Search

Individuals with mental illness are at higher risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes. However, previous studies on the uptake of COVID-19 vaccination in this population have reported conflicting results. Using data from seven cohort studies (N = 325,298) included in the multinational COVIDMENT consortium, and the Swedish registers (N = 8,080,234), this study investigates the association between mental illness (defined using self-report measures, clinical diagnosis and prescription data) and COVID-19 vaccination uptake. Results from the COVIDMENT cohort studies were pooled using meta-analyses, the majority of which showed no significant association between mental illness and vaccination uptake. In the Swedish register study population, we observed a very small reduction in the uptake of both the first and second dose of a COVID-19 vaccine among individuals with vs. without mental illness; the reduction was however greater among those not using psychiatric medication. Here we show that uptake of the COVID-19 vaccine is generally high among individuals both with and without mental illness, however the lower levels of vaccination uptake observed among subgroups of individuals with unmedicated mental illness warrants further attention. Monitoring COVID-19 vaccine uptake in those at risk of severe disease, such as people with mental illness, is important. Here, the authors use cohort and/or health registry data from five countries in northern Europe and investigate vaccine uptake by mental illness and treatment status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Norms play an important role in upholding orderly and well-functioning societies. Indeed, violations of norms can undermine social coordination and stability. Much is known about the antecedents of norm violations, but their social consequences are poorly understood. In particular, it remains unclear when and how norm violators gain or lose influence in groups. Some studies found that norm violators elicit negative responses that curtail their influence in groups, whereas other studies documented positive consequences that enhance violators' influence. We propose that the complex relationship between norm violation and influence can be understood by considering that norm violations differentially shape perceptions of dominance and prestige, which tend to have opposite effects on voluntary influence granting, depending on the type of norm that is violated. We first provide correlational (Study 1) and causal (Study 2) evidence that norm violations are associated with dominance, and norm abidance with prestige. We then examine how dominance, prestige, and resultant influence granting are shaped by whether local group norms and/or global community norms are violated. In Study 3, protagonists who violated global (university) norms but followed local (sorority/fraternity) norms were more strongly endorsed as leaders than protagonists who followed global norms but violated local norms, because the former were perceived not only as high on dominance but also on prestige. In Study 4, popular high-school students were remembered as violating global (school) norms while abiding by local (peer) norms. In Study 5, individuals who violated global (organizational) norms while abiding by local (team) norms were assigned more leadership tasks when global and local norms conflicted (making violators "rebels with a cause") than when norms did not conflict, because the former situation inspired greater prestige. We discuss implications for the social dynamics of norms, hierarchy development, and leader emergence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]