Note: When clicking on a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number, you will be taken to an external site maintained by the publisher.
Some full text articles may not yet be available without a charge during the embargo (administrative interval).
What is a DOI Number?
Some links on this page may take you to non-federal websites. Their policies may differ from this site.
-
Objective: During the COVID-19 pandemic, unprecedented collective stressors disrupted assumptions of safety and security. Cognitive strategies like finding benefits during adversity may facilitate coping during such times of social disruption by reducing distress or motivating health protective behaviors. Methods: We explored relationships between benefit finding, collective- and individual-level adversity exposure, psychological distress, and health protective behaviors using four waves of data collected during the COVID-19 era from a longitudinal sample from the NORC AmeriSpeak panel, a representative, probability-based online panel of U.S. residents: Wave 1 (N=6,514, 3/18/2020-4/18/2020, 58.5% completion rate); Wave 2 (N=5,661, 9/24/2020-10/16/2020, 87.1% completion rate); Wave 3 (N=4,881, 11/8/2021-11/24/2021, 75.3% completion rate); and Wave 4 (N=4,859, 5/19/2022-6/16/2022, 75.1% completion rate). Results: Benefit finding was common; k-means clustering (an exploratory, data-driven approach) yielded five trajectories: Always High (15.92%), Always Low (18.13%), Always Middle (29.81%), Increasing (16.84%) and Decreasing (19.30%). Benefit finding trajectories were generally not strong correlates of emotional exhaustion, traumatic stress symptoms, global distress, and functional impairment over time. Rather, benefit finding robustly correlated with health protective behaviors relevant to COVID-19 and another viral threat (the seasonal flu): adjusting for demographics, pre-pandemic mental health, and collective- and individual-level adversity, benefit finding was positively associated with more social distancing (β=0.28, p<.001) and mask wearing (β=.21, p<.001) at Wave 2 and greater COVID-19 (OR=1.37, p<.001) and flu (OR=1.18, p<.001) vaccination at Wave 3. Conclusions: Although benefit finding was not generally associated with lower psychological distress during a collective stressor, it correlated with engagement in stressor-related health protective behaviors. Public significance statement: Finding benefits or “silver linings” during collective stress may not be associated with reduced psychological distress. However, finding benefits may promote cognitive coping strategies that encourage health protective behaviors.more » « less
-
Over the past two decades of research, increased media consumption in the context of collective traumas has been cross-sectionally and longitudinally linked to negative psychological outcomes. However, little is known about the specific information channels that may drive these patterns of response. The current longitudinal investigation uses a probability-based sample of 5,661 Americans measured at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic to identify a) distinct patterns of information-channel use (i.e., dimensions) for COVID-related information, b) demographic correlates of these patterns, and c) prospective associations of these information channel dimensions with distress (i.e., worry, global distress, and emotional exhaustion), cognition (e.g., beliefs about the seriousness of COVID-19, response efficacy, and dismissive attitudes), and behavior (e.g., engaging in health-protective behaviors and risk-taking behaviors) 6 mo later. Four distinct information-channel dimensions emerged: journalistic complexity; ideologically focused news; domestically focused news; and nonnews. Results indicate that journalistic complexity was prospectively associated with more emotional exhaustion, belief in the seriousness of the coronavirus, response efficacy, engaging in health-protective behaviors, and less dismissiveness of the pandemic. A reliance on conservative-leaning media was prospectively associated with less psychological distress, taking the pandemic less seriously, and engaging in more risk-taking behaviors. We discuss the implications of this work for the public, policy makers, and future research.more » « less
An official website of the United States government
