Abstract Background The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and associated lockdown could be considered a ‘perfect storm’ for increases in emotional distress. Such increases can only be identified by studies that use data collected before and during the pandemic. Longitudinal data are also needed to examine (1) the roles of previous distress and stressors in emotional distress during the pandemic and (2) how COVID-19-related stressors and coping strategies are associated with emotional distress when pre-pandemic distress is accounted for. Methods Data came from a cohort study (N = 768). Emotional distress (perceived stress, internalizing symptoms, and anger), COVID-19-related stressors, and coping strategies were measured during the pandemic/lockdown when participants were aged 22. Previous distress and stressors were measured before COVID-19 (at age 20). Results On average, participants showed increased levels of perceived stress and anger (but not internalizing symptoms) during the pandemic compared to before. Pre-COVID-19 emotional distress was the strongest predictor of during-pandemic emotional distress, followed by during-pandemic economic and psychosocial stressors (e.g. lifestyle and economic disruptions) and hopelessness, and pre-pandemic social stressors (e.g. bullying victimization and stressful life events). Most health risks to self or loved ones due to COVID-19 were not uniquely associated with emotional distress in final models. Coping strategies associated with reduced distress included keeping a daily routine, physical activity, and positive reappraisal/reframing. Conclusions In our community sample, pre-pandemic distress, secondary consequences of the pandemic (e.g. lifestyle and economic disruptions), and pre-pandemic social stressors were more consistently associated with young adults' emotional distress than COVID-19-related health risk exposures.

Rationale Adolescents and young adults were identified internationally as a group with potentially low compliance rates with public health measures aimed at curbing the spread of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Although non-compliance research during pandemics has typically focused on concurrent correlates, less is known about how prior social and psychological risk factors are associated with non-compliance during pandemics. Objective This paper leverages a prospective-longitudinal cohort study with data before and during the pandemic to describe patterns of non-compliance with COVID- 19 related public health measures in young adults and to identify which characteristics increase the risk of non-compliance. Methods Data came from an ongoing cohort study in Zurich, Switzerland (n=737). Non-compliance with public health measures and concurrent correlates were measured at age 22. Antecedent sociodemographic, social, and psychological factors were measured at ages 15-20. Young adults generally complied with COVID-19 public health measures, although non-compliance with some measures (e.g., cleaning/disinfecting mobile phones, standing 1.5-2 meters apart) was relatively higher. Results Non-compliance, especially with hygiene-related measures, was more prevalent in males, and in individuals with higher education, higher SES, and a nonmigrant background. Non-compliance was higher in young adults who had previously scored high on indicators of “antisocial potential,” including low acceptance of moral rules, pre-pandemic legal cynicism, low shame/guilt, low self-control, engagement in delinquent behaviors, and association with delinquent peers. Young adults with low trust, including in the government’s measures for fighting the virus, also complied less. Conclusions In order to increase voluntary compliance with COVID-19 measures, public health campaigns should implement strategies that foster moral obligation and trust in authorities, or leverage trustworthy individuals in the community to disseminate information. For young adults with low self-control, self-monitoring, environmental restructuring, or nudging may increase compliance. Long-term investments into integrating youth with antisocial potential into society may decrease rule-breaking behaviors, including during pandemics when compliance saves lives.

Recent studies have suggested that the structure of psychopathology may be usefully represented in terms of a general factor of psychopathology (p-factor) capturing variance common to a broad range of symptoms transcending diagnostic domains in addition to specific factors capturing variance common to smaller subsets of more closely related symptoms. Little is known about how the general co-morbidity captured by this p-factor develops and whether general co-morbidity increases or decreases over childhood and adolescence. We evaluated two competing hypotheses: 1) dynamic mutualism which predicts growth in general co-morbidity and associated p-factor strength over time and 2) p-differentiation which predicts that manifestations of liabilities towards psychopathology become increasingly specific over time. Data came from the Zurich Project on the Social Development of Children and Youths (z-proso), a longitudinal study of a normative sample (approx. 50 % male) measured at 8 time points from ages 7 to 15. We operationalised general co-morbidity as p-factor strength in a bi-factor model and used omega hierarchical to track how this changed over development. In contrast to the predictions of both dynamic mutualism and p-differentiation, p-factor strength remained relatively constant over the studied period suggesting that such processes do not govern the interplay between psychopathological symptoms during this phase of development. Future research should focus on earlier phases of development and on factors that maintain the consistency of symptom-general covariation across this period.