Search

The COVID-19 pandemic challenged the public health system to respond to an emerging, difficult-to-understand pathogen through demanding behaviors, including staying at home, masking for long periods, and vaccinating multiple times. We discuss key challenges of the pandemic health communication efforts deployed in the United States from 2020 to 2022 and identify research priorities. One priority is communicating about uncertainty in ways that prepare the public for disagreement and likely changes in recommendations as scientific understanding advances: How can changes in understanding and recommendations foster a sense that "science works as intended" rather than "the experts are clueless" and prevent creating a void to be filled by misinformation? A second priority concerns creating a culturally fluent framework for asking people to engage in difficult and novel actions: How can health messages foster the perception that difficulties of behavior change signal that the change is important rather than that the change "is not for people like me?" A third priority entails a shift from communication strategies that focus on knowledge and attitudes to interventions that focus on norms, policy, communication about policy, and channel factors that impair behavior change: How can we move beyond educating and correcting misinformation to achieving desired actions?

Background: Each year, more than 1.7 million Americans suffer a traumatic brain injury (TBI) and the lifetime prevalence of major depressive disorder following TBI is between 25-50%. There are no validated established strategies to treat TBI depression. Repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS) is a novel putative treatment option for post-TBI depression, which, compared with standard pharmacological agents, may provide a more targeted treatment with fewer side-effects. However, TBI is associated with an increased risk of both early and late spontaneous seizures, a significant consideration in evaluating rTMS as a potential treatment for TBI depression. Whilst the risk of seizure from rTMS is low, underlying neuropathology may somewhat increase that risk., Review: This review focuses on the safety aspects of rTMS in TBI patients. The authors review why low frequency rTMS might be less likely to trigger a seizure than high frequency rTMS and propose low frequency rTMS as a safer option in TBI patients. Because there is little data on the safety of rTMS in TBI, the authors also review the safety of rTMS in patients with other brain pathology., Conclusion: It is concluded that pilot safety and tolerability studies should be first conducted in persons with TBI and neuropsychiatric comorbidities. These results could be used to help design larger randomized controlled trials.

Objectives: We examined the implications of the current recommended data collection practice of placing self-rated health (SRH) before specific health-related questions (hence, without a health context) to remove potential context effects, between Hispanics and non-Hispanics., Methods: We used 2 methodologically comparable surveys conducted in English and Spanish that asked SRH in different contexts: before and after specific health questions. Focusing on the elderly, we compared the influence of question contexts on SRH between Hispanics and non-Hispanics and between Spanish and English speakers., Results: The question context influenced SRH reports of Spanish speakers (and Hispanics) significantly but not of English speakers (and non-Hispanics). Specifically, on SRH within a health context, Hispanics reported more positive health, decreasing the gap with non-Hispanic Whites by two thirds, and the measurement utility of SRH was improved through more consistent mortality prediction across ethnic and linguistic groups., Conclusions: Contrary to the current recommendation, asking SRH within a health context enhanced measurement utility. Studies using SRH may result in erroneous conclusions when one does not consider its question context.

This paper investigates the link between disability and subjective wellbeing, using data from the 2009 Disability and Use of Time supplement to the Panel Study of Income Dynamics, the longest running national panel study in the United States. Disability is construed broadly to include both the presence of any physical, cognitive, or sensory impairment or activity limitation and also the severity of underlying impairments. Subjective wellbeing is measured using two distinct approaches: reports of life satisfaction and of moment-to-moment wellbeing-both positive and negative-on the previous day. The latter, collected through 24-h time diaries, also offers for the first time the ability to explore the role of participation in particular kinds of activities linking disability to subjective wellbeing. The analytic sample included married persons ages 60 and older and their spouses (n = 751 married individuals) who completed 1498 diaries. Several new findings emerged: no matter what the measure of wellbeing, older married adults with disability report worse subjective wellbeing than those without, and neither different demographic and socioeconomic profiles nor differences in participation fully account for these disparities. Influences of disability on global life satisfaction and episodic reports of happiness were relatively small and of comparable size. However, notably sizeable differences were identified in the cumulative number of pleasant minutes experienced yesterday by disability status - on the order of 71 fewer minutes on average for those with a disability of average severity. Differences appear to be more strongly linked to somatic symptoms of pain and feeling tired than to differential intensity of experiencing happiness, sadness, frustration, or worry. We also found limited support for the notion that participation partially mediates the relationship between disability and global, but not episodic, subjective wellbeing., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Good decision making often requires accurate predictions about how potential outcomes will make one feel. However, people often mispredict the emotional impact of unfamiliar circumstances. For example, they often overestimate the emotional impact that chronic illnesses and disability will have on their lives. In the present article, the authors look at possible sources of error in both the happiness reports of patients with chronic illness or disability and the happiness predictions of healthy people asked to imagine the same illnesses and disabilities. On balance, the available evidence suggests that, whereas patients misreport their well-being, healthy people also mispredict the emotional impact that chronic illness and disability will have on their lives.

Recent research has demonstrated that aspiring to the American Dream of financial success has negative consequences for various aspects of psychological well-being. The present longitudinal study examining the relation between the goal for financial success, attainment of that goal, and satisfaction with various life domains found that the negative impact of the goal for financial success on overall life satisfaction diminished as household income increased. The negative consequences of the goal for financial success seemed to be limited to those specific life domains that either concerned relationships with other people or involved income-producing activities, such as one's job; satisfactions with two of those life domains, however, were among the strongest predictors of overall life satisfaction in this sample of well-educated respondents in their late 30s. The negative consequences were particularly severe for the domain of family life; the stronger the goal for financial success, the lower the satisfaction with family life, regardless of household income.

Three experiments examined how norms characteristic of a "culture of honor" manifest themselves in the cognitions, emotions, behaviors, and physiological reactions of southern White males. Participants were University of Michigan students who grew up in the North or South. In 3 experiments they were insulted by a confederate who bumped into the participant and called him an "asshole". Compared with northerners--who were relatively unaffected by the insult--southerners were (a) more likely to think their masculine reputation was threatened, (b) more upset (as shown by a rise in cortisol levels), (c) more physiologically primed for aggression (as shown by a rise in testosterone levels), (d) more cognitively primed for aggression, and (e) more likely to engage in aggressive and dominant behavior. Findings highlight the insult-aggression cycle in cultures of honor, in which insults diminish a man's reputation and he tries to restore his status by aggressive or violent behavior.