The article ‘An analysis of SARS-CoV-2 viral load by patient age’ by Jones et al. claims that “viral loads in the very young do not differ significantly from those of adults. ”, and the authors “caution against an unlimited re-opening of schools and kindergartens in the present situation. Children may be as infectious as adults.” It has been widely reported as implying that viral loads in children are similar to adults, and yet the data in the article show children between 1 and 10 having on average 27% (conservative 95% interval 8% to 91%) of the viral load of adults aged over 20. We show how inappropriate statistical analysis led to the authors’ unjustified conclusions: essentially, in spite of initially finding a statistically significant difference between subgroups, they made it disappear by doing so many additional and uninteresting comparisons. We recommend that the error is acknowledged and the paper is withdrawn from circulation.

Is SARS-CoV-2 viral load lower in young children than adults? Jones et al provide evidence that it is (in spite of their claims to the contrary).

It was a tragedy for anyone hoping to see COVID-19 become a catalyst for international solidarity. On the first day of the first-ever virtual World Health Assembly, held during the worst acute global health crisis since WHO's creation in 1948, Alex Azar, US Secretary of Health and Human Services, further damaged the credibility of the US Government as a constructive member of the international community. “We must be frank”, he began. What followed was an astonishing series of unsubstantiated allegations. “There was a failure by this organisation”, Azar stated. He argued that WHO had conspired with a member state (he meant China) “in an apparent attempt to conceal this outbreak”. He accused WHO of unjustly blocking Taiwan's participation at the World Health Assembly. And he said “WHO must change.” It must be more transparent and more accountable. Earlier, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus gave a forceful defence of the agency. He accepted that “we all have lessons to learn”, but argued that WHO had stood “shoulder-to-shoulder with countries”. The agency had acted quickly, Tedros said. He promised to initiate an “independent evaluation” of the global response. “The world must never be the same.” There was no need for new plans, procedures, or institutions. What mattered now was to strengthen existing mechanisms, especially national public health capacities specified in the 2005 International Health Regulations. Investing in health was a prerequisite for development. To protect the world from future pandemics, Tedros called on member states to support a stronger WHO. In the speeches that followed, countries repeatedly backed WHO and the Director-General. China stressed that it acted in a timely, open, transparent, and responsible manner. Some countries went further, denouncing the unilateral and coercive actions of the US Government.

10.1016/S0140-6736(20)31206-X

Offline: Health in the unhappy time of COVID-19

10.31234/osf.io/6svxw

Objectives: In Germany, as in many other countries, several lockdown restrictions were put in place with the aim of curbing the spread of SARS-CoV-2 infections. This study investigated the impact of the coronavirus pandemic and the related lockdown restrictions on opportunities for social participation, social inclusion and psychological well-being for adults with and without mental disorders within a follow-up study based on pre- and post-lockdown assessments. Methods: Study participants (n=132) were assigned to one of three groups, depending on the mental health status at the initial survey. Parameters of interest were assessed using the Measure of Participation and Social Inclusion for Use in People with a Chronic Mental Disorder (F-INK), the Index for the Assessment of Health Impairments (IMET), and the Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI-18). Results: The impact on opportunities for social participation and social participation considerably differed depending on the participants’ mental health status at the first assessment. Independent of this, we found no detrimental effects on the psychological well-being of participants four weeks after the implementation of lockdown restrictions. Conclusion: Findings imply a general resilience in well-being during the preliminary stages of the coronavirus pandemic. This is in good accordance with the literature that has so far been published.

Social participation, inclusion and mental well-being following SARS-CoV-2 related lockdown restrictions in adults with and without mental disorders. Results from a follow-up study in Germany

10.31234/osf.io/8xzqy

In this tutorial, we describe a workflow to ensure long-term reproducibility of R-based data analyses. The workflow leverages established tools and practices from software engineering. It combines the benefits of various open-source software tools including R Markdown, Git, Make, and Docker, whose interplay ensures seamless integration of version management, dynamic report generation conforming to various journal styles and full cross-platform and long-term computational reproducibility. The workflow ensures meeting the primary goals that 1) the reporting of statistical results is consistent with the actual statistical results (dynamic report generation), the analysis exactly reproduces at a later time even if the computing platform or software is changed (computational reproducibility), and 3) changes at any time (during development and post-publication) are tracked, tagged, and documented while earlier versions of both data and code remain accessible. While the research community increasingly recognizes dynamic document generation and version management as tools to ensure reproducibility, we demonstrate with practical examples that these alone are not sufficient to ensure long-term computational reproducibility. Leveraging containerization, dependence management, version management, and literate programming, the workflow increases scientific productivity by facilitating later reproducibility and reuse of code and data.

A Reproducible Data Analysis Workflow with R Markdown, Git, Make, and Docker

10.31234/osf.io/6b4vh

A novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, has spread widely throughout the world. To reduce the spread of infection, children are prevented from going to school and have fewer opportunities for in-person communication. Although the pandemic has impacted the everyday lives of children, its impact on their development is unknown. This pre-registered study compared Japanese children’s socio-emotional skills and skills for operating digital devices before and during the pandemic. Parents completed a web-based questionnaire before and during the pandemic for children ages 0-9. The results indicated that during the pandemic, children were more prosocial, experienced more problems in their peer relationships, and had better digital skills, but no differences were found in emotional symptoms, conduct problems, hyperactivity between before and during the pandemic. The change in digital skills was mediated by the duration of children’s media use. Overall, our results suggest the pandemic may have immediate impact on children’s socio-emotional and digital skills.

