Pub Date : 2021-11-26DOI: 10.1027/1016-9040/a000463
Barbara Hanfstingl, Ana Arzenšek, Jan Apschner, Katharina Ingrid Gölly
Abstract. This research provides a systematic overview of psychological areas using assimilation and accommodation to explain development and adaptation processes from 1998 to 2018. We primarily aimed to identify the main psychological research areas connected to assimilation and accommodation. We used assimilation and accommodation as keywords to extract data from SpringerLink, PsycINFO, and PsycARTICLES. Of 500 articles, 473 were included in the analysis. Ten categories were identified to allow systematization along with different research areas and development trajectories. The meanings of these terms were analyzed in terms of scientific impact, their connection to Piaget and Baldwin, application, and research methods. Our analysis has distilled the most driving and scientifically relevant approaches to assimilation and accommodation within psychological research, with the work of Baldwin and Piaget influencing practically all views. Thus, we have identified a common understanding of assimilation and accommodation, although the direction of the adaptation process should be made explicit in the future. Based on our analyses, we were able to identify white spots on the research map that should be focused on in future work: the need to better understand the interdependence and synchronicity of both processes, the connection to affects and emotions, and the potential co-research with artificial intelligence.
{"title":"Assimilation and Accommodation","authors":"Barbara Hanfstingl, Ana Arzenšek, Jan Apschner, Katharina Ingrid Gölly","doi":"10.1027/1016-9040/a000463","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000463","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. This research provides a systematic overview of psychological areas using assimilation and accommodation to explain development and adaptation processes from 1998 to 2018. We primarily aimed to identify the main psychological research areas connected to assimilation and accommodation. We used assimilation and accommodation as keywords to extract data from SpringerLink, PsycINFO, and PsycARTICLES. Of 500 articles, 473 were included in the analysis. Ten categories were identified to allow systematization along with different research areas and development trajectories. The meanings of these terms were analyzed in terms of scientific impact, their connection to Piaget and Baldwin, application, and research methods. Our analysis has distilled the most driving and scientifically relevant approaches to assimilation and accommodation within psychological research, with the work of Baldwin and Piaget influencing practically all views. Thus, we have identified a common understanding of assimilation and accommodation, although the direction of the adaptation process should be made explicit in the future. Based on our analyses, we were able to identify white spots on the research map that should be focused on in future work: the need to better understand the interdependence and synchronicity of both processes, the connection to affects and emotions, and the potential co-research with artificial intelligence.","PeriodicalId":51443,"journal":{"name":"European Psychologist","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2021-11-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44561296","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-11-09DOI: 10.1027/1016-9040/a000466
{"title":"Correction to Hilbig et al., 2021","authors":"","doi":"10.1027/1016-9040/a000466","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000466","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":51443,"journal":{"name":"European Psychologist","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2021-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45293886","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-05DOI: 10.1027/1016-9040/a000459
Anthony Piermattéo
Abstract. A number of authors consider that exploring the interconnections between social representations and emotions is essential. However, both empirical and theoretical contributions have focused on specific aspects of these concepts and thus offer a narrow view of their articulation. Moreover, these are published in different languages, making it difficult to provide an overview of the current knowledge on the subject. Consequently, this article adopts a broader approach through a literature review articulating social representations and emotions. This is based on a search of various databases, conducted between March and April 2020 and using the terms “social representation” and “emotion” (or affect, mood, or feeling) in their singular and plural forms, both in French and in English. As a result, 41 references explicitly mentioned both terms and were published in English, French, Portuguese, and Spanish were collected. This brought to light two lines of inquiry that structure this field of research: the first focuses on the role of emotions in the emergence, dynamics, and functioning of social representations, while the second explores how social representations determine emotions or emotional processes. These perspectives will be discussed from both a theoretical and methodological standpoint with the aim of highlighting new avenues for research.
