https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(21)00084-5

6-month neurological and psychiatric outcomes in 236 379 survivors of COVID-19: a retrospective cohort study using electronic health records

There are *different* types of clots at issue in both papers. The one's discussed by Science article are explicitly *not* included in Lancet analysis

an 2021: I expected the fall/winter peak to subside much more slowly than it did. I saw people going back to work & school, after the holidays and expected that to prolong transmission. But the sacrifices we made around the holidays paid off & the surge ended pretty abruptly.

March/April 2020: I thought vaccine approval would be 12-18 months away. I didn’t factor in how much quicker trials would go with rampant COVID spread & how efficient the government could be at approval. I’m very glad to have been wrong on this.

Jan/Feb 2020: I thought community-level face mask use wouldn’t help. I based this on studies of the flu, which indicated community mask wearing mostly didn’t work & that sick people were the ones that needed masks. I was wrong. I didn’t know how much asymptomatic COVID we had.

Let’s start at the beginning: Jan 2020, I thought COVID would be contained relatively quickly with case counts on the order of SARS in 2003. This was a reasonable guess but clearly wrong.

I saw a tweet about how there isn’t enough discussion of what experts got wrong on COVID, so here’s a thread of things I got wrong.

Abstract BackgroundWhile risk of outdoor transmission of respiratory viral infections is hypothesized to be low, there are limited data on SARS-CoV-2 transmission in outdoor compared to indoor settings.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of peer-reviewed papers indexed in PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science and preprints in Europe PMC through 12 August 2020 that described cases of human transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Reports of other respiratory virus transmission were included for reference.ResultsFive identified studies found a low proportion of reported global SARS-CoV-2 infections occurred outdoors (<10%) and the odds of indoor transmission was very high compared to outdoors (18.7 times; 95% confidence interval, 6.0–57.9). Five studies described influenza transmission outdoors and 2 adenovirus transmission outdoors. There was high heterogeneity in study quality and individual definitions of outdoor settings, which limited our ability to draw conclusions about outdoor transmission risks. In general, factors such as duration and frequency of personal contact, lack of personal protective equipment, and occasional indoor gathering during a largely outdoor experience were associated with outdoor reports of infection.ConclusionsExisting evidence supports the wide-held belief that risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission is lower outdoors but there are significant gaps in our understanding of specific pathways.

Outdoor Transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and Other Respiratory Viruses: A Systematic Review

Main takeaways about Covid vaccines so far There are important, often major, differences in the characteristics and effects of the vaccines.2 vaccines have been convincingly shown to have high efficacy against getting sick with Covid-19 – BNT/Pfizer’s and NIH/Moderna’s.There is a material difference in the rate of adverse events reported between those 2 vaccines:Most people had adverse events after the BNT/Pfizer vaccine, but they were generally not severe;NIH/Moderna adverse events were more frequent and severe – severe adverse events were common.There are too many question marks around the trials of another 2 vaccines to be confident about results – Oxford/AstraZeneca’s and Sputnik V.2 inactivated virus vaccines from China are reported to have good efficacy and very low adverse events, but the data to substantiate that isn’t public. Other types of vaccines anticipated to also have lower rates of adverse events don’t have phase 3 results yet either, but could be public in the next few weeks.We don’t know to what extent being vaccinated with any of these vaccines reduces the risk of a person spreading Covid-19 if they don’t know they’re infected – but the vast majority of virus transmission is from people with symptoms.We don’t know much about the effects of these vaccines in young children, for people on immunosuppressant medication (including steroids and cancer medications), and in pregnancy and breastfeeding. (A trial of Moderna’s vaccine in people with cancer is being discussed.) We don’t know how long immunity will last.

Why Two Vaccines Passed the Finishing Line In a Year and Others Didn’t, and a Month 12 Roundup

really good tweet thread diving into the Lancet study on long term mental health conditions after severe covid.

5) If you’re an island like Britain is, you shouldn’t have 4.3 million #COVID19 cases, yet did somehow. Result is not just 127k deaths, but also 1.1 million #LongCovid cases... or 25% of all infected.

A 200,000-dose order of Russia’s Sputnik V vaccine that triggered a political crisis in Slovakia should not be administered yet because of incomplete or inaccurate information from the manufacturer, the national medicines agency has said.

Doubts over Russian Covid vaccine doses delay rollout in Slovakia

This is very perceptive via @bmj_latest and well worth a read: covid-19 yearbook: world leaders edition

two argument schemes combined here: analogy and reductio ad absurdum

COVID-19 and global income inequality / by Angus Deaton. © Princeton University https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/international_income_inequality_and_the_covid_v2_assembled_0.pdf

new updates to the SciBeh Vaccine wiki!

