CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 129COVID-19 and Mental HealthResilience and Mental HealthStudent Stress and Coping

Psychological resilience early in the COVID-19 pandemic: Stressors, resources, and coping strategies in a national sample of Americans.

Open access
Park, Crystal L., Finkelstein-Fox, Lucy, Russell, Beth S., Fendrich, Michael, Hutchison, Morica, Becker, Jessica·2021·American Psychologist
DOI 10.1037/amp0000813PMC PMC8595499
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Spreading rapidly across the United States beginning in the spring of 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic radically disrupted Americans' lives. Previous studies of community-wide disasters suggested people are fairly resilient and identified resources and strategies that promote that resilience. Yet, the COVID-19 pandemic is in some ways unique, with high levels of uncertainty, evolving implications and restrictions, and varied and uneven impacts. How resilient were Americans as the pandemic progressed? What psychosocial resources and coping strategies facilitated adjustment as the country moved into a summer of uneven reopenings and reclosures? Data from a national sample of 674 Americans were gathered at the height of early lockdowns and peaking infections in mid-April, 2020, and again, 5 and 10 weeks later. The study aimed to determine levels and sources of distress and to identify the resources and coping efforts that promoted or impeded resilience. Early levels of distress diminished to some extent over subsequent months while levels of wellbeing were comparable with usual norms, suggesting a largely resilient response. COVID-19-related stress exposure also decreased gradually over time. Older age, higher levels of mindfulness and social support, and meaning focused coping predicted better adjustment, reflecting resilience, while avoidance coping was particularly unhelpful. In models predicting change over time, approach-oriented coping (i.e., active coping, meaning-focused coping, and seeking social support) was minimally predictive of subsequent adjustment. Given the unique and ongoing circumstances presented by COVID-19, specific interventions targeting psychosocial resources and coping identified here may help to promote resilience as the pandemic continues to unfold. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/amp0000813

Cites

56 of 57 references verified1 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Better coping has been repeatedly linked to lower levels of COVID-19 distress and growth.

    “better coping has been repeatedly linked to lower levels of COVID‐19 distress and growth (Park et al., 2021).”

    From Parenthood during the <scp>COVID</scp>‐19 pandemic: <scp>Post‐traumatic</scp> growth amongst university students (2023) · cites this paper as Park et al., 2021

    The Discussion (page not provided) reports that meaning-focused coping predicted lower distress during the pandemic, while avoidance coping predicted more distress. It does not report a link between better coping and lower growth; it reports greater wellbeing with meaning-focused coping. The claim also overstates the breadth of the evidence by saying the COVID-19 association was found repeatedly. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • There is substantial evidence in adults that trait mindfulness promotes resilience to COVID-19 stressors.

    “There is substantial evidence in adults that trait mindfulness promotes resilience to COVID-19 stressors [46–51].”

    From Mindfulness supports emotional resilience in children during the COVID-19 pandemic (2023) · cites this paper as [46]

    The Discussion reports that baseline mindfulness predicted less later distress, greater wellbeing, and decreasing distress over time during the COVID-19 pandemic. But the Limitations section says the observational longitudinal design cannot determine causality, so this paper supports an association with resilience in adults, not the stronger claim that trait mindfulness promotes it. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Increased mindfulness predicted greater use of adaptive coping strategies and less use of maladaptive strategies over time, contributing positively to resilience.

    “Increased mindfulness predicted greater use of adaptive coping strategies (i.e., active, meaning-focused, and support-seeking coping) and less use of maladaptive strategies (i.e., avoidance coping) over time, contributing positively to resilience (Park et al., 2021).”

    From RESILIENCE, COPING, AND THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC ACROSS THE GLOBE – AN UPDATE: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED? (2023) · cites this paper as Park et al., 2021

  • In Americans, mindfulness positively predicted resilience over time during the height of the pandemic.

    “In Americans, mindfulness positively predicted resilience overtime during the height of the pandemic marked by lockdowns and increasing infection rates (Park et al., 2021).”

    From RESILIENCE, COPING, AND THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC ACROSS THE GLOBE – AN UPDATE: WHAT HAVE WE LEARNED? (2023) · cites this paper as Park et al., 2021

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Aldwin CM (2007). Stress, coping, and development: An integrative perspective (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  2. Browne MW, & Cudeck R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. In Bollen KA and Long JS (Eds.), Testing structural equation models (pp. 136– 162). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  3. Cohen J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York, NY: Routledge Academic.
  4. Cohen S, Mermelstein R, Kamarck T, & Hoberman HM (1985). Measuring the functional components of social support. In Sarason IG & Sarason BR (Eds.), Social support: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 73– 94). Seattle, WA: Martinus Nijhoff.
  5. Finkelstein-Fox L, Park CL, & Riley KE (2019). Mindfulness’ effects on stress, coping, and mood: A daily diary goodness-of-fit study. Emotion, 19, 1002– 1013. doi: 10.1037/emo0000495 30138006 · DOI
  6. Kline RB (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, Fourth edition. New York, NY: Guilford.
  7. Park CL & Blake EB (2020). Resilience and recovery following disasters: The meaning making model (pp. 9– 25). In Schulenberg SE (Ed.), Positive psychological approaches to disaster: Meaning, resilience, and posttraumatic growth. New York, NY: Springer.
  8. Park CL, Kaiser AP, Finkelstein-Fox L, Spiro A III, & Wachen JS (in press). Risk and resilience factors for traumatic stress disorders. In Beck G. & Sloan D. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of traumatic stress disorders. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Park, C. L., Finkelstein-Fox, L., Russell, B. S., Fendrich, M., Hutchison, M., & Becker, J.
Affiliations
University of Connecticut (US)
ORCID
Venue
American Psychologist
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
2021-07
Volume
76
Issue
5
Pages
715-728
ISSN
  • 0003-066X (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-990X
DOI
10.1037/amp0000813
PMC
PMC8595499
OpenAlex
W3163953615
Cited by
127
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 18 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 26 · 2021: 4
FWCI
14.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • American Psychologist (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (1R34AA027455)
  • University of Connecticut
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Resilience and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Student Stress and Coping
Keywords
psychological resilience, COVID-19 pandemic, stressors, coping strategies, psychosocial resources, mindfulness, social support, meaning-focused coping, avoidance coping, approach-oriented coping, psychological distress, well-being, lockdown, older adults
MeSH terms
COVID-19, Adaptation, Psychological, Communicable Disease Control, Humans, Social Support, United States, Resilience, Psychological, Pandemics, Mindfulness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review