{"title":"Social Representations and Emotions","authors":"Anthony Piermattéo","doi":"10.1027/1016-9040/a000459","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000459","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. A number of authors consider that exploring the interconnections between social representations and emotions is essential. However, both empirical and theoretical contributions have focused on specific aspects of these concepts and thus offer a narrow view of their articulation. Moreover, these are published in different languages, making it difficult to provide an overview of the current knowledge on the subject. Consequently, this article adopts a broader approach through a literature review articulating social representations and emotions. This is based on a search of various databases, conducted between March and April 2020 and using the terms “social representation” and “emotion” (or affect, mood, or feeling) in their singular and plural forms, both in French and in English. As a result, 41 references explicitly mentioned both terms and were published in English, French, Portuguese, and Spanish were collected. This brought to light two lines of inquiry that structure this field of research: the first focuses on the role of emotions in the emergence, dynamics, and functioning of social representations, while the second explores how social representations determine emotions or emotional processes. These perspectives will be discussed from both a theoretical and methodological standpoint with the aim of highlighting new avenues for research.","PeriodicalId":51443,"journal":{"name":"European Psychologist","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2021-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47332695","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-01DOI: 10.1027/1016-9040/a000468
Ciro Esposito, Immacolata Di Napoli, Barbara Agueli, Leda Marino, F. Procentese, C. Arcidiacono
Abstract. The purpose of this systematic review is to analyze the COVID-19 pandemic’s effects through the lens of community psychology. Our study applied PRISMA methodology, and it was carried out using the PsycInfo, PubMed, Embase, and EBSCO databases utilizing the keywords “connectedness,” “resilience,” “shared action,” “social action,” “trust,” “individual well-being,” and “social well-being.” We selected 12 of 216 eligible publications based on the inclusion criteria. The results indicated that the role of trust in institutions and others is a protective factor for communities that experience crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, developing social actions promoted connections and social support and that, in the absence of in-person communication, online communication promoted connections and reduced psychological distress and isolation. Finally, the study revealed that some psychosocial factors stem from declines in people’s well-being due to the pandemic and subsequent lockdowns. Furthermore, our findings highlighted the role of technology as a positive communication tool for promoting connectedness and social support, as well as the social function of trust in institutions. Our results suggested that community interactions at the local and virtual levels should be viewed as positive actions to support institutions in detecting the most effective social intervention measures to stimulate individual and community well-being during the pandemic. These findings may serve as a guide for health policymakers in their efforts to face the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic supporting beneficial strategies for social planning and effective public policies. Finally, both the strengths and limitations of the research will be discussed in depth.
{"title":"Well-Being and the COVID-19 Pandemic","authors":"Ciro Esposito, Immacolata Di Napoli, Barbara Agueli, Leda Marino, F. Procentese, C. Arcidiacono","doi":"10.1027/1016-9040/a000468","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000468","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. The purpose of this systematic review is to analyze the COVID-19 pandemic’s effects through the lens of community psychology. Our study applied PRISMA methodology, and it was carried out using the PsycInfo, PubMed, Embase, and EBSCO databases utilizing the keywords “connectedness,” “resilience,” “shared action,” “social action,” “trust,” “individual well-being,” and “social well-being.” We selected 12 of 216 eligible publications based on the inclusion criteria. The results indicated that the role of trust in institutions and others is a protective factor for communities that experience crises, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, developing social actions promoted connections and social support and that, in the absence of in-person communication, online communication promoted connections and reduced psychological distress and isolation. Finally, the study revealed that some psychosocial factors stem from declines in people’s well-being due to the pandemic and subsequent lockdowns. Furthermore, our findings highlighted the role of technology as a positive communication tool for promoting connectedness and social support, as well as the social function of trust in institutions. Our results suggested that community interactions at the local and virtual levels should be viewed as positive actions to support institutions in detecting the most effective social intervention measures to stimulate individual and community well-being during the pandemic. These findings may serve as a guide for health policymakers in their efforts to face the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic supporting beneficial strategies for social planning and effective public policies. Finally, both the strengths and limitations of the research will be discussed in depth.","PeriodicalId":51443,"journal":{"name":"European Psychologist","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42826976","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-01DOI: 10.1027/1016-9040/a000461
A. Bacon, Dino Krupić, N. Çakı, P. Corr
Abstract. This review appraises evidence for the role of personality in COVID-19 related emotions and behaviors. Three key models of personality are considered: the Five-factor Model, HEXACO model, and Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST). In line with personality research, more generally, most studies focus on the Five-Factor model. Key findings are that neuroticism is most associated with poor mental health, and extraversion is associated with a reluctance to socially isolate. Conscientiousness predicts compliance with safety guidelines but also with fewer prosocial behaviors, particularly stockpiling. Research within the HEXACO framework largely confirms these findings, especially for emotionality and mental health. The additional HEXACO Honesty-Humility factor is found to be associated with prosocial views and abstention from panic buying. Studies based on the Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory of personality indicate emotional conflict as people wish to stay safe while maintaining a sense of normality. Behavioral compliance is driven by activation in the Fight-Flight-Freeze System (FFFS; fear-related) and the Behavioral Inhibition System (BIS; anxiety-related). The Behavioral Approach System (BAS) is implicated in approach-driven behaviors such as avoiding infection. These findings have implications for health communications and post-pandemic support.
