Milman Evgenia, Lee Sherman A, Neimeyer Robert A, Mathis Amanda A, Jobe Mary C
Adjunct Faculty, St Edward's University, Medical University of South Carolina, United States.
Department of Psychology, Christopher Newport University, United States.
J Affect Disord Rep. 2020 Dec 15;2:100023. doi: 10.1016/j.jadr.2020.100023. Epub 2020 Nov 12.
The aim of this research was to examine core belief violation and disrupted meaning making as primary cognitive processes regulating mental health during the pandemic. The study tested the hypothesis that both these cognitive processes function as mediating mechanisms, accounting for the adverse mental health effects of multiple pandemic stressors.
A survey design ( = 2380) assessed demographic variables associated with poor pandemic mental health (gender, age, ethnicity, education), direct COVID stressors (diagnosis, death), indirect COVID stressors (unemployment, increased living costs, childcare loss), core belief violation, meaning made of the pandemic, coronavirus anxiety (CA), depression, and general anxiety. RESULTS: Core belief violation and disrupted meaning making explained the severity of depression, general anxiety, and CA to a significantly greater degree than did demographics, direct COVID stressors, and indirect COVID stressors combined. In addition, core belief violation and disrupted meaning making significantly mediated the impact of direct and indirect COVID stressors on all mental health outcomes. Specifically, each stressor was associated with increased core belief violation and decreased meaning making of the pandemic, in turn, those whose core beliefs were violated and those who made less meaning of the pandemic experienced greater depression, general anxiety, and CA.
The use of a cross-sectional design prohibited assessment of alternative causal orders.
This study describes the first unifying model of pandemic mental health, establishing violation of core beliefs and the inability to make meaning of the pandemic as targets for clinical intervention in the context diverse pandemic stressors.
本研究旨在探讨核心信念违背和意义建构受阻作为大流行期间调节心理健康的主要认知过程。该研究检验了这样一个假设,即这两种认知过程均作为中介机制,解释多种大流行应激源对心理健康的不利影响。
一项调查设计(n = 2380)评估了与大流行期间心理健康不佳相关的人口统计学变量(性别、年龄、种族、教育程度)、直接的新冠应激源(诊断、死亡)、间接的新冠应激源(失业、生活成本增加、育儿缺失)、核心信念违背、对大流行的意义建构、新冠焦虑(CA)、抑郁和一般焦虑。结果:与人口统计学变量、直接的新冠应激源和间接的新冠应激源加起来相比,核心信念违背和意义建构受阻对抑郁、一般焦虑和新冠焦虑严重程度的解释程度要显著更高。此外,核心信念违背和意义建构受阻显著介导了直接和间接的新冠应激源对所有心理健康结果的影响。具体而言,每个应激源都与核心信念违背增加和对大流行的意义建构减少相关,反过来,那些核心信念被违背的人和那些对大流行意义建构较少的人经历了更严重的抑郁、一般焦虑和新冠焦虑。
横断面设计的使用妨碍了对其他因果顺序的评估。
本研究描述了首个统一的大流行心理健康模型,确立了核心信念的违背以及无法对大流行赋予意义作为在多种大流行应激源背景下临床干预的目标。