Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Feb;40(2):551-575.
doi: 10.1177/02654075221119066. Epub 2022 Sep 16.

Workers' individual and dyadic coping with the COVID-19 health emergency: A cross cultural study

Silvia Donato  1   2 , Agostino Brugnera  3 , Roberta Adorni  2 , Sara Molgora  1   2 , Eleonora Reverberi  1   2 , Claudia Manzi  1   2 , Maria Angeli  4 , Anna Bagirova  5 , Veronica Benet-Martinez  6 , Liberato Camilleri  7 , Frances Camilleri-Cassar  8 , Evi Hatzivarnava Kazasi  9 , Gerardo Meil  10 , Maria Symeonaki  11 , Ayça Aksu  12 , Karina Batthyany  13 , Ruta Brazienė  14 , Natalia Genta  13 , Annick Masselot  15 , Suzy Morrissey  16
Affiliations

Workers' individual and dyadic coping with the COVID-19 health emergency: A cross cultural study

Silvia Donato et al. J Soc Pers Relat. 2023 Feb.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine workers' psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic as a function of their individual coping, dyadic coping, and work-family conflict. We also tested the moderating role of gender and culture in these associations. To achieve this aim, we run HLM analyses on data from 1521 workers cohabiting with a partner, coming from six countries (Italy, Spain, Malta, Cyprus, Greece, and Russia) characterized by various degrees of country-level individualism/collectivism. Across all six countries, findings highlighted that work-family conflict as well as the individual coping strategy social support seeking were associated with higher psychological distress for workers, while the individual coping strategy positive attitude and common dyadic coping were found to be protective against workers' psychological distress. This latter association, moreover, was stronger in more individualistic countries.

Keywords: COVID-19; Individual coping; culture; dyadic coping; work-family conflict.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Theoretical model of how the COVID-19 pandemic may affect the psychological distress of workers in couples (adapted from Pietromonaco & Overall, 2021).
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Moderating effect of individualism/collectivism on the relationship between common dyadic coping and psychological distress.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Adams-Prassl A., Boneva T., Golin M., Rauh C. (2020). Inequality in the impact of the coronavirus shock: Evidence from real time surveys. Journal of Public Economics, 189(2020), 104245. 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104245. - DOI
    1. Allen T. D., French K. A., Dumani S., Shockley K. M. (2020). A cross-national meta-analytic examination of predictors and outcomes associated with work–family conflict. Journal of Applied Psychology, 105(6), 539–576. 10.1037/apl0000442 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Amazue L. O., Onyishi I. E. (2016). Stress coping strategies, perceived organizational support and marital status as predictors of work–life balance among Nigerian Bank Employees. Social Indicators Research, 128(1), 147–159. 10.1007/s11205-015-1023-5 - DOI
    1. Babore A., Lombardi L., Viceconti M. L., Pignataro S., Marino V., Crudele M., Candelori C., Bramanti S. M., Trumello C. (2020). Psychological effects of the COVID-2019 pandemic: Perceived stress and coping strategies among healthcare professionals. Psychiatry Research, 293(2020), 113366. 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113366. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Birze A., Regehr C., Paradis E., LeBlanc V., Einstein G. (2021). Perceived organizational support and emotional labour among police communicators: What can organizational context tell us about posttraumatic stress? International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 95(2), 425–435. 10.1007/s00420-021-01708-9 - DOI - PubMed