Corrigendum: Religious Conspiracy Theories About the COVID-19 Pandemic Are Associated With Negative Mental Health.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.3389/ijph.2022.1604324.].

Religious Conspiracy Theories About the COVID-19 Pandemic Are Associated With Negative Mental Health.

Objectives: Together with the COVID-19 pandemic, conspiracy theories have begun to spread. Evidence is lacking for religious conspiracy theories (RCT) related to COVID-19 in a non-religious environment. This study aimed to assess links between religiosity and spirituality (R/S) and RCT about COVID-19, and to examine their associations with mental health. Methods: A sample of Czech adults (n = 1,273, mean age = 47.5, SD = 16.4; 51.5% male) participated in the survey. We measured R/S, RCT, negative religious coping (NRC), feelings impairment and mental health symptoms. Results: We found R/S were significantly associated with RCT with ß 0.71 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59-0.82) for the strongest association. Moreover, RCT and NRC were strongly associated with paranoia, anxiety and depression. The most frequent association was found for NRC and paranoid ideation, with ß of 0.35 (95% CI 0.26-0.44). Conclusion: Our findings showed associations between religiosity/spirituality and beliefs in religious conspiracy theories about COVID-19. Moreover, these RCT and negative religious coping were linked to higher possibility of mental health problems. Understanding these associations may help prevent this negative impact and contribute to the effectiveness of psychotherapeutic help.

The Associations of Experiencing the COVID-19 Pandemic With Religiosity and Spirituality: A Cross-Sectional Study in Czech Adults.

Objectives: We investigated the associations between religiosity/spirituality and respondents' changes in their relationships, feelings, thinking, and behaviour during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in the Czech Republic. Methods: A sample of Czech adults (n = 1,434; 48.3 ± 16.4 years; 49.65% women) participated in the online survey. We measured spirituality, religiosity, self-reported changes in relationships, disrupted feelings, and changes in behaviour during the pandemic. Results: Spiritual respondents were more likely to report increased physical activity, sex, reading and self-education, with odds ratios (ORs) ranging from 1.26 (95% confidence interval 1.09-1.46) to 1.56 (1.31-1.86). The combination of spirituality and religiosity led to an increase in the range of ORs to 1.57-2.69. Spiritual and religious participants were less likely to feel the decrease of hope by 70%, while mere spirituality significantly reduced the decrease of hope by only 30%. Religiosity itself led to a lower risk of reporting a disrupted day structure with an OR = 0.74 (0.58-0.95). Conclusion: Religiosity and spirituality separately help people during a pandemic in some areas. Especially their combination has a more positive impact on relationships, feelings, and behaviour.

Sensory Processing Sensitivity Questionnaire: A Psychometric Evaluation and Associations with Experiencing the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Sensory processing sensitivity (SPS) is a common human neurobiological trait that is related to many areas of human life. This trait has recently received increased public interest. However, solid scientific research on SPS is lagging behind. Progress in this area is also hindered by a lack of comprehensive research tools suitable for a rapid assessment of SPS. Thus, the aim of this study was to offer a newly developed tool, the Sensory Processing Sensitivity Questionnaire (SPSQ), and to assess its psychometric properties and associations with emotional and relational variables measured during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. We found the tool to have good psychometric characteristics: high temporal stability (r = 0.95) and excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's α = 0.92; McDonald's ω = 0.92). The fit of the SPSQ bi-factor model was satisfactory: χ2 (88.0) = 506.141; p < 0.001; CFI = 0.993; TLI = 0.990; RMSEA = 0.070; SRMR = 0.039. Testing of configural, metric, scalar and strict invariance suggested that the SPSQ assesses SPS equivalently between males and females. The scale's validity was supported via a strong association with an existing SPS measure. Further, we observed higher total SPSQ scores among women, students and religious respondents, and we found that more sensitive respondents reported higher feelings of anxiety and more deterioration in relationships during the COVID-19 pandemic. Thus, this study also identifies people with this trait as being potentially more vulnerable during periods of an increased presence of global stressors.

The Abbreviated Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale (OASIS) and the Abbreviated Overall Depression Severity and Impairment Scale (ODSIS): Psychometric Properties and Evaluation of the Czech Versions.

Short and effective tools for measuring depression, anxiety and their resulting impairments are lacking in the Czech language. The abbreviated versions of the Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale (OASIS) and the Overall Depression Severity and Impairment Scale (ODSIS) show very good psychometric properties in English and other languages, and can be used in different settings for research or clinical purposes. The aim of this study was the psychometric evaluation and validation of the Czech versions of the abbreviated forms of both tools in the general population. A nationally representative sample of 2912 participants (age = 48.88, SD = 15.56; 55% female) was used. The non-parametric testing of the differences between sociodemographic groups revealed a higher level of anxiety and depression in students, females and religious respondents. Confirmatory Factor Analysis suggested a good fit for the unidimensional model of the OASIS: x2(4) = 38.28; p < 0.001; TLI = 0.999; CFI = 0.997; RMSEA = 0.078; SRMR = 0.027 and the ODSIS: x2(4) = 36.54; p < 0.001; TLI = 0.999; CFI = 0.999; RMSEA = 0.076; SRMR = 0.021 with the data. Both scales had an excellent internal consistency (OASIS: Cronbach's alpha = 0.95, McDonald's omega = 0.95 and ODSIS: Cronbach's alpha = 0.95, McDonald's omega = 0.95). A clinical cut-off of 15 was identified for the OASIS and a cut-off of 12 for the ODSIS. The study showed good validity for both scales. The Czech versions of the abbreviated OASIS and ODSIS were short and valid instruments for measuring anxiety and depression.

Courage, Justice, and Practical Wisdom as Key Virtues in the Era of COVID-19.

Fowers et al. (2017) recently made a general argument for virtues as the characteristics necessary for individuals to flourish, given inherent human limitations. For example, people can flourish by developing the virtue of friendship as they navigate the inherent (healthy) human dependency on others. This general argument also illuminates a pathway to flourishing during the COVID-19 pandemic, the risks of which have induced powerful fears, exacerbated injustices, and rendered life and death decisions far more common. Contexts of risk and fear call for the virtue of courage. Courage has emerged more powerfully as a central virtue among medical personnel, first responders, and essential workers. Longstanding inequalities have been highlighted during the pandemic, calling for the virtue of justice. When important personal and public health decisions must be made, the central virtue of practical wisdom comes to the fore. Wise decisions and actions incorporate the recognition of relevant moral concerns and aims, as well as responding in fitting and practical ways to the specifics of the situation. Practicing courage, justice, and practical wisdom illuminates a path to flourishing, even in a pandemic.

We’re All Going Crazy Now: How the COVID-19 Pandemic Can Promote More Compassionate Clinical Perspectives

Categorical conceptions of mental disorder divide individuals? functioning into the categories of normal and abnormal. It is well established that normal functioning is partially culturally defined and understood with reference to culturally expected responses to daily life. However, when a radical and unprecedented situation occurs, as in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, these expectations become less clearly defined, and any categorical account of mental disorder becomes obscured. We argue that, in the midst of this pandemic, traditional hierarchies between the clinician and their client are challenged, because categorical interpretations of mental disorder are less applicable. We use this observation to argue that incidents like the COVID-19 pandemic reveal the ambiguity and permeability of the divide between normal and abnormal functioning, while recommending more humanistic perspectives on individual distress.