Like previous pandemics, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has direct and indirect effects, including in mental health. To evaluate the immediate psychological impact of COVID-19, we conducted an online survey in Portugal (24-27 March 2020), using the Impact of Event Scale-Revised (IES-R) and the Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21). From the 10,529 participants (M = 31.33; SD = 9.73), 83.4% were women, had a mean age of 31.2 years, and 70.9% were active workers. Depression, anxiety, and stress were rated as moderate to severe in 11.7%, 16.9%, and 5.6% of the sample, respectively. Moreover, 49.2% of participants reported a moderate or severe psychological impact of the outbreak. Women, the unemployed, those with lower education, living in rural areas, and with flu-like symptoms or chronic disorders were risk factors. Further research is needed to identify vulnerable groups to better inform and adapt mental health policies and interventions.

The COVID-19 pandemic has become one of the main international concerns regarding its impact on mental health. The present study aims to investigate the prevalence of depression, anxiety, and stress symptoms, and behavioral aspects amidst the COVID-19 pandemic in a Brazilian population. An online survey was administered from May 22 to June 5, 2020 using a questionnaire comprising of sociodemographic information, the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21), and the Coping Strategies Inventory. Participants comprised 3,000 people from Brazil’s 26 states and the Federal District, with an average age of 39.8 years, women (83%), married (50.6%), graduates (70.1%) and employees (46.7%). Some contracted the virus (6.4%) and had dead friends or relatives (22.7%). There was more consumption of drugs, tobacco, medication, and food (40.8%). Almost half of participants expressed symptoms of depression (46.4%), anxiety (39.7%), and stress (42.2%). These were higher in women, people without children, students, patients with chronic diseases, and people who had contact with others diagnosed with COVID-19. The existence of a group more vulnerable to situations with a high stress burden requires greater attention regarding mental health during and after the pandemic. That said, it should be emphasized that these findings are preliminary and portray a moment still being faced by many people amid the pandemic and quarantine measures. Therefore, we understand that the magnitude of the impacts on mental health will only be more specific with continuous studies after total relaxation of the quarantine.

Objective: This study aimed to examine the impact of dyadic coping on the quality of life of couples during pregnancy and to explore the potential mediating role of marital adjustment on this association. Background: According to the systemic transactional model, pregnancy can be characterized as a situation of dyadic stress since it affects both members of the couple. However, the impact of dyadic coping on couples' quality of life during pregnancy is unexplored. Also, the potential mediating role of marital adjustment on this association remains understudied. Methods: Participants were 320 pregnant women and their partners (N = 640) who completed the Dyadic Coping Inventory, the Dyadic Adjustment Scale and the World Health Organization Quality of Life instrument. Data were analysed using the actor-partner interdependence mediation model. Results: Results showed that there was an intrapersonal indirect effect of dyadic coping on quality of life through marital adjustment. Moreover, an interpersonal indirect effect was found with fathers' dyadic coping being associated with mothers' quality of life through mothers' marital adjustment. Conclusions: These findings highlight the importance of assessing dyadic coping strategies of couples during pregnancy and targeting them in the psychological support offered to couples as a way of improving their marital adjustment, and consequently, their quality of life.

Perinatal research has focused essentially on maternal outcomes leaving paternal outcomes unexplored. This cross-sectional study aimed to explore the intrapersonal and interpersonal effects of mothers' and fathers' anxiety and depressive symptoms on their own and their partners' antenatal attachment to the fetus. Additionally, it aimed to explore the mediating role of dyadic adjustment on these associations. Participants, 320 pregnant women and their partners, completed the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, the Dyadic Adjustment Scale and the Maternal and Paternal Antenatal Attachment Scale. Data were analyzed using the actor-partner interdependence mediation model. Mothers' (ß = -.16, p <.01) and fathers' depressive symptoms (ß = -.38, p <.001) were associated with their levels of antenatal attachment to the fetus. These relationships, however, were mediated by levels of dyadic adjustment (ß = -.08, p <.05; ß = -.09, p <.05, respectively). Fathers' anxiety symptoms were associated with their levels of antenatal attachment to the fetus (ß = .16, p <.05). This relationship was partially mediated by their levels of dyadic adjustment (ß = -.05, p <.05).Finally, fathers' depressive symptoms were associated with mothers' levels of antenatal attachment to the fetus through the mothers' dyadic adjustment levels (ß = -.06, p <.05).Results indicated that anxiety and depressive symptoms as well as lower levels of dyadic adjustment during pregnancy seem to negatively impact the levels of antenatal attachment to the fetus, especially for fathers. Results highlight the need to adopt a dyadic perspective to understand mothers' and fathers' outcomes during pregnancy.

The current study examines whether the fear of being laughed at (gelotophobia) can be assessed reliably and validly by means of a self-report instrument in di¤erent countries of the world. All items of the GELOPH 254 R. T. Proyer et al. (Ruch and Titze 1998;Ruch and Proyer 2008b) were translated to the local language of the collaborator (42 languages in total). In total, 22,610 participants in 93 samples from 73 countries completed the GELOPH. Across all samples the reliability of the 15-item questionnaire was high (mean alpha of .85) and in all samples the scales appeared to be unidimensional. The endorsement rates for the items ranged from 1.31% through 80.00% to a single item. Variations in the mean scores of the items were more strongly related to the culture in a country and not to the language in which the data were collected. This was also supported by a multidimensional scaling analysis with standardized mean scores of the items from the GELOPH3154. This analysis identified two dimensions that further helped explaining the data (i.e., insecure vs. intense avoidant-restrictive and low vs. high suspicious tendencies towards the laughter of others). Furthermore, multiple samples derived from one country tended to be (with a few exceptions) highly similar. The study shows that gelotophobia can be assessed reliably by means of a self-report instrument in cross-cultural research. This study enables further studies of the fear of being laughed at with regard to di¤erences in the prevalence and putative causes of gelotophobia in comparisons to di¤erent cultures.