Search

Established in March 2020, the C19PRC Study monitors the psychological and socio-economic impact of the pandemic in the UK and other countries. This paper describes the protocol for Wave 6 (August-September 2021).The survey assessed: COVID-19 related experiences; experiences of common mental health disorders; psychological characteristics; and social and political attitudes. Adult participants from any previous wave (N = 3170) were re-invited, and sample replenishment procedures helped manage attrition. Weights were calculated using a survey raking algorithm to ensure the on-going original panel (from baseline) was nationally representative in terms of gender, age, and household income, amongst other factors.1643 adults were re-interviewed at Wave 6 (51.8% retention rate). Non-participation was higher younger adults, those born outside UK, and adults living in cities. Of the adults recruited at baseline, 54.3% (N = 1100) participated in Wave 6. New respondent (N = 415) entered the panel at this wave, resulting in cross-sectional sample for Wave 6 of 2058 adults. The raking procedure re-balanced the longitudinal panel to within 1.3% of population estimates for selected socio-demographic characteristics.This paper outlines the growing strength of the publicly available C19PRC Study data for COVID-19-related interdisciplinary research.

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 longitudinal study of a representative sample of the UK adult population and data from an Italian arm of the study. We first compare data from the third wave (W3) of the UK arm of the study, collected in July/August 2020, with data from an equivalent sample (N = 1034) and stage of the pandemic in Italy in July 2020. Next, using UK longitudinal data collected from C19PRC Waves 1, 3 and 5, collected between March 2020 and April 2021 we identify the proportion of people who were resilient. Finally, we examine which factors, drawn from the ecological model, predict resilient and non-resilient outcomes.We find that the 72% of the UK sample was resilient, in line with the Italian study. In the cross-sectional logistic regression model, age and self-esteem were significantly associated with resilience whilst death anxiety thoughts, neuroticism, loneliness, and PTSD symptoms related to COVID-19 were significantly associated with Non-Resilient outcomes.In the longitudinal UK analysis, at Wave 5, 80% of the sample was Resilient. Service use, belonging to wider neighbourhood, self-rated health, self-esteem, openness, and externally generated death anxiety were associated with Resilient outcomes. In contrast, PTSD symptoms and loneliness were associated with Non-Resilient outcomes.The EMR effectively explained the results. There were some variables which are amenable to intervention which could increase resilience in the face of similar future challenges.

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 the study. We first compare data from the third wave of the UK arm of the study, collected in July/August 2020, with data from an equivalent sample and stage of the pandemic in Italy in July 2020. Next, using UK longitudinal data collected from C19PRC Waves 1, 3 and 5, collected between March 2020 and April 2021 we identify the proportion of people who were resilient. Finally, we examine which factors, drawn from the EMR, predict resilient and non-resilient outcomes. We find that the 72% of the UK sample was resilient, in line with the Italian study. In the cross-sectional logistic regression model, age and self-esteem were significantly associated with resilience whilst death anxiety thoughts, neuroticism, loneliness, and Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) symptoms related to COVID-19 were significantly associated with Non-Resilient outcomes. In the longitudinal UK analysis, at Wave 5, 80% of the sample was Resilient. Service use, belonging to wider neighbourhood, self-rated health, self-esteem, openness, and externally generated death anxiety were associated with Resilient outcomes. In contrast, PTSD symptoms and loneliness were associated with Non-Resilient outcomes. The EMR effectively explained the results. There were some variables which are amenable to intervention which could increase resilience in the face of similar future challenges.

