Test-retest reliability of the STRAQ-1:A registered report

This Registered Report provides the first test of measurement invariance across time points and estimates of test-retest reliability for the Social Thermoregulation, Risk Avoidance Questionnaire (STRAQ-1, Vergara et al., 2019). The scale was developed and validated to understand the physiological drives underlying interpersonal bonding, measured by four constructs: the desire to socially regulate one's temperature, the desire to solitary regulate one's temperature, the sensitivity to higher temperatures, and the desire to avoid risk. Previous studies with large samples across 12 countries showed that the STRAQ-1 has a stable factorial structure, satisfying internal consistencies for the temperature subscales, and expected correlations in its nomological network. However, to date, this instrument has no estimates of test-retest reliability. Throughout four academic years (from 2018 to 2022), N = 183 French student participants took the STRAQ-1 at least two times. Out of the four STRAQ-1 subscales, four were longitudinally non-invariant across two-time points. The constructs and latent scores were thus dissimilar and incomparable across time. We then conducted test-retest reliability using Intra Class Correlation coefficient (ICC) for the Social Thermoregulation, Solitary Thermoregulation, High-Temperature Sensitivity, and Risk Avoidance subscales. ICCs estimates were respectively for agreement and consistency: .70, .70 overall moderate to good, .62, .62 overall moderate, .67, .67 overall moderate, and .53, .53 overall poor to moderate, respectively. We discuss our findings in regard to the relatively long time between the repeated measures.Keywords: Test-Retest, Longitudinal Measurement Invariance, Attachment Theory, Social Thermoregulation, Registered Repor

In COVID-19 Health Messaging, Loss Framing Increases Anxiety with Little-to-No Concomitant Benefits: Experimental Evidence from 84 Countries

The COVID-19 pandemic (and its aftermath) highlights a critical need to communicate health information effectively to the global public. Given that subtle differences in information framing can have meaningful effects on behavior, behavioral science research highlights a pressing question: Is it more effective to frame COVID-19 health messages in terms of potential losses (e.g., "If you do not practice these steps, you can endanger yourself and others") or potential gains (e.g., "If you practice these steps, you can protect yourself and others")? Collecting data in 48 languages from 15,929 participants in 84 countries, we experimentally tested the effects of message framing on COVID-19-related judgments, intentions, and feelings. Loss- (vs. gain-) framed messages increased self-reported anxiety among participants cross-nationally with little-to-no impact on policy attitudes, behavioral intentions, or information seeking relevant to pandemic risks. These results were consistent across 84 countries, three variations of the message framing wording, and 560 data processing and analytic choices. Thus, results provide an empirical answer to a global communication question and highlight the emotional toll of loss-framed messages. Critically, this work demonstrates the importance of considering unintended affective consequences when evaluating nudge-style interventions

A global experiment on motivating social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic

Finding communication strategies that effectively motivate social distancing continues to be a global public health priority during the COVID-19 pandemic. This cross-country, preregistered experiment (n = 25,718 from 89 countries) tested hypotheses concerning generalizable positive and negative outcomes of social distancing messages that promoted personal agency and reflective choices (i.e., an autonomy-supportive message) or were restrictive and shaming (i.e., a controlling message) compared with no message at all. Results partially supported experimental hypotheses in that the controlling message increased controlled motivation (a poorly internalized form of motivation relying on shame, guilt, and fear of social consequences) relative to no message. On the other hand, the autonomy-supportive message lowered feelings of defiance compared with the controlling message, but the controlling message did not differ from receiving no message at all. Unexpectedly, messages did not influence autonomous motivation (a highly internalized form of motivation relying on one’s core values) or behavioral intentions. Results supported hypothesized associations between people’s existing autonomous and controlled motivations and self-reported behavioral intentions to engage in social distancing. Controlled motivation was associated with more defiance and less long-term behavioral intention to engage in social distancing, whereas autonomous motivation was associated with less defiance and more short- and long-term intentions to social distance. Overall, this work highlights the potential harm of using shaming and pressuring language in public health communication, with implications for the current and future global health challenges

A global experiment on motivating social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic

Finding communication strategies that effectively motivate social distancing continues to be a global public health priority during the COVID-19 pandemic. This cross-country, preregistered experiment (n = 25,718 from 89 countries) tested hypotheses concerning generalizable positive and negative outcomes of social distancing messages that promoted personal agency and reflective choices (i.e., an autonomy-supportive message) or were restrictive and shaming (i.e. a controlling message) compared to no message at all. Results partially supported experimental hypotheses in that the controlling message increased controlled motivation (a poorly-internalized form of motivation relying on shame, guilt, and fear of social consequences) relative to no message. On the other hand, the autonomy-supportive message lowered feelings of defiance compared to the controlling message, but the controlling message did not differ from receiving no message at all. Unexpectedly, messages did not influence autonomous motivation (a highly-internalized form of motivation relying on one’s core values) or behavioral intentions. Results supported hypothesized associations between people’s existing autonomous and controlled motivations and self-reported behavioral intentions to engage in social distancing: Controlled motivation was associated with more defiance and less long-term behavioral intentions to engage in social distancing, whereas autonomous motivation was associated with less defiance and more short- and long-term intentions to social distance. Overall, this work highlights the potential harm of using shaming and pressuring language in public health communication, with implications for the current and future global health challenges

A global experiment on motivating social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic

Significance Communicating in ways that motivate engagement in social distancing remains a critical global public health priority during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study tested motivational qualities of messages about social distancing (those that promoted choice and agency vs. those that were forceful and shaming) in 25,718 people in 89 countries. The autonomy-supportive message decreased feelings of defying social distancing recommendations relative to the controlling message, and the controlling message increased controlled motivation, a less effective form of motivation, relative to no message. Message type did not impact intentions to socially distance, but people’s existing motivations were related to intentions. Findings were generalizable across a geographically diverse sample and may inform public health communication strategies in this and future global health emergencies. Abstract Finding communication strategies that effectively motivate social distancing continues to be a global public health priority during the COVID-19 pandemic. This cross-country, preregistered experiment (n = 25,718 from 89 countries) tested hypotheses concerning generalizable positive and negative outcomes of social distancing messages that promoted personal agency and reflective choices (i.e., an autonomy-supportive message) or were restrictive and shaming (i.e., a controlling message) compared with no message at all. Results partially supported experimental hypotheses in that the controlling message increased controlled motivation (a poorly internalized form of motivation relying on shame, guilt, and fear of social consequences) relative to no message. On the other hand, the autonomy-supportive message lowered feelings of defiance compared with the controlling message, but the controlling message did not differ from receiving no message at all. Unexpectedly, messages did not influence autonomous motivation (a highly internalized form of motivation relying on one’s core values) or behavioral intentions. Results supported hypothesized associations between people’s existing autonomous and controlled motivations and self-reported behavioral intentions to engage in social distancing. Controlled motivation was associated with more defiance and less long-term behavioral intention to engage in social distancing, whereas autonomous motivation was associated with less defiance and more short- and long-term intentions to social distance. Overall, this work highlights the potential harm of using shaming and pressuring language in public health communication, with implications for the current and future global health challenges

Chimioradiothérapie des cancers de l’œsophage : revue critique de la littérature [Chemoradiation for oesophageal cancer: A critical review of the literature]

Locally advanced oesophageal cancer treatment requires a multidisciplinary approach with the combination of chemotherapy and radiotherapy for preoperative and definitive strategy. Preoperative chemoradiation improves the locoregional control and overall survival after surgery for locally advanced oesophageal cancer. Definitive chemoradiation can also be proposed for non-resectable tumours or medically inoperable patients. Besides, definitive chemoradiation is considered as an alternative option to surgery for locally advanced squamous cell carcinomas. Chemotherapy regimen associated to radiotherapy consists of a combination of platinum derived drugs (cisplatinum or oxaliplatin) and 5-fluorouracil or a weekly scheme combination of carboplatin and paclitaxel according to CROSS protocol in a neoadjuvant strategy. Radiation doses vary from 41.4Gy to 45Gy for a preoperative strategy or 50 to 50.4Gy for a definitive treatment. The high risk of lymphatic spread due to anatomical features could justify the use of an elective nodal irradiation when the estimated risk of microscopic involvement is higher than 15% to 20%. An appropriate delineation of the gross tumour volume requires an exhaustive and up-to-date evaluation of the disease. Intensity-modulated radiation therapy represents a promising approach to spare organs-at-risk. This critical review of the literature underlines the roles of radiotherapy for locally advanced oesophageal cancers and describes doses, volumes of treatment, technical aspects and dose constraints to organs-at-risk