Immediate impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the socio-emotional and digital skills of Japanese children

10.31234/osf.io/5n942

Covid-19 pandemic is exerting a tragic impact all around the world. First-person experience of life-threatening and stressful events can modify individuals’ risk perception, and, consequently, risk-taking behaviours. Here we investigated risk-taking profiles in 130 Italian residents, and compared healthcare to non-healthcare workers, during the lockdown phase. We ad hoc developed the “Covid-19 Risk Task”, including the classic monetary Holt-Laury Paired Lottery Task (Monetary Condition, MC) and two new ecological conditions exploring Covid-19 related risk-taking aptitudes in relation to different health (Health Status Condition, HsC) and employment (Employment Status Condition, EsC) outcomes. Results showed that, in the whole sample, individuals were more risk-averse in MC than in HsC and EsC. Moreover, a payoff increase produced a shift toward more risk-averse behaviours in MC, but not in HsC and EsC, where we found an opposite trend suggesting a more risk-loving behaviour. Finally, we found that healthcare workers were significantly less risk-averse compared to non-healthcare workers in EsC, but not in MC and HsC. These findings provided evidence of the possible effects of Covid-19 outbreak on risk-taking aptitudes. The negative impact on human choices and, consequently, on the whole world economy of this catastrophic life event must not be underestimated.

Covid-19 in mind: how job loss and health threatening events modulate risk-taking behaviours in real-life contexts

10.31234/osf.io/n6dcj

The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic is currently a global health threat attributed to negatively affecting the mental health and well-being of people globally. The purpose of the present study is to examine the mediating role of optimism-pessimism and psychological inflexibility in the relationship of coronavirus stress with psychological problems among Turkish adults. The sample of the study included 451 adults (55% women). Participants mainly consisted of young adults with a mean age of 23.30 years, ranging from 18 to 65 years (SD= 6.97). A mediation model indicated that coronavirus stress had a significant predictive effect on optimism-pessimism, psychological inflexibility, and psychological problems. Further, optimism-pessimism and psychological inflexibility mediated the effect of coronavirus stress on psychological problems in adults. Lastly, optimism-pessimism predicted the psychological problems of adults through psychological inflexibility. These results elucidate our understanding of the role of mediators in coronavirus stress and psychological health problems. The findings are useful in terms of providing evidence for tailoring interventions and implementing preventative approaches to mitigate the psychopathological consequences of COVID-19. Based on the present findings, the potential utility of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy is discussed within the context of COVID-19.

Coronavirus Stress, Optimism-Pessimism, Psychological Inflexibility, and Psychological Health: Testing the Psychometrics of the Coronavirus Stress Measure

10.31234/osf.io/697gk

Researchers studying curiosity and interest note a lack of consensus in how these important concepts that motivate learning are defined. One proposal is that curiosity and interest are naïve concepts, intuitively and subjectively constructed by people to express underlying psychological processes to which they lack introspective access. Thus, there may not be definitive a priori definitions but there should still be common subjective definitions held by people. In the current studies, we use machine learning techniques to examine whether people naively distinguish between curiosity and interest as different subjective experiences, as an empirical yardstick for distinguishing the terms. In Study 1 (preregistered), we train a Naïve Bayes classification algorithm to distinguish between free-text definitions of curiosity and interest (n = 396 definitions), using cross-validation to test the classifier on two sets of data (dependent n = 196; independent n = 218). The classifier accurately distinguished curiosity and interest definitions considerably above chance levels, demonstrating that there is a naïve consensus in how they are distinguished. In Study 2, the classifier from Study 1 accurately distinguished definitions provided by experts who study curiosity and research (n = 92) suggesting that experts share the naïve consensus. However, we showed that experts who study curiosity shared the naïve consensus more closely than experts who study interest. These results suggest that there is a shared consensus that curiosity and interest represent different subjective experiences, providing a basis for much-needed conceptual clarity.

How are Curiosity and Interest Different? Naïve Bayes Classification of People's Naïve Belief

10.31234/osf.io/8rgkc

Investigating how echo chambers emerge in social networks is increasingly crucial, given their role in facilitating the retention of misinformation, inducing intolerance towards opposing views, and misleading public and political discourse (e.g., disbelief in climate change). Previously, the emergence of echo chambers has been attributed to psychological biases and inter-individual differences, requiring repeated interactions among network-users. In the present work we show that two core components of social networks—users self-select their networks, and information is shared laterally (i.e. peer-to-peer)—are causally sufficient to produce echo chambers. Crucially, we show that this requires neither special psychological explanation (e.g., bias or individual differences), nor repeated interactions—though these may be exacerbating factors. In fact, this effect is made increasingly worse the more generations of peer-to-peer transmissions it takes for information to permeate a network. This raises important questions for social network architects, if truly opposed to the increasing prevalence of deleterious societal trends that stem from echo chamber formation.