Purpose The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the way many individuals go about their daily lives. This study attempted to model the complexity of change in lifestyle quality as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and its context within the UK adult population. Methods Data from the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium Study (Wave 3, July 2020; N = 1166) were utilised. A measure of COVID-19-related lifestyle change captured how individuals’ lifestyle quality had been altered as a consequence of the pandemic. Exploratory factor analysis and latent profile analysis were used to identify distinct lifestyle quality change subgroups, while multinomial logistic regression analysis was employed to describe class membership. Results Five lifestyle dimensions, reflecting partner relationships, health, family and friend relations, personal and social activities, and work life, were identified by the EFA, and seven classes characterised by distinct patterns of change across these dimensions emerged from the LPA: (1) better overall (3.3%), (2) worse except partner relations (6.0%), (3) worse overall (2.5%), (4) better relationships (9.5%), (5) better except partner relations (4.3%), (6) no different (67.9%), and (7) worse partner relations only (6.5%). Predictor variables differentiated membership of classes. Notably, classes 3 and 7 were associated with poorer mental health (COVID-19 related PTSD and suicidal ideation). Conclusions Four months into the pandemic, most individuals’ lifestyle quality remained largely unaffected by the crisis. Concerningly however, a substantial minority (15%) experienced worsened lifestyles compared to before the pandemic. In particular, a pronounced deterioration in partner relations seemed to constitute the more severe pandemic-related lifestyle change.

Research suggests that patients with Functional Neurological Symptom Disorder (pwFND) struggle to identify their own emotions and associated physiological cues (interoceptive sensitivity, IS). However, it is not known how this deficit interacts with stress. This study aimed to assess IS in pwFND at baseline and following stress induction, and relate the findings to self-reported emotion processing difficulties.Twenty-six pwFND and 27 healthy controls performed the Heart Beat Detection Task pre- and post-stress induction with the Cold Pressor Test. Participants also completed questionnaires assessing anxiety (GAD-7) and depressive symptomology (PHQ-9), as well as emotion processing (EPS-25).Patients reported deficits in emotion processing (Our findings suggest that pwFND are relatively impaired in the identification of their emotions at baseline and following stress induction. This may be related to the experience of functional sensory symptoms and has implications for the psychological treatment of emotion dysregulation in this population.

Purpose\ud \ud Previous research suggests that catastrophisation and perseverative, or repetitive negative thinking (RNT) could play an important role in the aetiology of Psychogenic Nonepileptic Seizures (PNES). This study was designed to explore whether these cognitive tendencies are more prevalent in patients with PNES than those with epilepsy and to examine the relationship between these cognitions, depression, anxiety, seizure frequency and diagnosis.\ud \ud \ud \ud Methods\ud \ud 26 patients with PNES (PWPNES) and 29 with epilepsy (PWE) self-reported RNT (Perseverative Thinking Questionnaire), catastrophisation tendencies (modified Safety Behaviors and Catastrophizing Scale), symptoms of anxiety (Generalised Anxiety Disorder Assessment 7) and depression (Primary Health Questionnaire 9) as well as seizure frequency.\ud \ud \ud \ud Results\ud \ud RNT and catastrophic thinking were highly correlated with each other and more prevalent in PWPNES than PWE. Positive correlations were also found between all other self-report measures and seizure frequency. The PNES diagnosis predicted RNT (perseverative thinking) independently of catastrophic thinking, anxiety, depression and seizure frequency.\ud \ud \ud \ud Conclusion\ud \ud PWPNES exhibit greater negative perseverative and catastrophising cognitive tendencies than PWE. PNES as a diagnosis independently predicted RNT. Hence, RNT and catastrophisation should be considered as possible specific targets for psychological interventions in patients with PNES.

Objectives: The COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study was established in March 2020 to monitor the psychological and socio-economic impact of the pandemic in the UK and other countries. This paper describes the protocol for Wave 6 (August-September 2021). Methods: The survey assessed: COVID-19 related experiences; experiences of common mental health disorders; psychological characteristics; and social and political attitudes. Adults who participated in any previous wave (N=3170) were re-invited to participate, and sample replenishment procedures were conducted to help manage attrition. Weights were calculated using a survey raking algorithm to ensure on-going original panel (commencing at baseline) was nationally representative in terms of gender, age, and household income, amongst other factors. Results: 1643 adults who participated in any previous wave were re-interviewed at Wave 6 (51.8% retention rate). Non-participation at Wave 6 was higher amongst women, younger adults, those in employment, those born outside UK, adults living in cities, and those not living alone. Of the adults recruited into the C19PRC study at baseline, 54.3% (N=1100) participated in Wave 6. An additional 415 new respondents entered the panel at this wave, resulting in cross-sectional sample for Wave 6 of 2058 adults. The raking procedure re-balanced the longitudinal panel to within 1.3% of population estimates for selected socio-demographic characteristics. Conclusion: This paper outlines the growing strength of the publicly available C19PRC Study data for COVID-19-related interdisciplinary research.

