Eye-tracking-based attentional research implicates sustained attention to threat in posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, most of this research employed small stimuli set-sizes, small samples that did not include both trauma-exposed healthy participants and non-trauma-exposed participants, and generally failed to report the reliability of used tasks and attention indices. Here, using an established eye-tracking paradigm, we explore attention processes to different negatively-valenced cues in PTSD while addressing these limitations.

PTSD patients (n = 37), trauma-exposed healthy controls (TEHC; n = 34), and healthy controls (HC; n = 30) freely viewed three blocks of 30 different matrices of faces, each presented for 6 s. Each block consisted of matrices depicting eight negatively-valenced faces (anger, fear, or sadness) and eight neutral faces. Gaze patterns on negative and neural areas of interest were compared. Internal consistency and test-retest reliability were evaluated for the entire sample and within groups.

The two trauma-exposed groups dwelled longer on negatively-valenced faces over neutral faces, while HC participants showed the opposite pattern. This attentional bias was more prominent in the PTSD than the TEHC group. Similar results emerged for first-fixation dwell time, but with no differences between the two trauma-exposed groups. No group differences emerged for first-fixation latency or location. Internal consistency and 1-week test-retest reliability were adequate, across and within groups.

Sustained attention on negatively-valenced stimuli emerges as a potential target for therapeutic intervention in PTSD designed to divert attention away from negatively-valenced stimuli and toward neutral ones.

High job demands, low job control, and their combination (job strain) may increase workers' risk of depression. Previous research is limited by small populations, not controlling for previous depression, and relying on the same informant for reporting exposure and outcome. This study aims to examine the relationship between objectively measured workplace factors and the risk of developing clinical depression among the Swedish working population while controlling for previous psychiatric diagnoses and sociodemographic factors.

Control, demands, and job strain were measured using the Swedish Job Exposure Matrix (JEM) measuring psychosocial workload linked to around 3 million individuals based on their occupational titles in 2005. Cox regression models were built to estimate associations between these factors and diagnoses of depression recorded in patient registers.

Lower job control was associated with an increased risk of developing depression (HR 1.43, 95% CI 1.39–1.48 and HR 1.27, 95% CI 1.24–1.30 for men and women with the lowest control, respectively), and this showed a dose–response relationship among men. Having high job demands was associated with a slight decrease in depression risk for men and women. High strain and passive jobs (both low control jobs) were associated with an increased risk of depression among men, and passive jobs were associated with an increased risk among women.

High job control appears important for reducing the risk of developing depression even when accounting for previous psychiatric diagnoses and sociodemographic factors. This is an important finding concerning strategies to improve occupational and in turn mental health.

The time of widespread outbreaks of infectious diseases can lead to elevated stress and mental health problems among all persons affected, and in particular those sub-groups of the population that are at an increased risk of mental health problems. One such vulnerable group constitutes university students. The aim of this study is to assess stress, depression, anxiety, and suicidality among different groups of university students (medical, psychology, and other).

Using a repeated cross-sectional study design, we collected survey data among a large sample of 7228 university students from Poland (mean age = 22.78, s.d. = 4.40; 81% female). Data were collected in five waves, during the first 2 months of the COVID-19 pandemic in Europe (March and April 2020).

The results demonstrate a significant increase in depression levels as the pandemic was progressing. We also found that female students scored significantly higher than male students on depression, anxiety, and stress. Psychology students recorded the lowest scores on depression and anxiety. Young adult students (aged 18–24 years) had more symptoms of depression, anxiety, and suicidality than adult students (⩾25 years).

These results provide insights into stress and mental health among university students during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Findings can be used for a more effective identification of students who may struggle during next stages of the pandemic and future crises.

Much research effort is focused on developing an effective vaccine for combatting coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Vaccine development itself, however, will not be enough given that a sufficient amount of people will need to be vaccinated for widespread immunity. Vaccine hesitancy is on the rise, varies across countries, and is associated with conspiratorial worldview. Given the rise in COVID-19-related conspiracy theories, we aimed to examine the levels of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and its association with beliefs on the origin of the novel coronavirus in a cross-cultural study.

We conducted an online survey in the UK (N = 1088) and Turkey (N = 3936), and gathered information on participants' willingness to vaccinate for a potential COVID-19 vaccine, beliefs on the origin of the novel coronavirus, and several behavioural and demographic predictors (such as anxiety, risk perception, government satisfaction levels) that influence vaccination and origin beliefs.

In all, 31% of the participants in Turkey and 14% in the UK were unsure about getting themselves vaccinated for a COVID-19 vaccine. In both countries, 3% of the participants rejected to be vaccinated. Also, 54% of the participants in Turkey and 63% in the UK believed in the natural origin of the novel coronavirus. Believing in the natural origin significantly increased the odds of COVID-19 vaccine acceptance.

Our results point at a concerning level of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, especially in Turkey, and suggest that wider communication of the scientific consensus on the origin of the novel coronavirus with the public may help future campaigns targeting COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy.