Alison Fang-Wei Wu

Introduction: Acting training focuses on improving actors’ emotion recognition and expression, and it has been used to strengthen individuals’ emotional skills in both artistic and non-artistic contexts. However, when examining the impact of this training on emotion recognition and expression in studies outside the arts, diverse research designs resulted in inconsistent findings or limitations for comparison across studies. Method: We reviewed and evaluated the research design and evidence. Results: The 32 included articles show that acting-based interventions have been employed across diverse areas, including clinical, occupational and educational contexts, and these interventions could improve emotion recognition and expression. We examine the possible reasons for the inconsistency found in the literature, evaluating assessment tools and training content. Discussion: We suggest addressing the underlying mechanism of the acting-based intervention’s impact on emotion recognition and expression skills and subsequently propose future research directions. Systematic review Registration: Doi: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/R2KTB .

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic exacerbated pre-existing societal inequities. Our study addresses the dearth of studies on how intersecting factors of disadvantage and discrimination affected pandemic daily life for disabled people from minoritised ethnic groups, aiming to improve their experiences and social, health and well-being outcomes. Objectives: Through an intersectionality lens, to: explore and compare, by location and time, survey and qualitative data on changing needs for social, health and well-being outcomes relate coping strategies/solutions to these explore formal and informal network issues/affordances gain insights from synthesising our data contextualise and explore transferability of findings co-create outputs with stakeholders. Design: Mixed-methods, asset-based, underpinned by embodiment disability models and intersectionality, integrating three strands: (secondary): analysis of existing cohort/panel data, literature review (primary: quantitative): new survey (n = 4326), three times over 18 months (primary: qualitative): semistructured interviews (n = 271), interviewee co-create workshops (n = 104) 5 and 10 months later, mixed stakeholder co-design workshops (n = 30) for rapid-impact solutions to issues, key informant interviews (n = 4). Setting: United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland. Participants: Strand 2: community-dwelling migrants, White British comparators, with/without disability. Strand 3: focus on Arab, South Asian, African, Central/East European, or White British heritage with/without disability. Results: We found strong adherence to pandemic restrictions (where accommodation, economic situations and disability allowed) due to COVID-19 vulnerabilities. High vaccine hesitancy (despite eventual uptake) resulted from side-effect concerns and (mis)trust in the government. Many relied on food banks, local organisations, communities and informal networks. Pandemic-related income loss was common, particularly affecting undocumented migrants. Participants reported a crisis in mental health care, non-holistic social and housing care, and inaccessible, poor-quality and discriminatory remote health/social care. They preferred private care (which they could not easily afford), community or self-help online support. Lower socioeconomic status, mental health and mobility issues reduced well-being. Individual and community assets and coping strategies mitigated some issues, adapted over different pandemic phases, and focused on empowerment, self-reflection, self-care and social connectivity. Technology needs cut across these. Limitations: We could not explore area-level social distancing and infection rates. Data collection was largely online, possibly excluding some older, digitally deprived or more disabled participants. Participants engaged differently in online and face-to-face co-create workshops. Our qualitative data over-represent England and South Asian people and use contestable categories. Conclusions: Different intersecting factors led to different experiences, with low socioeconomic status particularly significant. Overall, disability and minoritised ethnic identities led to worse pandemic experiences. Our co-design work shows how to build on the assets and strengths; simple changes in professional communication and understanding should improve experience. Minoritised groups can easily be involved in policy and practice decision-making, reducing marginalisation, with better сare and outcomes. Future work: More research is needed on: (1) the impact of the post-pandemic economic situation and migration policies on migrant mental health/well-being; (2) supporting empowerment strategies across disadvantaged intersecting identities; and (3) technological deprivation and the cultural and disability-relevant acceptability of remote consultations. We found some differences in the devolved nations, which need elucidation. Study registration: This study is registered as ISRCTN40370, PROSPERO CRD42021262590 and CRD42022355254. Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme (NIHR award ref: NIHR132914) and is published in full in Health and Social Care Delivery Research; Vol. 13, No. 2. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

Next Steps (previously known as the Longitudinal Study of Young People in England, LSYPE) is an ongoing, multidisciplinary, longitudinal study following 16 122 people who were in secondary school in England and were born in 1989–90. The Next Steps generation faced distinct socio-environmental pressure. For example: they grew up in a time of rapid technological change; faced unprecedented levels of student debt (an average of £50 000 upon graduating ¹); entered the labour market during the Great Recession, which meant increased job precarity; and have encountered a challenging housing market. These pressures may shape the unique health and social impacts on this generation.