Cascades across networks are sufficient for the formation of echo chambers: An agent-based model

10.31234/osf.io/2mdxh

Progress in psychology has been frustrated by challenges concerning replicability, generalizability, strategy selection, inferential reproducibility, and computational reproducibility. Although often discussed separately, we argue that these five problems share a common cause: insufficient investment of resources into the typical psychology study. We argue that team science is a possible solution to these problems because it allows large groups of scientists to pool their resources, allowing higher resource investments than would be possible by solo PIs. As long as the unique barriers and risks are properly recognized and managed, we believe team science has unique potential to spur progress in psychology and beyond.

A Manifesto for Team Science

10.31234/osf.io/k3ynj

The present work posits that social motives, particularly status seeking in the form of moral grandstanding, are likely at least partially to blame for elevated levels of political polarization in the U.S. In Study 1, results from both undergraduates (N=981; Mean age =19.4; SD=2.1; 69.7% women) and a cross-section of U.S. adults matched to 2010 census norms (N=1,063; Mean age =48.20, SD=16.38; 49.8% women) indicated that prestige-motived grandstanding was consistently and robustly related to greater ideological polarization. In Study 2, results from a weighted nationally-representative cross-section of U.S. adults (N=2,519; Mean age =47.5, SD=17.8; 51.4% women) found that prestige motivated grandstanding was reliably related to both ideological and affective polarization.

Moral Grandstanding and Political Polarization: A Multi-Study Consideration

10.31234/osf.io/mxh75

With globalization, digitalization, and the spread of information and communication technologies, rules regulating work have been softened or completely abolished. As a consequence, employees face additional cognitive demands to plan, structure, and coordinate their work. In order to capture these demands of contemporary work, we constructed and validated the Cognitive Demands of Flexible Work (CODE) scale. The scale comprises four subscales (i.e., structuring of work tasks, planning of working times, planning of working places, and coordinating with others). We validated the scale in three independent studies (overall N = 1129) in German and English. Confirmatory Factor Analyses supported the four- factor structure as well as the metric invariance of the different language versions. Moreover, the subscales showed convergent validity with related constructs such as requirements for problem solving or autonomy. Criterion validity for emotional exhaustion, engagement, and positive work rumination, negative work rumination, and problem-solving pondering suggests that cognitive demands of flexible work can be construed as challenge stressors. However, relationships with emotional exhaustion were only significant for one of the four subscales. Overall, the CODE scale was shown to be a reliable and valid instrument to measure cognitive demands of flexible work.

Development and Validation of a Scale to Measure Cognitive Demands of Flexible Work

10.31234/osf.io/nkz5a

Children as young as 3-4 years are already concerned about inequality and declare that equality is a norm that should be followed. From 3 to 8 years they develop a strong preference for equality, which is typically reflected in both “envy” and “compassion”, that is, aversion to disadvantageous and advantageous inequality, respectively4. Further studies suggest that inequality aversion does not continue increasing after that age, but rather exhibit an inverse-U shape relation with age in childhood and adolescence, with a peak at 8 years old. Since children are particularly sensitive to inequality at the age of 8, it is an open question how exposure to real economic inequality at this age modulates prosocial behaviour in adult life. Here we link generosity in dictator game experiments conducted among Spanish university students (n>400) with existing macro-level data on income inequality within their region when they were children. The data show that individuals who were exposed to higher levels of inequality at the age of 8 are more generous in adult life. Interestingly, exposure at older ages has no impact on generosity. Our results extend previous findings on the development of egalitarianism by showing long-lasting effects of childhood inequality experience into adult life. If prosocial behaviour is (partly) developed as a reaction to an unequal environment then, in the future, inequality might be counteracted.

Exposure to economic inequality at the age of 8 enhances prosocial behavior in adult life

10.31234/osf.io/eqyjp

This article describes the qualitative approach used to generate and interpret the quantitative study reported by Song and colleagues’ (2020) in their article, “What counts as an ‘environmental’ issue? Differences in environmental issue conceptualization across race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status.” Song and colleagues (2020) describe the results of a survey documenting that, in the United States, White and high-SES respondents perceive environmental issues differently than their non-White and lower-SES counterparts, reflecting structural differences in environmental risks. While Song and colleagues (2020) discuss the survey results in detail, the discussion of the qualitative research that led to the creation of that survey was limited due to space constraints. The current article provides a more holistic account of the methods behind the Song and colleagues (2020) study by discussing the qualitative component of the research in detail. In addition to discussing how the qualitative research complements and critically informs the findings reported by Song et al., we also consider the broader implications and value of integrating qualitative and quantitative methods in environmental psychology.

Using Qualitative Approaches to Improve Quantitative Inferences in Environmental Psychology

10.31234/osf.io/qdhx4

There are a number of well-accepted ways to measure risk sensitivity, with researchers often making conclusions about individual differences based on a single task. Even though long-standing observations suggest that how risky outcomes are presented changes people's behavior, it is unclear whether risk sensitivity is a unitary trait that can be measured by any one of these instruments. To directly answer this question, we administered three tasks commonly used to elicit risk sensitivity within-subject to a large sample of participants on Amazon Mechanical Turk. Our findings revealed high individual variability in each measure, with little evidence of consistency among different tasks: many participants who were classified as "risk-averse'' in one task were "risk-seeking'' in another, and we observed no significant correlations between continuous measures of risk sensitivity as measured in each of the tasks. Our results cast doubt on the pervasive assumption that risk paradigms measure a single underlying trait, and suggest instead that behavior in risky situations is the result of heterogeneous, interacting, and possibly task-dependent cognitive mechanisms.

