Cardiovascular reactivity to acute stress: attachment styles and invisible stranger support

While the benefits of social support for physiological health are well established, the underlying pathways by which support can influence cardiovascular reactivity (CVR) are still being elucidated. In the present study, we adapted an attachment framework to further explore the support-CVR link. Specifically, we experimentally tested the effect of attachment and social support on CVR by manipulating the provision of invisible support from a stranger, across individuals with secure, anxious and avoidant attachment styles. Employing a 3 × 2 design, a sample of young adults (N = 138) from across each of the three attachment styles were randomly assigned to either an invisible support (from a stranger), or no support, condition. All participants were subject to an acute standardised stress testing protocol where cardiovascular indices were monitored throughout. Results from a factorial ANOVA showed no significant interaction between support and attachment on any cardiovascular reactivity parameter (SBP, DBP, HR) or any main effect of attachment or support. These findings suggest that, in this case, social support was not effective in buffering the effects of stress across various attachment styles. The benefits of incorporating a developmental perspective to the study of social support and health are discussed

Allostatic load and mental health during COVID-19: The moderating role of neuroticism

Background During the COVID-19 pandemic increased risk of poor mental health has been evident across different cultures and contexts. This study aims to examine whether allostatic load (AL) prior to the pandemic was predictive of poor mental health during the pandemic, and if any associations were moderated by neuroticism. Methods Data were extracted from Waves 2 (2011, allostatic load), 3 (2012, neuroticism), and the COVID-19 study (April 2020) of the Understanding Society database in the UK; data were available for 956 participants. Results Mental health increased from 2012- to during the pandemic. Neuroticism and AL were positively associated with poorer mental health during COVID-19, such that those who had scored higher on neuroticism and had higher AL prior to the pandemic reported poorer mental health during the pandemic. Neuroticism was also a significant moderator; the effect of AL on mental health during the pandemic was exacerbated in those with high and moderate levels of neuroticism but not lower. Moreover, this was driven by the immune-related indices of AL. This withstood adjustment for age, gender, employment status and prior mental health. These findings are discussed in relation to the pathophysiological mechanisms of mental health

Teaching open and reproducible scholarship: a critical review of the evidence base for current pedagogical methods and their outcomes

In recent years, the scientific community has called for improvements in the credibility, robustness and reproducibility of research, characterized by increased interest and promotion of open and transparent research practices. While progress has been positive, there is a lack of consideration about how this approach can be embedded into undergraduate and postgraduate research training. Specifically, a critical overview of the literature which investigates how integrating open and reproducible science may influence student outcomes is needed. In this paper, we provide the first critical review of literature surrounding the integration of open and reproducible scholarship into teaching and learning and its associated outcomes in students. Our review highlighted how embedding open and reproducible scholarship appears to be associated with (i) students' scientific literacies (i.e. students’ understanding of open research, consumption of science and the development of transferable skills); (ii) student engagement (i.e. motivation and engagement with learning, collaboration and engagement in open research) and (iii) students' attitudes towards science (i.e. trust in science and confidence in research findings). However, our review also identified a need for more robust and rigorous methods within pedagogical research, including more interventional and experimental evaluations of teaching practice. We discuss implications for teaching and learning scholarship.</p