Psychological Factors Predict Higher Odds and Impairment of Post-COVID Symptoms: A Prospective Study.

OBJECTIVE: The causes of the long-term persistence of symptoms after a severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection (i.e., post-COVID syndrome) remain elusive. Although previous research identified demographic and medical risk factors for the development of post-COVID, the present prospective study is the first to investigate the role of psychological factors. METHODS: The interview and survey data of polymerase chain reaction-positive participants ( n = 137; 70.8% female) were assessed in the acute, subacute (3 months after symptom onset), and chronic phases (6 months after symptom onset) of COVID. RESULTS: After controlling for medical (body mass index, disease score) and demographic factors (sex, age), psychosomatic symptom burden (measured by the Somatic Symptom Disorder-B Criteria Scale) predicted higher odds and magnitude of COVID-related symptom impairment in the post-COVID phases. Fear of COVID-related health consequences (measured by the Fear of COVID Scale) also predicted higher odds of reporting any COVID symptoms in the subacute and chronic phases, whereas it only predicted a higher magnitude of COVID-related symptom impairment in the subacute phase. In subsequent exploratory analyses, we found that other psychological factors were associated with an overall increase (i.e., chronic stress and depression) or decrease (i.e., trait positive affect) in the odds and magnitude of COVID-related symptom impairment. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that psychological factors can fuel or temper the experience in post-COVID syndrome, opening new possibilities for psychological interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study protocol was preregistered in the Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/k9j7t ).

Feeling lonely during the pandemic: Towards personality-tailored risk profiles.

This is the first study to disentangle associations of within- and between-person fluctuations in loneliness and their effect on evening mood during a nationwide lockdown due to COVID-19. To contribute to the development of personality-tailored risk profiles, we additionally explored the moderating role of trait neuroticism and extraversion on the association of within- and between-person loneliness and mood. We employed an ambulatory assessment design during 21 days of nationwide lockdown in Germany (13/04/2020-03/05/2020) with two interval-based assessments. The final sample comprised 322 participants (74.5% women) aged between 15 and 82 years (M = 30.7, SD = 14.9) providing 6,084 evening assessments. Linear mixed models were used to evaluate the effects of within- and between-person fluctuations in loneliness on evening mood while controlling for unspecific effects of time, sex, and age. Moderation analysis was used to investigate the influence of neuroticism and extraversion on the relation between loneliness and mood, respectively. Results indicate that especially higher between-person loneliness (i.e. participants felt lonelier compared to the average participant) but also higher within-person loneliness (i.e. participants felt lonelier compared to their individual mean) were associated with a more unpleasant mood. Neuroticism augmented the effect of within-person loneliness, while extraversion seemed to buffer the effect of between-person loneliness on mood. Our findings underline the importance of carefully monitoring loneliness during COVID-19. The findings contribute towards the development of personality-tailored risk profiles (e.g. among newly arising risk groups for loneliness due to COVID-19). We discuss how the differential consideration of within- and between-psychological processes might help to elucidate currently mixed findings on psychological coping during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Negative Emotion Differentiation Attenuates the Within-Person Indirect Effect of Daily Stress on Nightly Sleep Quality Through Calmness.

The ability to differentiate between negative emotional states [negative emotion differentiation (NED)] has been conceptualized as a trait that facilitates effective emotion regulation and buffers stress reactivity. In the present research, we investigated the role of NED in within-person processes of daily affect regulation and coping during times of stress (the first COVID-19-related pandemic lockdown in April 2020). Using intensive longitudinal data, we analyzed whether daily stress had an indirect effect on sleep quality through calmness in the evening, and we tested whether NED moderated this within-person indirect effect by buffering the link between daily stress and calmness in the evening. A non-representative community sample (n = 313, 15-82 years old) participated in a 21-day ambulatory assessment with twice-daily surveys. The results of multilevel mediation models showed that higher daily stress was related to within-day change in calmness from morning to evening, resulting in less calmness in the evening within persons. Less calmness in the evening, in turn, was related to poorer nightly sleep quality within persons. As expected, higher NED predicted a less negative within-person link between daily stress and calmness in the evening, thereby attenuating the indirect effect of daily stress on nightly sleep quality through calmness. This effect held when we controlled for mean negative emotions and depression. The results provide support for a diathesis-stress model of NED, and hence, for NED as a protective factor that helps to explain why some individuals remain more resilient during times of stress than others.

Coping under a COVID-19 lockdown: patterns of daily coping and individual differences in coping repertoires.

BACKGROUND: Polyregulation-the concurrent or sequential use of multiple strategies to regulate affect or cope with stressors-is a frequent but understudied phenomenon. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to identify patterns of daily coping and individuals' coping repertoires (i.e., range of coping patterns employed across situations) during a COVID-19 pandemic lockdown. We investigated day-level covariates (appraisals, worrying, mood) of daily coping patterns and person-level covariates (psychopathology, average mood) of coping repertoires. Design: A non-representative community sample (n = 322, 15-82 years old) participated in a 21-day ambulatory assessment study. METHODS: We applied multilevel latent class analysis.. RESULTS: We identified seven daily coping patterns and ten classes of individuals differing in the size of their coping repertoire and their propensity for polyregulation. Daily coping patterns differed in daily perceived controllability and mood (but not in daily worrying or stress). At the person level, individuals with a higher level of average coronavirus-related worrying more frequently engaged in a high degree of polyregulation. The size of individuals' coping repertoire was unrelated to psychopathology and average mood. CONCLUSION: The findings provide insights into the composition of daily coping patterns and individuals' coping repertoires during crisis periods and contribute to a new polyregulation perspective on coping.