The coronavirus pandemic is one of the biggest health crises of our time. In response to this global problem, various institutions around the world had soon issued evidence-based prevention guidelines. However, these guidelines, which were designed to slow the spread of COVID-19 and contribute to public well-being, are (deliberately) disregarded by some individuals. In the present study, we aimed to develop and test a multivariate model that could help us identify individual characteristics that make a person more/less likely to comply with COVID-19 prevention guidelines. A total of 525 attentive participants completed the online survey. The results of structural equation modeling (SEM) show that COVID-19 risk perception and trust in science both independently predict compliance with COVID-19 prevention guidelines, while the remaining variables in the model (political conservatism, religious orthodoxy, conspiracy ideation and intellectual curiosity) do so via the mediating role of trust in science. The described model exhibited an acceptable fit (χ 2 (1611) = 2485.84, p < .001, CFI = .91, RMSEA = .032, SRMR = .055). These findings thus provide empirical support for the proposed multivariate model and underline the importance of trust in science in explaining the different levels of compliance with COVID-19 prevention guidelines.

The ongoing coronavirus pandemic is one of the biggest health crises of our time. In response to this global problem, various institutions around the world had soon issued evidence-based prevention guidelines. However, these guidelines, which were designed to slow the spread of COVID-19 and contribute to public well-being, are deliberately disregarded or ignored by some individuals. In the present study, we aimed to develop and test a multivariate model that could help us identify individual characteristics that make a person more/less likely to comply with COVID-19 prevention guidelines. A total of 617 participants took part in the online survey and answered several questions related to socio-demographic variables, political conservatism, religious orthodoxy, conspiracy ideation, intellectual curiosity, trust in science, COVID-19 risk perception and compliance with COVID-19 prevention guidelines. The results of structural equation modeling (SEM) show that COVID-19 risk perception and trust in science both independently predict compliance with COVID-19 prevention guidelines, while the remaining variables in the model (political conservatism, religious orthodoxy, conspiracy ideation and intellectual curiosity) do so via the mediating role of trust in science. The described model exhibited an acceptable fit (χ2(1611) = 2485.84, p &lt; .001, CFI = .91, RMSEA = .032, SMR = .055). These findings thus provide empirical support for the proposed multivariate model and underline the importance of trust in science in explaining the different levels of compliance with COVID-19 prevention guidelines.

Interpersonal touch behavior differs across cultures, yet no study to date has systematically tested for cultural variation in affective touch, nor examined the factors that might account for this variability. Here, over 14,000 individuals from 45 countries were asked whether they embraced, stroked, kissed, or hugged their partner, friends, and youngest child during the week preceding the study. We then examined a range of hypothesized individual-level factors (sex, age, parasitic history, conservatism, religiosity, and preferred interpersonal distance) and cultural-level factors (regional temperature, parasite stress, regional conservatism, collectivism, and religiosity) in predicting these affective-touching behaviors. Our results indicate that affective touch was most prevalent in relationships with partners and children, and its diversity was relatively higher in warmer, less conservative, and religious countries, and among younger, female, and liberal people. This research allows for a broad and integrated view of the bases of cross-cultural variability in affective touch.

Love is an inherent part of human experience and one of the most important elements of close relationships. Researchers' interest in love is manifested in a handful of approaches that provide a potential theoretical framework for this unique feeling (e.g., philosophical, Secomb, 2007; economic, Becker, 1973; and biological perspectives; e.g., Sorokowski et al., 2017).The social sciences present several well-known theories of love. (A comprehensive review of theories can be found in Sternberg & Sternberg, 2019). Among the most popular theoretical approaches, one theory highlights a division into passionate (intense and arousing) and companionate (tender and affective) love (Feybesse & Hatfield, 2019;Hatfield & Walster, 1985), which suggests the parallel importance of love's different aspects. Another popular typology refers to love styles, as first described by Lee (1973) and as further adapted by Hendrick (1986, 2019). This theoretical framework specifies six styles of love: Eros (passionate love), Ludus (game-playing love), Storge (friendship love), Pragma (logical, pragmatic love), Mania (possessive, dependent love) and Agape (all-giving, selfless love). Attachment Theory (Bowlby, 2012), describing infant-parent bonding, has also given rise to a theoretical framework for understanding romantic love (Hazan & Shaver, 1987;

No abstract