS only when COVID-19 exposure was high. Burnout was predicted by COVID-19 anxiety and workplace exposure, and COVID-related functional impairment was predicted by death anxiety and COVID anxiety. These findings demonstrate that death-related and COVID-related concerns, independently and in interaction with each other, play an important role in psychological distress among physicians.

Pandemic reminders as psychological threat: thinking about COVID-19 lowers coping self-Efficacy among trauma-exposed adults.

Reminders of COVID-related problems have been pervasive throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Such reminders could have negative mental health impacts, especially among psychologically vulnerable people, including those with trauma-related problems. We experimentally examined the effects of pandemic reminders among trauma-exposed participants sampled from Prolific (N = 238). Participants were induced to think about health-related or social isolation-related aspects of COVID-19 or their favourite TV show and existential anxiety and coping self-efficacy (CSE) were then assessed. Posttraumatic stress symptoms (PTSS) related to a prior stressor and COVID-related functional impairment were assessed as potential moderators of reactions to pandemic reminders. Results showed that both types of pandemic reminders lowered CSE among participants with either higher PTSS or COVID-related functional impairment. Pandemic reminders did not significantly affect existential anxiety. These findings suggest that reminders of the COVID-19 pandemic may undermine the mental health of psychologically vulnerable populations.

Terror Management Theory and the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Terror management theory is focused on the role that awareness of death plays in diverse aspects of life. Here, we discuss the theory's implications for understanding the widely varying ways in which people have responded to the COVID-19 pandemic. We argue that regardless of whether one consciously believes that the virus is a major threat to life or only a minor inconvenience, fear of death plays an important role in driving one's attitudes and behavior related to the virus. We focus on the terror management theory distinction between proximal defenses, which are activated when thoughts of death are in current focal attention and are logically related to the threat at hand, and distal defenses, which are activated when thoughts of death are on the fringes of one's consciousness and entail the pursuit of meaning, personal value, and close relationships. We use this framework to discuss the many ways in which COVID-19 undermines psychological equanimity, the diverse ways people have responded to this threat, and the role of ineffective terror management in psychological distress and disorder that may emerge in response to the virus.

Randomized controlled trial of the Resilience and Coping Intervention (RCI) with undergraduate university students.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this pilot study was to evaluate the Resilience and Coping Intervention (RCI) with college students. PARTICIPANTS: College students (aged 18-23) from a large Midwest US university who volunteered for a randomized controlled trial during the 2015 spring semester. METHODS: College students were randomly assigned to an intervention (n = 64) or a control (n = 65) group. Intervention participants received three 45-minute RCI sessions over subsequent weeks. All participants completed pre- and post-intervention assessments at the beginning of Week 1 and end of Week 3. Student resilience, coping, hope, stress, depression, and anxiety were assessed. RESULTS: RCI participants reported significantly more hope and less stress and depression from Week 1 to Week 3 compared with control participants. Results for resilience also approached statistical significance. Effect sizes were small to moderate. CONCLUSIONS: This study found preliminary evidence that RCI is an effective resilience intervention for use with college students.