Explore the vast range of titles available.

At the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic (10-14 March, 2020) we conducted a survey (n = 1028) of a nationally representative sample (age, sex, and locale) in Poland. Respondents indicated how strong they thought the threat was to themselves, to Poland, and the world. They also described their emotional reactions to the pandemic, which we used to calculate three scores: Anxiety, Hopelessness, and Panic. Respondents also indicated how often they engaged in various coping behaviors and how much they supported different types of economic sacrifice. We used these responses to calculate measures that we labelled as Spread Prevention (e.g., social distancing), Self-preservation (food stockpiling), and Economic Sacrifice (e.g., fighting COVID-19 regardless of the cost). Multiple regression analyses found that perceived threat to self was the most reliable predictor (positive) of emotional reactions and of coping behaviors, and that Anxiety was the most reliable predictor (positive) of Spread prevention and Economic sacrifice. Panic predicted (positively) Self-preservation. A series of mediation analyses found that Anxiety mediated relationships between threat and coping behaviors, and that Panic mediated the relationship between perceived threats and Self-preservation. In addition, we found that scores on all measures, except Panic, increased following the announcement of the first COVID-19 related fatality in Poland, which occurred on the third (middle) day of the study. The mediational relationships we found did not vary as a function of whether the data were collected before or after this announcement. The present results suggest that emotional reactions to perceived threats can serve an instrumental function by providing the motivation to engage in coping behaviors. Such a mechanism complements much research on stress that has focused on how coping mediates threat-emotion relationships.

Norepinephrine (NE) plays a central role in the acquisition of aversive learning via actions in the lateral nucleus of the amygdala (LA) [1, 2]. However, the function of NE in expression of aversively-conditioned responses has not been established. Given the role of the central nucleus of the amygdala (CeA) in the expression of such behaviors [3–5], and the presence of NE axons projections in this brain nucleus [6], we assessed the effects of NE activity in the CeA on behavioral expression using receptor-specific pharmacology and cell- and projection-specific chemogenetic manipulations. We found that inhibition and activation of locus coeruleus (LC) neurons decreases and increases freezing to aversively conditioned cues, respectively. We then show that locally inhibiting or activating LC terminals in CeA is sufficient to achieve this bidirectional modulation of defensive reactions. These findings support the hypothesis that LC projections to CeA are critical for the expression of defensive responses elicited by conditioned threats.

Background Hospital staff frequently encounter high-stress situations, emergencies, and disasters, which profoundly impact their well-being and resilience. The aim of the study was to examine associations between perceived threats, well-being, individual resilience, and resilience at work among staff of a general hospital, following the unexpected Hamas assault on Israel on October 7, 2023, and during the Israel-Gaza conflict. Methods This cross-sectional study was conducted at a central Israeli public hospital, a level-two trauma center, surveying 434 staff members. Validated questionnaires were used to assess perceived threats, well-being, individual and work resilience, alongside demographic and professional characteristics. Data was collected via Qualtrics and paper questionnaires. Descriptive statistics, Pearson’s correlation, T-tests, ANOVA, Chi-square, and linear regression models were used to analyze relationships, differences, and key factors associated with well-being, personal resilience, and work resilience. Results Key findings revealed that higher resilience at work and well-being are linked to greater individual resilience, while higher threat perception negatively affected well-being. Israeli-born individuals and those identifying as Jewish showed higher resilience. Men reported higher well-being than women, and physicians demonstrated higher well-being compared to nurses. Resilience at work was higher among administrative staff compared to nurses, with employment in the emergency department showing a significant negative relationship with resilience at work. Conclusions The study revealed significant predictors of well-being, individual resilience, and workplace resilience among hospital staff in conflict situations. The immediate threat of war was perceived as most significant, highlighting the dynamic nature of threat perceptions. Prolonged emergencies can severely impact well-being, necessitating timely support. The findings emphasize the importance of integrated programs that enhance individual well-being and foster resilience in both personal and professional domains. Significant gender differences and the positive role of religiosity in resilience underscore the need for targeted interventions and systemic organizational changes to better support healthcare workers during crises. These insights highlight the importance of a comprehensive approach for cultivating a robust and resilient medical staff capable of effectively managing future crises.

There is high risk of contamination with COVID-19 virus during routine dental procedures and infection control is crucial. The aim of this study was to determine the factors associated with Covid-19 preventive behaviors among oral health care providers using an extended parallel process model (EPPM). In a cross-sectional study, short text message invite surveys were sent to 870 oral health care providers in west part of Iran. Data were collected through validated self-report EPPM questionnaires. Descriptive statistics, Chi-square and Fishers exact tests were used for data analysis. In total, 300 completed questionnaires were received and the mean age of respondents was 29.89 ± 11.17 years (range: 20-75 years). Among the study population, 284 (94.67%) perceived the threat of infection highly. Washing hands frequently with water and soap and use of hand sanitizer was reported by 93.33%, of participants. Age (P = 0.010), sex (P = 0.002) and occupation field (P = 0.010) were significantly associated with danger control responses. Data identified that those oral health care providers that were on the danger control response adopted preventive behaviors more strictly than those on fear control response. The results of this study showed how degrees of perceived threat and perceived efficacy influenced oral health providers' willingness to perform recommended health behaviors. These findings can assist public health agencies in developing educational programs specifically designed for promoting preventive behaviors among oral health providers in pandemic situations.