{"title":"Emotional and Behavioral Responses to COVID-19","authors":"A. Bacon, Dino Krupić, N. Çakı, P. Corr","doi":"10.1027/1016-9040/a000461","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000461","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. This review appraises evidence for the role of personality in COVID-19 related emotions and behaviors. Three key models of personality are considered: the Five-factor Model, HEXACO model, and Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST). In line with personality research, more generally, most studies focus on the Five-Factor model. Key findings are that neuroticism is most associated with poor mental health, and extraversion is associated with a reluctance to socially isolate. Conscientiousness predicts compliance with safety guidelines but also with fewer prosocial behaviors, particularly stockpiling. Research within the HEXACO framework largely confirms these findings, especially for emotionality and mental health. The additional HEXACO Honesty-Humility factor is found to be associated with prosocial views and abstention from panic buying. Studies based on the Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory of personality indicate emotional conflict as people wish to stay safe while maintaining a sense of normality. Behavioral compliance is driven by activation in the Fight-Flight-Freeze System (FFFS; fear-related) and the Behavioral Inhibition System (BIS; anxiety-related). The Behavioral Approach System (BAS) is implicated in approach-driven behaviors such as avoiding infection. These findings have implications for health communications and post-pandemic support.","PeriodicalId":51443,"journal":{"name":"European Psychologist","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46967162","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-01DOI: 10.1027/1016-9040/a000457
S. Rudert, I. Gleibs, M. Gollwitzer, M. Häfner, Katharina V. Hajek, N. Harth, J. Häusser, R. Imhoff, D. Schneider
Abstract. From a social psychological perspective, the COVID-19 pandemic and its associated protective measures affected individuals’ social relations and basic psychological needs. We aim to identify sources of need frustration (stressors) and possibilities to bolster need satisfaction (buffers). Particularly, we highlight emerging empirical research in which social psychological theorizing can contribute to our understanding of the pandemic’s social consequences: Loneliness, social networks, role conflicts, social identity, compliance, trust, reactance, and conspiracy beliefs. We highlight directions for future social psychological research as the pandemic continues.
