Search

The COVID-19 pandemic, a high-uncertainty situation, presents an ideal opportunity to examine how trait intolerance of uncertainty (IU) and situation-specific IU relate to each other and to mental health outcomes. The current longitudinal study examined the unique associations of trait and COVID-specific IU with general distress (anxiety and depression) and pandemic-specific concerns (pandemic stress and vaccine worry). A community sample of Florida adults (N = 2152) was surveyed online at three timepoints. They completed measures of trait IU at Wave 1 (April–May 2020) and COVID-specific IU at Wave 2 (May–June 2020). At Wave 3 (December–February 2021), they reported symptoms of depression, anxiety, pandemic stress, and vaccine worry. We used structural equation modeling to test our overall model. Trait IU significantly predicted later COVID-specific IU, however there was no significant effect of trait IU on any outcome measure after accounting for COVID-specific IU. Notably, COVID-specific IU fully mediated the relationship between trait IU and all four symptom measures. There were several limitations of the current study, including the use of a community sample and high participant attrition. Results suggest that COVID-specific IU predicts mental health outcomes over and above trait IU, extending the existing literature. These findings indicate that uncertainty may be more aversive when it is related to specific distressing situations, providing guidance for developing more specific and individualized interventions. Idiographic treatments which target situation-specific IU may be more efficacious in reducing affective symptoms and related stress during the COVID-19 pandemic or other similar events. • Intolerance of uncertainty (IU) involves both trait and situation-specific components. • The COVID-19 pandemic is an ideal opportunity to test this theoretical model of IU. • Trait IU and COVID-specific IU appear to be related but distinct constructs. • COVID-specific IU mediated the relationship between trait IU and affective symptoms. • Situation-specific IU may be an important treatment target to consider. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: The COVID‐19 pandemic presented both serious health threats and economic hardships, which were reflected in increased rates of mood and anxiety symptoms. We examined two separate distress domains, health worries and work distress, as predictors of mood and anxiety symptoms. Additionally, we considered whether these two domains might be uniquely associated with the development of dysfunctional beliefs, as a proposed mechanism to account for increased symptoms during the pandemic. Two separate models were considered to examine if associations remained stable through the first year of the pandemic. Methods: Participants (N = 2152) were a representative sample of Florida adults. They completed online surveys at three waves: Wave 1 (April–May 2020), Wave 2 (May–June 2020), and Wave 3 (December–February 2021). Participants completed measures of COVID‐19 health worry and work distress, anxiety, and depression. They also reported their level of hopelessness and helplessness (indices of dysfunctional beliefs). Results: In an early pandemic model (Wave 1‐Wave 2), health worry directly and indirectly predicted anxiety and depression via dysfunctional beliefs. In contrast, work distress only indirectly predicted both outcomes. In a longer‐term model (Wave 2‐Wave 3), health worry had direct and indirect effects on downstream anxiety but not depression. Pandemic work distress had no effect on depression or dysfunctional beliefs; however, it was associated with less anxiety. Conclusions: Although health worry and work distress predicted later symptoms of anxiety and depression, they appeared to operate through different pathways. These findings provide guidance for the development of more effective interventions to reduce the impact of pandemics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Previous studies have established a link between the COVID‐19 pandemic and poor mental health. They further suggest that young adults may be especially vulnerable to worsened mental health during the pandemic, but few studies have investigated which specific aspects of the COVID‐19 experience affect psychological well‐being over time. To better understand concrete predictors of poor mental health outcomes in this population, we identified several pandemic‐related experiences and evaluated their effects on mental health symptoms (depression, anxiety, stress, alcohol, and substance use) in a sample of U.S. college students (N = 176). Methods: Both mental health symptoms and pandemic‐related experiences were evaluated at the start of quarantine (March/April 2020, Time 1) and the end of the Spring 2020 semester (May 2020, Time 2). Given the limited literature on specific predictors of mental health during a pandemic, we used elastic net regression, a novel analytic method that helps with variable selection when theoretical background is limited, to narrow our field of possible predictors. Results: While mental health symptoms were elevated at both timepoints, there were no clinically significant changes from Time 1 to Time 2 and few differences between sociodemographic groups. Both disruption due to the pandemic (β =.25, p =.021) and limited confidence in the federal government's response (β = −.14, p =.038) were significant predictors of depression symptoms at the end of the semester, even when controlling for baseline depression. Further, predictions that the pandemic would continue to impact daily life further into the future were linked with pandemic stress response symptoms (β =.15, p =.032) at Time 2, beyond the effects of baseline symptoms. Alcohol (β = −.22, p =.024) and substance use (β = −.26, p =.01) were associated with reduced adherence to COVID‐19 guidelines. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that specific aspects of the pandemic experience may be influencing internalizing symptoms and alcohol/substance use in college students, pointing to potential avenues for targeted support and intervention. Practitioner points: A range of factors may influence university student mental health during the COVID‐19 pandemic.Students who expect the pandemic will continue to impact daily life further into the future maybe more likely to report stress symptoms.Disruption due to the pandemic and limited confidence in the federal government's response may be associated with depression symptoms.Alcohol and substance use are associated with lower COVID‐19 guideline adherence in university students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Foundational cognitive models propose that people with anxiety and depression show risk estimation bias, but most literature does not compute true risk estimation bias by comparing people's subjective risk estimates to their individualized reality (i.e., person-level objective risk). In a diverse community sample (N = 319), we calculated risk estimation bias by comparing people's subjective risk estimates for contracting COVID-19 to their individualized objective risk. Person-level objective risk was consistently low and did not differ across symptom levels, suggesting that for low probability negative events, people with greater symptoms show risk estimation bias that is driven by subjective risk estimates. Greater levels of anxiety, depression, and COVID-specific perseverative cognition separately predicted higher subjective risk estimates. In a model including COVID-specific perseverative cognition alongside anxiety and depression scores, the only significant predictor of subjective risk estimates was COVID-specific perseverative cognition, indicating that symptoms more closely tied to feared outcomes may more strongly influence risk estimation. Finally, subjective risk estimates predicted information-seeking behavior and eating when anxious, but did not significantly predict alcohol or marijuana use, drinking to cope, or information avoidance. Implications for clinical practitioners and future research are discussed. • Greater anxiety and depression predicted greater risk estimation bias. • This effect was driven by higher subjective risk estimates, not objective risk. • Perseverative thought about the feared event most strongly predicted risk estimates. • Higher subjective risk estimates predicted some avoidance-based coping behaviors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]