Johanna Deleyer-Tiarks

In order to understand how health beliefs map onto health behaviors, a national survey, administered in the wake of the COVID-19 campus closures, was conducted to explore college students’ mind-body health beliefs and their health behaviors (across dimensions of physical exercise, diet/nutrition, and socialization). To this end, the Mind-Body Health Screener (MBHS), a five-item, Likert scale, brief measure, was developed. The present study applied an online survey design administered nationally to U.S. undergraduate students during the initial lockdowns with the pandemic (n = 557). To examine the psychometric properties of the MBHS, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were run as well as measures of reliability. Furthermore, linear regressions and effect sizes were computed to understand the connection between mind-body health beliefs and behaviors. While initial data supported the psychometric properties of the Mind-Body Health Screener (MBHS) developed for this purpose, substantive results suggested that mind-body health beliefs did not relate to mind-body health behaviors (either before or after the campus closures), aligning with the Cognitive Dissonance Theory. Post hoc analysis did, however, suggest a significant change in health behaviors from pre-campus closures to during the closures, suggesting students engaged in more physical exercise, eating behaviors, and socializing before campus closed, observed with small to large effects. Taken together, the findings of the present study illustrate how the Cognitive Dissonance Theory is a relevant perspective to consider the relation between health beliefs and behaviors during a period of immense stress, such as the COVID-19 initial campus closures.

There was an error in the original publication (Winter et al

The focus on college students’ mental and physical health is steadily increasing with more students reporting concern and need for services. This study investigates the results of college students’ utilization of mind–body health activities and services in the wake of COVID-19. As part of a larger research study on college wellbeing, a survey completed by 557 college students between May and August of 2020 assessed student’s use of mind–body health strategies. To examine differences in mind–body health (MBH) service and activity usage before and during COVID-19 campus closures, paired t-tests were used, while one-way ANOVAs were used to determine differences based on demographic variables. Findings across MBH service and activity use during campus closures were variable, with use differing based on a variety of factors including gender, socioeconomic background, age, and race, as well as the participant’s personal prior history of services. These findings provide insight into what services students accessed during the lockdown period to aid university health systems with recommended guidance and resources.

Contemporary intelligence theory and assessment in the United States—a century after Lewis Terman published the Stanford–Binet in 1916—has evolved in ways that even David Wechsler could not have envisioned

The literature on children born prematurely has consistently shown that full-term babies outperform preterm babies by about 12 IQ points, even when tested as adolescents, and this advantage for full-term infants extends to the language and motor domains as well. The results of comprehensive meta-analyses suggest that the degree of prematurity greatly influences later test performance, but these inferences are based on data from an array of separate studies with no control of potential confounding variables such as age. This study analyzed Bayley-4 data for 66 extremely premature infants and toddlers (Bayley-4. This investigation analyzed data on the five subtests: cognitive, expressive communication, receptive communication, fine motor, and gross motor. A multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) assessed for group mean differences across the three subsamples, while controlling for the children’s age. Extremely premature children scored significantly lower than moderately premature children on all subtests, and both preterm groups were significantly outscored by the full-term sample across all domains. In each set of comparisons, the cognitive and motor subtests yielded the largest differences, whereas language development, both expressive and receptive, appeared the least impacted by prematurity. A follow-up MANOVA was conducted to examine full-term versus preterm discrepancies on the five subtests for infants (2–17 months) vs. toddlers (18–42 months). For that analysis, the two preterm groups were combined into a single preterm sample, and a significant interaction between the age level and group (full-term vs. preterm) was found. Premature infants scored lower than premature toddlers on receptive communication, fine motor, and cognitive. Neither expressive communication nor gross motor produced significant discrepancies between age groups The findings of this study enrich the preterm literature on the degree of prematurity; the age-based interactions have implications for which abilities are most likely to improve as infants grow into toddlerhood.