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 Brief Report Monitoring the Different Emotional States As-sociated with the First and the Fourth Dose of the An-ti-SARS-Cov-2 Vaccine in an Italian Sample of Fragile Patients Aged Over 60 Years

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, many researchers have been interested in studying attitudes and behaviors in relation to vaccination, highlighting, through data, the so-called “vaccination hesitancy” (VH) phenomenon. Our aim was to investigate emotional states associated with the fourth dose of the anti-COVID-19 vaccine in individuals from the over 60-year-old and fragile patient category and to compare them with data that were previously recorded when the first vaccine doses were administered. The online questionnaire was created ad hoc and includes different sections: socio-personal data and the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-Y) were used to detect the level of the state of anxiety, understood as a feeling of insecurity and helplessness in the face of perceived damage that can lead to worry or to flight and avoidance. The total sample consisted of 57 participants (61.4% M; mean age 67.23; SD= 6.73). Differences in emotional states in relation to vaccination emerged between Group I and Group IV in which the former were more worried and indecisive, while the latter, although nervous, felt more comfortable. Overall, trust in science appears to be a key determinant of vaccination intention. Additional strategies promoting healthy behavior are needed

Stress lavoro-correlato in Sanità. Strategie, metodologie e interventi

Secondo la normativa per la valutazione del rischio di stress lavorativo devono essere presi in considerazione fattori inerenti l'organizzazione del lavoro, le caratteristiche psico-fisiche del lavoratore e socio-demografiche. Il progetto sperimentale è stato sviluppato per essere uno strumento specifico per l'ambito sanitario per la valutazione dello stress lavoro-correlato ed è caratterizzato dai seguenti obiettivi: indicare il livello di stress misurato mediante il questionario, mappare le criticità e individuare interventi migliorativi specifici tramite i risultati ottenuti

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

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