Connection between the COVID-19 pandemic, war trauma reminders, perceived stress, loneliness, and PTSD in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

In order to gain a better understanding of what happens during the COVID-19 pandemic to those who were previously traumatized, this study investigated perceived stress and severity of PTSD symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic in people who experienced the 1992-1995 war in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It was also examined how reminders of past trauma and loneliness instigated by the COVID-19 crisis relate to current stress and PTSD symptoms. The sample consisted of 123 participants (74.8% women). Participants responded to assessments of sociodemographic characteristics, exposure to COVID-related information, concerns over disease, severity of exposure to war, frequency and intensity of war trauma reminders, loneliness, stress, and severity of PTSD symptoms. Data was collected as part of [edited out for blind review] Global Survey. Results showed that in a population previously exposed to the effects of war, severity of PTSD symptoms was positively related to perceived stress, and loneliness during the pandemic significantly mediated this relationship. Intensity of exposure to war trauma reminders was associated with higher levels of PTSD symptom severity. Higher severity of PTSD symptoms was related to forced displacement during the war. Moreover, higher stress was related to increased concerns over disease. To conclude, those exposed to war may be more affected by the global COVID-19 pandemic and preventive measures that accompany it, while loneliness mediates the effects of PTSD and perceived stress in this population.

The effects of secondary stressors, social identity, and social support on perceived stress and resilience: Findings from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Primary stressors are direct outcomes of extreme events (e.g., viruses, floodwater) whereas secondary stressors stem from pre-disaster life circumstances and societal arrangements (e.g., illness, problematic pre-disaster policies) or from inefficient responses to the extreme event. Secondary stressors can cause significant long-term damage to people affected but are also tractable and amenable to change. In this study we explored the association between secondary stressors, social identity processes, social support, and perceived stress and resilience. Pre-registered analyses of data from the COVIDiSTRESS Global Survey Round II (N = 14,600; 43 countries) show that secondary stressors are positively associated with perceived stress and negatively associated with resilience, even when controlling for the effects of primary stressors. Being a woman or having lower socioeconomic status (SES) is associated with higher exposure to secondary stressors, higher perceived stress, and lower resilience. Importantly, social identification is positively associated with expected support and with increased resilience and lower perceived stress. However, neither gender, SES, or social identification moderated the relationship between secondary stressors and perceived stress and resilience. In conclusion, systemic reforms and the availability of social support are paramount to reducing the effects of secondary stressors.

Mediation analysis of conspiratorial thinking and anti-expert sentiments on vaccine willingness.

OBJECTIVE: Vaccines are an effective means to reduce the spread of diseases, but they are sometimes met with hesitancy that needs to be understood. METHOD: In this study, we analyzed data from a large, cross-country survey conducted between June and August 2021 in 43 countries (N = 15,740) to investigate the roles of trust in government and science in shaping vaccine attitudes and willingness to be vaccinated. RESULTS: Despite significant variability between countries, we found that both forms of institutional trust were associated with a higher willingness to receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Furthermore, we found that conspiratorial thinking and anti-expert sentiments predicted reduced trust in government and science, respectively, and that trust mediated the relationship between these two constructs and ultimate vaccine attitudes. Although most countries displayed similar relationships between conspiratorial thinking and anti-expert sentiments, trust in government and science, and vaccine attitudes, we identified three countries (Brazil, Honduras, and Russia) that demonstrated significantly altered associations between the examined variables in terms of significant random slopes. CONCLUSIONS: Cross-country differences suggest that local governments' support for COVID-19 prevention policies can influence populations' vaccine attitudes. These findings provide insight for policymakers to develop interventions aiming to increase trust in the institutions involved in the vaccination process. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Validity testing of the conspiratorial thinking and anti-expert sentiment scales during the COVID-19 pandemic across 24 languages from a large-scale global dataset.

In this study, we tested the validity across two scales addressing conspiratorial thinking that may influence behaviours related to public health and the COVID-19 pandemic. Using the COVIDiSTRESSII Global Survey data from 12 261 participants, we validated the 4-item Conspiratorial Thinking Scale and 3-item Anti-Expert Sentiment Scale across 24 languages and dialects that were used by at least 100 participants per language. We employed confirmatory factor analysis, measurement invariance test and measurement alignment for internal consistency testing. To test convergent validity of the two scales, we assessed correlations with trust in seven agents related to government, science and public health. Although scalar invariance was not achieved when measurement invariance test was conducted initially, we found that both scales can be employed in further international studies with measurement alignment. Moreover, both conspiratorial thinking and anti-expert sentiments were significantly and negatively correlated with trust in all agents. Findings from this study provide supporting evidence for the validity of both scales across 24 languages for future large-scale international research.

