Search

A growing body of evidence suggests that questionable health behaviors- not following medical recommendations and resorting to non-evidence based treatments-are more frequent than previously thought, and that they seem to have strong psychological roots. We thus aimed to: 1) document the lifetime prevalence of intentional non-adherence to medical recommendations (iNAR) and use of traditional, complementary and alternative medicine (TCAM) in Serbia and 2) understand how they relate to 'distal' psychological factors-personality traits and thinking dispositions, and 'proximal' factors-a set of beliefs and cognitive biases under the term 'irrational mindset'. In this preregistered cross-sectional study on a nationally representative sample (N = 1003), we observed high lifetime prevalence of iNAR (91.3%) and TCAM (99.2%). Irrational beliefs, especially magical health beliefs and medical conspiracy theories, were the strongest predictors of TCAM. They also mediated the relation between Disintegration/lower cognitive reflectiveness and TCAM. High Disintegration, and low Conscientiousness predicted iNAR directly, whilst negative experiences with the healthcare system facilitated both types of questionable health practices. The established psychological profile of people prone to questionable health behaviors and the fact they can be tracked to negative experiences with the system can be used to tailor public health communications., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2024 Knežević et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

In the present work, we addressed the relationship between parental leave policies and social norms. Using a pre-registered, cross-national approach, we examined the relationship between parental leave policies and the perception of social norms for the gender division of childcare. In this study, 19,259 students (11,924 women) from 48 countries indicated the degree to which they believe childcare is (descriptive norm) and should be (prescriptive norm) equally divided among mothers and fathers. Policies were primarily operationalized as the existence of parental leave options in the respective country. The descriptive and prescriptive norms of equal division of childcare were stronger when parental leave was available in a country - also when controlling for potential confounding variables. Moreover, analyses of time since policy change suggested that policy change may initially affect prescriptive norms and then descriptive norms at a later point. However, due to the cross-sectional nature of the data, drawing causal inferences is difficult., (© 2024 British Psychological Society.)

Despite assumptions that people strive for consistency between their beliefs, endorsement of mutually incompatible ones is not rare - a tendency we have previously labelled doublethink, by borrowing from Orwell. In an attempt to understand the nature of doublethink and the underlying mechanism that enables incompatible beliefs to coexist, we conducted two preregistered studies (total N = 691). To do so, in Study 1, we first explored how doublethink relates to (1) thinking styles (rational/intuitive, actively open-minded thinking, and need for cognitive closure), (2) a set of irrational beliefs (magical health, conspiratorial, superstitious, and paranormal beliefs) and (3) its predictiveness for questionable health practices (non-adherence to medical recommendations and use of traditional, complementary and alternative medicine). We then additionally expanded the set of health behaviors in Study 2, and related doublethink to trust in two epistemic authorities - science and the wisdom of the common man. Finally, in both studies, we explored whether those prone to inconsistent beliefs are also more likely to simultaneously rely on conventional and alternative medicine, despite their apparent incompatibility. While doublethink was positively related to need for cognitive closure and different irrational beliefs that easily incorporate contradictions, as well as negatively to actively open-minded thinking, we did not find it to be predictive of the use of non-evidence-based medicine nor of its simultaneous use with official medicine. It seems that this novel construct can be best understood as a feature of the cognitive system that allows incompatible claims to enter it. However, once beliefs are within the system, they are compartmentalized, without any cross-referencing between them. This is further reflected in non-evidence-based beliefs persisting within the belief system, irrespective of their content., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Objective: This content analysis study explored how online news media communicates and frames vaccination rates and herd immunity (the effect where enough people are immune, the virus is contained)., Methods: We analyzed 160 vaccination-related news stories by nine highest-trafficked news websites in Serbia, published July-December 2017, around the start of the measles outbreak. We coded both the news story as a whole and every vaccination-rate mention ( N  = 339)., Results: News stories framed current vaccination rates and changes in them in a predominantly negative way (175/241 and 67/98 mentions, respectively) (e.g., "only 50% vaccinated", "fewer parents vaccinating their children"), especially when referring to the measles vaccine (202/262 mentions). A total of 23/86 of news stories mentioning vaccination rates did not provide any numerical values. Reference groups for vaccination rates were rarely specified. Out of the 32 news stories mentioning herd immunity, 11 explained the effect., Conclusions: Even routine communication of vaccination rates can be biased through negative frames and imprecise descriptions. Lamenting low immunization rates could activate a negative descriptive social norm ("many people are not getting vaccinated"), which may be especially ill-advised in the absence of an explanation of the social benefit of achieving herd immunity through vaccination.

