BURA Collection:

Google-Search Data for Psychological Scientists: A Tutorial and Best Practices

2026-09-02T02:01:46Z

Title: Google-Search Data for Psychological Scientists: A Tutorial and Best Practices Authors: Moon, Jordan W; Barlev, Michael Abstract: Google searches have been described as the most important data set on the human psyche ever assembled. Google-search data—accessible through a tool called Google Trends—can provide new insights on topics as varied as stereotypes and prejudices, political attitudes, religious identity and belief, personality, motivations, psychological well-being, mental health, and culture. Google Trends can generate highly customized data sets: Users can compare the popularity of search terms across most of the world or access longitudinal data as far back as 2004, and they can do so with high geographical and temporal granularity. Notwithstanding these opportunities, Google Trends has significant limitations. Without appropriate caution, users can easily rely on data that are not meaningful or draw mistaken conclusions. We provide a comprehensive overview and tutorial covering (a) opportunities of Google Trends for psychological scientists; (b) how Google Trends scores are calculated, how reliable they are, and why some queries might yield low-quality data; (c) instructions with accompanying R code for creating custom data sets beyond what Google Trends provides by default; (d) example analyses for studies that could be done using Google Trends data; (e) an overview of common pitfalls; and (f) recommendations for safeguarding data quality and their interpretation. Description: Acknowledgments: This article does not involve human participants, personal data, or experimental procedures requiring ethical approval. All data included are publicly available, and no identifiable individual information is used.

Risperidone prescription and use for people with dementia in care homes: a qualitative study exploring perceptions of residents, relatives and health and social care professionals

2026-08-28T02:02:00Z

Title: Risperidone prescription and use for people with dementia in care homes: a qualitative study exploring perceptions of residents, relatives and health and social care professionals Authors: Macfarlane, Douglas; Griffiths, Alys Wyn; Ding, Joash; Stokes, Louis; Choma, Joshua; Dahir, Ikran; Ballard, Clive; Dennis, John; Henley, William; Mueller, Christoph; Williams, Nefyn; Creese, Byron Abstract: Objectives: Risperidone is an antipsychotic used to treat behavioural symptoms of dementia such as agitation, which should be used as a last resort. However, it carries a number of severe side effects, including stroke. Prescribing data suggest regular use outside of this guidance. We currently know very little about the first-hand experiences of people involved in prescribing decisions within care homes. This study aimed to understand perceptions around the risks and benefits of risperidone, preferences on how side effect risks are communicated, and how people feel about being able to better predict these risks. Methods: Semi-structured interviews and one focus group were conducted with care home residents, relatives, and staff. A focus group was conducted with external healthcare professionals. Results: Using framework analysis, five main themes were identified: (1) the interplay between the person and their symptoms; (2) balancing voices in decision-making; (3) what happens before prescription?; (4) bringing together information to make the right decision; (5) what happens after prescription?. Conclusions: Care home staff and relatives of people with dementia were generally uncertain of the risks of risperidone, and the potential side effects were often not explained adequately. While risperidone continues to be prescribed, efforts to minimise harm are required. Specifically, improved education around the risks of risperidone is needed. Relatives wish to be involved in the decision-making process alongside care staff, and their involvement should be optimised through improved communication. Accessible dementia-specific guidance on monitoring risperidone after prescription should also be developed. Description: Acknowledgements: The authors are grateful to the Lay Advisory Group who worked with us throughout study. The authors are also grateful to the Brunel Older People’s Reference Group (BORG) at Brunel University London for supporting public engagement activities and to the Brunel Partners Academic Centre for Health Sciences (BPACHS) for supporting dissemination activity.

