Despite the high death toll of the COVID-19 pandemic, reported rates of adherence to adaptive preventive health behaviours during the early wave of the pandemic were suboptimal for reducing the risk of disease spread. Additionally, some have adopted practices with the intention of preventing infection that have harmful consequences. Protection Motivation Theory (PMT), consisting of perceived vulnerability, severity, response efficacy, and self-efficacy, has been used to predict intentions to engage in behaviours in past pandemics, and can be extended to the COVID-19 outbreak. Three hundred and thirty-three American adults completed a survey in May 2020 through Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. Ten behaviours recommended by the CDC and WHO and two ‘maladaptive’ behaviours presented in the media were selected for investigation. Binary logistic regressions were conducted to assess the impacts of demographic variables and PMT constructs on behaviour frequency. Perceived severity and vulnerability were not significant predictors of behaviour frequency. Behaviour specific response efficacy and self-efficacy were significant predictors of 11/12 (odds ratios: 2.70–6.22) and 10/12 (odds ratios: 2.59–4.64) behaviours, respectively. Age, gender, education, political ideology, perceived severity, and perceived vulnerability were generally unimportant predictors. Beliefs about the effectiveness of the behaviour and one’s ability to carry out that behaviour consistently seem to be more important in predicting how often someone engages in that behaviour than the perceived dangerousness of COVID-19 and one’s believed susceptibility to infection. These results suggest that interventions trying to modulate the likelihood of engaging in preventive behaviours should focus on the effectiveness of these behaviours in reducing risk of spread and the individual’s ability to engage in these behaviours frequently rather than the dangerousness of the COVID-19 pandemic and the individual’s risk of becoming infected.

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused increased psychological distress and decreased quality of life (QoL), but limited research has evaluated cognitive appraisals of COVID-19. This study aimed to exami...

Although exposure therapy (ET) is an effective treatment for anxiety disorders and obsessive-compulsive disorder, many clinicians report not utilizing it. The present study targeted common utilization barriers by evaluating an intensive ET training experience in a relatively inexperienced sample of pre-professionals. Thirty-two individuals at the undergraduate or college graduate level without formal clinical experience participated as camp counsellors in a 5day exposure-based therapeutic summer camp for youth with anxiety disorders and/or obsessive-compulsive disorder. Participants were trained in ET through a progressive cascading model and answered questionnaires before and after camp. Repeated measure MANOVA revealed significantly increased feelings of self-efficacy conducting exposures, and significantly decreased feelings of disgust sensitivity and contamination-related disgust from pre-camp to post-camp. A subset of individuals providing data 1 month after the camp maintained a significant gain in ET self-efficacy. Regression analyses revealed that contamination-related disgust, but not disgust sensitivity, significantly predicted post-camp ET self-efficacy. These findings suggest that individuals early into their post-secondary education can learn ET, and the progressive cascading model holds promise in its utility across experience levels and warrants further investigation. Disgust may also play a role in feelings of competency conducting ET. Implications on dissemination and implementation efforts are also discussed. Key learning aims: (1) How can training of CBT techniques such as exposure occur prior to graduate education? (2) Can self-efficacy in conducting exposures meaningfully increase in an experiential training of pre-professionals? (3) How does an individual’s tolerance of disgust impact feelings of competence conducting exposures?

Despite the high prevalence of anxiety disorders in children and adolescents and the existence of effective evidence-based treatments for them, access to psychological care remains a major public health concern. Summer camps may provide an effective treatment avenue for youth who might not otherwise have access to care. This study describes the design and implementation of Fear Facers, a semistructured, 5-day, daytime exposure-therapy-based summer camp designed for youth with a primary diagnosis of obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), social anxiety, separation anxiety, or a specific phobia. Preliminary data regarding feasibility and patient outcomes is also reported. Among 52 children and adolescents aged 7 to 16 who attended one of six camp sessions between 2018 and 2021, significant reductions in anxiety (d = 0.54) and OCD symptoms (d = 0.57) were observed from pre-camp to immediately post-camp. A subset of campers who were followed for an additional 3 months post-camp (n = 22) showed maintenance of treatment gains. Retention rates for the intervention were high. Our investigation provides further support for the use of a camp-based design for cognitive-behavioral approaches, and may provide a unique setting to maximize elements of inhibitory learning in exposures. We also discuss a number of elements regarding feasibility that need consideration for those hoping to develop similar interventions.