In the last decade, the number of investigations of the beliefs in conspiracy theories has begun to increase in the fields of social, differential, and experimental psychology. A considerable number of variables have been suggested as predictors of conspiracy beliefs, amongst them personality factors such as low agreeableness (as disagreeableness is associated with suspicion and antagonism) and high openness to experience (due to its positive association to seek out unusual and novel ideas). The association between agreeableness, openness to experience and conspiracy beliefs remains unclear in the literature. The present study reviews the literature of psychological studies investigating conspiracy beliefs. Additionally, the association between Big Five personality factors and conspiracy beliefs is analyzed meta-analytically using random-effects models. Ninety-six studies were identified for the systematic review. A comprehensive account of predictors, consequences, operationalization, questionnaires, and most prominent conspiracy theories is presented. For meta-analysis, 74 effect sizes from 13 studies were extracted. The psychological literature on predictors of conspiracy beliefs can be divided in approaches either with a pathological (e.g., paranoia) or socio-political focus (e.g., perceived powerlessness). Generally, there is a lack of theoretical frameworks in this young area of research. Meta-analysis revealed that agreeableness, openness to experience, and the remaining Big Five personality factors were not significantly associated with conspiracy beliefs if effect sizes are aggregated. Considerable heterogeneity in designs and operationalization characterizes the field. This article provides an overview of instrumentation, study designs, and current state of knowledge in an effort toward advancement and consensus in the study of conspiracy beliefs.

Background: Self-harm is a clinically relevant and prevalent behaviour which peaks in adolescence. Given the high prevalence of self-harm, the high levels of psychiatric comorbidity, and its role as a risk factor for suicide, delivering evidence-based care is critical. Methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature on treating self-harm in adolescents (12-19 years) published in the last 20 years, identifying 25 randomised controlled trials. We calculated the effect of treatment interventions relative to active control conditions in reducing self-harm, suicidal ideation and depressive symptoms. Results: Overall, treatment interventions fared slightly better than active controls in decreasing self-harm (d = 0.13, 95% CI 0.04-0.22, p = .004), suicidal ideation (d = 0.31, 95% CI 0.12-0.50, p = .001) and depressive symptoms (d = 0.22, 95% CI 0.07-0.38, p = .006). Subgroup analysis of specific therapies revealed moderate effects of DBT-A in reducing self-harm (d = 0.51, 95% CI 0.18-0.85, p = .002) and suicidal ideation (d = 0.48, 95% CI 0.17-0.80, p = .003), as well as moderate effects of family-centred therapy in the treating suicidal ideation (d = 0.58, 95% CI 0.01-1.15, p = .049).

Contrary to specific phobias, for which Virtual Reality Exposure Therapy (VRET) constitutes an effective treatment, uncertainty still exists regarding the usefulness of VRET for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Therefore, this meta-analysis investigated the efficacy of VRET for PTSD as compared to waitlist and active comparators. A literature search yielded nine controlled studies encompassing 296 participants (124 VRET, 172 controls). The differences between conditions regarding the primary outcome of PTSD symptom severity and the secondary outcome of depressive and anxiety symptoms post-treatment were calculated using Hedges' g. Compared to waitlist controls, VRET showed a significantly better outcome for PTSD symptoms (g = 0.62, p = .017) and depressive symptoms (g = 0.50, p = .008). There was no significant difference between VRET and active comparators regarding PTSD symptoms (g = 0.25, p = .356) and depressive symptoms (g = 0.24, p = .340) post-treatment. No significant effects emerged for anxiety symptoms. These findings suggest that VRET may be as effective as active comparators for PTSD patients. However, the results must be interpreted with caution due to the limited number of trials and the substantial number ofpredominantly malemilitary service members studied. Additional controlled trials, considering a wider range of trauma types and balanced gender, are required to strengthen the evidence.重程度的差异，以及抑郁和焦虑症状的差异。与等候名单对照组相比，VRET显示出PTSD 症状(g = 0.62，p = .017)和抑郁症状(g = 0.50，p = .008)的显著更好的结果。 VRET 和有效对照疗法之间在治疗后PTSD症状(g = 0.25，p = .356)和抑郁症状(g = 0.24，p = .340)上没有显著差异。对焦虑症状没有显著效果。这些发现表明，VRET可能与PTSD患 者的有效对照疗法一样有效。但是，因为纳入试验数量有限，并且研究了大量以男性为 主的军事服务人员，必须谨慎解释研究结果。需要进一步的对照试验以加强证据，未来 的研究需要考虑更广泛的创伤类型和对参与者性别进行平衡。 ORCID Oswald D. Kothgassner http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3243-0238 Andreas Goreis http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8994-964X Johanna X. Kafka http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3404-3546 Rahel L. Van Eickels http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7461-2929 Paul L. Plener

Background Given the widespread nature and clinical consequences of self-harm and suicidal ideation among adolescents, establishing the efficacy of developmentally appropriate treatments that reduce both self-harm and suicidal ideation in the context of broader adolescent psychopathology is critical. Methods We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the Dialectical Behaviour Therapy for Adolescents (DBT-A) literature on treating self-injury in adolescents (12–19 years). We searched for eligible trials and treatment evaluations published prior to July 2020 in MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases for clinical trials. Twenty-one studies were identified [five randomized-controlled trials (RCTs), three controlled clinical trials (CCTs), and 13 pre-post evaluations]. We extracted data for predefined primary (self-harm, suicidal ideation) and secondary outcomes (borderline personality symptoms; BPD) and calculated treatment effects for RCTs/CCTs and pre-post evaluations. This meta-analysis was pre-registered with OSF: osf.io/v83e7. Results Overall, the studies comprised 1673 adolescents. Compared to control groups, DBT-A showed small to moderate effects for reducing self-harm (g = −0.44; 95% CI −0.81 to −0.07) and suicidal ideation (g = −0.31, 95% CI −0.52 to −0.09). Pre-post evaluations suggested large effects for all outcomes (self-harm: g = −0.98, 95% CI −1.15 to −0.81; suicidal ideation: g = −1.16, 95% CI −1.51 to −0.80; BPD symptoms: g = −0.97, 95% CI −1.31 to −0.63). Conclusions DBT-A appears to be a valuable treatment in reducing both adolescent self-harm and suicidal ideation. However, evidence that DBT-A reduces BPD symptoms was only found in pre-post evaluations.

Little is known about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health and psychological well-being of young people. The aim of this study is to investigate the psychological well-being and changes in the mental-health state of young people living in Austria and Turkey. By using an anonymous online survey, we recruited 1240 people aged 15–25 years from these two countries. We used the “Psychological General Well-being” and a self-created questionnaire to capture individual experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic and quarantine period. The native Turks indicated higher “anxiety” (ps < 0.010), lower “vitality” (ps < 0.011), and lower “general health” (ps < 0.011) than native Austrians or Austrian migrants and increased “depression” (p = 0.005) and lower “self-control” (p = 0.022), than Austrian migrants. Moreover, 50.9% of native Turks reported a decrease in their mental health status, compared to 31.1% of native Austrians and 23.7% of Austrian migrants. Participants with financial problems (OR = 1.68) and prior mental health problems (i.e., already in treatment by the time of COVID-19, OR = 5.83) reported a higher probability for a worsening in their mental health status. Our results show that the COVID-19 pandemic impaired the psychological well-being and mental health of young people. Especially people in Turkey were most affected, probably due to the stringent policies to fight COVID-19.