Search results

The purpose of this study is (1) to confirm the relationship between the two dimensions of social desirability (pretending and denying), self-reported stress and health reports in police officers and (2) to assess whether dysfunctions in basal cortisol profiles are related to social desirability.

Social desirability is known to influence how individuals respond to sensitive topics, such as questions concerning health in the workplace, and has usually been defined according to two dimensions: pretending and denying. However, it is not known whether social desirability is only a bias in responding to health surveys or a more general attitude of denying problems and pretending to be stronger than one is in the everyday life. If the latter is true, social desirability may have important health implications, and underlying mechanisms must be described. In total, 77 police officers completed questionnaires measuring social desirability (denying and pretending), perceived stress as well as mental and somatic health symptoms. They were further instructed to collect saliva samples for cortisol concentrations assays.

These preliminary results showed that denying was negatively related to the report of stress and health symptoms. Furthermore, police officers higher in pretending showed a flatter diurnal cortisol slope.

The correlation between dysregulation of the hypothalmic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, as expressed by a flatter cortisol slope, and a higher score in the pretending subscale suggests that looking for social approval by inflating one's capacities is related to chronic work-related stress, making the individual more vulnerable to stress-related disease.

To study the potential health-relevant consequences and underlying mechanisms of social desirability bias related to police culture by including stress biomarkers.

One of the most prolific areas of misinformation research is examining corrective strategies in messaging. The main purposes of the current study are to examine the effects of (1) partisan media (2) credibility perceptions and emotional reactions and (3) theory driven corrective messages on people's misperceptions about COVID-19 mask wearing behaviors.

The authors used a randomized experimental design to test the hypotheses. The data were collected via the survey firm Lucid. The number of participants was 485. The study was conducted using Qualtrics after the research project was exempt by the Institutional Research Board of a large University in the US. The authors conducted an online experiment with four conditions, narrative versus statistics and individual versus collective. The manipulation messages were constructed as screenshots from Facebook.

The findings of this study show that higher exposure to liberal media was associated with lower misperceptions, whereas higher credibility perceptions of and positive reactions toward the misinformation post and negative emotions toward the correction comment were associated with higher misperceptions. Moreover, the findings showed that participants in the narrative and collective-frame condition had the lowest misperceptions.

The authors tested theory driven misinformation corrective messages to understand the impact of these messages and multiple related variables on misperceptions about COVID-19 mask wearing. This study contributes to the existing misinformation correction literature by investigating the explanatory power of the two well-established media effects theories on misinformation correction messaging and by identifying essential individual characteristics that should be considered when evaluating how misperceptions about the COVID-19 crisis works and gets reduced.

The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-11-2021-0600