The COVID-19 pandemic represents a massive global health crisis. Because the crisis requires large-scale behaviour change and places significant psychological burdens on individuals, insights from the social and behavioural sciences can be used to help align human behaviour with the recommendations of epidemiologists and public health experts. Here we discuss evidence from a selection of research topics relevant to pandemics, including work on navigating threats, social and cultural influences on behaviour, science communication, moral decision-making, leadership, and stress and coping. In each section, we note the nature and quality of prior research, including uncertainty and unsettled issues. We identify several insights for effective response to the COVID-19 pandemic and highlight important gaps researchers should move quickly to fill in the coming weeks and months.

/pdf/using-social-and-behavioural-science-to-support-covid-19-25vr5kyvxt.pdf

Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response.

Social network sites are ubiquitous and now constitute a common tool people use to interact with one another in daily life. Here we review the consequences of interacting with social network sites for subjective well-being—that is, how people feel moment-to-moment and how satisfied they are with their lives. We begin by clarifying the constructs that we focus on in this review: social network sites and subjective well-being. Next, we review the literature that explains how these constructs are related. This research reveals: (a) negative relationships between passively using social network sites and subjective well-being, and (b) positive relationships between actively using social network sites and subjective well-being, with the former relationship being more robust than the latter. Specifically, passively using social network sites provokes social comparisons and envy, which have negative downstream consequences for subjective well-being. In contrast, when active usage of social network sites predicts subjective well-being, it seems to do so by creating social capital and stimulating feelings of social connectedness. We conclude by discussing the policy implications of this work.

/pdf/do-social-network-sites-enhance-or-undermine-subjective-well-1zspcyk163.pdf

Do Social Network Sites Enhance or Undermine Subjective Well‐Being? A Critical Review

Introduction: Given the breadth of correlational research linking social media use to worse well-being, we undertook an experimental study to investigate the potential causal role that social media plays in this relationship. Method: After a week of baseline monitoring, 143 undergraduates at the University of Pennsylvania were randomly assigned to either limit Facebook, Instagram and Snapchat use to 10 minutes, per platform, per day, or to use social media as usual for three weeks. Results: The limited use group showed significant reductions in loneliness and depression over three weeks compared to the control group. Both groups showed significant decreases in anxiety and fear of missing out over baseline, suggesting a benefit of increased self-monitoring. Discussion: Our findings strongly suggest that limiting social media use to approximately 30 minutes per day may lead to significant improvement in well-being.

No More FOMO: Limiting Social Media Decreases Loneliness and Depression

An extensive literature shows that social relationships influence psychological well-being, but the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. We test predictions about online interactions and well-being made by theories of belongingness, relationship maintenance, relational investment, social support, and social comparison. An opt-in panel study of 1,910 Facebook users linked self-reported measures of well-being to counts of respondents' Facebook activities from server logs. Specific uses of the site were associated with improvements in well-being: Receiving targeted, composed communication from strong ties was associated with improvements in well-being while viewing friends' wide-audience broadcasts and receiving one-click feedback were not. These results suggest that people derive benefits from online communication, as long it comes from people they care about and has been tailored for them.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jcc4.12162

The Relationship between Facebook Use and Well-Being depends on Communication Type and Tie Strength

In their Facebook profiles, users communicate abundant social comparison information conveying mainly positive self-portrayals. Thereby, social networking sites like Facebook provide a fertile ground for envy. This has been proposed as a mechanism for the potential negative effects of Facebook use on well-being and depression. This article reviews research on this process. Studies show that (especially passive) Facebook use indeed predicts different measures of social comparison as well as envy. In several studies social comparison or envy mediate a positive association between Facebook use and undesirable affective outcomes such as depression. However, causal relationships have not yet been sufficiently established. Methodological and conceptual variety across studies limits their comparability, but reveals viable ideas for future research.

The interplay between Facebook use, social comparison, envy, and depression

Prior research indicates that Facebook usage predicts declines in subjective well-being over time. How does this come about? We examined this issue in 2 studies using experimental and field methods. In Study 1, cueing people in the laboratory to use Facebook passively (rather than actively) led to declines in affective well-being over time. Study 2 replicated these findings in the field using experience-sampling techniques. It also demonstrated how passive Facebook usage leads to declines in affective well-being: by increasing envy. Critically, the relationship between passive Facebook usage and changes in affective well-being remained significant when controlling for active Facebook use, non-Facebook online social network usage, and direct social interactions, highlighting the specificity of this result. These findings demonstrate that passive Facebook usage undermines affective well-being.

/pdf/passive-facebook-usage-undermines-affective-well-being-1navy2enh1.pdf

Passive Facebook usage undermines affective well-being: Experimental and longitudinal evidence

“You” is one of the most common words in the English language.
 Although it typically refers to the person addressed (“How are
 you?”), “you” is also used to make timeless statements
 about people in general (“You win some, you lose some.”). Here, we
 demonstrate that this ubiquitous but understudied linguistic device, known as
 “generic-you,” has important implications for how people derive
 meaning from experience. Across six experiments, we found that generic-you is
 used to express norms in both ordinary and emotional contexts and that producing
 generic-you when reflecting on negative experiences allows people to
 “normalize” their experience by extending it beyond the self. In
 this way, a simple linguistic device serves a powerful meaning-making
 function.

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/355/6331/1299.full.pdf

How "you" makes meaning

Prior research indicates that psychological distance facilitates emotion regulation. Here, we propose that the ability to transcend one’s immersed perspective may be hidden in plain sight, within t...

Linguistic Shifts: A Relatively Effortless Route to Emotion Regulation?:

Background During the fall of 2014, the threat of an Ebola outbreak gripped the United States (Poll, 8-12 October 2014; see Harvard School of Public Health & SSRS, 2014), creating a unique opportunity to advance basic knowledge concerning how emotion regulation works in consequential contexts and translate existing research in this area to inform public health and policy. Method We addressed these issues by examining whether third-person self-talk, a simple technique that promotes emotion regulation, could nudge people into reasoning about Ebola more rationally. In all, 1,257 people from across the United States were asked to write about their feelings about Ebola using their name or I (i.e. third-person self-talk vs. first-person self-talk) as concerns about Ebola swelled (24 October 2014-26 October 2014). Results Third-person self-talk led participants who scored high on Ebola worry at baseline to generate more fact-based reasons not to worry about Ebola, which predicted reductions in their Ebola worry and risk perception. These findings held when controlling for several theoretically relevant covariates, highlighting their robustness. Conclusion These results demonstrate how a simple linguistic technique can enhance rational thinking and quell worry about a pressing public health threat.

/pdf/third-person-self-talk-reduces-ebola-worry-and-risk-4u8to2y5tz.pdf

Ariana Orvell

Papers

Passive Facebook usage undermines affective well-being: Experimental and longitudinal evidence

How "you" makes meaning

Linguistic Shifts: A Relatively Effortless Route to Emotion Regulation?:

Third-Person Self-Talk Reduces Ebola Worry and Risk Perception by Enhancing Rational Thinking.

That's how “you” do it: Generic you expresses norms during early childhood