Objective\ud \ud Given the highly infectious nature of COVID-19, social distancing practices are key in stemming the spread of the virus. We aimed to assess the complex interplay among psychological factors, socio-demographic characteristics and social distancing behaviours within the framework of the widely used Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model.\ud \ud \ud \ud Design\ud \ud The present research employed network psychometrics on data collected during the first UK lockdown in April 2020 as part of the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study. Using a network approach, we examined the predictions of psychological and demographic variables onto social distancing practices at two levels of analysis: macro and micro.\ud \ud \ud \ud Design\ud \ud The present research employed network psychometrics on data collected during the first UK lockdown in April 2020 as part of the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study. Using a network approach, we examined the predictions of psychological and demographic variables onto social distancing practices at two levels of analysis: macro and micro.\ud \ud \ud \ud Results\ud \ud Our findings revealed several factors that influenced social distancing behaviour during the first UK lockdown. The COM-B model was successful in predicting particular aspects of social-distancing via the influence of psychological capability and motivation at the macro-and micro-levels, respectively. Notably, demographic variables, such as education, income, and age, were directly and uniquely predictive of certain social distancing behaviours.\ud \ud \ud \ud Conclusion\ud \ud Our findings reveal psychological factors that are key predictors of social distancing behaviour and also illustrate how demographic variables directly influence such behaviour. Our research has implications for the design of empirically-driven interventions to promote adherence to social distancing practices in this and future pandemics.

Aims: This study investigated the acceptability and feasibility of delivering the On The Level (OTL) mental health intervention to a sample of young people (aged 11-18 years) in secondary schools in London and Essex, UK.Methods: Participants were offered a OTL show intervention session as part of their class. Participants were followed up 4-6 weeks post-intervention session. Measures were completed for intervention acceptability and engagement, mental health outcomes and intervention evaluation at baseline/intervention (T1) and at follow-up (T2; 4-6 weeks post-intervention). Results: In total, 10,315 participants participated at T1. The results indicated good feasibility and acceptability of the OTL intervention among participants. It was feasible to recruit a large sample of young people and the OTL could be delivered during class at UK-based secondary schools as planned. Some adaptations to the study methods were identified in this study. Some preliminary differences were found for the mental health outcome measures between T1 and T2, notably with a significant reduction in levels of stress.Conclusion: This feasibility study provides preliminary evidence for the feasibility and acceptability of the OTL mental health intervention for young people in secondary schools in the UK.

Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) commonly co-occur, and researchers often estimate their impact using a cumulative risk approach. The person-centered approach offers another approach to operationalize the co-occurrence of ACEs. This study aims to estimate latent classes of ACEs in a sample of U.K. children, examine their relationship with emotional and behavioral problems, and compare the explanatory value of the latent classes to cumulative risk scores. Data were collected among a general population sample of British 10-year-old children extracted from the U.K. Household Longitudinal Study ( N = 601). Seven items characterized ACEs, comprising parent-report physical discipline, emotional abuse, supervisory neglect, maternal psychological distress, child-report parental educational disinterest, bullying victimization, and adverse neighborhood. Outcome measures were derived from the self-report Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire including total difficulties, emotional symptoms, conduct problems, hyperactivity, peer problems, and prosocial behavior. Latent class analysis resulted in a three-class solution: low ACEs, household challenges, and community challenges. Compared to the other classes, the community challenges class scored substantially worse on total difficulties, emotional symptoms, and peer subscales. The cumulative risk score was associated with all outcomes except prosocial behavior. Cumulative risk models accounted for a larger proportion of variance compared with the latent class models, except for peer problems which the person-centered model explained better. This study confirms that ACEs are associated with impairment in child functioning, and that both person-centered and cumulative risk approaches can capture this relationship well. Specifically, the person-centered approach demonstrated how co-occurring risk factors in the community challenges class produced particularly poor internalizing outcomes.