Scientism proposes science to be an all-powerful human enterprise, able to answer not only all practical but also philosophical or moral questions. We are taking a psychological approach to scientism, studying uncritical trust in science and uncritical trust in scientists as a part of a unique attitudinal tendency. Our novel measure assesses both kinds of trust through short Thurstone scales allowing us to establish a clear threshold for endorsing scientism, thus effectively delineating it from science enthusiasm, which previous instruments were unable to do. We built and refined a novel scale through five stages in which we consulted relevant literature, experts, and laypeople. We demonstrated that uncritical trust in science and scientists are interrelated, yet distinct constructs. As expected, these two subscales positively correlated with dogmatism, scientific knowledge, and overclaiming, but not with knowledge overestimation. The results suggest the new instrument is reliable, valid, and suitable for the lay public.

Introduction: We will launch a national survey in Serbia to document the prevalence of two types of questionable health behaviours: (1) intentional non-adherence to medical recommendations and (2) use of traditional, complementary and alternative medicine practices, as well as the relation between the two. We will also investigate their psychological roots, including (a) 'distal' predictors such as HEXACO personality traits (plus Disintegration) and thinking dispositions (rational/experiential thinking and cognitive reflexivity), and (b) 'proximal' predictors under the umbrella 'irrational mindset' (set of unfounded beliefs consisting of conspiratorial thinking, superstition, magical health beliefs as well as selected cognitive biases), which have more content-wise overlap with the health behaviours., Methods and Analysis: In this cross-sectional study, a research agency will collect data from a nationally representative sample (n=1043; age 18-75 years; estimated start/end-June/November 2021) recruited online (approximately, 70% of the sample, aged 18-54; 11 years) and face-to-face (approximately, 30% of the sample, aged 55-75 years). Participants will complete a battery of tests assessing questionable health behaviours, basic personality traits, thinking dispositions, irrational mindset, sociopolitical beliefs, sociodemographic and health-related variables. Prevalence rates will be calculated using descriptive statistics. To explore the relation between (psychological) predictors and questionable health behaviours, we will use hierarchical regression and partial mediation models (path analysis or full SEM models)., Ethics and Dissemination: Ethical Committees of the Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade (#935/1), Faculty of Special Education and Rehabilitation (#139/1) and Faculty of Media and Communications (#228) approved the protocol. Only participants who provide informed consent will participate in the study. A research report based on the study results will be submitted to peer-reviewed journals and results will be made available to stakeholders through reports on the project website https://reasonforhealth.f.bg.ac.rs/en/ and disseminated via social media., Trial Registration Number: NCT05808660., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Health care policies often rely on public cooperation, especially during a health crisis. However, a crisis is also a period of uncertainty and proliferation of health-related advice: while some people adhere to the official recommendations, others tend to avoid them and resort to non-evidence based, pseudoscientific practices. People prone to the latter are often the ones endorsing a set of epistemically suspect beliefs, with two being particularly relevant: conspiratorial pandemic-related beliefs, and the appeal to nature bias regarding COVID-19 (i.e., trusting natural immunity to fight the pandemic). These in turn are rooted in trust in different epistemic authorities, seen as mutually exclusive: trust in science and trust in the "wisdom of the common man". Drawing from two nationally representative probability samples, we tested a model in which trust in science/wisdom of the common man predicted COVID-19 vaccination status (Study 1, N = 1001) or vaccination status alongside use of pseudoscientific health practices (Study 2, N = 1010), through COVID-19 conspiratorial beliefs and the appeal to nature bias regarding COVID-19. As expected, epistemically suspect beliefs were interrelated, related to vaccination status, and to both types of trust. Moreover, trust in science had both a direct and indirect effect on vaccination status through both types of epistemically suspect beliefs. Trust in the wisdom of the common man had only an indirect effect on vaccination status. Contrary to the way they are typically portrayed, the two types of trust were unrelated. These results were largely replicated in the second study, in which we added pseudoscientific practices as an outcome; trust in science and the wisdom of the common man contributed to their prediction only indirectly, through epistemically suspect beliefs. We offer recommendations on how to make use of different types of epistemic authorities and how to tackle unfounded beliefs in communication during a health crisis., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Žeželj et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

