Increasingly, social and personality psychologists are conducting studies in which data are collected simultaneously at multiple levels, with hypotheses concerning effects that involve multiple levels of analysis. In studies of naturally occurring social interaction, data describing people and their social interactions are collected simultaneously. This article discuses how to analyze such data using random coefficient modeling. Analyzing data describing day-to-day social interaction is used to illustrate the analysis of event-contingent data (when specific events trigger or organize data collection), and analyzing data describing reactions to daily events is used to illustrate the analysis of interval-contingent data (when data are collected at intervals). Different analytic strategies are presented, the shortcomings of ordinary least squares analyses are described, and the use of multilevel random coefficient modeling is discussed in detail. Different modeling techniques, the specifics of formulating and testing hypotheses, and the differences between fixed and random effects are also considered.

Ostracism is a negative interpersonal experience that has been studied primarily in laboratory settings in which people have been ostracized by strangers and the motives for being ostracized have been ambiguous. This study extended this research by investigating ostracism as it occurs in daily life, focusing on people's reflective reactions to being ostracized in their daily lives and on the nature of the ostracism they experience. For 2 weeks, 40 participants (adults residing in the community) described what happened each time they felt ostracized using a diary method modeled after the Rochester Interaction Record (RIR; Wheeler & Nezlek, 1977). The questions in the diary were based on Williams's (2007) need-threat model of ostracism. Most ostracism episodes were from persons of equal status, and participants reported lower levels of belonging, control, self-esteem, and meaningful existence after being ostracized. Participants' needs were threatened more when friends or close others had ostracized them than when they had been ostracized by acquaintance and strangers, and they reacted more negatively to punitive, defensive, and oblivious ostracism as opposed to role based or ambiguous ostracism. This research suggests that the reflective effects of ostracism can vary as a function of who ostracizes someone and why people feel they have been ostracized.14 page(s

Changing collective behaviour and supporting non-pharmaceutical interventions is an important component in mitigating virus transmission during a pandemic. In a large international collaboration (Study 1,N = 49,968 across 67 countries), we investigated self-reported factors associated with public health behaviours (e.g., spatial distancing and stricter hygiene) and endorsed public policy interventions (e.g., closing bars and restaurants) during the early stage of the COVID-19 pandemic (April-May 2020). Respondents who reported identifying more strongly with their nation consistently reported greater engagement in public health behaviours and support for public health policies. Results were similar for representative and non-representative national samples. Study 2 (N = 42 countries) conceptually replicated the central finding using aggregate indices of national identity (obtained using the World Values Survey) and a measure of actual behaviour change during the pandemic (obtained from Google mobility reports). Higher levels of national identification prior to the pandemic predicted lower mobility during the early stage of the pandemic (r = −0.40). We discuss the potential implications of links between national identity, leadership, and public health for managing COVID-19 and future pandemics.