Another update to wiki underlying our COVID-19 vaccination handbook at https://sks.to/c19vax . Added explanatory videos by the brilliant @Asher__Williams 1/n

One of the most important topics in #COVID epidemiology, by a great speaker. Don't miss it!

this debate feels increasingly like an exchange where one side isn't even listening to the other any more... arguments need to be *cumulative*, collecting pros and cons into one place for summary evaluation. Without such tools, Twitter just helps debates go around in circles

there will be many a wrong analysis as we cycle through the 1 year anniversary and there is nothing to mark this one out as uniquely bad, but what does seem surprising to me in hindsight is the confidence with which people pronounced given that this was a new disease.

The bloom of COVID19 has resulted in the explosion of ripple pollens which have severely affected the world community in the terms of their multi-axial impact. These pollens, despite being indistinguishable, have a varied set of characteristics in terms of their origin and contribution towards the overall declining homeostasis of human beings. The most prominent of these pollens are misinformation. Various studies have been conducted, performed, and stochastically replicated to build ML-based models to accurately detect misinformation and its variates on the common modalities of spread. However, the recent independent analysis conducted on the prior studies reveals how the current fact-checking systems fail and fall flat in fulfilling any practical demands that the misinfodemic of COVID19 brought for us. While the scientific community broadly accepts the pandemic-like resemblance of the rampant misinformation spread, we must also make sure that our response to the same is multi-faceted, interdisciplinary, and doesn’t stand restricted. As crucial it is to chart the features of misinformation spread, it is also important to understand why it spreads in the first place? Our paper deals with the latter question through a game-theory based approach. We implement a game with two social media users or players who aim at increasing their outreach on their social media handles whilst spreading misinformation knowingly. We take five independent parameters from 100 Twitter handles that have shared misinformation during the period of COVID19. Twitter was chosen as it is a prominent social media platform accredited to the major modality for misinformation spread. The outreach increment on the user’s Twitter handles were measured using various features provided by Twitter - number of comments, number of retweets, and number of likes. Later, using a computational neuroscientific approach, we map each of these features with the type of neural system they trigger in a person’s brain. This helps in understanding how misinformation whilst being used as an intentional decoy to increase outreach on social media, also, affects the human social cognition system eliciting pseudo-responses that weren’t intended otherwise leading to realizing possible neuroscientific correlation as to how spreading misinformation on social media intentionally/unintentionally becomes a strategic maneuver to increased reach and possibly a false sense of accomplishment.

10.31234/osf.io/f6kne

The bloom of COVID19 has resulted in the explosion of ripple pollens which have severely affected the world community in the terms of their multi-axial impact. These pollens, despite being indistinguishable, have a varied set of characteristics in terms of their origin and contribution towards the overall declining homeostasis of human beings. The most prominent of these pollens are misinformation. Various studies have been conducted, performed, and stochastically replicated to build ML-based models to accurately detect misinformation and its variates on the common modalities of spread. However, the recent independent analysis conducted on the prior studies reveals how the current fact-checking systems fail and fall flat in fulfilling any practical demands that the misinfodemic of COVID19 brought for us. While the scientific community broadly accepts the pandemic-like resemblance of the rampant misinformation spread, we must also make sure that our response to the same is multi-faceted, interdisciplinary, and doesn’t stand restricted. As crucial it is to chart the features of misinformation spread, it is also important to understand why it spreads in the first place? Our paper deals with the latter question through a game-theory based approach. We implement a game with two social media users or players who aim at increasing their outreach on their social media handles whilst spreading misinformation knowingly. We take five independent parameters from 100 Twitter handles that have shared misinformation during the period of COVID19. Twitter was chosen as it is a prominent social media platform accredited to the major modality for misinformation spread. The outreach increment on the user’s Twitter handles were measured using various features provided by Twitter - number of comments, number of retweets, and number of likes. Later, using a computational neuroscientific approach, we map each of these features with the type of neural system they trigger in a person’s brain. This helps in understanding how misinformation whilst being used as an intentional decoy to increase outreach on social media, also, affects the human social cognition system eliciting pseudo-responses that weren’t intended otherwise leading to realizing possible neuroscientific correlation as to how spreading misinformation on social media intentionally/unintentionally becomes a strategic maneuver to increased reach and possibly a false sense of accomplishment.

