This study investigated the relationships between selected emotional aspects of mental ill-health and mental well-health experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic. The theoretical model of the study was based on Martin Seligman’s positive psychology and PERMA theory and Paul Wong’s Existential Positive Psychology 2.0 Theory, which postulates that negative experiences contribute to well-being and personal growth. The static approach was complemented by exploring the mediating role of psychological flexibility in the relationship between negative emotions and well-being. The data were collected during (...) the initial phase of the COVID-19 pandemic from 277 participants, aged M = 33.83, SD = 12.77. The results confirmed that negative emotions correlated negatively with various domains of well-being, except for accomplishment. Moreover, negative emotions were related to the general well-being through psychological flexibility in that higher depression, anxiety, and stress were associated with lower psychological flexibility, which decreased general well-being. Finally, negative emotions were shown to be beneficial, having an adaptive effect that allows individuals to maintain their ability to cope with the situation, reach goals, and fulfill daily duties and responsibilities despite critical, stressful situation that limit their psychological flexibility. This observation confirmed the positive potential of negative aspects of life postulated within Existential Positive Psychology. (shrink)

Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 has resulted in an increase in known risk factors for mental health problems. Mexico adopted lockdown and physical distancing as a containment strategy with potential consequences on day to day life, such as social isolation, loss of income and loneliness that can have important consequences in terms of mental health.Objective: We aimed to examine the effect of the initial phases of the COVID-19 pandemic on psychological distress, well-being and perceived physical health among Mexican-base respondents and to (...) examine whether coping strategies would play a potential intermediating role in relation to these variables. Under the Existential Positive Psychology perspective, an emphasis was made on meaning-centered coping.Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted between April 30 and June 16th 2020 among 604 Mexicans-base respondents of which 471 were women and 132 men. Data was collected by using online questionnaires. Psychological distress was measured using the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale. The Brief COPE Inventory was used to assess problem-focused and emotion-focused coping strategies. We also used the Meaning-Centered Coping Scale. PERMA-Profiler was used to assess well-being, perceived physical health, and loneliness. Profiler and Descriptive analyses and bivariate linear regression were performed to examine the association of variables.Results: 45.9% of the participants reported moderate to extremely severe psychological distress. Our results demonstrate that problem-focused and emotion-focused coping were positively related to psychological distress, whereas meaning-centered coping was negatively associated with distress. Furthermore, psychological distress played a potential negative role in the perceived physical health, while meaning-centered coping and well-being buffered the negative influence of psychological distress on perceived physical health (completely standardized indirect effect = –0.01, SE: 0.012, 95% CI [−0.065; −0.017].Conclusion: Meaning-centered coping was found to suppress the negative influence of psychological distress on sensation of decreased physical health corroborating the critical role of meaning in life in promoting well-being. Future studies can further examine the value of the critical role of meaning in life in promoting well-being as a protective factor against severe distress during traumatic events. Findings of this study can be used to orient policies and interventions aimed to alleviate suffering in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic. (shrink)

ObjectiveThe current study examined whether compliance with anti-pandemic measures during the COVID-19 pandemic relates to importance of the fulfillment of core psychological needs, namely, relationship, self-esteem, efficacy, and pleasure; coping behavior styles, namely, surrender, self-soothing, divert attention, and confrontation; and worries or concerns beyond COVID-19 which may impair wellbeing.MethodsThis study used a cross-sectional design and online survey data from responses to a structured questionnaire developed within the theoretical framework of schema-based psychotherapy on psychological needs and coping behavior styles from 740 (...) participants in Central Europe and West Africa.ResultsAnalysis indicated that people with the psychological needs of “pleasure” and “efficacy” and the coping style of “surrender” were more likely to comply with anti-pandemic measures. We also found that people with the coping style of “confrontation” were less likely to comply. There were no statistically significant relationships between compliance and “relationship,” “self-esteem,” “self-soothing,” “divert attention,” and “existential concerns.”DiscussionOur findings indicate that how likely a given individual is to comply with prescribed pandemic countermeasures varies based on their specific psychological needs and behavior styles. Therefore, to control contagion during a pandemic, authorities must recognize the relevance of human need fulfillment and their behavior styles and accordingly highlight and encourage admissible and feasible actions. The findings demonstrate that some individual differences in core psychological needs and coping behavior patterns predict compliance behavior. (shrink)