Search

Since the beginning of the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, individuals worldwide have shown different anxiety-related reactions. Several vulnerability factors may play a role in individuals' psychological reactions to the COVID-19 pandemic. Such factors include pathological personality traits which have been shown to contribute to the development of anxiety-related conditions. Consequently, the present study investigated the relationships between DSM-5 pathological personality domains and COVID-19-related anxiety symptoms. Using an online data portal, the relationships between DSM-5 pathological personality domains and COVID-19-related anxiety symptoms among a mixed university student and community sample (N = 612) were studied. The results showed that there was a positive and significant relationship between all DSM-5 pathological personality domains and COVID-19-related anxiety. The results of multiple linear regression analysis showed that DSM-5 pathological personality domains explained 21% of COVID-19-related anxiety variance. Based on standardized coefficients, the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) negative affect domain had the main role in COVID-19-related anxiety. The findings suggest that pathological personality domains can be predictors in the symptoms of anxiety in a viral outbreak. The novel findings add to the literature on individual differences in domains of personality in response to pandemic situations. Implications for future clinical applications and research investigations are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The high incidence and prevalence rates of depression among students identify them as a vulnerable population and make the case for the development of cost-effective treatments. Aims: We aimed to examine the comparative effects of brief group metacognitive therapy (MCT) versus behavioural activation (BA) treatments for depression, anxiety, and emotion regulation in university students. Method: All participants (25 women, 16 men; age range: 18–30 years) fulfilled criteria for major depression and were randomly assigned to MCT (n = 15), BA (n = 15), or a wait-list control group (n = 15). The treatment groups received 8 weekly MCT or BA sessions. Scores on the Beck Depression Inventory, Beck Anxiety Inventory, and Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire were used as outcome measures. Results: This pilot study showed that both treatments were equally effective for depressive and anxiety symptoms. However, therapeutic techniques differed with regards to their effects on specific facets of emotion regulation, such as Positive Reappraisal and Catastrophizing, with MCT being more effective compared to BA. BA also showed a stronger relapse at follow-up with regards to Acceptance and Refocus on Planning. Conclusions: Results suggest that groups MCT and BA may be implemented as cost-effective treatments for students with moderate depression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]