Psychogenic Nonepileptic Seizures (PNES) have been linked to dysregulated emotions and arousal. However, the question which emotions may be most relevant has received much less attention. In this multidisciplinary narrative review, we argue that the self-conscious emotion of shame is likely to be of particular importance for PNES. We summarize current concepts of the development of shame processing and its relationship with other emotional states. We demonstrate the potential of acute shame to cause a sudden disruption of normal cognitive function and trigger powerful behavioral, cognitive, physiological and secondary emotional responses which closely resemble key components of PNES. These responses may lead to the development of shame avoidance strategies which can become disabling in themselves. We discuss how excessive shame proneness and shame dysregulation are linked to several psychopathologies often associated with PNES (including depression and PTSD) and how they may predispose to, precipitate and perpetuate PNES disorders, not least by interacting with stigma. We consider current knowledge of the neurobiological underpinnings of shame and PNES. We explore how shame could be the link between PNES and a heterogeneous range of possible etiological factors, and how it may link historical aversive experiences with individual PNES events occurring much later and without apparent external trigger. We argue that, in view of the potential direct links between shame and PNES, the well-documented associations of shame with common comorbidities of this seizure disorder and the well-characterized relationship between chronic shame and stigma, there is a compelling case to pay greater attention to shame in relation to PNES. Its role in the treatment of patients with PNES is discussed in a separate, linked review incorporating case vignettes to highlight the complex interactions of different but interlinked shame-related issues in individual patients.

Previous research has established a link between Psychogenic Nonepileptic Seizures (also known as dissociative or functional seizures) and abnormal emotion processing. In a companion article to this multidisciplinary narrative review, we have argued that, in the context of a biopsychosocial understanding of the condition, the emotion of shame is particularly likely to contribute to the aetiology, manifestation, semiology and perpetuation of psychogenic non-epileptic seizures (PNES). Here we demonstrate how unrecognised and unaddressed shame may cause difficulties when clinicians explain the diagnosis, attempt to engage patients in psychological treatment, construct a diagnostic formulation and undertake psychotherapy. Case vignettes are used to bring theoretical considerations to life and to illustrate the complex interactions which may be observed between high shame proneness, chronic and dysregulated shame, stigma and PNES. The particular focus on shame does not mean that recent explanatory models of PNES are obsolete. Rather, we demonstrate how the inclusion of shame helps to embed the emotional, cognitive and behavioral aspects of the Integrative Cognitive Model (ICM) of PNES in a social / interpersonal context. While we describe how a number of different psychotherapeutic approaches can help to address shame-related processes we conclude that specific modalities are less important than the eventual enhancement of emotional literacy and tolerance through a healing relationship with the psychotherapist.

BackgroundThe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) emergency has led to numerous attempts to assess the impact of the pandemic on population mental health. The findings indicate an increase in depression and anxiety but have been limited by the lack of specificity about which aspects of the pandemic (e.g. viral exposure or economic threats) have led to adverse mental health outcomes.MethodsNetwork analyses were conducted on data from wave 1 (N = 2025, recruited 23 March–28 March 2020) and wave 2 (N = 1406, recontacts 22 April–1 May 2020) of the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium Study, an online longitudinal survey of a representative sample of the UK adult population. Our models included depression (PHQ-9), generalized anxiety (GAD-7) and trauma symptoms (ITQ); and measures of COVID-specific anxiety, exposure to the virus in self and close others, as well as economic loss due to the pandemic.ResultsA mixed graphical model at wave 1 identified a potential pathway from economic adversity to anxiety symptoms via COVID-specific anxiety. There was no association between viral exposure and symptoms. Ising network models using clinical cut-offs for symptom scores at each wave yielded similar findings, with the exception of a modest effect of viral exposure on trauma symptoms at wave 1 only. Anxiety and depression symptoms formed separate clusters at wave 1 but not wave 2.ConclusionsThe psychological impact of the pandemic evolved in the early phase of lockdown. COVID-related anxiety may represent the mechanism through which economic consequences of the pandemic are associated with psychiatric symptoms.

