Explore the vast range of titles available.

Community responses are important for the management of early-phase outbreaks of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Perceived susceptibility and severity are considered key elements that motivate people to adopt nonpharmaceutical interventions. This study aimed to (i) explore perceived susceptibility and severity of the COVID-19 pandemic, (ii) examine the practice of nonpharmaceutical interventions, and (iii) assess the potential association of perceived COVID-19 susceptibility and severity with the practice of nonpharmaceutical interventions among people living in Afghanistan. A cross-sectional design was used, using online surveys disseminated from April to May 2020. Convenience sampling was used to recruit the participants of this study. The previously developed scales were used to assess the participants' demographic information, perceived risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, and perceived severity of COVID-19. Multivariate analyses were conducted to assess the potential association of perceived COVID-19 susceptibility and severity with the practice of nonpharmaceutical interventions. The Internet was the main source for obtaining COVID-19 information among participants in this study. While 45.8% of the participants believed it was \"very unlikely\" for them to get infected with COVID-19, 76.7% perceived COVID-19 as a severe disease. Similarly, 37.5% believed the chance of being cured if infected with COVID-19 is \"unlikely/very unlikely.\" The majority of participants (95.6%) perceived their health to be in \"good\" and \"very good\" status. Overall, 74.2% mentioned that they stopped visiting public places, 49.7% started using gloves, and 70.4% started wearing a mask. Participants who believed they have a low probability of survival if infected with COVID-19 were more likely to wear masks and practice hand washing. It appears that communities' psychological and behavioral responses were affected by the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in Afghanistan, especially among young Internet users. The findings gained from a timely behavioral assessment of the community might be useful to develop interventions and risk communication strategies in epidemics within and beyond COVID-19.

A large body of research has shown that terrorism enhances fears and undermines perceived safety in a high proportion of both directly exposed individuals and individuals without any form of direct exposure (i.e. no geographical proximity to an attack). Some studies have further suggested that fear of terrorism may adversely affect health in those without direct exposure and that this may constitute an important public health burden because of the number who are indirectly exposed. Limited studies have investigated threat and safety perception after workplace terrorism and the possible consequences for employee health. To explore whether perceived safety and threat in employees whose workplace was subjected to a terrorist attack are associated with subsequent sick-leave. A longitudinal questionnaire survey on governmental employees' perceived safety and threat at work one (T1) and two (T2) years after the 2011 terrorist attack on the Norwegian ministries was linked to registry data on doctor-certified sick-leave for two 9-month periods following T1 and T2 (N = 1703). There was fairly strong evidence (0.004 < p < 0.034) that higher perceived safety was associated with a close to 30% reduction in sick-leave in fully adjusted models which included terror exposure and symptom-based PTSD. There was inconclusive evidence that lower perceived threat was associated with reduced sick-leave in the full models. Reduced perceived safety in employees following workplace terrorism may have adverse health consequences of public health significance given how prevalent this perception seems to be. The study supports that post-terrorism response plans should include strategies on how to address the potentially large number of individuals suffering ill health after terror even if they were not directly exposed and do not meet criteria for PTSD.

Background: The wave of terrorist attacks over the past years in Europe and other regions may cause problems such as anxiety and depressive symptoms. Some studies suggest that perceived threat might also trigger physical health problems. Objective: To investigate the association between feeling threatened and subjective health during the week following a terrorist attack. Method: Online survey with a self-selected sample in the Belgian population one week after the terrorist attacks in 2016. Participants were invited through the Belgian media to fill in a questionnaire in Dutch, French or English on a website. The main outcomes were the association between 'feeling threatened' and subjective health problems. Perceived threat was measured with the question 'During the week after the attacks ... Did you feel threatened?' Subjective health was measured by using standardized scales (ACSA, PHQ-4, PHQ-15). Results: A total of 2620 respondents completed the questionnaire, of whom 69.8% were female, 27.7% lived and 43.1% worked in Brussels. Gender, age, place of living and working, media exposure, religiousness and religious affiliation were associated significantly with higher perceived threat. A total of 21% of the respondents felt much or very much threatened during the week after the attacks. They reported significantly higher levels of mental and physical health problems. The most frequently reported problems were anxiety and depressive symptoms. The health problems that differentiated most markedly between those with low and high levels of perceived threat were fainting spells, chest pain and shortness of breath. Conclusion: In a self-selected sample of respondents, 'feeling threatened' was strongly associated with lower level of wellbeing and higher levels of mental and physical health problems. The most prevalent health problems were mental health problems but the most pronounced differences between people with low versus high levels of perceived threat were physical health problems.

A decades-long trend toward greater racial and ethnic diversity in the United States is expected to continue, with White Americans projected to constitute less than 50% of the national population by mid century. The present review integrates recent empirical research on the effects of making this population change salient with research on how actual diversity affects Whites Americans’ intergroup attitudes and behavior. Specifically, we offer a framework for understanding and predicting the effects of anticipated increases in racial diversity that highlights the competing influences of intergroup concerns, such as relative group status and power, and more interpersonal experiences, such as positive contact, on intergroup relations. We close with a discussion of the likely moderators of the effects of the increasing national racial diversity and consider implications of this societal change for racial equity in the 21st century.