10.31234/osf.io/mqpvn

Students have been multiply impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic: threats to their own and their family’s health, the closure of schools, and pivoting to online learning in March 2020, a long summer of physical distancing, and then the challenge of returning to school in fall 2020. As damaging as the physical health effects of a global pandemic are, much has been speculated about the “second wave” of mental health crises, particularly for school-aged children and adolescents. Yet, few studies have asked students about their experiences during the pandemic. The present study engaged with over two thousand (N = 2,310; 1288 female; Mage = 14.5) 12-18-year-old Alberta students during their first few weeks of return-to-school in fall 2020. Students completed an online survey that asked about their perceptions of COVID-19, their fall return-to-school experiences (84.9% returned in-person), their self-reported pandemic-related stress, and their behaviour, affect, and cognitive functioning in the first few weeks of September. The majority of students (84.9%) returned to school in person. Students reported moderate and equal concern for their health, family confinement, and maintaining social contact. Student stress levels were also above critical thresholds for 25 percent of the sample, and females and older adolescents (age 15-18 years) generally reported higher stress indicators as compared to males and younger (age 12-14 years) adolescents. Multivariate analysis showed that stress indicators were positively and significantly correlated with self-reported behavioural concerns (i.e., conduct problems, negative affect, and cognitive/inattention), and that stress arousal (e.g., sleep problems, hypervigilance) accounted for significant variance in behavioural concerns. Results are discussed in the context of how schools can provide both universal responses to students during COVID-19 knowing that most students are coping well, while some may require more targeted strategies to address stress arousal and heightened negative affect

COVID-19 and Student Well-being: Stress and Mental Health during Return-to-School

10.31234/osf.io/uatjd

Misinformation often continues to influence people’s cognition even after corrected (the ‘continued influence effect of misinformation’, the CIEM). This study investigated the role of information relevance in the CIEM by questionnaire survey and experimental study. The results showed that information with higher relevance to the individuals had a larger CIEM, indicating a role of information relevance in the CIEM. Personal involvement might explain the effects of information relevance on the CIEM. This study provides insightful clues for reducing the CIEM in different types of misinformation and misinformation with varying relevance.

The influence of information relevance on the continued influence effect of misinformation

10.31234/osf.io/htjx5

Across the world when the deadly COVID-19 virus started spreading, severe health issues and death rates increased amongst thousands of people in a noticeably short period. The one and the only way to stop the transmission of the virus was to stop economic and social activities in the affected countries for an indefinite time. This research covers three main sections which are growing variations in work practices that have remained essential to stop the spread, including compulsory working from home, psychological and financial impacts that are noticeable in the aftermath of COVID-19, which includes idleness, mental illness, and dependence. Besides, the potential moderating factor of age is also examined. This research intends to deliver a consolidative methodology for studying the consequences of COVID-19 on work cultures and workplaces along with pinpointing issues for further work and understandings to advise solutions.

Changes in work culture and workplace due to COVID19 crisis

10.31234/osf.io/nm7te

The Covid-19 pandemic has caused major changes to family life followed by a call for knowledge about how these changes have affected parental functioning, particularly in vulnerable families (Prime, Wade & Brooks, 2020). This study uses a natural experiment design to investigate the effect of the Covid-19 lockdown on parental mental health, parenting stress and three dimensions of destructive interparental conflict in a heterogeneous sample characterized by pre-existing relationship problems. Results from mixed model regression analyses showed that despite significantly higher levels of parenting stress in the lockdown group (n = 744 families) compared with the control group (n = 427 families), lockdown did not adversely affect parental mental health or levels of destructive conflicts behaviors. In fact, levels of verbal aggression and child involvement in conflict decreased during lockdown among parents living apart. Pre-existing destructive conflict levels, financial problems and age of youngest child did not moderate any of the associations. Thus, findings indicated that pre-existing family vulnerability did not predispose for reduced parental functioning during lockdown, beyond increased parenting stress. Resilient processes and an increased sense of purpose may be potential mechanisms. Caution should be taken when generalizing the findings due to the welfare context of the sample and as long-term lockdown effects were not investigated. Importantly, children in vulnerable families may have been negatively impacted by increased family time, despite relatively stable parental functioning during lockdown.

Effects of Covid-19 lockdown on parental functioning in vulnerable families

10.31234/osf.io/5qryd

Behavioural science has been effectively used by policy makers in various domains, from health to savings. However, interventions that behavioural scientists typically employ to change behaviour have been at the centre of an ethical debate, given that they include elements of paternalism that have implications for people’s freedom of choice. In the present article, we argue that this ethical debate could be resolved in the future through implementation and advancement of new technologies. We propose that several technologies which are currently available and are rapidly evolving (i.e., virtual and augmented reality, social robotics, gamification, self-quantification, and behavioural informatics) have a potential to be integrated with various behavioural interventions in a non-paternalistic way. More specifically, people would decide themselves which behaviours they want to change and select the technologies they want to use for this purpose, and the role of policy makers would be to develop transparent behavioural interventions for these technologies. In that sense, behavioural science would move from libertarian paternalism to liberalism, given that people would freely choose how they want to change, and policy makers would create technological interventions that make this change possible.

