The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively impacted the psychosocial functioning of children and families. It is important to consider adversity in relation to processes of positive adaptation. To date, there are no empirically validated multi-item scales measuring COVID-related positive adaptation within families. The aim of the current study was to develop and validate a new measure: the Family Positive Adaptation during COVID-19 Scale (Family PACS). The sample included 372 female and 158 male caregivers (73% White-European/North American; median 2019 income = $50,000 to $74,999 USD) of children ages 5–18 years old from the United Kingdom (76%), the United States (19%), Canada (4%), and Australia (1%), who completed measures in May 2020. Participants responded to a 14-item survey indexing a range of perceived coping and adaptation behaviors at the beginning of the pandemic. An exploratory factor analysis yielded an optimal one-factor solution comprised of seven items related to family cohesion, flexibility, routines, and meaning-making (loadings from 0.44 to 0.67). Multigroup confirmatory factor analysis demonstrated measurement invariance across female and male caregivers, demonstrating that the factor structure, loadings, and thresholds did not vary by caregiver sex. There was evidence for concurrent validity with significant bivariate correlations between the Family PACS scores and measures of caregiver positive coping, parenting practices, couple satisfaction, and family functioning (correlations from 0.10 to 0.23), but not negatively-valenced constructs. Findings inform our conceptualization of how families have adapted to adverse pandemic-related conditions. Further, we provide preliminary support for the Family PACS as a practical tool for evaluating positive family adaptation during this global crisis, with implications for future widespread crises.

The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has contributed to a global increase in mental health problems including "COVID-19 anxiety," the presence of dysfunctional anxiety about the novel coronavirus (e.g., fear of contracting or spreading the virus). The present study investigated potential moderators of the relationship between COVID-19 anxiety and (a) daily functioning and (b) quality of life, to determine which individuals are most susceptible to these negative outcomes. Intolerance of uncertainty and health locus of control were examined as possible moderators. This study recruited 193 Canadian adults using crowdsourcing platforms during the third wave of COVID-19. Participants completed online questionnaires assessing demographics and the constructs of interest. Regression analyses found that neither intolerance of uncertainty nor health locus of control significantly moderated the relationships between COVID-19 anxiety and daily functioning. However, both intolerance of uncertainty and health locus of control were significant moderators between COVID-19 anxiety and quality of life. These findings extend past research by emphasizing the need to target specific risk factors, such as intolerance of uncertainty and health locus of control, in therapeutic settings to better support individuals' quality of life during this difficult and unpredictable time. Public Significance StatementHigh coronavirus disease (COVID) anxiety during Canada's third wave of the pandemic was associated with reduced quality of life in individuals. Specific risk factors such as intolerance of uncertainty and internal health locus of control resulted in a greater vulnerability to the psychological consequences of COVID-19. These findings highlight potential areas for clinical intervention to support Canadians suffering during and after the pandemic.

This study aimed to examine the impact of calorie labels on food choice and consumption as well as the moderating role of disordered eating on these outcomes. Participants were 59 female undergraduate students from a large Canadian university. Participants had their height and weight measured, completed self-report questionnaires assessing food preferences, disordered eating, and physiological states, and selected a snack item to consume from a menu that either included or did not include calorie labels. Participants’ food intake was measured by weighing the food item prior to and after consumption. There were no significant differences between the calorie-label and no calorie-label groups on food choice or number of calories consumed. Contrary to hypotheses, there also was no significant interaction between calorie labels and disordered eating on food choice. Bayesian statistics indicated that there was little-to-no evidence supporting the alternative hypotheses and provide further support that the observed findings were true null effects and not a function of sample size. Findings suggest that calorie labelling may be ineffective in influencing eating behaviour in young adult females. Future research should explore the impact of menu labelling on food choice and consumption in individuals with a clinical diagnosis of an eating disorder or those at high risk for disordered eating. Gaining a better understanding of the impact of calorie labelling on food choice and consumption in this population may support the development of tailored interventions.