On the convergent validity of risk sensitivity measures

10.31234/osf.io/w9ygc

Interest in wisdom in the cognitive sciences, psychology, and education has been paralleled by conceptual confusions about its nature and assessment. To clarify these issues and promote consensus in the field, wisdom researchers met in Toronto in July of 2019, resolving disputes through discussion. Guided by a survey of scientists who study wisdom-related constructs, we established a common wisdom model, observing that empirical approaches to wisdom converge on the morally-grounded application of metacognition to reasoning and problem-solving. After outlining the function of relevant metacognitive and moral processes, we critically evaluate existing empirical approaches to measurement and offer recommendations for best practices. In the subsequent sections, we use the common wisdom model to selectively review evidence about the role of individual differences for development and manifestation of wisdom, approaches to wisdom development and training, as well as cultural, subcultural, and social-contextual differences. We conclude by discussing wisdom’s conceptual overlap with a host of other constructs and outline unresolved conceptual and methodological challenges.

The Science of Wisdom in a Polarized World: Knowns and Unknowns

10.31234/osf.io/mktgj

Three experiments (N = 854) examined the effect of a four-step elicitation method used in several expert elicitation studies on judgment accuracy. Participants made judgments about topics that were either searchable or unsearchable online using one of two order variations of the four-step procedure. One group of participants provided their best judgment (one step) prior to constructing an interval (i.e., lower bound, upper bound, and a confidence rating that the correct value fell in the range provided), whereas another group of participants provided their best judgment last after the three-step confidence interval was constructed. The overall effect of this elicitation method was not significant. The accuracy of best estimates was not improved by prior interval construction, and the accuracy of confidence intervals was not affected by elicitation order either. The coherence of participants’ judgments, however, stably predicted more accurate best estimates and also wider credible intervals.

Effect of Confidence Interval Construction on Judgment Accuracy

10.31234/osf.io/ryvg3

This document presents a method for eliciting and scoring rolling forecasts. Rolling forecasts ask when some event will occur; the question remains open and forecasters can update their forecasts until the event occurs.

Rolling Forecasts

10.31234/osf.io/mujek

Humans live in an uncertain world and often rely on social information in order to reduce uncertainty. However, the relationship between uncertainty and social information use is not yet fully understood. In this work we argue that previous studies have often neglected different degrees of uncertainty that need to be accounted for when studying social information use. We introduce a novel experimental paradigm to measure risky decision making, wherein social information and uncertainty are manipulated. We also developed a Bayesian model of social information use. We show that across different levels of uncertainty; social influence follows similar principles. Social information is more impactful when individuals are more uncertain. Notably, this relationship holds for experimental manipulations of uncertainty but also for subjective uncertainty within experimental conditions. We conclude with discussing that social influence can be better understood when paying credit to subjective uncertainties and preferences.

A Bayesian Model of Social Influence under Risk and Uncertainty

10.31234/osf.io/sp3j5

The inefficiency of the current peer-review system has been discussed for many years, and now there is a surge of various countermeasures aiming to solve the problems. Post-publication peer review (PPPR) has emerged as one of them, and some scholars expected that it would be the definite solution. Unfortunately, a decade of trial has not turned out to be as fruitful as expected. We assessed that the biggest reason for this situation was the lack of incentives among contributors, and proposed that publishing review commentaries as independent and qualified publications in a dedicated section of a journal might solve the problem. Specifically, we took the open peer commentary section of Behavioral and Brain Sciences as a model of such an incentivised structure, and pictured a possible implementation of this idea in the current web-based environment. Potentials of this new PPPR format were suggested.

Post-Publication Peer Review for Real

10.31234/osf.io/p6qxt

In the wake of the current COVID-19 health crisis, there is uncertainty and concern about the impact this pandemic will have on children’s health and educational outcomes. Play is a fundamental part of childhood and can be integral to children’s health in moments of crisis. Due to severe lockdown regulations around the world, typical play experiences have needed to adapt to school and playground closures, changes to peer interactions, and social distancing. We undertook a rapid literature review of the impact of quarantine, isolation, or other restrictive environments on children’s play and whether play may mitigate the adverse effects of such restrictions. Fifteen peer-reviewed studies were identified, spanning various environments in which children faced restriction, including hospitalisation, juvenile and immigration detention, and displacement to a refugee camp. We found that the literature provided evidence of changes in children’s access to play under restrictive circumstances, but less conclusive inferences regarding changes in frequency of play behaviours. These studies also indicated ways in which play might support children going through periods of isolation or quarantine, via promoting coping, expression, sociability, and skill development, but critically lacked robust investigations of play as a mechanism or intervention target in mitigating the negative impacts of restriction during childhood. Studies pertaining to children in isolation due to infectious disease outbreaks were notably absent from the literature reviewed in this search. We present these findings from the literature followed by recommendations for further research that may better support children in this and future moments of crisis.