Purpose COVID-19 pandemic has had long-standing consequences for all aspects of life. Although young people appear less susceptible to severe forms of physical illness due to the coronavirus, they have not escaped unscathed from its’ psychological impacts. The present study measured the content of worries in young people residing in the UK during the pandemic and how it varied with sociodemographic factors. Methods Between May and December 2020, UK-residing participants aged 12–25 years completed an online survey that presented participants with free-text fields to describe their top three worries over the last two weeks, in addition to demographic and other information. Cross-sectional data from 2560 participants (Males = 767; Female = 1793) was analyzed. Results Irrespective of sociodemographic, a majority of the participants reported worries related to academics, followed by social relationships, own physical health, social and work routines, and physical health of others. Significantly more females reported concerns about academics, finances, physical health, social and work routines, social relationships, mental health and emotions, and physical health of others. Expectedly, more older (18–25 years) than younger (12–17 years) participants reported concerns about career-prospects and finances, while more younger than older ones were worried about academics (98.41% vs. 80.90%). With respect to financial worries, a higher percentage of BAME (Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic) communities in the UK reported such worries. Ethnicity significantly predicted more worries about social relationships among White than BAME participants. Significant differences also existed across different SES groups regarding endorsement of a particular category of worry. Conclusion These findings highlight the need for tailored interventions depending on the major concerns for young people of different ages, sexes, ethnicities, and SES.

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has inequitably impacted the experiences of people living with ill health/impairments or from minoritized ethnic groups across all areas of life. Given possible parallels in inequities for disabled people and people from minoritized ethnic backgrounds, their existence before the pandemic and increase since, and the discriminations that each group faces, our interest is in understanding the interplay between being disabled AND being from a minoritized ethnic group.Objective: The overarching aim of the Coronavirus Chronic Conditions and Disabilities Awareness (CICADA) project, building on this understanding, is to improve pandemic and longer-term support networks, and access to and experiences of care, services, and resources for these underserved groups, both during the pandemic and longer term, thereby reducing inequities and enhancing social, health, and well-being outcomes.Methods: This mixed methods study involves three “sweeps” of a new UK survey; secondary analyses of existing cohort and panel surveys; a rapid scoping review; a more granular review; and qualitative insights from over 200 semistructured interviews, including social network/map/photo elicitation methods and two subsequent sets of remote participatory research workshops. Separate stakeholder cocreation meetings, running throughout the study, will develop analyses and outputs. Our longitudinal study design enables the exploration of significant relationships between variables in the survey data collected and to the assessment of changes in variables over time, including consideration of varying pandemic contexts. The qualitative data will provide more granular detail. We will take a strengths and assets–based approach, underpinned by the social model of disability and by intersectional considerations to challenge discrimination. Our exploration of the social determinants of health and well-being is framed by the social ecological model.Results: The CICADA project was funded by the Health and Social Care Delivery Research (HSDR) Programme of the United Kingdom (UK) National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) in March 2021 and began in May 2021. Further work within the project (84 interviews) was commissioned in March 2022, a substudy focusing on mental health, specifically in Northeast England, Greater Manchester, and the Northwest Coast of the United Kingdom. Data collection began in August 2021, with the last participants due to be recruited in September 2022. As of January 2022, 5792 survey respondents and 227 interviewees had provided data. From April 2022, the time of article submission, we will recruit participants for the substudy and wave 2 of the surveys and qualitative work. We expect results to be published by winter 2022.Conclusions: In studying the experiences of disabled people with impairments and those living with chronic conditions who come from certain minoritized ethnic groups, we are aiming for transformative research to improve their health and well-being.International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/38361