Validation of the care partner stress scale in the CAN-PROTECT study

2026-08-28T02:01:59Z

Title: Validation of the care partner stress scale in the CAN-PROTECT study Authors: Vellone, Daniella; Guan, Dylan X; Crockford, Jasper FE; Warring, Ibadat; Ballard, Clive; Creese, Byron; Corbett, Anne; Pickering, Ellie; Roach, Pamela; Smith, Eric E; Ismail, Zahinoor Abstract: Background: Family and friend care partners play a vital role in supporting individuals with neurocognitive disorders, such as Alzheimer's disease dementia. Care partners are often uncompensated and face multifaceted challenges that contribute to stress. The Care Partner Stress Scale (CPSS) was developed to assess caregiver stress across seven domains: cognition, behavior, function; unmet needs and emotional impact; work and financial strain; family and interpersonal conflict; and situational perception. Objective: To evaluate psychometric properties of the CPSS in care partners of individuals with neurocognitive or neurodegenerative diseases of aging. Methods: The CPSS was completed by 168 (83.93% female, age = 61.98 years) care partners in the CAN-PROTECT online cohort. Participants completed measures of depression, anxiety, quality of life, function, loneliness, and life satisfaction and engagement. We assessed internal consistency, item-total correlations, convergent and discriminant validity, and floor/ceiling effects. Results: The CPSS demonstrated excellent internal consistency (α = 0.95, 95% CI: 0.94–0.96), with item-total correlations >0.23. Higher CPSS scores were associated with greater depression (b = 2.38, 95%CI [0.72, 4.03], p = 0.005), anxiety (b = 4.47, 95%CI [2.44, 6.50], p < 0.001), and anxious distress (b = 6.37, 95%CI [3.54, 9.21], p < 0.001), as well as lower life satisfaction (b = −3.42, 95%CI [−5.61, −1.23], p = 0.002), poorer social relationships (b = −2.31, 95%CI [−4.54, −0.09] p = 0.042), greater loneliness (b = 5.26, 95%CI [1.33, 9.19], p = 0.009), and poorer life engagement (b = 2.89, 95%CI [1.23, 4.65], p = 0.001). CPSS scores were not associated with self-care (b = −1.06, 95%CI [−5.03, 2.92], p = 0.600). Floor effects were minimal (0.60%), with no ceiling effects. Conclusions: Findings provide initial support for multidimensional assessment of care partner stress in neurocognitive disorders. Description: Data availability statement: At this time, the authors do not have ethical or legal permission to share the study data, including de-identified data. The study is still in its early stages, and a data access committee has not yet been established, nor has a data sharing policy been finalized. Upon study completion, the authors will seek legal review and submit an amendment to the ethics board. Addressing data sharing is a priority, contingent on obtaining stable funding for all study activities. While the authors are unable to publicly post the data at this time, they are open to sharing data with qualified investigators for validation purposes. Interested researchers may contact ismailz@ucalgary.ca to request access to the data. R scripts used for data cleaning and analysis in this study are available upon reasonable request to the corresponding author; Supplementary Material is available online at: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/13872877261457652#supplementary-materials .

The Independent and Combined Roles of Attentional and Interpretative Biases in Antisocial Behavior, Trait Aggression and Aggressive Responses Under Provocation

2026-08-24T02:01:14Z

Title: The Independent and Combined Roles of Attentional and Interpretative Biases in Antisocial Behavior, Trait Aggression and Aggressive Responses Under Provocation Authors: Puzzo, Ignazio; Hamid‐Saifullah, Anam; Cantarella, Simona; Fieldwalker, Anna; Aldridge‐Waddon, Luke; Kumari, Veena Abstract: Aggressive behavior has been linked to biases in social information processing, including heightened attention to threat and hostile interpretations of ambiguous social cues. The extent to which attention and interpretational biases uniquely or jointly contribute to aggression under provocation remains unclear. The present study investigated the effects of attentional bias toward angry faces and hostile interpretation bias on aggression using both self‐report and behavioral measures in a non‐clinical sample. Participants ( n = 67) completed an emotional attentional blink task and a hostile interpretation bias measure, alongside self‐report indices of aggression and antisocial behavior, and an experimental measure of provoked aggression. Hostile interpretation bias was positively associated with self‐reported aggression and antisocial tendencies, whereas attentional bias toward angry faces was selectively associated with behavioral aggression. Critically, these cognitive biases were examined as potentially independent, overlapping, or interactive contributors to aggression under provocation, and attentional and interpretation biases interacted to predict aggressive behavior under conditions of high provocation, such that individuals high in both biases displayed the greatest levels of aggression. No interaction effects were observed for self‐reported outcomes. These findings support social information‐processing models proposing that multiple cognitive biases jointly contribute to aggression and highlight the importance of considering situational provocation and outcome modality when examining cognitive risk factors for aggressive behavior and preventive cognitive interventions in at risk populations. Description: Data Availability Statement: The data that support the findings will be made openly available at the University of Reading data archive.; At head of title: Brief report.