Correction to: Connection between the COVID-19 pandemic, war trauma reminders, perceived stress, loneliness, and PTSD in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1007/s12144-021-02407-x.].

Big Five traits predict stress and loneliness during the COVID-19 pandemic: Evidence for the role of neuroticism.

The rapid outbreak of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has affected citizens' daily lives in an unprecedented way. To curb the spread of the pandemic, governments have taken numerous measures such as social distancing and quarantine, which may be associated with psychological consequences, namely stress and loneliness globally. To understand differential associations of personality traits with psychological consequences of COVID-19, we utilize data from a sample of 99,217 individuals from 41 countries collected as part of the COVIDiSTRESS Global Survey. Data were analyzed using multigroup confirmatory factor analysis and multilevel regression models. Findings showed that while some of the associations were rather weak, Big Five personality traits were significantly associated with perceived stress and loneliness during the pandemic. Our study illustrates that neuroticism especially can be a vulnerability factor for stress and loneliness in times of crisis and can contribute to detection of at-risk individuals and optimization of psychological treatments during or after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Iron fists and velvet gloves: Investigating the associations between the stringency of governments' responses to COVID-19, stress, and compliance in the early stages of the pandemic.

To tackle the spread of COVID-19, governments worldwide have implemented restrictive public health behavioural measures. Whether and when these measures lead to positive or negative psychological outcomes is still debated. In this study, drawing on a large sample of individuals (Ntotal  = 89,798) from 45 nations, we investigated whether the stringency of public health measures implemented at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic in March-May 2020 was associated with individuals' levels of stress and compliance. Moreover, we addressed the question of how these associations may be moderated by the measures' implementation lag, nations' tolerance for unequal distributions of power (i.e., power distance), and individuals' institutional trust. Linear mixed models suggested that slower implementation of less stringent measures was associated with higher stress and lower compliance. Also, rapid implementation of stricter measures was associated with a mild increase in stress. Such effects were especially pronounced in countries with less tolerance for inequality. Albeit significant, the moderating effect of institutional trust was very small. The results suggest that it may be important to consider the measures' implementation lag when tackling the spread of COVID-19, but findings should be interpreted in relation to the data collection period.

Stress and worry in the 2020 coronavirus pandemic: relationships to trust and compliance with preventive measures across 48 countries in the COVIDiSTRESS global survey.

The COVIDiSTRESS global survey collects data on early human responses to the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic from 173 429 respondents in 48 countries. The open science study was co-designed by an international consortium of researchers to investigate how psychological responses differ across countries and cultures, and how this has impacted behaviour, coping and trust in government efforts to slow the spread of the virus. Starting in March 2020, COVIDiSTRESS leveraged the convenience of unpaid online recruitment to generate public data. The objective of the present analysis is to understand relationships between psychological responses in the early months of global coronavirus restrictions and help understand how different government measures succeed or fail in changing public behaviour. There were variations between and within countries. Although Western Europeans registered as more concerned over COVID-19, more stressed, and having slightly more trust in the governments' efforts, there was no clear geographical pattern in compliance with behavioural measures. Detailed plots illustrating between-countries differences are provided. Using both traditional and Bayesian analyses, we found that individuals who worried about getting sick worked harder to protect themselves and others. However, concern about the coronavirus itself did not account for all of the variances in experienced stress during the early months of COVID-19 restrictions. More alarmingly, such stress was associated with less compliance. Further, those most concerned over the coronavirus trusted in government measures primarily where policies were strict. While concern over a disease is a source of mental distress, other factors including strictness of protective measures, social support and personal lockdown conditions must also be taken into consideration to fully appreciate the psychological impact of COVID-19 and to understand why some people fail to follow behavioural guidelines intended to protect themselves and others from infection. The Stage 1 manuscript associated with this submission received in-principle acceptance (IPA) on 18 May 2020. Following IPA, the accepted Stage 1 version of the manuscript was preregistered on the Open Science Framework at https://osf.io/g2t3b. This preregistration was performed prior to data analysis.