This study examines how a 2013 Arizona law on shared parenting would affect living arrangements, and thus mental health measures. There were two hypotheses. According to the Law Change Hypothesis, it was hypothesized that parenting time in Arizona would be more equal following the 2013 Arizona law change while there would be no change in parenting time in other states following the 2013 Arizona law change. It was further hypothesized that child mental health would be better after the law change in Arizona with no change being seen in other states. Results of this study were almost completely inconsistent with the hypothesis. According to the Law Reflect Hypothesis, the law is actually reflecting the behavior of the community and their thoughts on equal parenting time becoming more favorable, and therefore a change towards more equal parenting time would be found prior to 2013 in Arizona with no change seen in other states. Furthermore, as the Arizona community’s behavior changed, child mental health would be better with no change being seen in other states. Regressions found that a small change toward more equal parenting and closeness with father was prior to 2013 for Arizona students, compared to out-of-state students, although it did not find that the year of divorce resulted in less anxiety, stress, and depression. This partially agrees with past research that the 2013 law is working as intended, even if it started working earlier than we thought. This does not agree with previous research stating there is a connection between equal parenting and better mental health. This is important because this study questions the efficacy of an important and controversial policy. If future studies are consistent with this one, the effectiveness of the Arizona 2013 law change on mental health will need to be further evaluated.

Sex, Love, & Dating During the COVID-19 Pandemic is a creative thesis project that addresses two main issues: 1) the overall lack of resources and information available to the public about how to proceed with respect to sex, love, and dating during a global pandemic; and 2) my inability as director of Devils in the Bedroom (an on-campus sexual health club at ASU) to get condoms and other sexual health materials into the hands of students while in quarantine. A resource was developed, an informational pamphlet on the three main topics (sex, love, and dating), as well as a program to distribute the materials by mail, the sexual health care packages.

This study attempts to answer the following questions: Is civic engagement a social activity among 18-25-year-old college students? How are opinions regarding civic and political engagement impacted by social settings? How are civic and political engagement atmospheres impacted by social distancing and isolation protocol? In this study, the researcher hypothesized that civic and political engagement are social activities, so they are therefore susceptible to changing social context. Since the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted typical social interaction through social distancing and isolation protocol, the researcher hypothesized that it also altered mechanisms of civic and political engagement. Political engagement would be more prevalent among students who participate with others even in pandemic conditions that may otherwise decrease close contact and social interactions. These findings seem to disagree with the literature that suggests young people are supplanting voting with other forms of engagement (Zukin et al., 2006). Rather, the “complexity” denoted in interviews and in reports of engagements on the pre- and post-election surveys suggests that young people are voting as well as dedicating their time to other activities. Voting does seem to be a social activity according to the interviews, poll observations, and the surveys. This is consistent with the literature regarding social norms and group predictors. However, this social aspect of engagement seems to manifest in a wider variety of formats that originally thought. Finally, students continued to engage in the context of the pandemic that surrounded the election in question. It seems that the formats through which students engaged have expanded to maintain the connections that are crucial to civic participation.

The present study explored the relationship between desired purchasing behavior and individual differences using two nationally-representative, longitudinal samples of the U.S. population early in the COVID-19 pandemic. Past research has shown that individual differences provide information about how one might respond to threat. Therefore, we predicted changes in desired purchasing behavior across different sociodemographic variables that might reflect those differences. Specifically, we investigated hypotheses related to political orientation, age, sexual orientation, socioeconomic status, and whether or not the participant had children. We measured participants’ reported desired purchasing behavior across eleven categories of goods and investigated the connection between specific demographic variables and desired purchasing behavior. We found that conservatives desired to purchase more basic protection goods (guns/ammunition, cash, gas) and that older people desired to purchase more cleaning supplies and toiletries. These findings illustrate possible explanations for purchasing behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic and reveal directions for marketing designed to influence purchasing behavior.

Objective: This study looked at three key variables of fear of COVID-19, preventative behaviors, and vaccination intent among college students in the United Sates. In addition, the three key variables were compared between genders, age groups, race groups, and over time to see if there were any significant findings. <br/>Method: This longitudinal study consisted of two anonymous online surveys administered on REDCap before and after a COVID-19 vaccine became available. <br/>Results: The findings suggested positive correlations between students’ fear of COVID-19 and their preventative behaviors with the passing of time. Hispanic/Latino participants had significantly higher fear of COVID-19 scores compared to Non-Hispanic Whites and other races at Wave I and II. Participants between 25 and 30 years old had a marginally greater difference fear of COVID-19 score compared to those less than 25. Females had significantly higher mean preventative behavior score than males at Wave II. There was a significant association between race/ethnicity groups and vaccination intent. <br/>Conclusion: Knowing why different groups do not engage in recommended preventative behaviors or receive vaccinations can tell us more about what tailored interventions may need to be developed and implemented to promote health and wellbeing in this population. Further research needs to be done regarding race, gender, and age and how these different groups of college students are responding to COVID-19 and why.

In a healthcare system already struggling with burnout among its professionals, the COVID-19 pandemic presented a barrage of personal and occupational strife to US healthcare workers. Structural and everyday discrimination contributed to the health inequities of people of color in the US, exacerbated by COVID-19-related racism and xenophobia. There is little research regarding the effects of COVID-19 and related and/or concurring discrimination upon minority nursing staff, despite their importance in supporting the diverse American patient population with culturally competent, tireless care amid the pandemic. This cross-sectional survey study aimed to examine 1) the relationships between discrimination, social support, resilience, and quality of life among minority nursing staff in the US during COVID-19, and 2) the differences of discrimination, social support resilience, and quality of life among minority nursing staff between different racial/ethnic groups during COVID-19. The sample (n = 514) included Black/African American (n = 161, 31.4%), Latinx/Hispanic (n = 131, 25.5%), Asian (n = 87, 17%), Native American/Alaskan Native (n = 69, 13.5%), and Pacific Islander (n = 65, 12.7%) nursing staff from 47 US states. The multiple regression results showed that witnessing discrimination was associated with a lower quality of life score, while higher social support and resilience scores were associated with higher quality of life scores across all racial groups. Furthermore, while participants from all racial groups witnessed and experienced discrimination, Hispanic/Latinx nursing staff experienced discrimination most commonly, alongside having lowest quality of life and highest resilience scores. Native American/Alaskan Native nursing staff had similarly high discrimination and low quality of life, although low resilience scores. Our findings suggest that minority nursing staff who have higher COVID-19 morbidity and mortality rates (Hispanic/Latinx, Native American/Alaskan Native) were left more vulnerable to negative effects from discrimination. Hispanic/Latinx nursing staff reported a relatively higher resilience score than all other groups, potentially attributed to the positive effects of biculturality in the workplace, however, the low average quality of life score suggests a simultaneous erosion of well-being. Compared to all other groups, Native American and Alaskan Native nursing staff’s low resilience and quality of life scores suggest a potential compounding effect of historical trauma affecting their well-being, especially in contrast to Hispanic/Latinx nursing staff. This study has broader implications for research on the lasting effects of COVID-19 on minority healthcare workers’ and communities’ well-being, especially regarding Hispanic/Latinx and Native American/Alaskan Native nursing staff.