Americans' COVID-19 Stress, Coping, and Adherence to CDC Guidelines

Crystal L Park, Beth S Russell, Michael Fendrich, Lucy Finkelstein-Fox, Morica Hutchison, Jessica Becker, Crystal L Park, Beth S Russell, Michael Fendrich, Lucy Finkelstein-Fox, Morica Hutchison, Jessica Becker

Abstract

Importance: Documenting Americans' stress responses to an unprecedented pandemic and their degree of adherence to CDC guidelines is essential for mental health interventions and policy-making.

Objective: To provide the first snapshot of immediate impact of COVID-19 on Americans' stress, coping, and guideline adherence.

Design: Data were collected from an online workers' platform for survey research (Amazon's Mechanical Turk) from April 7 to 9, 2020. The current data represents the baseline of a longitudinal study. Best practices for ensuring high-quality data were employed.

Participants: Individuals who are 18 years of age or older, living in the USA, and English-speaking were eligible for the study. Of 1086 unique responses, 1015 completed responses are included.

Setting: Population-based.

Main outcomes: Exposure to and stressfulness of COVID-19 stressors, coping strategies, and adherence to CDC guidelines.

Results: The sample was 53.9% women (n = 547), with an average age of 38.9 years (SD = 13.50, range = 18-88), most of whom were White (n = 836, 82.4%), non-Hispanic (n = 929, 91.5%), and straight/heterosexual (n = 895, 88.2%); 40% were currently married (n = 407), and 21.6% (n = 219) were caregivers. About half (50.5%) endorsed having at least "mostly" enough money to meet their needs. Respondents' locations across the USA ranged from 18.5% in the Northeast to 37.8% in the South. The most commonly experienced stressors were reading/hearing about the severity and contagiousness of COVID-19, uncertainty about length of quarantine and social distancing requirements, and changes to social and daily personal care routines. Financial concerns were rated most stressful. Younger age, female gender, and caregiver status increased risk for stressor exposure and greater degree of stressfulness. The most frequently reported strategies to manage stress were distraction, active coping, and seeking emotional social support. CDC guideline adherence was generally high, but several key social distancing and hygiene behaviors showed suboptimal adherence, particularly for men and younger adults.

Conclusions and relevance: Americans have high COVID-19 stress exposure and some demographic subgroups appear particularly vulnerable to stress effects. Subgroups less likely to adhere to CDC guidelines may benefit from targeted information campaigns. these findings may guide mental health interventions and inform policy-making regarding implications of specific public health measures.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they do not have a conflict of interest.