This chapter will explore psychological and demographic influences on citizens’ ability to enact protective health behaviours during the COVID-19 pandemic. Such behaviours include social distancing and hygienic practices that have been recommended across the globe to reduce the spread of infection from the coronavirus. Such behaviours represent a seismic change in usual social behaviour and have been particularly difficult to adopt under urgent circumstances. However, human behaviour is the essential driver of the rate and spread of infection. Using evidence from a large-scale longitudinal survey conducted throughout the pandemic in the UK, this chapter explores protective behaviours in relation to the Capability, Opportunity, Motivation-Behaviour (COM-B) model of behaviour change, which presents a framework for understanding the influences on behaviour. We will illustrate how the components of the COM-B model can inform behaviour change interventions and the importance of the role of anxiety in shaping behavioural responses to the pandemic.

This paper serves to alert IJPDS readers to the availability of a major new longitudinal survey data resource, the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study, which is being released for secondary use via the Open Science Framework. The C19PRC Study is a rich and detailed dataset that provides a convenient and valuable foundation from which to study the social, political, and health status of European adults during an unprecedent time of change as a direct result of the COVID-19 pandemic and Brexit. Here, we provide an overview of the C19PRC Study design, with the purpose of stimulating interest about the study among social scientists and maximising use of this resource.

Shevlin et al. (2021) recently demonstrated heterogeneity in mental health responses to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic over time from a nationally representative sample of UK adults (March–July 2020). Five subpopulations representing either stability, deterioration or improvement in both anxiety-depression and COVID-19 posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) were identified. The majority of the sample were characterised by low levels of anxiety-depression (56.6%) and COVID-19 traumatic stress (68.3%) during this early phase of the pandemic but some showed deterioration and some showed mental health benefits. Here, we extend these findings using two additional survey waves from the COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) study, thereby modelling mental health trajectories for the UK population within the entire first year of the pandemic.

Objective: The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and Generalized Anxiety Disorder scale (GAD-7) are self-report measures of major depressive disorder and generalised anxiety disorder. The primary aim of this study was to test for differential item functioning (DIF) on the PHQ-9 and GAD-7 items based on age, sex (males and females), and country.Method (or Design): Data from nationally representative surveys in UK, Ireland, Spain, and Italy (combined N = 6, 040) were used to fit confirmatory factor analytic and multiple-indictor multiple-causes models.Results: Spain and Italy had higher latent variable means than the UK and Ireland for both anxiety and depression, but there was no evidence for differential items functioning.Conclusions: The PHQ-9 and GAD-7 scores were found to be unidimensional, reliable, and largely free of DIF in data from four large nationally representative samples of the general population in the UK, Ireland, Italy and Spain.

Shevlin et al. (2021) recently demonstrated heterogeneity in mental health and psychological responses to the COVID-19 pandemic over time from a nationally representative sample of UK adults (March–July 2020). Five subpopulations representing either stability, deterioration or improvement in both anxiety-depression and COVID-19 PTSD were identified. The majority of the sample were characterised by low levels of anxiety-depression (56.6%) and COVID-19 traumatic stress (68.3%) during this early phase of the pandemic but some showed deterioration and some showed mental health benefits. Here we extend these findings using two additional survey waves from the C19PRC Study, thereby modelling mental health trajectories for the UK population within the entire first year of the pandemic.