Differences in attitudes on social issues such as abortion, immigration and sex are hugely divisive, and understanding their origins is among the most important tasks facing human behavioural sciences. Despite the clear psychological importance of parenthood and the motivation to provide care for children, researchers have only recently begun investigating their influence on social and political attitudes. Because socially conservative values ostensibly prioritize safety, stability and family values, we hypothesized that being more invested in parental care might make socially conservative policies more appealing. Studies 1 (preregistered; n = 376) and 2 ( n = 1924) find novel evidence of conditional experimental effects of a parenthood prime, such that people who engaged strongly with a childcare manipulation showed an increase in social conservatism. Studies 3 ( n = 2610, novel data from 10 countries) and 4 ( n = 426 444, World Values Survey data) find evidence that both parenthood and parental care motivation are associated with increased social conservatism around the globe. Further, most of the positive association globally between age and social conservatism is accounted for by parenthood. These findings support the hypothesis that parenthood and parental care motivation increase social conservatism.

Rationale: Belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories can have severe consequences; it is therefore crucial to understand this phenomenon, in its similarities with general conspiracy belief, but also in how it is context-dependent., Objective: The aim of this systematic review is to provide a comprehensive overview of the available research on COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs and to synthesise this research to make it widely accessible., Methods: We present a synthesis of COVID-19 conspiracy belief research from 85 international articles, identified and appraised through a systematic review, in line with contemporary protocols and guidelines for systematic reviews., Results: We identify a number of potential antecedents of COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs (individual differences, personality traits, demographic variables, attitudes, thinking styles and biases, group identity, trust in authorities, and social media use), their consequences (protective behaviours, self-centred and misguided behaviours such as hoarding and pseudoscientific health practices, vaccination intentions, psychological wellbeing, and other negative social consequences such as discrimination and violence), and the effect sizes of their relations with the conspiracy beliefs., Conclusions: We conclude that understanding both the potential antecedents and consequences of conspiracy beliefs and how they are context-dependent is highly important to tackle them, whether in the COVID-19 pandemic or future threats, such as that of climate change., (Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Territorial ownership claims are central to many interethnic conflicts and can constitute an obstacle to conflict resolution and reconciliation. However, people in conflict areas might also have a perception that the territory simultaneously belongs to one's ingroup and the rival outgroup. We expected such perceptions of shared ownership to be related to higher reconciliation intentions. We examined this expectation in relation to the territory of Kosovo among random national samples of Albanians and Serbs from Kosovo, and Serbs from Serbia (Study 1, total N = 995). In general, participants perceived low levels of shared ownership, however, shared ownership perceptions were positively related to reconciliation intentions in Kosovo. In Study 2 (total N = 375), we experimentally manipulated shared ownership (vs. ingroup ownership) and found that shared ownership elicited stronger reconciliation intentions. It is concluded that fostering a sense of shared ownership can be important for improving intergroup relations in post-conflict settings., (© 2021 The Authors. British Journal of Social Psychology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Psychological Society.)