A rapid review of the impact of quarantine and restricted environments on children’s play and health outcomes

10.31234/osf.io/s3fcu

The Covid-19 pandemic has far-reaching implications for researchers. For example, many researchers cannot access their labs anymore and are hit by budget-cuts from their institutions. Luckily, there are a range of ways how high-quality research can be conducted without funding and face-to-face interactions. In the present paper, I discuss eight such possibilities, including meta-analyses, secondary data analyses, web-scrapping, scientometrics, or sharing one’s expert knowledge (e.g., writing tutorials). Most of these possibilities can be done from home, as they require only access to a computer, the internet, and time; but no state-of-the art equipment or funding to pay for participants. Thus, they are particularly relevant for researchers with limited financial resources beyond pandemics and quarantines.

Conducting High Impact Research With Limited Financial Resources (While Working From Home)

10.31234/osf.io/pk6jy

Do crises bring people together or pull them apart? Here we examine how people’s willingness to help others and their perceived interdependence with others changed during the COVID-19 pandemic, and assess what factors are associated with any change. We collected data at 4 time points from the same cohort of 497 paid participants, starting on March 6th, before the pandemic was declared, through April 2. We found that perceived interdependence with neighbors and with humanity increased over time on multiple measures. However, regarding cooperation, agreement with the statement that helping someone in need “is the right thing to do” decreased over time (towards both a neighbor and a citizen of another country). Although the changes per time period were small for some of these effects, cumulatively they were non-trivial (ranging from a .33 to a .75 change on a 7 point likert scale). There was no change over time in participants' reported willingness to help somebody in their neighborhood (cooperation) or their feelings that when “All of humanity succeeds” they feel good (interdependence). We found reliable associations of change in cooperation and interdependence with sex, age, and pre-existing medical condition. We are collecting data on an ongoing basis which will allow us to investigate how these variables continue to change or not as the pandemic unfolds.

How is the COVID-19 pandemic affecting cooperation?

YouTube doesn't allow content about COVID-19 that poses a serious risk of egregious harm.  YouTube doesn't allow content that spreads medical misinformation that contradicts the World Health Organization (WHO) or local health authorities’ medical information about COVID-19. This is limited to content that contradicts WHO or local health authorities’ guidance on: Treatment  Prevention Diagnostic  Transmission

10.2196/19128

Background: During the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, governments issued movement restrictions and placed areas into quarantine to combat the spread of the disease. In addition, individuals were encouraged to adopt personal health measures such as social isolation. Information regarding the disease and recommended avoidance measures were distributed through a variety of channels including social media, news websites, and emails. Previous research suggests that the vast amount of available information can be confusing, potentially resulting in overconcern and information overload.Objective: This study investigates the impact of online information on the individual-level intention to voluntarily self-isolate during the pandemic. Using the protection-motivation theory as a framework, we propose a model outlining the effects of cyberchondria and information overload on individuals’ perceptions and motivations.Methods: To test the proposed model, we collected data with an online survey (N=225) and analyzed it using partial least square-structural equation modeling. The effects of social media and living situation were tested through multigroup analysis.Results: Cyberchondria and information overload had a significant impact on individuals’ threat and coping perceptions, and through them on self-isolation intention. Among the appraisal constructs, perceived severity (P=.002) and self-efficacy (P=.003) positively impacted self-isolation intention, while response cost (P<.001) affected the intention negatively. Cyberchondria (P=.003) and information overload (P=.003) indirectly affected self-isolation intention through the aforementioned perceptions. Using social media as an information source increased both cyberchondria and information overload. No differences in perceptions were found between people living alone and those living with their families.Conclusions: During COVID-19, frequent use of social media contributed to information overload and overconcern among individuals. To boost individuals’ motivation to adopt preventive measures such as self-isolation, actions should focus on lowering individuals’ perceived response costs in addition to informing them about the severity of the situation.

Impact of Online Information on Self-Isolation Intention During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Cross-Sectional Study

10.31234/osf.io/z2kup

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused immediate changes in the food retailing environment, particularly for countries that have “locked down” and imposed strict physical distancing measures. Consumer behavior has changed, including an initial period of panic buying, likely to be followed by further changes caused by constraints on the shopping experience. We interpret recent findings on shopping under constraints, and research on the effects of the SARS epidemic, on consumer behavior. As consumers spend less time making decisions in supermarkets, they will likely rely more heavily on price and brand heuristics to choose products. This trend may be reinforced by a counter-intuitive increased expenditure on supermarket goods, as was seen during the Great Recession of 2008. Online shopping will experience extensive growth.

What does food retail research tell us about the implications of COVID-19 for grocery purchasing habits?

10.31234/osf.io/qjhfp

The coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and attendant lockdown measures present serious threats to psychological well-being worldwide. Here, we examined the extent to which being outdoors (versus indoors), the experience of loneliness, and screen-time are associated with psychological well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic using an experiencing sampling method. In April 2020, Austrian adults (N = 286, age M = 31.0 years) completed a 21-day experience sampling phase in which they reported their psychological well-being, whether they were indoors or outdoors, and loneliness at three random time-points each day, as well as their daily screen-time. Results indicated that being outdoors was associated with higher psychological well-being, whereas greater loneliness and greater daily screen-time were associated with poorer well-being. Additionally, the impact of loneliness on well-being was weaker when participants were outdoors than indoors. Temporal changes in well-being, loneliness, and screen-time across the 21 days were small. These results have health policy implications for the promotion of population well-being during pandemics.

