Bögemann Sophie A, Puhlmann Lara M C, Wackerhagen Carolin, Zerban Matthias, Riepenhausen Antje, Köber Göran, Yuen Kenneth S L, Pooseh Shakoor, Marciniak Marta A, Reppmann Zala, Uściƚko Aleksandra, Weermeijer Jeroen, Lenferink Dionne B, Mituniewicz Julian, Robak Natalia, Donner Nina C, Mestdagh Merijn, Verdonck Stijn, van Dick Rolf, Kleim Birgit, Lieb Klaus, van Leeuwen Judith M C, Kobylińska Dorota, Myin-Germeys Inez, Walter Henrik, Tüscher Oliver, Hermans Erno J, Veer Ilya M, Kalisch Raffael
Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition and Behaviour, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
Leibniz Institute for Resilience Research (LIR), Mainz, Germany.
JMIR Ment Health. 2023 Oct 17;10:e46518. doi: 10.2196/46518.
Cross-sectional relationships between psychosocial resilience factors (RFs) and resilience, operationalized as the outcome of low mental health reactivity to stressor exposure (low "stressor reactivity" [SR]), were reported during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020.
Extending these findings, we here examined prospective relationships and weekly dynamics between the same RFs and SR in a longitudinal sample during the aftermath of the first wave in several European countries.
Over 5 weeks of app-based assessments, participants reported weekly stressor exposure, mental health problems, RFs, and demographic data in 1 of 6 different languages. As (partly) preregistered, hypotheses were tested cross-sectionally at baseline (N=558), and longitudinally (n=200), using mixed effects models and mediation analyses.
RFs at baseline, including positive appraisal style (PAS), optimism (OPT), general self-efficacy (GSE), perceived good stress recovery (REC), and perceived social support (PSS), were negatively associated with SR scores, not only cross-sectionally (baseline SR scores; all P<.001) but also prospectively (average SR scores across subsequent weeks; positive appraisal (PA), P=.008; OPT, P<.001; GSE, P=.01; REC, P<.001; and PSS, P=.002). In both associations, PAS mediated the effects of PSS on SR (cross-sectionally: 95% CI -0.064 to -0.013; prospectively: 95% CI -0.074 to -0.0008). In the analyses of weekly RF-SR dynamics, the RFs PA of stressors generally and specifically related to the COVID-19 pandemic, and GSE were negatively associated with SR in a contemporaneous fashion (PA, P<.001; PAC,P=.03; and GSE, P<.001), but not in a lagged fashion (PA, P=.36; PAC, P=.52; and GSE, P=.06).
We identified psychological RFs that prospectively predict resilience and cofluctuate with weekly SR within individuals. These prospective results endorse that the previously reported RF-SR associations do not exclusively reflect mood congruency or other temporal bias effects. We further confirm the important role of PA in resilience.
在2020年新冠疫情第一波期间，有研究报告了心理社会复原力因素（RFs）与复原力之间的横断面关系，复原力被定义为对应激源暴露的低心理健康反应性（低“应激源反应性”[SR]）的结果。
为扩展这些发现，我们在此研究了几个欧洲国家在第一波疫情之后的纵向样本中，相同的RFs与SR之间的前瞻性关系和每周动态变化。
在基于应用程序的5周评估中，参与者用6种不同语言之一每周报告应激源暴露、心理健康问题、RFs和人口统计学数据。如（部分）预先注册的那样（此处不太明确准确意思，可能是指研究设计方面的预先规划），使用混合效应模型和中介分析在基线时进行横断面检验（N = 558），并进行纵向检验（n = 200）。
基线时的RFs，包括积极评价风格（PAS）、乐观（OPT）、一般自我效能感（GSE）、感知良好的压力恢复（REC）和感知社会支持（PSS），不仅在横断面（基线SR分数；所有P <.001）上与SR分数呈负相关，而且在前瞻性方面（后续几周的平均SR分数；积极评价（PA），P =.008；OPT，P <.001；GSE，P =.01；REC，P <.001；PSS，P =.002）也是如此。在这两种关联中，PAS介导了PSS对SR的影响（横断面：95% CI -0.064至 -0.013；前瞻性：95% CI -0.074至 -0.0008）。在每周RF - SR动态变化的分析中，对应激源的PA总体上以及与新冠疫情具体相关的PA和GSE与SR以同期方式呈负相关（PA，P <.001；与新冠疫情相关的PA（PAC），P =.03；GSE，P <.001），但不是滞后相关（PA，P =.36；PAC，P =.52；GSE，P =.06）。
我们确定了能够前瞻性预测复原力并在个体内与每周SR共同波动的心理RFs。这些前瞻性结果支持了先前报告的RF - SR关联并非完全反映情绪一致性或其他时间偏差效应。我们进一步证实了PA在复原力中的重要作用。
Zotero 插件