BACKGROUND The COVID-19 pandemic has inequitably impacted the experiences of people living with ill health/impairments or from minoritized ethnic groups across all areas of life. Given possible parallels in inequities for disabled people and people from minoritized ethnic backgrounds, their existence before the pandemic and increase since, and the discriminations that each group faces, our interest is in understanding the interplay between being disabled AND being from a minoritized ethnic group. OBJECTIVE The overarching aim of the Coronavirus Chronic Conditions and Disabilities Awareness (CICADA) project, building on this understanding, is to improve pandemic and longer-term support networks, and access to and experiences of care, services, and resources for these underserved groups, both during the pandemic and longer term, thereby reducing inequities and enhancing social, health, and well-being outcomes. METHODS This mixed methods study involves three “sweeps” of a new UK survey; secondary analyses of existing cohort and panel surveys; a rapid scoping review; a more granular review; and qualitative insights from over 200 semistructured interviews, including social network/map/photo elicitation methods and two subsequent sets of remote participatory research workshops. Separate stakeholder cocreation meetings, running throughout the study, will develop analyses and outputs. Our longitudinal study design enables the exploration of significant relationships between variables in the survey data collected and to the assessment of changes in variables over time, including consideration of varying pandemic contexts. The qualitative data will provide more granular detail. We will take a strengths and assets–based approach, underpinned by the social model of disability and by intersectional considerations to challenge discrimination. Our exploration of the social determinants of health and well-being is framed by the social ecological model. RESULTS The CICADA project was funded by the Health and Social Care Delivery Research (HSDR) Programme of the United Kingdom (UK) National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) in March 2021 and began in May 2021. Further work within the project (84 interviews) was commissioned in March 2022, a substudy focusing on mental health, specifically in Northeast England, Greater Manchester, and the Northwest Coast of the United Kingdom. Data collection began in August 2021, with the last participants due to be recruited in September 2022. As of January 2022, 5792 survey respondents and 227 interviewees had provided data. From April 2022, the time of article submission, we will recruit participants for the substudy and wave 2 of the surveys and qualitative work. We expect results to be published by winter 2022. CONCLUSIONS In studying the experiences of disabled people with impairments and those living with chronic conditions who come from certain minoritized ethnic groups, we are aiming for transformative research to improve their health and well-being. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT DERR1-10.2196/38361

Pathological social withdrawal (PSW), an extreme form of socially avoidant behaviour, is emerging as a global public health issue. Prior PSW theories implicate personal values that deviate from sociocultural norms resulting in inner conflict and mental health problems. Speculatively, this conflict could manifest or be embedded within a person’s cognitive and affective self-concepts (self-construal and self-esteem respectively). In this study, we tested the hypotheses that compared to those without PSW, individuals with PSW would have lower personal and collective self-esteem, and endorse independent and/or interdependent self-construals to differing degrees. 343 Taiwanese adults completed a two-step online survey, which consisted measuring their social withdrawal condition, sociocultural deviance, personal/collective self-esteem, independent/interdependent self-construal and mental health problems. As expected, data showed that the affected group had lower self-esteem than the unaffected group, but no group difference emerged in either self-construal dimension. We also found that personal self-esteem in the PSW group was (concurrently) associated with sociocultural deviance and symptoms of poor mental health. Our results tentatively supported theories of PSW, suggesting that the influences individuals’ personal self-esteem and sociocultural deviance should be considered in future studies or treatments/preventions.

Objectives: Pathological social withdrawal (PSW) has become a public health concern, especially in Asia. However, few studies have investigated the presence of PSW and its characteristics in Taiwan. In this study, we aimed to discover whether individuals in Taiwan display PSW behaviours, the demographic characteristics and psychiatric history of those meeting criteria for PSW and the associated psychological risks. Methods: An online self-report survey collected participants’ demographic characteristics, social behaviours and their psychiatric history, along with information on adherence to cultural norms and mental health. Results: Among 1,046 valid respondents, 9% reported behaviours consistent with PSW for at least 6 months, commensurate with other online surveys in Asian countries. Around 20% of these also reported current or past psychiatric disorders, although this was lower than previous findings (50%–80%). Participants with PSW reported poorer mental health and lower confidence in social/academic/work skills than unaffected participants. Conclusion: This study identified for the first time the presence of PSW in Taiwan. Except the lower rates of psychiatric comorbidity (which could be explained by sociocultural factors and sampling methods), data were consistent with previous findings. We also extended our understanding of possible psychological risk factors associated with this pathological condition.