Early neglect or maltreatment has been associated with changes in children's processing of emotional facial expressions, including a hypersensitivity to the emotion of anger. This may facilitate the avoidance of danger in a maltreating environment. However, few studies have examined whether experiences of early life stress (ELS) are associated with atypical avoidance responses towards emotional facial expressions, or whether the effects of ELS can be observed in adult participants. The present study therefore examined the effects of ELS on adults’ approach-avoidance tendencies towards angry, happy, and neutral facial expressions. Surprisingly, higher levels of ELS were associated with reduced avoidance of angry facial expressions among individuals with no evidence of mental illness. In contrast, there was no evidence of a relationship between ELS and avoidance of angry facial expressions among individuals with experience of mental illness. These novel findings suggest that ELS-related changes in social cognition can be observed years after the ELS itself occurred.

Objectives: The COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study aims to assess the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in the adult population in multiple countries. This paper describes the execution of the third wave of the UK survey (the ‘parent’ strand of the Consortium) during July-August 2020. Methods: Adults (N=2025) who previously participated in the baseline and/or the first follow-up surveys were reinvited to participate in this survey, which assessed: (1) COVID-19 related knowledge, attitudes, and behaviours; (2) the occurrence of common mental health disorders; as well as the role of (3) psychological factors and (4) social and political attitudes, in influencing the public’s response to the pandemic. Weights were calculated using a survey raking algorithm to ensure that the cross-sectional sample is nationally representative in terms of gender, age, household income, household composition, and urbanicity. Results: 1166 adults (57.6% of baseline participants) were successfully recontacted and provided full interviews at Wave 3. As expected, the raking procedure successfully re-balanced the cross-sectional sample to within 1% of population estimates across the selected socio-demographic characteristics. Conclusion: This paper outlines the growing strength of the C19PRC Study data to facilitate and stimulate interdisciplinary research addressing important public health questions relating to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Despite the severe psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, some individuals do not develop high levels of psychological distress and can be termed resilient. Using the ecological resilience model, we examined factors promoting or hindering resilience in the COVID-19 pandemic. Of the 1034 participants (49.9±16.2 years; females 51.2%) from Italian general population, 70% displayed resilient outcomes and 30% reported moderate-severe anxiety and/or depression. A binary regression model revealed that factors promoting resilience were mostly psychological (e.g., trait resilience, conscientiousness) together with social distancing. Conversely, factors hindering resilience included COVID-19-anxiety, COVID-19-related PTSD symptoms, intolerance of uncertainty, loneliness, living with children, higher education, and living in regions where the virus was starting to spread. In conclusion, the ecological resilience model in the COVID-19 pandemic explained 64% of the variance and identified factors promoting or hindering resilient outcomes. Critically, these findings can inform psychological interventions supporting individuals by strengthening factors associated with resilience.

Background The current study argues that population prevalence estimates for mental health disorders, or changes in mean scores over time, may not adequately reflect the heterogeneity in mental health response to the COVID-19 pandemic within the population. Methods The COVID-19 Psychological Research Consortium (C19PRC) Study is a longitudinal, nationally representative, online survey of UK adults. The current study analysed data from its first three waves of data collection: Wave 1 (March 2020, N = 2025), Wave 2 (April 2020, N = 1406) and Wave 3 (July 2020, N = 1166). Anxiety-depression was measured using the Patient Health Questionnaire Anxiety and Depression Scale (a composite measure of the PHQ-9 and GAD-7) and COVID-19-related posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) with the International Trauma Questionnaire. Changes in mental health outcomes were modelled across the three waves. Latent class growth analysis was used to identify subgroups of individuals with different trajectories of change in anxiety-depression and COVID-19 PTSD. Latent class membership was regressed on baseline characteristics. Results Overall prevalence of anxiety-depression remained stable, while COVID-19 PTSD reduced between Waves 2 and 3. Heterogeneity in mental health response was found, and hypothesised classes reflecting (i) stability, (ii) improvement and (iii) deterioration in mental health were identified. Psychological factors were most likely to differentiate the improving, deteriorating and high-stable classes from the low-stable mental health trajectories. Conclusions A low-stable profile characterised by little-to-no psychological distress (‘resilient’ class) was the most common trajectory for both anxiety-depression and COVID-19 PTSD. Monitoring these trajectories is necessary moving forward, in particular for the ~30% of individuals with increasing anxiety-depression levels.