From Libertarian Paternalism to Liberalism: Behavioural Science and Policy in an Age of New Technology

10.31234/osf.io/2xvbr

In response to the rapid spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), governments and health-authorities have both recommended and mandated various measures aiming to contain the spread of the virus and, in turn, save lives. Despite generally high levels of compliance with and public support for these measures, several countries have witnessed a recent upsurge in the number of people who no longer sufficiently adhere to the restrictions and keep themselves informed about the pandemic. This developing trend has either been named or attributed to Pandemic Fatigue. Notably, though, a scientific conceptualization, including an identification of Pandemic fatigue and theoretical dissociation from its correlates and outcomes, is completely lacking. Using representative survey data from Denmark and Germany (overall N = 5,841), we introduce a psychometrically sound measure of Pandemic Fatigue, show who experiences it, identify related emotions and perceptions, and reveal its effects on health protective behaviors. We find that Pandemic Fatigue consists of two distinct, yet highly correlated dimensions – Information and Behavioral Fatigue – and that younger, healthier, and less educated people are more likely to experience it. Further, we find that Pandemic Fatigue is related to certain emotions and perceptions that could be targeted through different interventions in an attempt to reinvigorate fatigued individuals. Moreover, we find that Pandemic Fatigue is a strong predictor of nonadherence to health protective measures, even beyond other relevant emotions and perceptions. Taken together, the results call for a multifaceted approach towards keeping public compliance high when facing a pandemic.

Correlates and Outcomes of Pandemic Fatigue

10.31234/osf.io/b9zq4

Aim and Method: This perspective searches presents evidence of mature gratitude as a way of coping with the threats and boundaries of COVID-19. This narrative, non-systematic review will be based on studies from the COVID-19 period in association with more general literature on the characteristics of mature gratitude related to good mental health. Results: The results from the literature suggest that a confrontation with our existential vulnerability during a pandemic is not only a crisis but also an opportunity to view our lives in a different way. Mature gratitude, as proposed in this perspective, can help us in coping with the threats and boundaries that are part of our lives due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This time of crisis gives us the opportunity to self-reflect on our current life and plans for the future and to reframe them through a positive lens which can encourage individuals to actively strengthen their psychological resilience and coping skills. Conclusion: Cultivating an attitude of mature gratitude through actions of kindness, expressing being thankful for life and God, and enjoying all the small things in life helps in coping with the current threats of COVID-19 and building lifelong resilience for the future Knowledge about these associations can help psychologists, counselors, and coaches to support people who experience psychological issues due to the current pandemic and all crises to come.

A Perspective on Mature Gratitude as a Way of Coping with COVID-19

10.31234/osf.io/qgc3h

There is a global consensus about the potential of the COVID-19 pandemic to affect people's mental health. In this context, and prior to the formulation of mitigation strategies, tools are required that allow an objective and effective assessment of mental health risk. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the psychometric characteristics of COVID-19 Stress Scale, formulated by Taylor et al. (2020), based on the concept of COVID-19 Stress Syndrome. A national sample of 1214 participating adults was taken in Colombia, who answered a translated version of the scale. Evidence of a hexa-dimensional structure was obtained whose goodness of fit indicators were Chi2 = 1215,759, Sig. =. 000, CMIN / DF = 2.202, RMSEA = .044, NFI = .943, TLI = .964, CFI =. 968 and FMIN = 1,967. Regarding reliability, an α = .924 and Spearman-Brown = .824 were obtained for the entire scale; the reliability indicators of the 6 subscales were also high. The similarities and differences in the findings with respect to the original psychometric study of the scale are discussed, as well as the utility and importance of the instrument as a tool in future efforts to mitigate the psychosocial effects of the pandemic