Psychological Well-Being Under Conditions of Lockdown: An Experience Sampling Study in Austria During the COVID-19 Pandemic

10.31234/osf.io/7snqb

Corona Virus 2019 (COVID-19) which hit Indonesia is very important for all major aspects of health and economy. The Indonesian government in its fight against COVID-19 was carried out in various ways contained in government regulations. At present the government rules against COVID-19 and the renewal that took place in Indonesia, the Indonesian government issued a New Normal. The purpose of this review is to bring out a new normal term in Indonesia after the COVID-19 pandemic. In conclusion, New Normal is a term resulting from the adaptation process while in the COVID-19 pandemic. Humans will have new habits from the learning process and the adaptation process after the COVID-19 pandemic.

NEW NORMAL “INDONESIA” AFTER COVID-19 PANDEMIC

Is the risk of dying from Covid-19 comparable to driving to work every day, skydiving or being a soldier in a war?

Putting the Risk of Covid-19 in Perspective

Dive Brief:  The City of Miami has partnered with shipping company DHL Express and mobility logistics hub Reef Technology to pilot four low-powered electric-assist e-cargo bikes that will be used for deliveries across the city.  ​The cargo bikes will come equipped with three wheels and a cargo container. They're capable of pulling up to 400 pounds or 60 cubic feet in volume.  The bikes are anticipated to reduce 101,000 kg of CO2e annually, and should help DHL achieve its short-term goal of "clean pickup and delivery solutions" for 70% of operations by 2025. 

Miami pilots e-cargo bikes to reduce congestion, pollution

Our World in DataArticles by topicHealthDemographic ChangeFood and AgricultureEducation and KnowledgeEnergy and EnvironmentInnovation and Technological ChangePoverty and Economic DevelopmentLiving conditions, Community and WellbeingHuman rights and DemocracyViolence and WarSustainable Development Goals TrackerLatestAboutDonateAll chartsSustainable Development Goals Tracker

Poverty, disease, hunger, climate change, war, existential risks, and inequality: The world faces many great and terrifying problems. It is these large problems that our work at Our World in Data focuses on. Thanks to the work of thousands of researchers around the world who dedicate their lives to it, we often have a good understanding of how it is possible to make progress against the large problems we are facing. The world has the resources to do much better and reduce the suffering in the world. We believe that a key reason why we fail to achieve the progress we are capable of is that we do not make enough use of this existing research and data: the important knowledge is often stored in inaccessible databases, locked away behind paywalls and buried under jargon in academic papers.  The goal of our work is to make the knowledge on the big problems accessible and understandable. As we say on our homepage, Our World in Data is about Research and data to make progress against the world’s largest problems.

It seems like all the news articles are based on this press release, which itself does not link to any published or unpublished research: https://scs.cmu.edu/news/nearly-half-twitter-accounts-discussing-%E2%80%98reopening-america%E2%80%99-may-be-bots… When I go to the publications page of the lab, I can't find anything from 2020 about bots. http://casos.cs.cmu.edu/publications/index.php…

The thing I normally do when I see an article like this is click through to the academic research being cited but....... I cannot find the academic research being cited

Ah here we go, this is the paper that describes Bothunter, the algorithm described in the Asia-Pacific paper, which again I am *assuming* is what was used in the research referred to in the NPR article (which again, has not been published) http://casos.cs.cmu.edu/publications/papers/LB_5.pdf

I found a couple of posters that share the same Office of Naval Research funding award numbers as the Asia-Pacific bot paper that detail some machine learning approaches to social network analysis, possibly related: http://casos.cs.cmu.edu/events/summer_institute/2019/si_portal/posters/poster-Binxuan%201.pdf…

Unfortunately this presents its bot detection methodology as a handwavey machine learning black box, based on a training data set that itself isn't auditable, and with a threshold of 60% probability-you-are-a-bot being their cutoff for comfortably declaring an account a bot

NPR -- Researchers: Aurora Borealis Discovered At This Time of Year, At This Time of Day, In This Part of the Country, Localized Entirely Within Your Kitchen

Maybe I should send out a press release and see what mainstream news outlets run with it: "Darius Kazemi, noted Twitter bot expert, says to CMU researchers 'nuh-uh, you're definitely wrong', based on research that he has not published yet and almost certainly exists"

In conclusion, holy shit, publish or at least preprint your damn research before you do a massively alarmist press release, my fuckin god

...and probably not the activity people are thinking of when they see a headline like "Nearly Half Of Accounts Tweeting About Coronavirus Are Likely Bots". But since there is no published paper for that particular press released, I am just guessing based on their prior research!

This incident was definitely a bot-based attack, but of a weird DDOS style harassment attack, rather than a "take control of the conversation" style attack. In other words, their training data set (at least for this paper) is based on a very narrow slice of bot activity...120

Well they based it off of this article by the Atlantic Council:#BotSpot: The IntimidatorsTwitter bots unleashed in a social media disruption tacticmedium.com

So to train their model they need known bots acocunts. Instead of attempting to attract bots, or looking at accounts that were suspended for bot activity, they picked a single "known and publicized" bot attack on the Atlantic Council (!). How do they know it was a bot attack?

