Search for: All records

We investigated how tightness-looseness, reflecting strictness of social norms, of state of residence in the USA predicts behaviors and attitudes related to COVID-19. Because individual-level tightness may better capture current attitudes during the pandemic, whereas state-level archival measures reflect historical factors, we assessed the extent to which tightness-looseness at both levels predicted adherence to public health guidelines and biases toward outgroups related to COVID-19. In Spring 2020, 544 mTurk participants, primarily from the 13 tightest and 13 loosest states, completed survey questions about health behaviors in response to COVID-19, endorsement of future policy changes, feeling of responsibility for lives, and attitudes toward groups marginalized during the pandemic (i.e., Asians, older adults). State-level results indicated some associations with attitudes toward Asians and older adults, but effects were not robust. Results based on individuals’ ratings of the tightness of their state indicated that higher levels of perceived tightness were associated with higher levels of protective self-reported public health behaviors (e.g., mask wearing, handwashing) during COVID-19, more endorsement of future policy changes to contain the pandemic, higher reported feelings of responsibility for one’s life, and stronger negative attitudes toward Asians. The relations between tightness and health outcomes persisted after controlling for political attitudes and demographics. Thus, individual, more than state, tightness-looseness accounted for some degree of public health behaviors (unique contribution of individual tightness: R 2  = .034) and attitudes toward marginalized groups ( R 2  = .020) early during the COVID-19 pandemic. The implications of these findings for interventions to support behavior change or combat anti-Asian bias are discussed. 

We assessed associations between child stunting, recovery, and faltering with schooling and human capital skills in a native Amazonian society of horticulturalists‐foragers (Tsimane').

We used cross‐sectional data (2008) from 1262 children aged 6 to 16 years in 53 villages to assess contemporaneous associations between three height categories: stunted (height‐for‐age Z score, HAZ<–2), moderately stunted (–2 ≤ HAZ≤–1), and nonstunted (HAZ>–1), and three categories of human capital: completed grades of schooling, test‐based academic skills (math, reading, writing), and local plant knowledge. We used annual longitudinal data (2002–2010) from all children (n = 853) in 13 villages to estimate the association between changes in height categories between the first and last years of measure and schooling and academic skills.

Stunting was associated with 0.4 fewer completed grades of schooling (∼24% less) and with 13–15% lower probability of showing any writing or math skills. Moderate stunting was associated with ∼20% lower scores in local plant knowledge and 9% lower probability of showing writing skills, but was not associated with schooling or math and writing skills. Compared with nonstunted children, children who became stunted had 18–21% and 15–21% lower probabilities of showing math and writing skills, and stunted children had 0.4 fewer completed grades of schooling. Stunted children who recovered showed human capital outcomes that were indistinguishable from nonstunted children.

The results confirm adverse associations between child stunting and human capital skills. Predictors of growth recovery and faltering can affect human capital outcomes, even in a remote, economically self‐sufficient society.