Validation to Spanish version of the COVID-19 Stress Scale

10.31234/osf.io/w8hd5

The COVID-19 pandemic and countermeasures implemented by governments around the world have led to dramatically increased symptoms of depression and anxiety. Pregnant women may be particularly vulnerable to the negative psychological effects of COVD-19 public health measures, because they represent a demographic that is most affected by disasters and because pregnancy itself entails significant life changes that require major psychosocial and emotional adjustments. The Pregnancy During the COVID-19 Pandemic (PdP) study was designed to investigate the associations between exposure to objective hardship caused by the pandemic, perceived stress and psychological distress in pregnant individuals, and developmental outcomes in their offspring. Methods The PdP study comprises a prospective longitudinal cohort of pregnant individuals (at enrollment) with repeated follow-ups during pregnancy and the postpartum period. Participants were eligible if they were: pregnant, ≥17 years, ≤35 weeks gestation at study enrollment, living in Canada, and able to read and write in English or French. Participant recruitment via social media (Facebook, Instagram) began on April 5, 2020 and is ongoing. At enrollment, participants completed an initial survey that assessed demographic and socioeconomic characteristics, previous pregnancies and births, pre-pregnancy health, health conditions during pregnancy, medications, psychological distress, social support, and hardships experienced because of COVID-19 (e.g., lost employment, loved one dying). For the first three months following the initial survey, participants received a monthly email link to complete a follow-up survey that asked about experiences since the previous survey. After three months, follow-up surveys were sent bi-monthly to reduce participant burden. For each of these surveys, participants were first asked if they were still pregnant and then routed either to the next prenatal survey or to the delivery survey. In the postpartum, surveys were sent at 3-, 6-, and 12-months of infant age to assess maternal psychological distress and infant development. Discussion This longitudinal investigation seeks to elucidate the associations between hardships, maternal psychological distress, child development during COVID-19, and risk and resilience factors that amplify or ameliorate these associations. Findings are intended to generate knowledge about the psychological consequences of pandemics on pregnant individuals and point toward prevention and intervention targets.

Protocol for the Canadian Pregnancy During the COVID-19 Pandemic study

A reliable measure to evaluate the predictive accuracy of a theoretical construct should be independent of the empirical setting in which the construct is tested. Effect size measures such as Cohen’s d, widely used for this very purpose today, instead plague this evaluation with ambiguity. Evaluating a theoretically postulated effect size in view of an empirically observed standard deviation—as Cohen’s d requires—is particularly inadequate when the empirical adequacy of a theoretical construct must be evaluated across empirical settings. As an improved measure, the similarity index compares the theoretically predicted effect size directly to the empirically observed effect size. Their similarity thus informs the construct’s empirical adequacy. Based on computer simulations, we propose a specific similarity interval as useful for theory-construction. We illustrate the similarity index using select findings from social and personality psychology, and describe its application in different empirical research designs.

10.31234/osf.io/gdmvx

A reliable measure to evaluate the predictive accuracy of a theoretical construct should be independent of the empirical setting in which the construct is tested. Effect size measures such as Cohen’s d, widely used for this very purpose today, instead plague this evaluation with ambiguity. Evaluating a theoretically postulated effect size in view of an empirically observed standard deviation—as Cohen’s d requires—is particularly inadequate when the empirical adequacy of a theoretical construct must be evaluated across empirical settings. As an improved measure, the similarity index compares the theoretically predicted effect size directly to the empirically observed effect size. Their similarity thus informs the construct’s empirical adequacy. Based on computer simulations, we propose a specific similarity interval as useful for theory-construction. We illustrate the similarity index using select findings from social and personality psychology, and describe its application in different empirical research designs.

A simple measure for the empirical adequacy of a theoretical construct

The world is facing a race between controlling new and more infectious variants of coronavirus and implementing vaccinations: How can health authorities and governments most effectively communicate the need to engage more strongly in protective behavior to avoid a collapse of the healthcare system until vaccination programs are effective? In the first wave of the pandemic, citizens became engaged in `flattening the curve' via powerful visualizations. Here, we use epidemiological modelling to develop a new visual communication aid, `buying time with hope', which reflects the pandemic trade-offs currently facing governments, authorities and citizens. Using a population-based experiment conducted in United States (N = 3,022), we demonstrate that this hope-oriented visual communication aid, depicting the competing effects on the epidemic curve of (1) more infectious variants and (2) vaccinations, motivates public action and communicates more effectively than fear-oriented visual communication, focusing exclusively on the threat of the new variants. Finally, using cross-national representative surveys from eight countries (N = 3,995), we document the urgent need to motivate public action to halt the spread of the new, more infectious variants. These findings not only provide public health authorities globally with a validated blueprint for health communication in a critical period of the pandemic but also provide general psychological insights into the importance of hope as a health communication strategy.

