Does taking a short break from social media have a positive effect on well-being? Evidence from three preregistered field experiments

Concerns about the consequences of social media use on well-being has led to the practice of taking a brief hiatus from social media platforms, a practice known as “digital detoxing.” These brief “digital detoxes” are becoming increasingly popular in the hope that the newly found time, previously spent on social media, would be used for other, theoretically more rewarding, activities. In this paper, we test this proposition. Participants in three preregistered field experiments (ntot = 600) were randomly assigned to receiving each of two conditions on each of two different days: a normal-use day or an abstinence day. Outcomes (social relatedness, positive and negative affect, day satisfaction) were measured on each of the two evenings of the study. Results did not show that abstaining from social media has positive effects on daily well-being (in terms of social relatedness, positive and negative affect, day satisfaction) as suggested by the extant literature. Participants reported similar well-being on days when they used social media and days when they did not. Evidence indicated that abstinence from social media had no measurable positive effect on well-being, and some models showed significant deficits in social relatedness and satisfaction with one’s day. We discuss implications of the study of social media hiatus and the value of programmatic research grounded in preregistered experimental designs

Observation of Caustics in the Trajectories of Cold Atoms in a Linear Magnetic Potential

We have studied the spatial and temporal dynamics of a cold atom cloud in the conservative force field of a ferromagnetic guide, after laser cooling has been switched off suddenly. We observe outgoing 'waves' that correspond to caustics of individual trajectories of trapped atoms. This provides detailed information on the magnetic field, the energy distribution and the spin states.Comment: 21 pages, incl. 12 figure

Acceptability of an open-label wait-listed trial design: Experiences from the PROUD PrEP study

Background PROUD participants were randomly assigned to receive pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) immediately or after a deferred period of one-year. We report on the acceptability of this open-label wait-listed trial design. Methods Participants completed an acceptability questionnaire, which included categorical study acceptability data and free-text data on most and least liked aspects of the study. We also conducted in-depth interviews (IDI) with a purposely selected sub-sample of participants. Results Acceptability questionnaires were completed by 76% (415/544) of participants. After controlling for age, immediate-group participants were almost twice as likely as deferred-group participants to complete the questionnaire (AOR:1.86;95%CI:1.24,2.81). In quantitative data, the majority of participants in both groups found the wait-listed design acceptable when measured by satisfaction of joining the study, intention to remain in the study, and interest in joining a subsequent study. However, three-quarters thought that the chance of being in the deferred-group might put other volunteers off joining the study. In free-text responses, data collection tools were the most frequently reported least liked aspect of the study. A fifth of deferred participants reported ‘being deferred’ as the thing they least liked about the study. However, more deferred participants disliked the data collection tools than the fact that they had to wait a year to access PrEP. Participants in the IDIs had a good understanding of the rationale for the open-label wait-listed study design. Most accepted the design but acknowledged they were, or would have been, disappointed to be randomised to the deferred group. Five of the 25 participants interviewed reported some objection to the wait-listed design. Conclusion The quantitative and qualitative findings suggest that in an environment where PrEP was not available, the rationale for the wait-listed trial design was well understood and generally acceptable to most participants in this study

Genome-wide association analyses identify new susceptibility loci for oral cavity and pharyngeal cancer

We conducted a genome-wide association study of oral cavity and pharyngeal cancer in 6,034 cases and 6,585 controls from Europe, North America and South America. We detected eight significantly associated loci (P < 5 x 10(-8)), seven of which are new for these cancer sites. Oral and pharyngeal cancers combined were associated with loci at 6p21.32 (rs3828805, HLA-DQB1), 10q26.13 (rs201982221, LHPP) and 11p15.4 (rs1453414, OR52N2-TRIM5). Oral cancer was associated with two new regions, 2p23.3 (rs6547741, GPN1) and 9q34.12 (rs928674, LAMC3), and with known cancer-related loci-9p21.3 (rs8181047, CDKN2B-AS1) and 5p15.33 (rs10462706, CLPTM1L). Oropharyngeal cancer associations were limited to the human leukocyte antigen (HLA) region, and classical HLA allele imputation showed a protective association with the class II haplotype HLA-DRB1*1301-HLA-DQA1*0103-HLA-DQB1*0603 (odds ratio (OR) = 0.59, P = 2.7 x 10(-9)). Stratified analyses on a subgroup of oropharyngeal cases with information available on human papillomavirus (HPV) status indicated that this association was considerably stronger in HPV-positive (OR = 0.23, P = 1.6 x 10(-6)) than in HPV-negative (OR = 0.75, P = 0.16) cancers

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 multi-country test of brief reappraisal interventions on emotions during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has increased negative emotions and decreased positive emotions globally. Left unchecked, these emotional changes might have a wide array of adverse impacts. To reduce negative emotions and increase positive emotions, we tested the effectiveness of reappraisal, an emotion-regulation strategy that modifies how one thinks about a situation. Participants from 87 countries and regions (n = 21,644) were randomly assigned to one of two brief reappraisal interventions (reconstrual or repurposing) or one of two control conditions (active or passive). Results revealed that both reappraisal interventions (vesus both control conditions) consistently reduced negative emotions and increased positive emotions across different measures. Reconstrual and repurposing interventions had similar effects. Importantly, planned exploratory analyses indicated that reappraisal interventions did not reduce intentions to practice preventive health behaviours. The findings demonstrate the viability of creating scalable, low-cost interventions for use around the world

The role of common humanity and mindfulness in compassion

There is an urgent need for improving the well-being of students. The current project suggests compassion as a key candidate to enhance students’ well-being and investigates factors that can cultivate compassion. Mindfulness and common humanity are identified as two enhancing factors. A 2 (Mindfulness: High vs. Low) X 2 (Common Humanity: High vs. Low) factorial experimental design is employed to test whether mindfulness and common humanity can enhance compassion and its associated positive outcomes. The results provided partial support of common humanity as an enhancing factor of compassion. Conceptual and applied issues of compassion are also discussed in this article.published_or_final_versionEducational PsychologyMasterMaster of Social Science

Balancing listening and action is key to supportive parenting

Parents convey high-quality listening when they pay close attention and show acceptance and comprehension of what their child expresses. These behaviors are fundamental to supporting closeness and autonomy, increasing well-being, and fostering future self-disclosures. Whether and how parental listening is balanced with action may depend on the domain of interaction. When children and parents are exploring each other's perspectives or sharing, and when children are seeking comfort for worries or sadness (attachment), listening dominates. When parents are called to discipline or keep safe, listening helps inform parents' actions, but may need to be curtailed to ensure effective action. Models of parental listening and action represent a next step in the literature and inform research in self-determination theory and perceived parent responsiveness