Oh no. This paper is.... not very good in my opinion. It's 8 pages long, about 3 pages of which is the actual research, and those sections (1, 2, and 3) don't give hardly any auditable information. What they do lay out is, well, not what I would do if I were running a bot study

Ah here we go, this is the paper that describes Bothunter, the algorithm described in the Asia-Pacific paper, which again I am *assuming* is what was used in the research referred to in the NPR article (which again, has not been published) http://casos.cs.cmu.edu/publications/papers/LB_5.pdf

I suppose that for now I have to assume the lab is using the same methodology outlined in this 2019 paper looking at the role of bots in activist hashtags in the Asia-Pacific region (PDF): http://casos.cs.cmu.edu/events/summer_institute/2019/si_portal/pubs/Uyheng%20-%20Characterizing%20Bot%20Networks.pdf…

Can anyone point me to a published paper or any of the research mentioned in this article? There's no link here, no link in an MIT Tech Review article, nothing in several other articles I've seen. @CMU_CASOS can you help me out here? I want to review your methodology.Citar TweetNPR@NPR · 21 may.Nearly half of the accounts tweeting about the coronavirus pandemic are likely bots, Carnegie Mellon researchers say, adding that the tweets appeared aimed at sowing divisions in America. https://trib.al/DFLzKEu

SenseMaker® for COVID-19

Using SenseMaker® to navigate the current pandemic In response to the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic that is sweeping the globe, Cognitive Edge and the Cynefin Centre have designed unique ready-to-use offerings that will help provide leaders and decision-makers across all industries with actionable insights based on the real experiences and needs of their employees, customers, communities and citizens.

10.31234/osf.io/yq287

In order to provide time critical information on the social determinants of health during the COVID-19 pandemic, we relate levels of trust in science with government responses to the pandemic and the extent to which populations reduced mobility, a measure identified by epidemiologists as critical to halt the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. We used data from the 2018 Wellcome Global Monitor to develop a comparable index of trust in science across 144 countries using confirmatory analysis models for categorical data (often referred as Item Response Models) with alignment optimisation. We use this index to provide evidence on the association between trust in science, country level mobility changes following the COVID-19 pandemic and the stringency of regulations to halt COVID-19 spread. We find that trust in science was highest in Nordic European countries, among individuals with high educational attainment and income. Differences by religiosity, gender and residency were less pronounced. Countries where individuals trust science the most enacted less stringent regulations in reaction to the COVID-19 pandemic than countries where individuals trust science the least. Irrespective of country-specific trust in science, behaviors such as mobility reductions changed the most in countries with more stringent regulations. Stringent regulations were associated with large reductions in mobility irrespective of levels of trust in science. By contrast, where regulations were less stringent, mobility decreased more in countries with lower levels of trust in science. Many governments are considering relaxing regulations that were put in place following the rapid surge of cases and deaths and the risk that health care systems would be overwhelmed. At the country level, higher levels of trust in science appear to be associated with less voluntary adoption of behaviors that could reduce transmission, such as mobility reductions.

Can we rely on trust in science to beat the COVID-19 pandemic?

10.31234/osf.io/4c6av

While COVID-19 was quietly spreading across the globe, conspiracy theories were finding loud voices on the internet. What contributes to the spread of these theories? In two national surveys (NTotal = 950) conducted in the United States and the United Kingdom, we identified national narcissism – a belief in the greatness of one’s nation that others do not appreciate – as a risk factor for the spread of conspiracy theories during the COVID-19 pandemic. We found that national narcissism was strongly associated with the proneness to believe and disseminate conspiracy theories related to COVID-19, accounting for up to 22% of the variance. Further, we found preliminary evidence that belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories and national narcissism was linked to health-related behaviors and attitudes towards public policies to mitigate the spread of COVID-19. Our study expands previous work by illustrating the importance of identity processes in the spread of conspiracy theories during pandemics.

Collective narcissism predicts the belief and dissemination of conspiracy theories during the COVID-19 pandemic

10.31234/osf.io/edwta License

Objective: The COVID-19 pandemic has not only a physical health impact but also a psychological toll, which is associated with the social isolation and emotional contagion of fear and anxiety. One of the main factors which influence the increased levels of stress is the fear of COVID-19, and specifically the fear of being infected, and of transmitting the virus to one’s family and friends. In this study, a new measure named “The Fear of COVID-19 Familial Infection Scale” (FCFI) is suggested, and its psychometric properties are tested. Methods: A sample of 582 participants filled an online survey; of those, 393 (67.5%) were healthcare workers. Of the healthcare workers, 218 (37.5%) were medical doctors, 46 (7.9%) were nurses, and 117 (20.1%) were other healthcare professionals. Participants filled out a demographic questionnaire, The FCFI, the Fear of the COVID-19 scale, and the Depression and Anxiety Scale (DASS-21). Results: Exploratory factor analysis revealed that the FCFI has two factors: Fear of infecting others, and Perception of Others’ fear of being infected by me. This bidimensional model accounts for 69.5% of the variance in the FCFI. The two subscales had good reliability and high convergence validity as indicated by its correlations with being exposed to COVID-19, fear of COVID-19 and the DASS-21 subscales. Conclusion: The FCFI has initial good psychometric properties and could be a useful tool to assess levels of fear of COVID-19 familial infection.