Communicate Hope to Motivate Action Against Highly Infectious SARS-CoV-2 Variants

10.31234/osf.io/wgy9e

News from Artificial Intelligence is Believed Less

10.31234/osf.io/ypqmk

We show that governor charisma can affect individual behavior to help mitigate COVID-related outcomes. We provide evidence in the field using deep neural ratings of charisma of governor speeches over time to explain physical distancing based on anonymized data from smart phones. We also show in an incentivized laboratory experiment that individuals who are conservative are more responsive to charismatic appeals of a governor, which drives their beliefs on whether their co-citizens will physically distance; these beliefs in turn appear to affect their behavior too. Interestingly, liberals are unaffected by charisma, as a result of their preference to physically distance regardless. These findings are important because they show that a learnable skill—or at least one that can be honed—can give leaders an additional weapon to complement policy interventions for pandemics, especially with certain populations who may need a “nudge,” and hence save lives.

Combating COVID-19 with Charisma: Evidence on Governor Speeches and Physical Distancing in the United States

10.31234/osf.io/u73sy

The COVID-19 pandemic massively changed the context and feasibility of developmental research. This new reality as well as considerations, e.g., about sample diversity and naturalistic settings for developmental research, indicate the need for solutions for online studies. In this article, we present e-Babylab, an open-source browser-based tool for unmoderated online studies specifically targeted at studying young children and babies. e-Babylab offers an intuitive graphical user interface for study creation and management of studies, users, participant data, and stimulus material with no programming skills required. Various kinds of audiovisual media can be presented as stimuli and possible measures include webcam recordings, audio recordings, key presses, mouse-click/touch coordinates, and reaction times. Information pages, consent forms, and participant forms are all customizable. e-Babylab was used with a variety of measures and paradigms in 14 studies with children aged 12 months to 8 years (n = 1516). We briefly summarize some results of these studies to demonstrate data quality and that participants’ engagement and the overall results are comparable in lab and online settings. We then present in more detail one replication of an established preferential-looking paradigm with gaze directions manually coded from the webcam captures. Finally, we discuss useful tips for using e-Babylab and present plans for upgrades.

10.31234/osf.io/hcta4

Curiosity is a powerful determinant of behavior. The past decade has seen a surge of scientific research on curiosity, an endeavor recently imbibed with urgency by the WHO, which set managing information-seeking as a public health goal during pandemics. And yet, a fundamental aspect of curiosity has remained unresolved: its relationship to utility. Is curiosity a drive towards information simply for the sake of obtaining that information, or is it a rational drive towards optimal learning? We leveraged people’s curiosity about COVID-19 to study information-seeking and learning in a large sample (n=5376) during the spring of 2020. Our findings reveal that curiosity is goal-rational in that it maximizes the personal utility of learning. Personal utility, unlike normative economic utility, is contingent on a person’s motivational state. On the basis of these findings, we explain information-seeking during the pandemic with a rational theoretical framework for curiosity.

Rational Curiosity and Information-Seeking in the COVID-19 Pandemic

10.31234/osf.io/4avt6

The COVID-19 pandemic may have affected mental health in the general population. We examined if a higher proportion of people screened positive for depression and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) during the first week of nationwide quarantine than in February 2019; if each disorder increased over six weeks of quarantine; and what predicted screening positive for depression or GAD across this period. Two nationally representative samples of Irish adults were collected using identical methods in February 2019 (N = 1020) and April 2020 (N = 1041). The latter were followed for six weeks during nationwide quarantine. Respondents completed the same measures of depression and GAD. A significantly greater proportion of people screened positive for depression in 2019 (29.8% 95% CI = 27.0, 32.6) than 2020 (22.8% 95% CI = 20.2, 25.3). There were no significant changes in the proportion of people who screened positive for depression or GAD across six weeks of quarantine. Screening positive for depression or GAD during the pandemic was predicted by female sex, younger age, and multiple psychological variables. We discuss the need to consider contextual factors to understand the mental health effects of COVID-19 and how these findings can inform responses to the pandemic.

A longitudinal assessment of depression and anxiety in the Republic of Ireland during the COVID-19 pandemic

10.31234/osf.io/2ht75

Introduction: In the absence of vaccines or causal therapies, behavioral measures such as wearing face masks and keeping distance are central to fighting Covid-19. Yet, their benefits are often questioned and adherence is variable. Methods: We examined in representative samples across eight countries (N = 7,568) whether adherence reported around June 1, 2020 predicted the increase in Covid-19 mortality by August 31, 2020. Results: Mortality increased 81.3% in low adherence countries (United States, Sweden, Poland, Russia), 8.4% in high adherence countries (Germany, France, Spain, United Kingdom). Across countries adherence and subsequent mortality increases correlated with r = -0.91. Limitations: No African or South American countries were included in the present study, which limits the generalizability of the findings. Conclusions: While reported Covid-19 mortality is likely to be influenced by other factors, the almost tenfold difference in additional mortality is significant, and may inform decisions when choosing whether to prioritize individual liberty rights or health-protective measures.