The cigarette is the deadliest artifact in the history of human civilization. It is also one of the most beguiling, thanks to more than a century of manipulation at the hands of tobacco industry chemists. In Golden Holocaust, Robert N. Proctor draws on reams of formerly-secret industry documents to explore how the cigarette came to be the most widely-used drug on the planet, with six trillion sticks sold per year. He paints a harrowing picture of tobacco manufacturers conspiring to block the recognition of tobacco-cancer hazards, even as they ensnare legions of scientists and politicians in a web of denial. Proctor tells heretofore untold stories of fraud and subterfuge, and he makes the strongest case to date for a simple yet ambitious remedy: a ban on the manufacture and sale of cigarettes.

Background The novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has emerged as a major global public health challenge. This study aimed to investigate on how people perceive the COVID-19 outbreak using the components of the Extended Parallel Process Model (EPPM) and to find out how this might contribute to possible behavioral responses to the prevention and control of the disease. Methods This cross-sectional study was conducted in Iran during March and April 2020. Participants were recruited via online applications using a number of platforms such as Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram asking people to take part in the study. To collect data an electronic self-designed questionnaire based on the EPPM was used in order to measure the risk perception (efficacy, defensive responses, perceived threat) related to the COVID-19. Descriptive statistics, chi-square, t-test and analysis of variance (ANOVA), were used to explore the data. Results A total of 3727 individuals with a mean age (SD) of 37.0 (11.1) years participated in the study. The results revealed significant differences in efficacy, defensive responses and perceived threat among different population groups particularly among those aged 60 and over. Women had significantly higher scores than men on some aspects such as self-efficacy, reactance, and avoidance but men had higher perceived susceptibility scores compared to women. Overall 56.4% of participants were engaged in danger control (preventive behavior) while the remaining 43.6% were engaged in fear control (non-preventive behavior) process. Conclusion More than half of all participants motivated by danger control. This indicated that more than half of participants had high perceived efficacy (i.e., self-efficacy and response efficacy). Self-efficacy scores were significantly higher among participants who were older, female, single, lived in rural areas, and had good economic status. The results suggest that socioeconomic and demographic factors are the main determinants of the COVID-19 risk perception. Indeed, targeted interventions are essential for controlling the pandemic.

The need to control violent and non-violent harm has been central to human existence since societies first emerged. This book analyses the problem of harm in world politics which stems from the fact that societies require the power to harm in order to defend themselves from internal and external threats, but must also control the capacity to harm so that people cannot kill, injure, humiliate or exploit others as they please. Andrew Linklater analyses writings in moral and legal philosophy that define and classify forms of harm, and discusses the ways in which different theories of international relations suggest the power to harm can be controlled so that societies can co-exist with the minimum of violent and non-violent harm. Linklater argues for new connections between the English School study of international society and Norbert Elias' analysis of civilizing processes in order to advance the study of harm in world politics.

People make judgments of others based on appearance, and these inferences can affect social interactions. Although the importance of facial appearance in these judgments is well established, the impact of the body morphology remains unclear. Specifically, it is unknown whether experimentally varied body morphology has an impact on perception of threat in others. In two preregistered experiments ( N = 250), participants made judgments of perceived threat of body stimuli of varying morphology, both in the absence (Experiment 1) and presence (Experiment 2) of facial information. Bodies were perceived as more threatening as they increased in mass with added musculature and portliness, and less threatening as they increased in emaciation. The impact of musculature endured even in the presence of faces, although faces contributed more to the overall threat judgment. The relative contributions of the faces and bodies seemed to be driven by discordance, such that threatening faces exerted the most influence when paired with non-threatening bodies, and vice versa. This suggests that the faces and bodies were not perceived as entirely independent and separate components. Overall, these findings suggest that body morphology plays an important role in perceived threat and may bias real-world judgments.

The COVID-19 pandemic has interrupted everyday life virtually everywhere in the world, enabling real-life research on threat-and-defense processes. In a survey conducted within the first days of implementing social distancing measures in Austria and Germany, we aimed to explore the pathways from threat perception to preferences of defense strategies. We found that anxiety, approach-related affect, and reactance were specifically elicited by motivational (vs. epistemic) discrepancies. In a second step, we tested the mediating effect of anxiety, approach-related affect, and reactance on preferences regarding personal-social and concrete-abstract defenses. Experiencing anxiety was related to interest in security-related actions, and approach-affect was related to both personal projects and social media use. Participants experiencing reactance were more inclined to pursue personal projects (personal-abstract) and less interested in security-related (personal-concrete) actions. They also showed marginally lower system justification (social-abstract). Additionally, we examined the relationship of loneliness with defense strategies, showing that loneliness was associated with lower system justification and security behaviors. The results suggest that individuals deal with threat in their own ways, mostly depending on affective state and motivational orientation: Anxiety was related to security, approach-state to action (both social and personal), reactance to derogation of the system and disregard for security, while loneliness was associated with inaction.