There is growing evidence of the connection between variations in kinship intensity and cross-cultural differences in psychological traits. Contributing to this literature on kinship intensity, we put forward a mental model to explain the enduring connection between ancestral niche and psychological traits. Our model posits that two primary orientations or dispositions-strong-ties and weak-ties rationalities-have co-evolved with our ancestral niches to perpetuate-by internalizing and reproducing-the social structure (such as preferences for certain attitudes, values, and beliefs) of the ancestral niche. The findings from 1,291 participants across four societies-China, India, Taiwan, and the United States-support our hypothesis that strong-ties (weak-ties) rationalities, when activated, will endorse strong-tie (weak-ties) values and beliefs. This proposed model contributes to the toolbox of cultural and cross-cultural psychology in a twofold sense: First, in addition to the index of kinship intensity, it offers a measure of kin-based rationality as another predictor of psychological traits; second, it renders intelligible the niche and rationality disconnect prevalent in the globalizing era.
Coronavirus Anxiety Scale (CAS) is a widely used measure that captures somatic symptoms of coronavirus-related anxiety. In a large-scale collaboration spanning 60 countries (Ntotal = 21,513), we examined the CAS's measurement invariance and assessed the convergent validity of CAS scores in relation to the fear of COVID-19 (FCV-19S) and the satisfaction with life (SWLS-3) scales. We utilized both conventional exact invariance tests and alignment procedures, with results revealing that the single-factor model fit the data well in almost all countries. Partial scalar invariance was supported in a subset of 56 countries. To ensure the robustness of results, given the unbalanced samples, we employed resampling techniques both with and without replacement and found the results were more stable in larger samples. The alignment procedure demonstrated a high degree of measurement invariance with 9% of the parameters exhibiting noninvariance. We also conducted simulations of alignment using the parameters estimated in the current model. Findings demonstrated reliability of the means but indicated challenges in estimating the latent variances. Strong positive correlations between CAS and FCV-19S estimated with all three different approaches were found in most countries. Correlations of CAS and SWLS-3 were weak and negative but significantly differed from zero in several countries. Overall, the study provided support for the measurement invariance of the CAS and offered evidence of its convergent validity while also highlighting issues with variance estimation. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).
With the COVID-19 pandemic, behavioural scientists aimed to illuminate reasons why people comply with (or not) large-scale cooperative activities. Here we investigated the motives that underlie support for COVID-19 preventive behaviours in a sample of 12,758 individuals from 34 countries. We hypothesized that the associations of empathic prosocial concern and fear of disease with support towards preventive COVID-19 behaviours would be moderated by trust in the government. Results suggest that the association between fear of disease and support for COVID-19 preventive behaviours was strongest when trust in the government was weak (both at individual- and country-level). Conversely, the association with empathic prosocial concern was strongest when trust in the government was high, but this moderation was only found at individual-level scores of governmental trust. We discuss how motivations may be shaped by socio-cultural context, and outline how findings may contribute to a better understanding of collective action during global crises.
In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Psychological Science Accelerator coordinated three large-scale psychological studies to examine the effects of loss-gain framing, cognitive reappraisals, and autonomy framing manipulations on behavioral intentions and affective measures. The data collected (April to October 2020) included specific measures for each experimental study, a general questionnaire examining health prevention behaviors and COVID-19 experience, geographical and cultural context characterization, and demographic information for each participant. Each participant started the study with the same general questions and then was randomized to complete either one longer experiment or two shorter experiments. Data were provided by 73,223 participants with varying completion rates. Participants completed the survey from 111 geopolitical regions in 44 unique languages/dialects. The anonymized dataset described here is provided in both raw and processed formats to facilitate re-use and further analyses. The dataset offers secondary analytic opportunities to explore coping, framing, and self-determination across a diverse, global sample obtained at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, which can be merged with other time-sampled or geographic data.
The COVID-19 pandemic has increased negative emotions and decreased positive emotions globally. Left unchecked, these emotional changes might have a wide array of adverse impacts. To reduce negative emotions and increase positive emotions, we tested the effectiveness of reappraisal, an emotion-regulation strategy that modifies how one thinks about a situation. Participants from 87 countries and regions (n = 21,644) were randomly assigned to one of two brief reappraisal interventions (reconstrual or repurposing) or one of two control conditions (active or passive). Results revealed that both reappraisal interventions (vesus both control conditions) consistently reduced negative emotions and increased positive emotions across different measures. Reconstrual and repurposing interventions had similar effects. Importantly, planned exploratory analyses indicated that reappraisal interventions did not reduce intentions to practice preventive health behaviours. The findings demonstrate the viability of creating scalable, low-cost interventions for use around the world. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: The stage 1 protocol for this Registered Report was accepted in principle on 12 May 2020. The protocol, as accepted by the journal, can be found at https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.c.4878591.v1.
The COVID-19 pandemic (and its aftermath) highlights a critical need to communicate health information effectively to the global public. Given that subtle differences in information framing can have meaningful effects on behavior, behavioral science research highlights a pressing question: Is it more effective to frame COVID-19 health messages in terms of potential losses (e.g., "If you do not practice these steps, you can endanger yourself and others") or potential gains (e.g., "If you practice these steps, you can protect yourself and others")? Collecting data in 48 languages from 15,929 participants in 84 countries, we experimentally tested the effects of message framing on COVID-19-related judgments, intentions, and feelings. Loss- (vs. gain-) framed messages increased self-reported anxiety among participants cross-nationally with little-to-no impact on policy attitudes, behavioral intentions, or information seeking relevant to pandemic risks. These results were consistent across 84 countries, three variations of the message framing wording, and 560 data processing and analytic choices. Thus, results provide an empirical answer to a global communication question and highlight the emotional toll of loss-framed messages. Critically, this work demonstrates the importance of considering unintended affective consequences when evaluating nudge-style interventions.