COVID-19大流行期间的应对动态。

IF 0.6 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, MATHEMATICAL
Andrea D Guastello, Stephen J Guastello, Ryan J McCarty, Seth T Downing, Tannaz MirHosseini, Joseph P McNamara
{"title":"COVID-19大流行期间的应对动态。","authors":"Andrea D Guastello,&nbsp;Stephen J Guastello,&nbsp;Ryan J McCarty,&nbsp;Seth T Downing,&nbsp;Tannaz MirHosseini,&nbsp;Joseph P McNamara","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Approach-avoidance conflicts were one of the earliest applications of catastrophe theory. Empirical studies evaluating the cusp catastrophe model for approach-avoidance dynamics have only started to appear recently, however. The present study reviews the extant research and expands the concept to approach and avoidance coping styles. Research participants were 333 adults from the general population recruited through Amazon Mechanical Turk. They completed measures of psychological symptoms, quality of life (QOL), approach and avoidance coping styles, and COVID-related stress. Cusp models for symptoms (R2 = .84) and QOL (R2 = .89) illustrated approach and avoidance functioning as bifurcation gradients for both psychological symptoms and QOL. Both models provided more accurate representations of the data than the linear alternatives (R2 = .54 and .24 respectively), thus providing further support for the cusp dynamics. The cusp catastrophe model has extensive applicability to approach-avoidance behaviors. There was greater variability (hysteresis) in outcomes for people who used fewer coping strategies of either the approach or avoidance types.</p>","PeriodicalId":46218,"journal":{"name":"Nonlinear Dynamics Psychology and Life Sciences","volume":"26 4","pages":"403-422"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Approach and Avoidance Coping Dynamics during the COVID-19 Pandemic.\",\"authors\":\"Andrea D Guastello,&nbsp;Stephen J Guastello,&nbsp;Ryan J McCarty,&nbsp;Seth T Downing,&nbsp;Tannaz MirHosseini,&nbsp;Joseph P McNamara\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Approach-avoidance conflicts were one of the earliest applications of catastrophe theory. Empirical studies evaluating the cusp catastrophe model for approach-avoidance dynamics have only started to appear recently, however. The present study reviews the extant research and expands the concept to approach and avoidance coping styles. Research participants were 333 adults from the general population recruited through Amazon Mechanical Turk. They completed measures of psychological symptoms, quality of life (QOL), approach and avoidance coping styles, and COVID-related stress. Cusp models for symptoms (R2 = .84) and QOL (R2 = .89) illustrated approach and avoidance functioning as bifurcation gradients for both psychological symptoms and QOL. Both models provided more accurate representations of the data than the linear alternatives (R2 = .54 and .24 respectively), thus providing further support for the cusp dynamics. The cusp catastrophe model has extensive applicability to approach-avoidance behaviors. There was greater variability (hysteresis) in outcomes for people who used fewer coping strategies of either the approach or avoidance types.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":46218,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nonlinear Dynamics Psychology and Life Sciences\",\"volume\":\"26 4\",\"pages\":\"403-422\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nonlinear Dynamics Psychology and Life Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, MATHEMATICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nonlinear Dynamics Psychology and Life Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MATHEMATICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

避近冲突是灾变理论最早的应用之一。然而,最近才开始有实证研究对趋避动力学的尖点突变模型进行评估。本研究在回顾已有研究的基础上,将这一概念扩展到接近和回避应对方式。研究参与者是333名通过亚马逊土耳其机器人招募的普通人群中的成年人。他们完成了心理症状、生活质量(QOL)、方法和回避应对方式以及与covid相关的压力的测量。症状(R2 = 0.84)和生活质量(R2 = 0.89)的尖点模型表明,接近和回避是心理症状和生活质量的分岔梯度。这两种模型都比线性替代模型提供了更准确的数据表示(R2分别为0.54和0.24),从而为尖端动力学提供了进一步的支持。尖点突变模型对避近行为具有广泛的适用性。对于较少使用接近型或回避型应对策略的人,结果有更大的可变性(滞后)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Approach and Avoidance Coping Dynamics during the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Approach-avoidance conflicts were one of the earliest applications of catastrophe theory. Empirical studies evaluating the cusp catastrophe model for approach-avoidance dynamics have only started to appear recently, however. The present study reviews the extant research and expands the concept to approach and avoidance coping styles. Research participants were 333 adults from the general population recruited through Amazon Mechanical Turk. They completed measures of psychological symptoms, quality of life (QOL), approach and avoidance coping styles, and COVID-related stress. Cusp models for symptoms (R2 = .84) and QOL (R2 = .89) illustrated approach and avoidance functioning as bifurcation gradients for both psychological symptoms and QOL. Both models provided more accurate representations of the data than the linear alternatives (R2 = .54 and .24 respectively), thus providing further support for the cusp dynamics. The cusp catastrophe model has extensive applicability to approach-avoidance behaviors. There was greater variability (hysteresis) in outcomes for people who used fewer coping strategies of either the approach or avoidance types.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
11.10%
发文量
26
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信