{"title":"Us and the Virus","authors":"S. Rudert, I. Gleibs, M. Gollwitzer, M. Häfner, Katharina V. Hajek, N. Harth, J. Häusser, R. Imhoff, D. Schneider","doi":"10.1027/1016-9040/a000457","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000457","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. From a social psychological perspective, the COVID-19 pandemic and its associated protective measures affected individuals’ social relations and basic psychological needs. We aim to identify sources of need frustration (stressors) and possibilities to bolster need satisfaction (buffers). Particularly, we highlight emerging empirical research in which social psychological theorizing can contribute to our understanding of the pandemic’s social consequences: Loneliness, social networks, role conflicts, social identity, compliance, trust, reactance, and conspiracy beliefs. We highlight directions for future social psychological research as the pandemic continues.","PeriodicalId":51443,"journal":{"name":"European Psychologist","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41522970","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-01DOI: 10.1027/1016-9040/a000456
K. Ścigała, Christoph Schild, Morten Moshagen, Lau Lilleholt, Ingo Zettler, Anna Stückler, Stefan Pfattheicher
Abstract. The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has strongly affected individuals and societies worldwide. In this review and meta-analysis, we investigated how aversive personality traits – that is, relatively stable antisocial personality characteristics – related to how individuals perceived, evaluated, and responded to the COVID-19 pandemic. Across 34 studies with overall 26,780 participants, we found that people with higher scores in aversive personality traits were less likely to perceive guidelines and restrictions to curb the spread of the virus as protective ([Formula: see text] = −.11), to engage in health behaviors related to COVID-19 ([Formula: see text] = −.16), and to engage in non-health-related prosocial behavior related to COVID-19 ([Formula: see text] = −.14). We found no consistent relation between aversive personality and negative effect regarding the pandemic. The results thus indicate the importance of aversive personality traits in understanding individual differences with regard to COVID-19.
{"title":"Aversive Personality and COVID-19","authors":"K. Ścigała, Christoph Schild, Morten Moshagen, Lau Lilleholt, Ingo Zettler, Anna Stückler, Stefan Pfattheicher","doi":"10.1027/1016-9040/a000456","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000456","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has strongly affected individuals and societies worldwide. In this review and meta-analysis, we investigated how aversive personality traits – that is, relatively stable antisocial personality characteristics – related to how individuals perceived, evaluated, and responded to the COVID-19 pandemic. Across 34 studies with overall 26,780 participants, we found that people with higher scores in aversive personality traits were less likely to perceive guidelines and restrictions to curb the spread of the virus as protective ([Formula: see text] = −.11), to engage in health behaviors related to COVID-19 ([Formula: see text] = −.16), and to engage in non-health-related prosocial behavior related to COVID-19 ([Formula: see text] = −.14). We found no consistent relation between aversive personality and negative effect regarding the pandemic. The results thus indicate the importance of aversive personality traits in understanding individual differences with regard to COVID-19.","PeriodicalId":51443,"journal":{"name":"European Psychologist","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47831674","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-01DOI: 10.1027/1016-9040/a000452
J. Brailovskaia, J. Margraf, S. Schneider
Abstract. This cross-national study investigated the extent of social media use (SMU) as a source of information about COVID-19, and its relationship with the experienced burden caused by the pandemic. Representative data from eight countries (France, Germany, Poland, Russia, Spain, Sweden, the UK, the USA) were collected online (end of May to the beginning of June 2020). Of the overall 8,302 participants, 48.1% frequently used social media (SM) as a COVID-19 information source (range: 31.8% in Germany, to 65.4% in Poland). In the overall samples and in all country-specific samples, regression analyses revealed the experienced burden caused by COVID-19 to be positively associated with SMU and stress symptoms. Furthermore, stress symptoms partly mediated the relationship between SMU and the burden. The results emphasize the significant association between the use of SM as a source of information, individual emotional state, and behavior during the pandemic, as well as the significance of conscious and accurate use of SM specifically during the COVID-19 outbreak.
