2023
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0283254
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Predicting resilience during the COVID-19 Pandemic in the United Kingdom: Cross-sectional and longitudinal results

Abstract: Although the COVID-19 pandemic has impacted the psychological wellbeing of some people, there is evidence that many have been much less affected. The Ecological Model of Resilience (EMR) may explain why some individuals are not resilient whilst others are. In this study we test the EMR in a comparison of UK survey data collected from the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) longitudinal study of a representative sample of the United Kingdom (UK) adult population and data from an Italian arm of t… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

1
1
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 88 publications
1
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…They supported both the vulnerability–stress model and terror management theory regarding death anxiety. In the UK, resilience during the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic was studied, and death anxiety was associated with nonresilience, similar to findings in [ 21 ]. In another study during the pandemic, resilience was associated with death anxiety, while death anxiety was also linked to gender and employment status [ 22 ].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 66%
“…They supported both the vulnerability–stress model and terror management theory regarding death anxiety. In the UK, resilience during the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic was studied, and death anxiety was associated with nonresilience, similar to findings in [ 21 ]. In another study during the pandemic, resilience was associated with death anxiety, while death anxiety was also linked to gender and employment status [ 22 ].…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 66%
“…Moreover, the cross-sectional research design did not allow for observation of whether these findings remained consistent over time. Finally, in this study, differences associated with biological sex and gender were not considered [ 75 ], nor were factors related to broader social [ 76 , 77 ] and environmental conditions [ 78 ]. Future studies are warranted to either confirm or refute these findings and to broaden their applicability to other populations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%