AdherenceCovid19Mortality, Margraf_Preprint

Objective: Some gambling product messages are designed to inform gamblers about the long-run cost of gambling, e.g., “this game has an average percentage payout of 90%.” This message is in the “return-to-player” format and is meant to convey that for every £100 bet about £90 will be paid out in prizes. Some previous research has found that restating this information in the “house-edge” format, e.g., “this game keeps 10% of all money bet on average”, is better understood by gamblers and reduces gamblers’ perceived chances of winning. Here we additionally test another potential risk communication improvement: a “volatility statement” highlighting that return-to-player and house-edge percentages are long-run statistical averages, which may not be experienced in any short period of gambling. Method: Gambling information format and volatility statement presence were manipulated in an online experiment involving 2,025 UK gamblers. Results: The house-edge format and the presence of volatility statements both additively reduced gamblers’ perceived chances of winning. In terms of gamblers’ understanding, house-edge messages were understood the best, but no consistent effect of volatility statements was observed. Conclusions: The return-to-player gambling messages in current widespread use can be improved by switching to the house-edge format and via the addition of a volatility statement.

10.31234/osf.io/yj2sr

Objective: Some gambling product messages are designed to inform gamblers about the long-run cost of gambling, e.g., “this game has an average percentage payout of 90%.” This message is in the “return-to-player” format and is meant to convey that for every £100 bet about £90 will be paid out in prizes. Some previous research has found that restating this information in the “house-edge” format, e.g., “this game keeps 10% of all money bet on average”, is better understood by gamblers and reduces gamblers’ perceived chances of winning. Here we additionally test another potential risk communication improvement: a “volatility statement” highlighting that return-to-player and house-edge percentages are long-run statistical averages, which may not be experienced in any short period of gambling. Method: Gambling information format and volatility statement presence were manipulated in an online experiment involving 2,025 UK gamblers. Results: The house-edge format and the presence of volatility statements both additively reduced gamblers’ perceived chances of winning. In terms of gamblers’ understanding, house-edge messages were understood the best, but no consistent effect of volatility statements was observed. Conclusions: The return-to-player gambling messages in current widespread use can be improved by switching to the house-edge format and via the addition of a volatility statement.

Risk communication improvements for gambling: House-edge information and volatility statements

Rising interest in online experiments for cognitive science research lies in the ability to reach a large number of participants in a short time at a relatively low cost. However, compared to controlled laboratory studies, online data is far more noisy. This is especially relevant when reliable response-timing at a millisecond-level is paramount, as it is the case for many decision-making tasks. In this paper we sought to replicate a well-validated cognitive effect -the distance effect in number comparisons- using an online mobile-friendly app developed with open-source tools in R-Shiny. In this task, adapted from (Dehaene et al., 1990), participants have to decide whether a number on the screen is larger or smaller than a standard (65 in our study). The distance effect stands for the fact that response time (RT) is significantly larger as the presented number is closer to the standard. A total of N=170 participants (110 with a mobile device, 60 on a desktop computer) completed 116 trials over a ~7-minute session. Using generalized linear mixed models estimated with Bayesian inference methods, we found a numerical distance effect strikingly consistent with the original study. Furthermore, we report systematic offsets in RTs that different OS, browsers and devices introduced. Our results demonstrate the reliability of R-Shiny for RT data collection. By doing so, our work paves the ground for a seamless and robust implementation of simple cognitive tasks in online studies over desktop and mobile devices using only R, a widely popular programming framework among cognitive scientists. See less

10.31234/osf.io/nuxdg

Time to Shine: Reliable Response-Timing Using R-Shiny for Online Experiments

10.31234/osf.io/5ntzc

The COVID-19 outbreak has generated significant uncertainty about the future, especially for young adults. Health and economic threats, as well as more diffuse concerns about the consequences of COVID-19, can trigger feelings of anxiety, leading individuals to adopt uncertainty-reducing behaviours. We tested whether anxiety was associated with an increase in willingness to be exposed to the risk of COVID-19 infection (WiRE) using an online survey administered to 3,110 French individuals aged between 18 and 35 years old during the lockdown period (April 2020). Overall, 56.5% of the sample declared a positive WiRE. Unemployment was associated with a higher WiRE (+8.2 percentage points (pp); 95% CI +0.9-15.4 pp). One standard deviation increases in income (+1160€) and psychological state anxiety raised the WiRE by +2.7 pp (95% CI: +1.1-4.4 pp) and +3.9 pp (95% CI: +1.6-6.2 pp), respectively. A one standard deviation increase in perceived hospitalisation risk was associated with a -4.1 pp (95% CI: -6.2-2.1 pp) decrease in the WiRE. Overall, our results suggest that both the prospect of economic losses and psychological anxiety can undermine young adults’ adherence to physical distancing recommendations. Public policies targeting young adults must consider both their economic situation and their mental health, and they must use uncertainty-reducing communication strategies.