The Fear of COVID-19 Familial Infection Scale: Initial Psychometric Examination

10.31234/osf.io/k8us2

Pandemics have historically shaped the world of work in various ways. With COVID-19 presenting as a global pandemic, there is much speculation about the impact that this crisis will have for the future of work and for people working in organizations. In this article, we discuss 10 of the most relevant research and practice topics in the field of industrial and organizational (IO) psychology that will likely be impacted by COVID-19. For each of these topics, the pandemic crisis is creating new work-related challenges, but also presenting various opportunities. The topics discussed herein include occupational health and safety, work-family issues, telecommuting, virtual teamwork, job insecurity, precarious work, leadership, human resources policy, the aging workforce, and careers. This article sets the stage for further discussion of various ways in which IO psychology research and practice can address the impacts of COVID- 19 for work and organizational processes that are affecting workers now and will shape the future of work and organizations in both the short and long term. This article concludes by inviting IO psychology researchers and practitioners to address the challenges and opportunities of COVID-19 head-on by proactively innovating the work that we do in support of workers, organizations, and society as a whole.

Pandemics: Implications for Research and Practice in Industrial and Organizational Psychology

10.31234/osf.io/rz78k

Many conspiracy theories appeared along with the COVID-19 pandemic. Since it is documented that conspiracy theories negatively affect vaccination intentions, these beliefs might become a crucial matter in the near future. We conducted two cross-sectional studies examining the relations between COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs, vaccine attitudes and intention to be vaccinated against the COVID-19 when a vaccine becomes available. In an exploratory study 1 (N = 409), two subdimensions of COVID- 19 conspiracy theories were robust predictors of negative attitude toward vaccine science. These results were replicated and extended in a pre-registered study 2 (N = 396). Moreover, we found that COVID- 19 conspiracy beliefs (among which, conspiracy beliefs about chloroquine), as well as a conspiracy mentality (i.e., predisposition to believe in conspiracy theories) negatively predicted participants’ intentions to be vaccinated against COVID-19 in the future. Interestingly, none of the conspiracy beliefs referred directly to the dangers of the vaccines. Last, we observed a strikingly high level of COVID-19 vaccination hesitancy. Implications for the pandemic and potential responses are discussed based on existing literature.

Conspiracy beliefs, chloroquine, and the rejection of vaccination: A conceptual replication-extension in the COVID-19 pandemic context

10.31234/osf.io/xju6y

Acknowledging COVID-19 as being potentially fatal triggered mental health-related consequences. In the US, the pandemic has highlighted the inadequacies of the mental healthcare system, especially in rural areas, inadequacies that result from lack of awareness and the severe mental health ramifications of COVID-19. Rural areas in the U.S. are particularly susceptible because mental-health resources are scant to start with, telehealth counseling relies on spotty Internet coverage, and COVID-19 has been slower to emerge outside urban centers.

The COVID-19 Pandemic Mental Health Crisis Ahead

10.31234/osf.io/chw5d

The recent COVID-19 pandemic has imposed threats on both physical and mental health since its outbreak. This study aims to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health among a representative sample of home-quarantined Bangladeshi adults. A cross-sectional design was used with an online survey completed by a convenience sample recruited via social media. 1,427 respondents were recruited & assessed by DASS-21 measure. Chi-square tests and multivariable logistic regressions were performed to examine the association of variables. The prevalence of stress, anxiety, and depression was 59.7%, 33.7%, and 57.9%, respectively. Chi-square tests suggest that age, gender, marital status, education, income, residence, and presence of an elderly family member are associated with mental health outcomes. Perceptions that the pandemic disrupted life events, affected mental health, jobs, the economy and education, predictions of a worsening situation, and uncertainty of the health care system capacities were significantly associated with poor mental health outcomes. Multivariable logistic regressions showed that sociodemographic factors and perceptions of COVID-19 significantly predict mental health outcomes. These findings warrant consideration of easily accessible low-intensity mental health interventions during and beyond this pandemic.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health of the adult population in Bangladesh: A nationwide cross-sectional study

10.31234/osf.io/t3yxa

Few things bind disparate groups together like a common obstacle. Yet, numerous polls suggest that the COVID-19 pandemic has been subject to a deep partisan divide. Using geo-tracking data of over 17 million smartphone users around the United States, we examined whether partisan differences predict objective physical-distancing behaviors. U.S. counties that voted for Donald Trump over Hillary Clinton in 2016 exhibited 16% less physical distancing from March 9 to May 8, 2020, as assessed by overall movement and visits to nonessential services (e.g., restaurants). Counties that watched more conservative media (i.e., Fox News) also exhibited reduced physical distancing, as did states with higher Trump approval. Contrary to our preregistered predictions, these differences did not weaken with time and remained even in pro-Trump states with active stay-at-home orders. Finally, lower physical distancing in strongly pro-Trump counties (those whose pro-Trump margin was 2 SDs above the mean) was associated with a 27% higher growth rate in COVID-19 infections. Taken together, these data suggest that behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic is not immune to the partisan divide in the United States and that partisan differences in physical distancing predict subsequent coronavirus infections and fatalities.