TY - JOUR
T1 - Psychological Resilience Factors and Their Association With Weekly Stressor Reactivity During the COVID-19 Outbreak in Europe
T2 - Prospective Longitudinal Study
AU - Bögemann, Sophie A.
AU - Puhlmann, Lara M.C.
AU - Wackerhagen, Carolin
AU - Zerban, Matthias
AU - Riepenhausen, Antje
AU - Köber, Göran
AU - Yuen, Kenneth S.L.
AU - Pooseh, Shakoor
AU - Marciniak, Marta A.
AU - Reppmann, Zala
AU - Ko, Aleksandra Uści
AU - Weermeijer, Jeroen
AU - Lenferink, Dionne B.
AU - Mituniewicz, Julian
AU - Robak, Natalia
AU - Donner, Nina C.
AU - Mestdagh, Merijn
AU - Verdonck, Stijn
AU - van Dick, Rolf
AU - Kleim, Birgit
AU - Lieb, Klaus
AU - van Leeuwen, Judith M.C.
AU - Kobylińska, Dorota
AU - Myin-Germeys, Inez
AU - Walter, Henrik
AU - Tüscher, Oliver
AU - Hermans, Erno J.
AU - Veer, Ilya M.
AU - Kalisch, Raffael
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 Human Kinetics, Inc.
PY - 2023/10/17
Y1 - 2023/10/17
N2 - Background: 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. Objective: 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. Methods: 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. Results: 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). Conclusions: 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.
AB - Background: 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. Objective: 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. Methods: 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. Results: 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). Conclusions: 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.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85169089486
U2 - 10.2196/46518
DO - 10.2196/46518
M3 - Article
C2 - 37847551
AN - SCOPUS:85169089486
SN - 2368-7959
VL - 10
JO - JMIR Mental Health
JF - JMIR Mental Health
IS - 1
M1 - e46518
ER -