ANXIETY INCREASES THE WILLINGNESS TO BE EXPOSED TO COVID-19 RISK AMONG YOUNG ADULTS IN FRANCE

10.31234/osf.io/jg67m

In this brief reflection, I explore three key lessons learned from conducting a policy research placement during the COVID-19 pandemic. I explore how the placement changed my perspective on my PhD research, working life, and suggest how academics may better engage with policymakers in the future.

The Pandemic and my PhD: Lessons from a Policy Research Placement with the Reset Initiative

10.31234/osf.io/whe6q

Understanding the concept of “flattening the curve” in connection with the COVID-19 crisis requires an understanding of which curve needs to be flattened – but how well do ordinary Americans understand the relationship between the various curves presented in the media? Based on prior research, we hypothesized that ordinary Americans will have difficulty comprehending the link between the two most commonly used graphs: graphs of new daily cases and cumulative cases, and this lack of understanding would shape attitudes towards enforcing social-distancing. To investigate this, we collected data from 594 Amazon MTurk participants. We found that: a) indeed, most people have a poor understanding of the link between new daily cases and cumulative cases, b) people also have unjustified high confidence in their judgments and c) their judgments and their confidence are systematically related to their policy attitudes. We also show that a simple training intervention can significantly improve this understanding.

Misunderstanding “Flattening the Curve”

10.31234/osf.io/uaqc2

To reduce the spread of COVID-19 transmission, government agencies in the United States (US) have recommended COVID prevention guidelines, including wearing masks and social distancing. However, compliance with these guidelines have been inconsistent. This study examined whether individual differences in decision-making and motivational propensities predicted compliance with COVID-19 preventative behaviors in a representative sample of US adults (N=225). Participants completed an online study in September 2020 that included a risky choice decision-making task, temporal discounting task, and measures of appropriate mask wearing, social distancing, and perceived risk of engaging in public activities. Linear regression results indicated that greater risky decision-making behavior and temporal discounting were associated with less appropriate mask-wearing behavior and social distancing. Additionally, demographic factors, including political affiliation and income level, were also associated with differences in COVID-19 preventative behaviors. Path analysis results showed that risky decision-making behavior, temporal discounting, and risk perception collectively predicted 61% of the variance in appropriate mask-wearing behavior. Individual differences in general decision-making patterns are therefore highly predictive of who complies with COVID-19 prevention guidelines.

Risk-Taking Unmasked: Using Risky Choice and Temporal Discounting to Explain COVID-19 Preventative Behaviors

Fear and anxiety about COVID-19 has swept across the globe. Understanding the factors that contribute to increasing emotional distress regarding the pandemic is paramount—especially as experts warn about rising cases. Despite large amounts of data, it remains unclear which variables are essential for predicting who will be most affected by the distress of future waves. We collected cross-sectional data on a multitude of socio-psychological variables from a sample of 948 United States participants during the early stages of the pandemic. Using a cross-validated hybrid stepwise procedure, we developed a descriptive model of COVID-19 emotional distress. Results reveal that trait anxiety, gender, and social (but not government) media consumption were the strongest predictors of increasing emotional distress. In contrast, commonly associated variables, such as age and political ideology, exhibited much less unique explanatory power. Together, these results can help public health officials identify which populations will be especially vulnerable to experiencing COVID-19 related emotional distress.

10.31234/osf.io/ah7jq

Fear and anxiety about COVID-19 has swept across the globe. Understanding the factors that contribute to increasing emotional distress regarding the pandemic is paramount—especially as experts warn about rising cases. Despite large amounts of data, it remains unclear which variables are essential for predicting who will be most affected by the distress of future waves. We collected cross-sectional data on a multitude of socio-psychological variables from a sample of 948 United States participants during the early stages of the pandemic. Using a cross-validated hybrid stepwise procedure, we developed a descriptive model of COVID-19 emotional distress. Results reveal that trait anxiety, gender, and social (but not government) media consumption were the strongest predictors of increasing emotional distress. In contrast, commonly associated variables, such as age and political ideology, exhibited much less unique explanatory power. Together, these results can help public health officials identify which populations will be especially vulnerable to experiencing COVID-19 related emotional distress.

Psychological determinants of emotional distress during the COVID-19 pandemic