心理社会应对资源和COVID-19丧亲之痛

IF 3 1区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY Society and Mental Health Pub Date : 2022-08-04 DOI:10.1177/21568693221113221
Matthew K. Grace, Jane S. VanHeuvelen
{"title":"心理社会应对资源和COVID-19丧亲之痛","authors":"Matthew K. Grace, Jane S. VanHeuvelen","doi":"10.1177/21568693221113221","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The COVID-19 pandemic ushered in a bereavement crisis unparalleled in a generation, with devastating consequences for the mental health of those who lost a loved one to the virus. Using national survey data (n = 2,000) containing detailed information about people’s experiences of pandemic-related stressors, coping resources, and mental health, in this study we examine whether and how three psychosocial coping resources—mastery, self-esteem, and social support—moderate the association between COVID-19 bereavement and psychological distress. We find that coping resources have both expected and unanticipated effects on the relationship between bereavement and mental health. Consistent with the stress process model, higher levels of mastery uniformly reduce the damaging effects of bereavement on depressive symptoms and anger, whereas self-esteem mitigates the positive association between losing a close tie to the virus and reports of anger. Contrary to the stress-buffering hypothesis, however, higher levels of perceived support exacerbate the positive associations between bereavement and each indicator of psychological distress. Our findings suggest that the putatively advantageous aspects of social support may be compromised, or even reversed, in the context of constrained social engagement. We discuss the theoretical implications of these findings for sociological research on the stress process.","PeriodicalId":46146,"journal":{"name":"Society and Mental Health","volume":"12 1","pages":"248 - 270"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Psychosocial Coping Resources and the Toll of COVID-19 Bereavement\",\"authors\":\"Matthew K. Grace, Jane S. VanHeuvelen\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/21568693221113221\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The COVID-19 pandemic ushered in a bereavement crisis unparalleled in a generation, with devastating consequences for the mental health of those who lost a loved one to the virus. Using national survey data (n = 2,000) containing detailed information about people’s experiences of pandemic-related stressors, coping resources, and mental health, in this study we examine whether and how three psychosocial coping resources—mastery, self-esteem, and social support—moderate the association between COVID-19 bereavement and psychological distress. We find that coping resources have both expected and unanticipated effects on the relationship between bereavement and mental health. Consistent with the stress process model, higher levels of mastery uniformly reduce the damaging effects of bereavement on depressive symptoms and anger, whereas self-esteem mitigates the positive association between losing a close tie to the virus and reports of anger. Contrary to the stress-buffering hypothesis, however, higher levels of perceived support exacerbate the positive associations between bereavement and each indicator of psychological distress. Our findings suggest that the putatively advantageous aspects of social support may be compromised, or even reversed, in the context of constrained social engagement. We discuss the theoretical implications of these findings for sociological research on the stress process.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46146,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Society and Mental Health\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"248 - 270\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Society and Mental Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/21568693221113221\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Society and Mental Health","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21568693221113221","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

COVID-19大流行引发了一代人前所未有的丧亲危机,对那些因病毒失去亲人的人的心理健康造成了毁灭性的后果。在本研究中,我们利用全国调查数据(n = 2000),其中包含有关人们在大流行相关压力源、应对资源和心理健康方面的详细信息,研究了掌握、自尊和社会支持这三种社会心理应对资源是否以及如何调节COVID-19丧亲之痛和心理困扰之间的关联。研究发现,应对资源对丧亲与心理健康的关系既有预期的影响,也有非预期的影响。与压力过程模型一致的是,更高水平的掌握一致地减少了丧亲之痛对抑郁症状和愤怒的破坏性影响,而自尊则减轻了与病毒失去密切联系和愤怒报告之间的积极联系。然而,与压力缓冲假说相反,更高水平的感知支持加剧了丧亲之痛与各心理困扰指标之间的正相关关系。我们的研究结果表明,在社会参与受限的情况下,社会支持的假定优势方面可能会受到损害,甚至逆转。我们讨论了这些发现对压力过程社会学研究的理论意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Psychosocial Coping Resources and the Toll of COVID-19 Bereavement
The COVID-19 pandemic ushered in a bereavement crisis unparalleled in a generation, with devastating consequences for the mental health of those who lost a loved one to the virus. Using national survey data (n = 2,000) containing detailed information about people’s experiences of pandemic-related stressors, coping resources, and mental health, in this study we examine whether and how three psychosocial coping resources—mastery, self-esteem, and social support—moderate the association between COVID-19 bereavement and psychological distress. We find that coping resources have both expected and unanticipated effects on the relationship between bereavement and mental health. Consistent with the stress process model, higher levels of mastery uniformly reduce the damaging effects of bereavement on depressive symptoms and anger, whereas self-esteem mitigates the positive association between losing a close tie to the virus and reports of anger. Contrary to the stress-buffering hypothesis, however, higher levels of perceived support exacerbate the positive associations between bereavement and each indicator of psychological distress. Our findings suggest that the putatively advantageous aspects of social support may be compromised, or even reversed, in the context of constrained social engagement. We discuss the theoretical implications of these findings for sociological research on the stress process.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.50
自引率
7.80%
发文量
17
期刊介绍: Official journal of the ASA Section on the Sociology of Mental Health. Society and Mental Health (SMH) publishes original and innovative peer-reviewed research and theory articles that link social structure and sociocultural processes with mental health and illness in society. It will also provide an outlet for sociologically relevant research and theory articles that are produced in other disciplines and subfields concerned with issues related to mental health and illness. The aim of the journal is to advance knowledge in the sociology of mental health and illness by publishing the leading work that highlights the unique perspectives and contributions that sociological research and theory can make to our understanding of mental health and illness in society.
期刊最新文献
Identity Characteristics as Moderators of Discrepancy on Well-being Gender Differences in the Relationship between Coming Out as LGB to Family and Depression in South Korea Centering Agency: Examining the Relationship between Acts of Resistance, Anxiety, and Depression Among Undocumented College Students Cumulative Exposure to Social Isolation and Longitudinal Changes in Life Satisfaction among Older Adults Subjective Social Status as a Predictor of Physical and Mental Health among Early Midlife Adults in the United States: Appraising the Role of Gender
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1