Research shows that performing positive activities, such as expressing gratitude and doing acts of kindness, boosts happiness. But do specific positive activities work equally well across cultures? Our study examined the role of culture–activity fit by testing two positive activities across two cultures. Participants from the United States (n = 250) and South Korea (n = 270) were randomly assigned to express gratitude, perform kind acts, or engage in a neutral activity for the first half of a 6-week positive activity intervention. Multilevel growth modeling analyses revealed that the effect of practicing gratitude or kindness was moderated by culture: U.S. participants increased in well-being (WB) from both activities, γ11 = 0.19, SE = 0.06, t(511) = 3.04, p = .0006; γ12= 0.11, SE = 0.06, t(511) = 1.73, p = .03 (compared with the control group), but South Korean participants benefited significantly less from practicing gratitude than did U.S. participants, γ13 = −0.24, SE = 0.07, t(511) = −3.36, p = .002. South Korean participants, however, showed similar increases in WB as did U.S. participants when performing kind acts, γ14 = −0.06, SE = 0.07, t(511) = −0.82, ns. Finally, although greater self-reported effort yielded significantly larger increases in WB for U.S. participants, the effect of effort was not as strong for South Korean participants. We posit that, due to their dialectical philosophical tradition, South Koreans might have been more prone to feel mixed emotions (e.g., indebtedness and gratitude) while engaging in the gratitude letter activity than did U.S. participants.

No abstract

When deciding whether to eat inside a restaurant or how many health protection items to purchase, individuals in the coronavirus disease era tend to consider the infection risk of crowds of generalized others. With a field study and four experiments, the present study identifies associations between COVID-19 and friendship (e.g., thinking of a friend while reading COVID-19-related news, perceiving a friend as the source of infection, noting friends' presence during potential COVID-19 exposure) that decrease both infection risk perceptions and protective behaviors. The sense of safety that stems from psychological closeness of friends reduces perceived virus infection risks associated with third-party crowds. The distinction between psychological closeness and safety toward friends versus acquaintances widens with clear in-group/out-group boundaries, such that this friend-shield effect is especially pronounced among people whose group boundaries are well established. Limiting interactions to close friends and family members is a common protective measure to reduce COVID-19 transmission risk, but the study findings demonstrate that this practice also unintentionally creates other issues, in that people tend to perceive reduced health risks and engage in potentially hazardous health behaviors. By identifying this risk and encouraging more holistic responses, this research offers implications for individuals, health officials, and policymakers. Public Significance StatementEven in the face of health measures designed to limit interactions to reduce coronavirus disease (COVID-19) transmission, people experience reduced risk perceptions and engage in riskier behaviors when COVID-19 is associated with their friends. Noting this link, this research shows individuals, health practitioners, and policymakers that they need to consider the effects of social distancing measures on psychological risk perceptions and behaviors when designing and implementing complementary health campaigns.

No abstract

No abstract