A cross-lagged panel analysis of giving and receiving social support and anxiety among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHIATRY
Mary O. Smirnova, Anna C. Cole, Cynthia L. Lancaster
{"title":"A cross-lagged panel analysis of giving and receiving social support and anxiety among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic","authors":"Mary O. Smirnova,&nbsp;Anna C. Cole,&nbsp;Cynthia L. Lancaster","doi":"10.1016/j.jpsychires.2025.06.020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>During the pandemic, rates of anxiety among healthcare workers increased dramatically. Social support may be a promising strategy for buffering against anxiety under stress. For example, receiving support has been bidirectionally associated with lower stress reactivity. In contrast to receiving support, little is known about the impact of giving support. Therefore, we tested the bidirectional associations of giving and receiving support with anxiety among healthcare workers during the pandemic. We recruited 190 U.S. healthcare workers who completed measures of giving social support, receiving social support, and state anxiety at baseline (April–May 2020), one-month, and six-month follow-up. We used a three-wave, cross-lagged panel design to test for bidirectional and unidirectional relationships. Both giving and receiving support were associated with lower anxiety, but the direction of the relationship differed. Giving support at baseline predicted lower anxiety one month later. In contrast, lower anxiety at baseline predicted higher received support one month later. Notably, these relationships were present from baseline to 1-month follow-up, but not 1-month to 6-month follow-up, suggesting that the effects were most pronounced during the acute, rather than prolonged adjustment period. In sum, findings suggest that giving support may be a promising strategy for reducing anxiety. Reducing anxiety, in turn, may increase access to social support resources. Therefore, support-giving interventions, such as acts of kindness interventions, may be a promising pathway for buffering against anxiety under stress.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of psychiatric research","volume":"189 ","pages":"Pages 311-315"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of psychiatric research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022395625004182","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

During the pandemic, rates of anxiety among healthcare workers increased dramatically. Social support may be a promising strategy for buffering against anxiety under stress. For example, receiving support has been bidirectionally associated with lower stress reactivity. In contrast to receiving support, little is known about the impact of giving support. Therefore, we tested the bidirectional associations of giving and receiving support with anxiety among healthcare workers during the pandemic. We recruited 190 U.S. healthcare workers who completed measures of giving social support, receiving social support, and state anxiety at baseline (April–May 2020), one-month, and six-month follow-up. We used a three-wave, cross-lagged panel design to test for bidirectional and unidirectional relationships. Both giving and receiving support were associated with lower anxiety, but the direction of the relationship differed. Giving support at baseline predicted lower anxiety one month later. In contrast, lower anxiety at baseline predicted higher received support one month later. Notably, these relationships were present from baseline to 1-month follow-up, but not 1-month to 6-month follow-up, suggesting that the effects were most pronounced during the acute, rather than prolonged adjustment period. In sum, findings suggest that giving support may be a promising strategy for reducing anxiety. Reducing anxiety, in turn, may increase access to social support resources. Therefore, support-giving interventions, such as acts of kindness interventions, may be a promising pathway for buffering against anxiety under stress.
COVID-19大流行期间医护人员给予和接受社会支持与焦虑的交叉滞后面板分析
在大流行期间,卫生保健工作者的焦虑率急剧上升。社会支持可能是缓解压力下焦虑的一种有希望的策略。例如,接受支持与较低的压力反应性双向相关。与接受支持相比,人们对给予支持的影响知之甚少。因此,我们测试了大流行期间医护人员给予和接受支持与焦虑之间的双向关联。我们招募了190名美国医护人员,他们在基线(2020年4月至5月)、1个月和6个月的随访期间完成了给予社会支持、接受社会支持和状态焦虑的测量。我们使用三波,交叉滞后面板设计来测试双向和单向关系。给予和接受支持都与较低的焦虑有关,但关系的方向不同。在基线时给予支持,一个月后焦虑水平会降低。相比之下,基线时较低的焦虑预示着一个月后得到的支持较高。值得注意的是,这些关系从基线到1个月的随访都存在,但从1个月到6个月的随访则不存在,这表明在急性期的影响最为明显,而不是延长的适应期。总之,研究结果表明,给予支持可能是减少焦虑的一种有希望的策略。反过来,减少焦虑可能会增加获得社会支持资源的机会。因此,支持给予干预,如善意行为干预,可能是缓解压力下焦虑的有希望的途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of psychiatric research
Journal of psychiatric research 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
7.30
自引率
2.10%
发文量
622
审稿时长
130 days
期刊介绍: Founded in 1961 to report on the latest work in psychiatry and cognate disciplines, the Journal of Psychiatric Research is dedicated to innovative and timely studies of four important areas of research: (1) clinical studies of all disciplines relating to psychiatric illness, as well as normal human behaviour, including biochemical, physiological, genetic, environmental, social, psychological and epidemiological factors; (2) basic studies pertaining to psychiatry in such fields as neuropsychopharmacology, neuroendocrinology, electrophysiology, genetics, experimental psychology and epidemiology; (3) the growing application of clinical laboratory techniques in psychiatry, including imagery and spectroscopy of the brain, molecular biology and computer sciences;
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信