Coping strategies and belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories.

Conspiracy beliefs have been related to aversive emotional experiences often accompanying major world events and have also been linked to maladaptive ways of coping with stress. In this research, we examined how different coping strategies (i.e. self-sufficient, social-support, avoidance and religious) predicted the adoption of COVID-19 conspiracy theories. In two studies (Study 1, n = 1000 and Study 2, n = 616) conducted among Polish participants, we found that avoidance and religious coping were positively linked to COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs. In Study 1, conspiracy beliefs also mediated the positive relationships between avoidance and religious coping and adherence to safety and self-isolation guidelines during the COVID-19 pandemic. Study 2 additionally showed that the relationship between fear, induced by reading threatening news on COVID-19, and conspiracy beliefs was the strongest among those high in avoidance coping. These studies highlight the role of coping strategies in the adoption of COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs.

Does Belief in Conspiracy Theories Affect Interpersonal Relationships?

In recent years, researchers have begun to study the social consequences of conspiracy beliefs. However, little research has investigated the impact of conspiracy beliefs on interpersonal relationships. In this review, we draw attention to this issue by summarizing available empirical evidence and proposing potential social-psychological mechanisms to explain whether and why conspiracy theories affect interpersonal relationships. We firstly discuss that the attitude change that often accompanies the internalization of conspiracy beliefs might distance people's opinions and, consequently, erode their relationships. Furthermore, we argue that the stigmatizing value of conspiracy theories can negatively affect the evaluation of conspiracy believers and discourage others from getting close to them. Finally, we consider that the misperception of social norms associated with the acceptance of certain conspiracy narratives can lead conspiracy believers to engage in non-normative behavior. Others are likely to perceive such behavior negatively, resulting in diminished interpersonal interaction. We highlight the need for further research to address these issues, as well as the potential factors that may prevent relationships being eroded by conspiracy beliefs.

Does Belief in Conspiracy Theories Affect Interpersonal Relationships?

In recent years, researchers have begun to study the social consequences of conspiracy beliefs. However, little research has investigated the impact of conspiracy beliefs on interpersonal relationships. In this review, we draw attention to this issue by summarizing available empirical evidence and proposing potential social-psychological mechanisms to explain whether and why conspiracy theories affect interpersonal relationships. We firstly discuss that the attitude change that often accompanies the internalization of conspiracy beliefs might distance people’s opinions and, consequently, erode their relationships. Furthermore, we argue that the stigmatizing value of conspiracy theories can negatively affect the evaluation of conspiracy believers and discourage others from getting close to them. Finally, we consider that the misperception of social norms associated with the acceptance of certain conspiracy narratives can lead conspiracy believers to engage in non-normative behavior. Others are likely to perceive such behavior negatively, resulting in diminished interpersonal interaction. We highlight the need for further research to address these issues, as well as the potential factors that may prevent relationships being eroded by conspiracy beliefs. (AU)

From Individual Anxiety to Collective Narcissism? Adult Attachment Styles and Different Types of National Commitment.

National narcissism and national identification, two distinct types of national commitment, differ in terms of their psychological concomitants. Therefore, in the current article, we hypothesized that they would also relate to different adult attachment styles. Namely, we proposed that national narcissism would be positively associated with higher attachment anxiety, while national identification would be associated with lower attachment anxiety and avoidance. These hypotheses were tested in three cross-sectional surveys (Study 1 N = 570; Study 3 N = 558; Study 4 N = 649) and one longitudinal survey (Study 2 N = 808). In all studies, we found a consistent positive relationship between attachment anxiety and national narcissism, and a negative relationship between attachment avoidance and national identification. Finally, we also demonstrated indirect effects of attachment anxiety (via national narcissism) on maladaptive group-related outcomes: conspiracy beliefs, non-normative collective action, and willingness to conspire.

From bad to worse: Avoidance coping with stress increases conspiracy beliefs.

The present research empirically examines how different types of coping strategies are associated with belief in conspiracy theories. Conspiracy beliefs have been linked to the frustration of basic needs and seem to increase during major world events that evoke stress. Thus, we hypothesized that they may serve as a psychological response to maladaptive coping strategies. This hypothesis was tested among British participants and conceptually replicated across three studies. Cross-sectionally, we examined coping strategies (i.e., self-sufficient, social-support, avoidance, and religious) and belief in a specific conspiracy theory (Study 1, n = 199) and belief in general notions of conspiracy (Study 2, n = 411). In Study 3 (n = 398), we experimentally primed different coping styles via a mnemonic recollection procedure and measured belief in notions of conspiracy. Avoidance coping (recognized as being maladaptive and leading to at least temporary disengagement and abandonment of goal-related behaviours) positively predicted belief in conspiracy theories (Studies 1 and 2). In Study 3, priming avoidance coping (vs. self-sufficient coping or no coping strategy) significantly increased belief in conspiracy theories. These findings suggest that using maladaptive coping strategies (either dispositional or situationally induced) may foster conspiracy beliefs.