References

    1. Coronavirus (COVID-19): Daily life and coping. Centers for Disease Control, 2020a. (.)
    1. Brooks SK, Webster RK, Smith LE, et al. The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence. Lancet. 2020;395:912–20. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30460-8.
    1. Qiu J, Shen B, Zhao M, Wang Z, Xie B, Xu Y. A nationwide survey of psychological distress among Chinese people in the COVID-19 epidemic: Implications and policy recommendations. Gen Psychiatry. 2020;33:e100213. doi: 10.1136/gpsych-2020-100213.
    1. Zhang Y, Ma ZF. Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Mental Health and Quality of Life among Local Residents in Liaoning Province, China: A Cross-Sectional Study. Int J of Env Rsch and Pub Hlth. 2020;17(7):2381. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17072381.
    1. Wang C, Pan R, Wan X, et al. Immediate psychological responses and associated factors during the initial stage of the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic among the general population in china. In J o f Env Res Pub Health. 2020;17:1729. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17051729.
    1. Sun J, Harris K, & Vazire S. Is well-being associated with the quantity and quality of social interactions? J of Pers and Soc Psych 2019; Advance online publication. 10.1037/pspp0000272
    1. Coronavirus (COVID 19): How to protect yourself and others. Centers for Disease Control, 2020b. (.)
    1. Baumeister RF, Leary MR. The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psych Bull. 1995;117:497–529. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497.
    1. Aldwin CM. Stress, coping, and development. New York, NY: Guilford; 2007.
    1. Finkelstein-Fox L, Park CL. Control-coping goodness-of-fit and chronic illness: a systematic review of the literature. Health Psych Rev. 2019;13(2):137–62. doi: 10.1080/17437199.2018.1560229.
    1. Stoycheff E. Please participate in Part 2: Maximizing response rates in longitudinal MTurk designs. Meth Innov. 2016;9:1–5. doi: 10.1177/2059799116672879.
    1. Bartneck C, Deunset A, Moltchanova E, Zawieska K. Comparing the similarity of responses received from studies in Amazon’s Mechanical Turk to studies conducted online and with direct recruitment. PLoS ONE. 2015;10:1–23. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0121595.
    1. Huff C, Tingley D. Who are these people? Evaluating the demographic characteristics and political preferences of MTurk survey respondents. Res & Politics. 2015;2:1–12.
    1. Sheehan KB, Pittman M. Amazon’s mechanical Turk for academics: The HIT handbook for social science research. Melvin & Leigh: Irvine, CA; 2016.
    1. Berinsky AJ, Huber GA, Lenz GS. Evaluating online labor markets for experimental research: ’s Mechanical Turk. Pol Analysis. 2012;20:351–68. doi: 10.1093/pan/mpr057.
    1. Kees J, Berry C, Burton S, Sheehan K. An analysis of data quality: Professional panels, student subject pools, and Amazon’s mechanical Turk. J of Advertising. 2017;46:141–55. doi: 10.1080/00913367.2016.1269304.
    1. Mortensen K, Hughes TL. Comparing Amazon’s Mechanical Turk platform to conventional data collection methods in the health and medical research literature. J of Gen Int Med. 2018;33(4):533–8. doi: 10.1007/s11606-017-4246-0.
    1. U. S. Census Regions and Divisions of the United States [Internet], United States Census Bureau, April 11 2020. (.)
    1. Main A, Zhou Q, Ma Y, Luecken LJ, Liu X. Relations of SARS-related stressors and coping to Chinese college students’ psychological adjustment during the 2003 Beijing SARS epidemic. J of Couns Psych. 2011;58:410–23. doi: 10.1037/a0023632.
    1. Carver CS. You want to measure coping but your protocol’s too long: Consider the Brief COPE. Int J of Beh Med. 1997;4:92–100. doi: 10.1207/s15327558ijbm0401_6.
    1. DeSimone JA, Harms PD, DeSimone AJ. Best practice recommendations for data screening. J of Org Beh. 2015;36:171–81. doi: 10.1002/job.1962.
    1. Sheehan KB. Crowdsourcing research: Data collection with Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. Comm Monographs. 2018;85:140–56. doi: 10.1080/03637751.2017.1342043.
    1. Butler LD, Blasey CM, Garlan RW, et al. Posttraumatic growth following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001: Cognitive, coping, and trauma symptom predictors in an internet convenience sample. Traumatology. 2005;11(4):247–67. doi: 10.1177/153476560501100405.
    1. Janson J, Rohleder N. Distraction coping predicts better cortisol recovery after acute psychosocial stress. Biol Psych. 2017;128:117–24. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2017.07.014.
    1. Powell-Wiley TM, Miller PE, Agyemang P, Agurs-Collins T, Reedy J. Perceived and objective diet quality in US adults: a cross-sectional analysis of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) Pub Health Nutr. 2014;17:2641–49. doi: 10.1017/S1368980014000196.
    1. Hitlin H. Research in the crowdsourcing age, a case study: How scholars, companies and workers are using Mechanical Turk, a ‘gig economy’ platform, for tasks computers can’t handle. July: Pew Research Center; 2016.
    1. Galea S, Merchant RM, Lurie N. The Mental Health Consequences of COVID-19 and Physical Distancing: The Need for Prevention and Early Intervention. JAMA Internal Medicine.2020 April 10 10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.1562
    1. Merchant RM, Lurie N. Social media and emergency preparedness in response to novel coronavirus. JAMA. 2020 Mar 23. 10.1001/jama.2020.4469

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe