Culturally Grounded Scapegoating in Response to Illness and the COVID-19 Pandemic

For years, violence against doctors and healthcare workers has been a growing social issue in China. In a recent series of studies, we provided evidence for a motivated scapegoating account of this violence. Specifically, individuals who feel that the course of their (or their family member's) illness is a threat to their sense of control are more likely to express motivation to aggress against healthcare providers. Drawing on existential theory, we propose that blaming and aggressing against a single individual represents a culturally afforded scapegoating mechanism in China. However, in an era of healthcare crisis (i.e., the global COVID-19 pandemic), it is essential to understand cultural variation in scapegoating in the context of healthcare. We therefore undertook two cross-cultural studies examining how people in the United States and China use different scapegoating responses to re-assert a sense of control during medical uncertainty. One study was conducted prior to the pandemic and allowed us to make an initial validating and exploratory investigation of the constructs of interest. The second study, conducted during the pandemic, was confirmatory and investigated mediation path models. Across the two studies, consistent evidence emerged that, both in response to COVID-related and non-COVID-related illness scenarios, Chinese (relative to U.S.) individuals are more likely to respond by aggressing against an individual doctor, while U.S. (relative to Chinese) individuals are more likely to respond by scapegoating the medical industry/system. Further, Study 2 suggests these culture effects are mediated by differential patterns of primary and secondary control-seeking.

Questionnaire Design and Translation for Refugee Populations: Lessons Learned from the REHEAL Study

Surveying the refugee population poses particular challenges: what measurement and culture effects need to be taken into account? Are some of the constructs related to refugees unique or can constructs used in other surveys be adapted? Due to considerable variation in educational background, in trauma history or in perception of ethnicity or gender roles in refugee populations, one needs to raise the question whether a one-size-fits-all approach is suitable when designing a questionnaire for refugee populations. Drawing upon the experience of the REHEAL study conducted in 2016 during the early phase of refugees' settlement in Greek refugee camps, the article addresses the particular challenges when designing and translating a questionnaire for multinational, multicultural and potentially traumatized refugee populations, residing in refugee accommodation settings. A post hoc scrutiny of the Arabic and Farsi versions of the REHEAL questionnaire forms the basis of this article in order to empirically inform best practices in designing and translating questionnaires for special populations. The authors set the stage by summarizing key aspects of concept and measurement equivalence in cross-cultural research, and then by expanding on the fact that cross-cultural differences in response styles or response sets can affect comparability. Translation and adaptation challenges are examined and illustrated by examples. This article serves to empirically document the benefit and pitfalls of appropriate measurements for use in refugee research.