What role does intergroup contact play in promoting support for social change toward greater social equality? Drawing on the needs-based model of reconciliation, we theorized that when inequality between groups is perceived as illegitimate, disadvantaged group members will experience a need for empowerment and advantaged group members a need for acceptance. When intergroup contact satisfies each group's needs, it should result in more mutual support for social change. Using four sets of survey data collected through the Zurich Intergroup Project in 23 countries, we tested several preregistered predictions, derived from the above reasoning, across a large variety of operationalizations. Two studies of disadvantaged groups (Ns = 689 ethnic minority members in Study 1 and 3,382 sexual/gender minorities in Study 2) support the hypothesis that, after accounting for the effects of intergroup contact and perceived illegitimacy, satisfying the need for empowerment (but not acceptance) during contact is positively related to support for social change. Two studies with advantaged groups (Ns = 2,937 ethnic majority members in Study 3 and 4,203 cis-heterosexual individuals in Study 4) showed that, after accounting for illegitimacy and intergroup contact, satisfying the need for acceptance (but also empowerment) is positively related to support for social change. Overall, findings suggest that intergroup contact is compatible with efforts to promote social change when group-specific needs are met. Thus, to encourage support for social change among both disadvantaged and advantaged group members, it is essential that, besides promoting mutual acceptance, intergroup contact interventions also give voice to and empower members of disadvantaged groups. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Even if a small portion of the population refuses vaccination due to anti-vaccination conspiracy theories or misinformation, this poses a threat to public health. We argue that addressing conspiracy theories with only corrective information is not enough. Instead, considering that they are complex narratives embedded in personal and cultural worldviews, they should be encountered with counternarratives. To identify existing narrative interventions aimed at countering anti-vaccination conspiracy theories and, more generally, map prerequisites for a narrative intervention to be successful, we present a systematic review of experimental effects of exposure to pro-vaccine narratives on a range of vaccination outcomes, based on 17 studies and 97 comparisons. We did not find any narrative interventions aimed directly at conspiracy theories. However, the review allowed us to make evidence-based recommendations for future research and for public communicators. This might help pro-vaccine communication match anti-vaccine communication in its potential to spread and go viral.

In the coronavirus "infodemic," people are exposed to official recommendations but also to potentially dangerous pseudoscientific advice claimed to protect against COVID-19. We examined whether irrational beliefs predict adherence to COVID-19 guidelines as well as susceptibility to such misinformation. Irrational beliefs were indexed by belief in COVID-19 conspiracy theories, COVID-19 knowledge overestimation, type I error cognitive biases, and cognitive intuition. Participants ( N = 407) reported (1) how often they followed guidelines (e.g., handwashing, physical distancing), (2) how often they engaged in pseudoscientific practices (e.g., consuming garlic, colloidal silver), and (3) their intention to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Conspiratorial beliefs predicted all three outcomes in line with our expectations. Cognitive intuition and knowledge overestimation predicted lesser adherence to guidelines, while cognitive biases predicted greater adherence, but also greater use of pseudoscientific practices. Our results suggest an important relation between irrational beliefs and health behaviors, with conspiracy theories being the most detrimental., Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest concerning the authorship or the publication of this article., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Guided by the early findings of social scientists, practitioners have long advocated for greater contact between groups to reduce prejudice and increase social cohesion. Recent work, however, suggests that intergroup contact can undermine support for social change towards greater equality, especially among disadvantaged group members. Using a large and heterogeneous dataset (12,997 individuals from 69 countries), we demonstrate that intergroup contact and support for social change towards greater equality are positively associated among members of advantaged groups (ethnic majorities and cis-heterosexuals) but negatively associated among disadvantaged groups (ethnic minorities and sexual and gender minorities). Specification-curve analysis revealed important variation in the size-and at times, direction-of correlations, depending on how contact and support for social change were measured. This allowed us to identify one type of support for change-willingness to work in solidarity- that is positively associated with intergroup contact among both advantaged and disadvantaged group members.