{"title":"Social Media as Source of Information, Stress Symptoms, and Burden Caused by Coronavirus (COVID-19)","authors":"J. Brailovskaia, J. Margraf, S. Schneider","doi":"10.1027/1016-9040/a000452","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000452","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. This cross-national study investigated the extent of social media use (SMU) as a source of information about COVID-19, and its relationship with the experienced burden caused by the pandemic. Representative data from eight countries (France, Germany, Poland, Russia, Spain, Sweden, the UK, the USA) were collected online (end of May to the beginning of June 2020). Of the overall 8,302 participants, 48.1% frequently used social media (SM) as a COVID-19 information source (range: 31.8% in Germany, to 65.4% in Poland). In the overall samples and in all country-specific samples, regression analyses revealed the experienced burden caused by COVID-19 to be positively associated with SMU and stress symptoms. Furthermore, stress symptoms partly mediated the relationship between SMU and the burden. The results emphasize the significant association between the use of SM as a source of information, individual emotional state, and behavior during the pandemic, as well as the significance of conscious and accurate use of SM specifically during the COVID-19 outbreak.","PeriodicalId":51443,"journal":{"name":"European Psychologist","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41363292","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-01DOI: 10.1027/1016-9040/a000465
J. Wirkner, H. Christiansen, C. Knaevelsrud, Ulrike Lüken, S. Wurm, S. Schneider, E. Brakemeier
Abstract. The COVID-19 pandemic is one of the most serious health and economic crises of the 21st century. From a psychological point of view, the COVID-19 pandemic and its consequences can be conceptualized as a multidimensional and potentially toxic stressor for mental health in the general population. This selective literature review provides an overview of longitudinal studies published until June 2021 that have investigated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health in the European population. Risk and protective factors identified in the studies are summarized. Forty-two studies that met inclusion and search criteria ( COVID-19, mental health, longitudinal, and Europe) in PubMed, PsycInfo, and Web of Science databases indicate differential effects of the pandemic on mental distress, depression, and anxiety, depending on samples and methods used. Age-specific (e.g., young age), social (e.g., female, ethnical minority, loneliness), as well as physical and mental health-related factors (e.g., pre-pandemic illness) were identified as risk factors for poor mental health. The studies point to several protective factors such as social support, higher cognitive ability, resilience, and self-efficacy. Increasing evidence supports the assumption of the pandemic being a multidimensional stressor on mental health, with some populations appearing more vulnerable than others, although inconsistencies arise. Whether the pandemic will lead to an increase in the prevalence of mental disorders is an open question. Further high-quality longitudinal and multi-national studies and meta-analyses are needed to draw the complete picture of the consequences of the pandemic on mental health.
摘要新冠肺炎大流行是21世纪最严重的健康和经济危机之一。从心理学的角度来看，新冠肺炎大流行及其后果可以被概念化为对普通人群心理健康的多层面和潜在毒性压力源。这篇选择性文献综述概述了截至2021年6月发表的纵向研究，这些研究调查了新冠肺炎大流行对欧洲人口心理健康的影响。总结了研究中确定的风险和保护因素。PubMed、PsycInfo和Web of Science数据库中符合入选和搜索标准（新冠肺炎、心理健康、纵向和欧洲）的两项研究表明，根据使用的样本和方法，大流行对精神痛苦、抑郁和焦虑的影响不同。特定年龄（如年轻）、社会（如女性、少数民族、孤独）以及身体和心理健康相关因素（如大流行前的疾病）被确定为心理健康不佳的风险因素。研究指出了几个保护因素，如社会支持、更高的认知能力、韧性和自我效能。越来越多的证据支持这样一种假设，即疫情是心理健康的多层面压力源，尽管出现了不一致的情况，但一些人群似乎比其他人群更脆弱。新冠疫情是否会导致精神障碍患病率上升是一个悬而未决的问题。需要进一步进行高质量的纵向和多国研究和荟萃分析，以全面了解疫情对心理健康的影响。
{"title":"Mental Health in Times of the COVID-19 Pandemic","authors":"J. Wirkner, H. Christiansen, C. Knaevelsrud, Ulrike Lüken, S. Wurm, S. Schneider, E. Brakemeier","doi":"10.1027/1016-9040/a000465","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000465","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. The COVID-19 pandemic is one of the most serious health and economic crises of the 21st century. From a psychological point of view, the COVID-19 pandemic and its consequences can be conceptualized as a multidimensional and potentially toxic stressor for mental health in the general population. This selective literature review provides an overview of longitudinal studies published until June 2021 that have investigated the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health in the European population. Risk and protective factors identified in the studies are summarized. Forty-two studies that met inclusion and search criteria ( COVID-19, mental health, longitudinal, and Europe) in PubMed, PsycInfo, and Web of Science databases indicate differential effects of the pandemic on mental distress, depression, and anxiety, depending on samples and methods used. Age-specific (e.g., young