Does ongoing exposure to political violence prompt subject groups to support or oppose compromise in situations of intractable conflict? If so, what is the mechanism underlying these processes? Political scholarship neither offers conclusive arguments nor sufficiently addresses individual-level forms of exposure to violence in the context of political conflict, particularly the factors mediating political outcomes. We address this by looking at the impact of exposure to political violence, psychological distress, perceived threat, and ethos of conflict on support for political compromise. A mediated model is hypothesized whereby exposure to political violence provokes support for the ethos of conflict and hinders support for compromise through perceived psychological distress and perceived national threat. We examined representative samples of two parties to the same conflict: Israelis (N = 781) and Palestinians from Gaza, East Jerusalem, and the West Bank (N = 1,196). The study's main conclusion is that ethos of conflict serves as a mediating variable in the relationship between exposure to violence and attitudes toward peaceful settlement of the conflict.

In the last decade, our knowledge of authoritarianism has completely shifted from that of a personality dimension to that of a multidimensional attitudinal structure. Current theories stipulate that individuals are motivated to maintain a sense of collective security within their social group. When a group is confronted with societal threats, such as COVID-19, individuals respond by increasing their exhibition of authoritarian practices to maintain collective security. Where a sense of control cannot be maintained, it can contribute to poor psychological outcomes such as negative future outlooks. In the present study, we collected a community sample of 948 individuals to test how authoritarianism may alleviate feelings of future anxiety. We hypothesized that perceived risk and demoralization would mediate the effects of authoritarianism on future anxiety. Our results supported that demoralization is a significant mediator, in that higher authoritarianism is associated with lower levels of demoralization that in turn is associated with lower levels of future anxiety. However, we did not support a mediating role in the perceived risk of COVID-19. Our results illuminate a potential pathway between authoritarianism and the mitigation of maladaptive psychological outcomes in the face of societal threats. Perhaps encouragingly, authoritarianism was associated with morale but did not diminish the seriousness of the perceived threat of COVID-19. We suggest that morale be a point of future investigation when aiming to understand the effects of authoritarianism on maintaining groups’ collective security.

As environmental movements rage, how to handle nuclear power plants has become a hotly contested issue globally. While concerns about nuclear power plants are warranted, nuclear power plants may play a crucial role in climate change discourse. In this context, this study examines the connections between individuals’ perceived environmental threats and their perceptions of the environmental threats posed by nuclear power plants (perceived nuclear threats). In particular, the study explores whether such connections are moderated by individuals’ level of political trust, such that political trust helps weaken perceptions of threats individuals may feel from nuclear power plants. Using the 2014 Korean General Social Survey and ordered probit, this study confirmed that individuals’ perceived environmental threats were positively associated with their perceived nuclear threats. Additionally, individuals with a high level of trust in the government can help alleviate the positive link between individuals’ perceived environmental threats and perceived nuclear threats.

Perceived threat in youth’s environments can elevate risk for mental health, social, and neurocognitive difficulties throughout the lifespan. However, few studies examine variability in youth’s perceptions of threat across multiple contexts or evaluate outcomes across multiple domains, ultimately limiting our understanding of specific risks associated with perceived threats in different contexts. This study examined associations between perceived threat in youth’s neighborhood, school, and family contexts at ages 9–10 and mental health, social, and neurocognitive outcomes at ages 11–12 within a large US cohort ( N = 5525) enrolled in the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development SM Study (ABCD Study®). Latent profile analysis revealed four distinct profiles: Low Threat in all contexts, Elevated Family Threat, Elevated Neighborhood Threat, and Elevated Threat in all contexts. Mixed-effect models and post hoc pairwise comparisons showed that youth in Elevated Threat profile had poorer mental health and social outcomes 2 years later. Youth in the Elevated Family Threat profile uniquely showed increased disruptive behavior symptoms, whereas youth in the Elevated Neighborhood Threat profile predominantly displayed increased sleep problems and worse neurocognitive outcomes 2 years later. Together, findings highlight the importance of considering perceptions of threat across multiple contexts to achieve a more nuanced developmental picture.

PurposeArtificial intelligence (AI) applications pose a potential threat to users' data security and privacy due to their high data-dependence nature. This paper aims to investigate an understudied issue in the literature, namely, how users perceive the threat of and decide to use a threatening AI application. In particular, it examines the influencing factors and the mechanisms that affect an individual’s behavioral intention to use facial recognition, a threatening AI.Design/methodology/approachThe authors develop a research model with trust as the key mediating variable by integrating technology threat avoidance theory, the theory of planned behavior and contextual factors related to facial recognition. Then, it is tested through a sequential mixed-methods investigation, including a qualitative study (for model development) of online comments from various platforms and a quantitative study (for model validation) using field survey data.FindingsPerceived threat (triggered by perceived susceptibility and severity) and perceived avoidability (promoted by perceived effectiveness, perceived cost and self-efficacy) have negative and positive relationships, respectively, with an individual’s attitude toward facial recognition applications; these relationships are partially mediated by trust. In addition, perceived avoidability is positively related to perceived behavioral control, which along with attitude and subjective norm is positively related to individuals' intentions to use facial recognition applications.Originality/valueThis paper is among the first to examine the factors that affect the acceptance of threatening AI applications and how. The research findings extend the current literature by providing rich and novel insights into the important roles of perceived threat, perceived avoidability, and trust in affecting an individual’s attitude and intention regarding using threatening AI applications.