To understand recent anti-refugee protests in Europe, we examined how different levels of inclusiveness of group identities (national, European, and global) are related to intentions to protest among native Europeans. We focused on the mediating role of autochthony (a belief that the first inhabitants of a territory are more entitled) and the moderating role of threat. Survey data from 11 European countries ( N  =   1,909) showed that national identification was positively associated with autochthony, and therefore, with the intention to protest against refugees. In contrast, global identification was related to lower protest intentions via lower autochthony. These paths were found only among Europeans who perceived refugees as a threat. European identification was not related to the endorsement of autochthony or to collective action. These findings indicate why and when majority members are willing to participate in collective action against refugees, and underscore the importance of global identification in the acceptance of refugees., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflict of interest to declare., (© 2019 The Authors. European Journal of Social Psychology Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

There is evidence that not only believing in one conspiracy theory (CT) makes a person more probable to believe in others, however unrelated their content is, but that people can even believe in contradictory CTs about a single event. After piloting locally relevant conspiracy theories on a convenient Serbian speaking sample (N = 152), we sought to replicate this finding on a larger sample (N = 252), but introduced several changes. We differentiated necessarily and probably mutually exclusive CTs, and interviewed the participants who answered contradictory to understand the reasoning behind it. The participants were more prone to endorse probably than necessarily exclusive items (we registered positive correlations in former and no correlation or negative correlation in later). Two strategies enabled them to overcome the contradiction: (a) distilling the crucial content and downplaying other information and (b) treating the contradictory scenarios as possible versions of events. Taken together, these results indicate that participants are not as irrational as sometimes portrayed., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

People who are more avoidant of pathogens are more politically conservative, as are nations with greater parasite stress. In the current research, we test two prominent hypotheses that have been proposed as explanations for these relationships. The first, which is an intragroup account, holds that these relationships between pathogens and politics are based on motivations to adhere to local norms, which are sometimes shaped by cultural evolution to have pathogen-neutralizing properties. The second, which is an intergroup account, holds that these same relationships are based on motivations to avoid contact with outgroups, who might pose greater infectious disease threats than ingroup members. Results from a study surveying 11,501 participants across 30 nations are more consistent with the intragroup account than with the intergroup account. National parasite stress relates to traditionalism (an aspect of conservatism especially related to adherence to group norms) but not to social dominance orientation (SDO; an aspect of conservatism especially related to endorsements of intergroup barriers and negativity toward ethnic and racial outgroups). Further, individual differences in pathogen-avoidance motives (i.e., disgust sensitivity) relate more strongly to traditionalism than to SDO within the 30 nations., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

This research explored the effects of food choice motives, nutritional knowledge, and the use of food labels, on attitude toward food with health claims. Food with health claims was chosen as a relatively novel category of products designed to be beneficial for health. We identified eight motives served by food in general, and tested if they serve as motivations to positively evaluate functional food. Questionnaire was administered on nationally representative samples of 3085 respondents from six Western Balkan countries. We proposed two structural models relating an extensive list of eight and, alternatively, restricted list of three food-choice motives (health, mood and sensory appeal) to attitude toward functional food. We also expected the indirect association between the health motive and attitude, through nutritional knowledge and use of food labels. The results revealed highly positive, although undifferentiated attitude toward functional food, with no significant differences between the countries. The restricted model provided a better fit then the exhaustive model; the health motive was proven to have indirect influence on attitude through knowledge and label use. The implications of these findings for functional approach to attitudes, understanding the demand for functional food and overcoming barriers to dietary change are discussed., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Substantial empirical evidence exists regarding the importance of different factors underlying food choice in Western Europe. However, research results on eating habits and food choice in the Western Balkan Countries (WBCs) remain scarce. A Food Choice Questionnaire (FCQ), an instrument that measures the reported importance of nine factors underlying food choice, was administered to a representative sample of 3085 adult respondents in six WBCs. The most important factors reported are sensory appeal, purchase convenience, and health and natural content; the least important are ethical concern and familiarity. The ranking of food choice motives across WBCs was strikingly similar. Factor analysis revealed eight factors compared to nine in the original FCQ model: health and natural content scales loaded onto one factor as did familiarity and ethical concern; the convenience scale items generated two factors, one related to purchase convenience and the other to preparation convenience. Groups of consumers with similar motivational profiles were identified using cluster analysis. Each cluster has distinct food purchasing behavior and socio-economic characteristics, for which appropriate public health communication messages can be drawn., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)