age), social (e.g., female, ethnical minority, loneliness), as well as physical and mental health-related factors (e.g., pre-pandemic illness) were identified as risk factors for poor mental health. The studies point to several protective factors such as social support, higher cognitive ability, resilience, and self-efficacy. Increasing evidence supports the assumption of the pandemic being a multidimensional stressor on mental health, with some populations appearing more vulnerable than others, although inconsistencies arise. Whether the pandemic will lead to an increase in the prevalence of mental disorders is an open question. Further high-quality longitudinal and multi-national studies and meta-analyses are needed to draw the complete picture of the consequences of the pandemic on mental health.","PeriodicalId":51443,"journal":{"name":"European Psychologist","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45969213","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-01DOI: 10.1027/1016-9040/a000464
Eyüp Sabır Erbiçer, A. Metin, A. Çetinkaya, S. Şen
Abstract. The COVID-19 pandemic has had significant effects on public health. Previous studies showed that the fear of COVID-19 was positively correlated with depression, anxiety, and stress. This study aims to compile and meta-analyze the relationship between fear of COVID-19 and depression, anxiety, and stress among the general population. The studies published between March 2020 and June 2021 were scanned from various databases (Google Scholar, PubMed, Web of Science [ISI], and SCOPUS). As a result of the literature search, 746 studies were reached, 88 studies were found suitable, and 21 met the inclusion criteria. Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA Version 3.0) and metafor package in R were used for analyses. A strong relationship was observed between the fear of COVID-19 and anxiety ( r = .55, p < .001); there were moderate relationships between the fear of COVID-19 and depression ( r = .34, p < .001) and stress ( r = .44, p < .001). All these relationships were significant. The results showed that the relationships between the fear of COVID-19 and depression, anxiety, and stress had a high level of heterogeneity. Meta-regression analyses revealed that the average of the sample age was a significant predictor of the relationship between fear of COVID-19 and anxiety. However, other covariates (female proportion and culture) were not statistically significant for the relationship between fear of COVID-19 and anxiety. None of these covariates was significant predictors of the relationship between fear of COVID-19 with depression and stress. Although the current meta-analysis has some limitations, the results revealed that the fear of COVID-19 is associated with mental health problems such as depression, anxiety, and stress.
{"title":"The Relationship Between Fear of COVID-19 and Depression, Anxiety, and Stress","authors":"Eyüp Sabır Erbiçer, A. Metin, A. Çetinkaya, S. Şen","doi":"10.1027/1016-9040/a000464","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000464","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. The COVID-19 pandemic has had significant effects on public health. Previous studies showed that the fear of COVID-19 was positively correlated with depression, anxiety, and stress. This study aims to compile and meta-analyze the relationship between fear of COVID-19 and depression, anxiety, and stress among the general population. The studies published between March 2020 and June 2021 were scanned from various databases (Google Scholar, PubMed, Web of Science [ISI], and SCOPUS). As a result of the literature search, 746 studies were reached, 88 studies were found suitable, and 21 met the inclusion criteria. Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA Version 3.0) and metafor package in R were used for analyses. A strong relationship was observed between the fear of COVID-19 and anxiety ( r = .55, p < .001); there were moderate relationships between the fear of COVID-19 and depression ( r = .34, p < .001) and stress ( r = .44, p < .001). All these relationships were significant. The results showed that the relationships between the fear of COVID-19 and depression, anxiety, and stress had a high level of heterogeneity. Meta-regression analyses revealed that the average of the sample age was a significant predictor of the relationship between fear of COVID-19 and anxiety. However, other covariates (female proportion and culture) were not statistically significant for the relationship between fear of COVID-19 and anxiety. None of these covariates was significant predictors of the relationship between fear of COVID-19 with depression and stress. Although the current meta-analysis has some limitations, the results revealed that the fear of COVID-19 is associated with mental health problems such as depression, anxiety, and stress.","PeriodicalId":51443,"journal":{"name":"European Psychologist","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41621119","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：