M-LoCUS: A Scalable Intervention Enhances Growth Mindset and Internal Locus of Control in Undergraduate Students in STEM

Coping with COVID: risk and resilience factors for mental health in a German representative panel study

BACKGROUND

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic might affect mental health. Data from population-representative panel surveys with multiple waves including pre-COVID data investigating risk and protective factors are still rare.

METHODS

In a stratified random sample of the German household population (n = 6684), we conducted survey-weighted multiple linear regressions to determine the association of various psychological risk and protective factors assessed between 2015 and 2020 with changes in psychological distress [(PD; measured via Patient Health Questionnaire for Depression and Anxiety (PHQ-4)] from pre-pandemic (average of 2016 and 2019) to peri-pandemic (both 2020 and 2021) time points. Control analyses on PD change between two pre-pandemic time points (2016 and 2019) were conducted. Regularized regressions were computed to inform on which factors were statistically most influential in the multicollinear setting.

RESULTS

PHQ-4 scores in 2020 (M = 2.45) and 2021 (M = 2.21) were elevated compared to 2019 (M = 1.79). Several risk factors (catastrophizing, neuroticism, and asking for instrumental support) and protective factors (perceived stress recovery, positive reappraisal, and optimism) were identified for the peri-pandemic outcomes. Control analyses revealed that in pre-pandemic times, neuroticism and optimism were predominantly related to PD changes. Regularized regression mostly confirmed the results and highlighted perceived stress recovery as most consistent influential protective factor across peri-pandemic outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified several psychological risk and protective factors related to PD outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic. A comparison of pre-pandemic data stresses the relevance of longitudinal assessments to potentially reconcile contradictory findings. Implications and suggestions for targeted prevention and intervention programs during highly stressful times such as pandemics are discussed.

Effects of Wearable Fitness Trackers and Activity Adequacy Mindsets on Affect, Behavior, and Health: Longitudinal Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

There is some initial evidence suggesting that mindsets about the adequacy and health consequences of one's physical activity (activity adequacy mindsets [AAMs]) can shape physical activity behavior, health, and well-being. However, it is unknown how to leverage these mindsets using wearable technology and other interventions.

OBJECTIVE

This research examined how wearable fitness trackers and meta-mindset interventions influence AAMs, affect, behavior, and health.

METHODS

A total of 162 community-dwelling adults were recruited via flyers and web-based platforms (ie, Craigslist and Nextdoor; final sample size after attrition or exclusion of 45 participants). Participants received an Apple Watch (Apple Inc) to wear for 5 weeks, which was equipped with an app that recorded step count and could display a (potentially manipulated) step count on the watch face. After a baseline week of receiving no feedback about step count, participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 experimental groups: they received either accurate step count (reference group; 41/162, 25.3%), 40% deflated step count (40/162, 24.7%), 40% inflated step count (40/162, 24.7%), or accurate step count+a web-based meta-mindset intervention teaching participants the value of adopting more positive AAMs (41/162, 25.3%). Participants were blinded to the condition. Outcome measures were taken in the laboratory by an experimenter at the beginning and end of participation and via web-based surveys in between. Longitudinal analysis examined changes within the accurate step count condition from baseline to treatment and compared them with changes in the deflated step count, inflated step count, and meta-mindset conditions.

RESULTS

Participants receiving accurate step counts perceived their activity as more adequate and healthier, adopted a healthier diet, and experienced improved mental health (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System [PROMIS]-29) and aerobic capacity but also reduced functional health (PROMIS-29; compared with their no-step-count baseline). Participants exposed to deflated step counts perceived their activity as more inadequate; ate more unhealthily; and experienced more negative affect, reduced self-esteem and mental health, and increased blood pressure and heart rate (compared with participants receiving accurate step counts). Inflated step counts did not change AAM or most other outcomes (compared with accurate step counts). Participants receiving the meta-mindset intervention experienced improved AAM, affect, functional health, and self-reported physical activity (compared with participants receiving accurate step counts only). Actual step count did not change in either condition.

CONCLUSIONS

AAMs--induced by trackers or adopted deliberately--can influence affect, behavior, and health independently of actual physical activity.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03939572; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03939572.

Developing a Framework of Relationships Among Noncognitive Factors in Doctor of Pharmacy Students' Academic Performance

Objective. To develop a framework of the effects of select noncognitive factors (grit, perceived stress, internal locus of control, and select Big Five personality traits) on pharmacy students' academic performance.Methods. A survey measuring select noncognitive factors was administered to two cohorts of first professional year (P1) pharmacy students (entering classes of 2019 and 2020, n=374) during fall orientation. Demographics, pre-pharmacy GPA, and P1 fall semester GPA were collected from student records. Structural equation modeling was conducted to assess the proposed framework.Results. Academic performance was directly influenced by students' (n=367; 98.1%) perceived stress and neuroticism and indirectly influenced by internal locus of control and neuroticism (via perceived stress as mediator). Neuroticism has a complex relationship in the models as it was directly and positively associated with academic performance, and indirectly contributed to decreased academic performance via a positive association with perceived stress. Squared multiple correlations indicated 13% and 9% of the variance in academic performance in the first final model (academic performance measured by pre-pharmacy GPA and P1 fall GPA) and second final model (academic performance measured by P1 fall GPA), respectively, were explained by the predictor variables.Conclusion. Evidence provided by structural equation modeling supports the conclusion that select noncognitive factors, namely perceived stress, neuroticism, and internal locus of control, have direct and indirect effects on the academic success of P1 students. The model variances of 9% and 13% represent 36% to 52% of the predictive value of the most accepted cognitive measures used to determine students' potential for academic success.

Antiracist Opportunities in the Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education: Considerations for Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion

Authors in the Journal of Microbiology and Biology Education (JMBE) have demonstrated a clear commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) through commentaries, instructional approaches, and research. However, analysis of JMBE literature using Kendi's antiracist framework (How To Be an Antiracist, 2019) offers additional opportunities for growth. These opportunities are discussed and framed under five emergent conceptual categories (ECCs). First, capitalistic goals (e.g., productivity) are often drivers for DEI initiatives but disproportionately benefit those with power. Humanity-centered reasons, like honoring community values, are also important motivations. Second, faculty are often targeted as primary agents of change for DEI, but more powerful stakeholders such as department and institutional leadership can also implement equitable policies and practices to widen the impact of DEI initiatives. Third, study scopes are sometimes focused on the outcomes of inequity (e.g., lower retention rates for students of color) rather than the systemic causes (e.g., exclusivity of science). While outcomes are important to research, studies should create clear connections and distinctions between the systems and symptoms of inequity. Fourth, active learning and authentic research experiences are not automatically inclusive and do not necessarily validate students' identities. Such approaches may be more impactful when tailored for context and student background. Finally, language and communication can have broad impacts on DEI efforts. As a community, we may need to be more critical of our shared language and communication. This review discusses the five ECCs in depth and offers next steps for supporting DEI across the biology and microbiology education community.