Search

Background: Vaccine hesitancy and resistance pose significant threats to controlling pandemics and preventing infectious diseases. In a group of individuals unvaccinated against the disease caused by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus (COVID-19), we investigated how age, intolerance of uncertainty (IU), and their interaction affected the likelihood of having changed one's vaccination decision a year later. We hypothesized that higher IU would increase the likelihood of becoming vaccinated, particularly among individuals of younger age. We predicted that this effect would remain significant, even after controlling for delay discounting and trust in science., Purpose: The goal of this research was to understand the factors influencing changes in vaccination decisions among the vaccine hesitant., Methods: In a larger longitudinal study, ~7,500 participants from Prolific.co completed demographic and vaccination status questions, a delay discounting task, and the Intolerance of Uncertainty Scale in June-August 2021. Approximately 3,200 participants completed a follow-up survey in July-August 2022, answering questions about vaccination status, reasons for vaccination decision, and trust in science. We analyzed data from 251 participants who initially had no intention of getting vaccinated and completed the follow-up survey; 38% reported becoming vaccinated in the intervening year., Results: Data were analyzed using multilevel logistic regression. Over and above other factors related to vaccination decisions (delay discounting, trust in science), younger participants were more likely to change their decision and become vaccinated a year later, especially if they had higher IU, confirming our predictions. Primary reasons for becoming vaccinated were necessity and seeking protection against the virus., Conclusions: These findings highlight the complex interplay between age, uncertainty, and vaccination decisions, and inform health policies by suggesting the need for tailoring interventions to specific concerns in different age groups., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society of Behavioral Medicine.)

Research suggests that discounting of delayed rewards (i.e., tendency to choose smaller immediate rewards over large later rewards) is a promising target of intervention to encourage compliance with public health measures (PHM), such as vaccination compliance. The effects of delay discounting, however, may differ across the types of PHMs, given that the benefits of vaccination, unlike other PHMs (physical distancing, handwashing, and mask-wearing), are more temporally delayed. Here, we examined whether delay discounting predicts engaging in COVID-19 PHMs in approximately 7,000 participants recruited from 13 countries in June-August 2021. After controlling for demographic and distress variables, delay discounting was a negative predictor of vaccination, but a positive predictor of physical distancing (when restrictions are in place) and handwashing. There was no significant association between delay discounting and frequency of mask-wearing. It is possible that increasing vaccination compliance may require greater emphasis on future benefits of vaccination, whereas promotion of physical distancing and hand hygiene may require greater focus on the present moment. Further research is needed to investigate the nature of this relationship and its implications for public health messaging., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

How well do we know our city? It turns out, much more poorly than we might imagine. We used declarative memory and eye-tracking techniques to examine people's ability to detect modifications to real-world landmarks and scenes in Toronto locales with which they have had extensive experience. Participants were poor at identifying which scenes contained altered landmarks, whether the modification was to the landmarks' relative size, internal features, or relation to surrounding context. To determine whether an indirect measure would prove more sensitive, we tracked eye movements during viewing. Changes in overall visual exploration, but not to specific regions of change, were related to participants' explicit endorsement of scenes as modified. These results support the contention that very familiar landmarks are represented at a global or gist level, but not local or fine-grained, level. These findings offer a unified view of memory for gist across verbal and spatial domains, and across recent and remote memory, with implications for hippocampal-neocortical interactions., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Human thought is prone to biases. Some biases serve as beneficial heuristics to free up limited cognitive resources or improve well-being, but their neurocognitive basis is unclear. One such bias is a tendency to construe events in the distant future in abstract, general terms and events in the near future in concrete, detailed terms. Temporal construal may rely on our capacity to orient toward and/or imagine context-rich future events. We tested 21 individuals with impaired episodic future thinking resulting from lesions to the hippocampus or ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) and 57 control participants (aged 45-76 years) from Canada and Italy on measures sensitive to temporal construal. We found that temporal construal persisted in most patients, even those with impaired episodic future thinking, but was abolished in some vmPFC cases, possibly in relation to difficulties forming and maintaining future intentions. The results confirm the fractionation of future thinking and that parts of vmPFC might critically support our ability to flexibly conceive and orient ourselves toward future events.

Widespread vaccination is necessary to minimize or halt the effects of many infectious diseases, including COVID-19. Stagnating vaccine uptake can prolong pandemics, raising the question of how we might predict, prevent, and correct vaccine hesitancy and unwillingness. In a multinational sample (N = 4,452) recruited from 13 countries that varied in pandemic severity and vaccine uptake (July 2021), we examined whether short-sighted decision-making as exemplified by steep delay discounting-choosing smaller immediate rewards over larger delayed rewards-predicts COVID-19 vaccination status. Delay discounting was steeper in unvaccinated individuals and predicted vaccination status over and above demographics or mental health. The results suggest that delay discounting, a personal characteristic known to be modifiable through cognitive interventions, is a contributing cause of differences in vaccine compliance., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Knowledge and belief attribution are discussed in the context of episodic and semantic memory theory and research, with reference to patient-lesion and developmental studies under naturalistic conditions. Consideration of how episodic and semantic memory relate to each other and intersect in the real world, including how they fail, can illuminate the approach to studying how people represent others' minds.

Does the tendency to adjust appraisals of ourselves in the past and future in order to maintain a favourable view of ourselves in the present require episodic memory? A developmental amnesic person with impaired episodic memory (HC) was compared with two groups of age-matched controls on tasks assessing the Big Five personality traits and social competence in relation to the past, present and future. Consistent with previous research, controls believed that their personality had changed more in the past 5 years than it will change in the next 5 years (i.e. the end-of-history illusion), and rated their present and future selves as more socially competent than their past selves (i.e. social improvement illusion), although this was moderated by self-esteem. Despite her lifelong episodic memory impairment, HC also showed these biases of temporal self-appraisal. Together, these findings do not support the theory that the temporal extension of the self-concept requires the ability to recollect richly detailed memories of the self in the past and future., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)