A call for caution regarding infection-acquired COVID-19 immunity: The potentially unintended effects of "immunity passports" and how to mitigate them.

Research suggests that emerging information about infection-acquired COVID-19 immunity should be interpreted with caution. The introduction of "immunity passports" that would enable people who have recovered from COVID-19 to travel freely and return to work may therefore have detrimental consequences if not managed carefully. In two studies, we examined how perceived (suspected or imagined) recovery from COVID-19, and the concept of immunity passports, influence people's intentions to engage in behaviors aimed to reduce the spread of COVID-19. We also consider ways to lessen potential negative effects. In Study 1 (N = 1604), participants asked to imagine that they had recovered from COVID-19 reported lower social distancing intentions compared to a control condition. Participants who suspected (versus imagined) that they had recovered from past infection did not report lower preventative intentions compared to the control condition, even at high levels of certainty of past infection. In Study 2 (N = 1732), introducing the idea of immunity passports also reduced social distancing intentions compared to a control condition. The latter effect was, however, attenuated when cautious information about the equivocal science on COVID-19 was also presented to participants. Participants who suspected that they had COVID-19 in the past (compared to the control condition) revealed a similar pattern of results, but only at higher levels of certainty of past infection. Caution regarding infection-acquired COVID-19 immunity and immunity passports will be crucial in the COVID-19 response. Implications for premature pandemic announcements, as well as their potential remedies, are discussed.

Cultural orientation, power, belief in conspiracy theories, and intentions to reduce the spread of COVID-19.

The current study investigated cultural and psychological factors associated with intentions to reduce the spread of COVID-19. Participants (n = 704) completed measures of individualism-collectivism, belief in conspiracy theories about COVID-19, feelings of powerlessness, and intentions to engage in behaviours that reduce the spread of COVID-19. Results revealed that vertical individualism negatively predicted intentions to engage in social distancing, directly and indirectly through both belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories and feelings of powerlessness. Vertical collectivism positively predicted social distancing intentions directly. Horizontal collectivism positively predicted social distancing intentions indirectly through feelings of powerlessness. Finally, horizontal collectivism positively predicted hygiene-related intentions both directly and indirectly through lower feelings of powerlessness. These findings suggest that promoting collectivism may be a way to increase engagement with efforts to reduce the spread of COVID-19. They also highlight the importance of examining the interplay between culture and both personal feelings (powerlessness) and information consumption (conspiracy theories) during times of crisis.

Self-affirmation improves self-control over snacking among participants low in eating self-efficacy.

OBJECTIVE: Individuals low in eating self-efficacy are at particular risk of engaging in unhealthy eating behaviours, including the consumption of high calorie snacks. The elevated levels of snacking displayed by these individuals can largely be attributed to their experiencing low self-control over the avoidance of such foods (Hankonen, Kinnunen, Absetz, & Jallinoja, 2014). Interventions are thus required to boost self-control over snacking among those low in eating self-efficacy. Self-affirmation has been shown to boost self-control among individuals with depleted resources in other domains (Schmeichel & Vohs, 2009). The purpose of the current study was to test the hypothesis that a self-affirmation manipulation would similarly increase self-control over snacking for individuals low in eating self-efficacy. METHODS: At baseline, participants (N = 70) completed measures of dietary restraint and eating self-efficacy. In the main study, participants completed either a self-affirmation or a control task immediately before undertaking a joystick category judgment task that assessed self-control over snacking. RESULTS: Hierarchical multiple regression analysis revealed the predicted significant interaction between eating self-efficacy and self-affirmation, demonstrating that self-affirmation moderated the association between eating self-efficacy and self-control over snacking. Johnson-Neyman regions of significance confirmed that for participants low in eating self-efficacy the self-affirmation manipulation resulted in higher levels of self-control. Unexpectedly, however, for participants high in eating self-efficacy the self-affirmation manipulation was found to be associated with lower levels of self-control. CONCLUSIONS: Findings supported the hypothesis that a self-affirmation manipulation would boost self-control over snacking among individuals low in eating self-efficacy. Self-affirmation may thus provide a useful technique for strengthening self-control in relation to the avoidance of unhealthy foods among individuals who find it difficult to manage challenging dietary situations.