A thematic analysis of disinformation in gender-affirming healthcare bans in the United States.

CONTEXT: Bans on gender-affirming care (GAC) for transgender and gender-expansive (TGE) people are grounded in scientific disinformation and have been challenged in American courts. METHODS: Five legal filings by state officials in defense of GAC restriction from initial litigation were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis. Themes and subthemes of disinformation were identified after review and analysis of these filings. FINDINGS: Five themes of disinformation emerged: False and misleading claims about (1) gender dysphoria and gender identity, (2) the evidence regarding GAC, (3) standard practice of GAC, (4) the safety of GAC, and finally, (5) rejection of medical authority. These themes were well represented across the analyzed documents. CONCLUSIONS: The five disinformation themes and subthemes have been noted in lower courts, but have seen some purchase in appellate courts, suggesting that medical disinformation in law may have far-reaching consequences for medical policy.

The distinct associations of ingroup attachment and glorification with responses to the coronavirus pandemic: Evidence from a multilevel investigation in 21 countries.

While public health crises such as the coronavirus pandemic transcend national borders, practical efforts to combat them are often instantiated at the national level. Thus, national group identities may play key roles in shaping compliance with and support for preventative measures (e.g., hygiene and lockdowns). Using data from 25,159 participants across representative samples from 21 nations, we investigated how different modalities of ingroup identification (attachment and glorification) are linked with reactions to the coronavirus pandemic (compliance and support for lockdown restrictions). We also examined the extent to which the associations of attachment and glorification with responses to the coronavirus pandemic are mediated through trust in information about the coronavirus pandemic from scientific and government sources. Multilevel models suggested that attachment, but not glorification, was associated with increased trust in science and compliance with federal COVID-19 guidelines. However, while both attachment and glorification were associated with trust in government and support for lockdown restrictions, glorification was more strongly associated with trust in government information than attachment. These results suggest that both attachment and glorification can be useful for promoting public health, although glorification's role, while potentially stronger, is restricted to pathways through trust in government information.

Trust in scientific information mediates associations between conservatism and coronavirus responses in the U.S., but few other nations.

U.S.-based research suggests conservatism is linked with less concern about contracting coronavirus and less preventative behaviors to avoid infection. Here, we investigate whether these tendencies are partly attributable to distrust in scientific information, and evaluate whether they generalize outside the U.S., using public data and recruited representative samples across three studies (Ntotal = 34,710). In Studies 1 and 2, we examine these relationships in the U.S., yielding converging evidence for a sequential indirect effect of conservatism on compliance through scientific (dis)trust and infection concern. In Study 3, we compare these relationships across 19 distinct countries. Although the relationships between trust in scientific information about the coronavirus, concern about coronavirus infection, and compliance are consistent cross-nationally, the relationships between conservatism and trust in scientific information are not. These relationships are strongest in North America. Consequently, the indirect effects observed in Studies 1-2 only replicate in North America (the U.S. and Canada) and in Indonesia. Study 3 also found parallel direct and indirect effects on support for lockdown restrictions. These associations suggest not only that relationships between conservatism and compliance are not universal, but localized to particular countries where conservatism is more strongly related to trust in scientific information about the coronavirus pandemic.

Strong hearts, open minds: Cardiovascular challenge predicts non-defensive responses to ingroup-perpetrated violence.

Reminders of ingroup-perpetrated violence represent a psychological stressor that some people respond to defensively (e.g., justifying the violence), while others react non-defensively (e.g., accepting collective responsibility). To explain these divergent responses, we applied the biopsychosocial model of challenge and threat to the context of intergroup conflict. Participants (N = 130) read about either an ingroup (American) or outgroup (Australian) soldier torturing an Iranian captive. We recorded cardiovascular responses while participants video-recorded introductions to an Iranian confederate who they believed they would meet. In the ingroup (but not the outgroup) condition, cardiovascular responses of challenge (relative to threat) were associated with less psychological defensiveness of ingroup-perpetrated violence and greater support for diplomacy towards its victims. Self-reported challenge/threat appraisals demonstrated no such relationships. These findings suggest that motivational states of challenge and threat can differentiate defensive and non-defensive responses, and that these motivational states may be better captured with physiological rather than self-report measures.

Rapid effects of testosterone on social decision-making in a monogamous California mice (Peromyscus californicus).

Social animals must cope with challenges and opportunities by adjusting how they react to a salient stimulus. Here we use California mice (Peromyscus californicus) and investigate the mechanisms underlying social decision-making by studying (i) rapid effects of testosterone (T) pulses on a male's decisions to approach a novel male (challenge) versus a receptive female (opportunity), and (ii) whether social experience shapes how such effects are manifested. In Experiment 1, we found that sexually naïve males administered saline injections preferentially approached unfamiliar females over unfamiliar males, in contrast, 10 min after receiving a single T-injection, males expressed a preference for approaching unfamiliar males. Such an effect of T only occurred in sexually naïve males, but not pair-bonded males, suggesting that the rapid effects of T on approach behavior may rely on the pair-bonding experiences. Experiment 2 investigated social decision-making across three repeated exposures to the challenge/opportunity situations. Only the initial decision, approach to the challenge, predicted future aggressive behaviors, and such an effect relied on the rapid actions of T. We also found that experience with the controlled challenge situation (the male intruder was restrained behind a wire mesh) dampened the approach to the male side (potential threat) when later exposed to the same conditions. This suggests that a resident's motivation to defend against a threatening individual may decrease as the threat posed by the "neighbors" is reduced. Overall rapid effects of post-encounter T pulses may play important roles in influencing behavioral decisions during social interactions.

Challenges to Traditional Narratives of Intractable Conflict Decrease Ingroup Glorification.

Conflict narratives are cornerstones of group identity, but often facilitate violence by framing the group's actions in ways that foster defensive forms of group identification (i.e., glorification). Three experiments tested whether alternative narratives inclusive of the ingroup's and the adversarial group's suffering can reduce glorification. Israeli Jews (Study 1) and Americans (Study 2) reported less glorification after reading inclusive narratives rather than narratives that dismiss the outgroup's suffering. Study 3 found that through reducing glorification, inclusive narratives indirectly weakened support for retributive justice and militaristic policies and strengthened support for reconciliation. These effects were specific to people high in both (preexisting) glorification and attachment-people identified by prior research as the strongest supporters of violent approaches to conflict. These findings suggest that alternative narratives can reduce glorification by challenging the myopic focus of traditional conflict narratives on ingroup victimization, helping societies move beyond intractable conflict toward lasting peace.