During the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, the COVIDiSTRESS Consortium launched an open-access global survey to understand and improve individuals’ experiences related to the crisis. A year later, we extended this line of research by launching a new survey to address the dynamic landscape of the pandemic. This survey was released with the goal of addressing diversity, equity, and inclusion by working with over 150 researchers across the globe who collected data in 48 languages and dialects across 137 countries. The resulting cleaned dataset described here includes 15,740 of over 20,000 responses. The dataset allows cross-cultural study of psychological wellbeing and behaviours a year into the pandemic. It includes measures of stress, resilience, vaccine attitudes, trust in government and scientists, compliance, and information acquisition and misperceptions regarding COVID-19. Open-access raw and cleaned datasets with computed scores are available. Just as our initial COVIDiSTRESS dataset has facilitated government policy decisions regarding health crises, this dataset can be used by researchers and policy makers to inform research, decisions, and policy.
This provocation reimagines the dominant indigenisation discourse of psychology in South Africa PINS, 2016PINS, , 52, 1 -18, http://dx.doi.org/10.17159/2309PINS, -8708/2016 P I N S [ P s y c h o l o g y i n S o c i e t y ] 5 2 • 2 0 1 6 | 2
The problem of the South African university, and society in the same breath, is not so much that of governance or politics but ideology. The deepening realisation of the farcicality and impossibility of strategies, attendant ideologies and “master signifiers” of transformation (such as diversity, multiculturalism and rainbow nation) of the South African society and (whatever remains of) its institutions has never been more acute than now, when the insistence at meaningful change and the unanimous rejection, mostly by blacks, of the university (at least in its current form) have gained traction. This paper draws on Žižek’s Lacanian theory of ideology to provide a counter-narrative and reading of official transformation consensus and ideologies like diversity, by highlighting their ethical liminalities. The underside of diversity’s official claims to equality and justice are unmasked, and the terror and ironies of this liberal ideology are exposed, especially its refusal to recognise that whiteness (as a system) and justice can never coexist or inhabit the same space. Transformation discourse, of our kind, fashioned under diversity’s register can never escape being appropriated by liberal ideology and practice, as yet another means to reaffirm its priorities.
This study evaluated the factorial validity of the Beck Depression Inventory–II with a diverse sample of 919 university students. A randomised split of the data was done, and then exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were conducted on Group 1 (n = 460). Thereafter, confirmatory factor analysis was performed on Group 2 (n = 459) to cross-validate the determined factor structure. A lower-order factor structure that comprised three factors, namely, Negative Attitude, Performance Difficulty, and Somatic Complaints was found. A hierarchical second-order analysis indicated that the lower-order factors tap into a higher-order general factor of Depression. Results based on multigroup confirmatory factor analysis further indicated evidence of factorial invariance for this three lower-order factor structure across time. Evidence for convergent and discriminant validity were provided by predicted associations with subscales from the Hopkins Symptom Checklist–25. It is concluded that the Beck Depression Inventory–II is a reliable and valid measure that can be used to assess the severity of depressive symptoms over time among South African university students.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.