| dc.description.abstract | The COVID-19 pandemic, due to its high level of infection, imposed the need for physical distance, among other readaptations in the way of working, studying, and in leisure. In addition to the justified concern with physical health, it is important to pay attention to the effects of this period of various changes and restrictions on the population's mental health, especially those of more vulnerable groups such as people with mental illnesses during the period. The aim of the present study was to investigate the impact of the diagnosis of mental illnesses and personality traits on psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic. 3,633 people (76.3% women) aged between 18 and 80 years took part in this study (M = 32.90 years; SD = 12.96; 51.0% were between 18 and 29 years old). Participants answered the sample characterization questionnaire, the Personality Inventory for the DSM-5 - brief form, the Personality Inventory for the DSM-5 - brief form (PID-5-BF), and the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21). Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to validate the Psychological Suffering construct. Then, the theoretical model was estimated by modeling structural equations. The results show the adequacy of the variables depression, anxiety, stress and post-traumatic stress for the formation of the psychological suffering construct. Regarding the theoretical model, it was found that all relations are positive and statistically significant. The diagnosis of a mental illness has a positive impact on all five personality traits, with the highest coefficient being on Negative Affectivity and Psychological Suffering during the pandemic. As for personality traits, the five traits directly impact Psychological Suffering. Psychoticism and Distancing showed the highest coefficients, while Antagonism, the lowest one. Therefore, the results of the final model confirm the hypotheses of this study. This knowledge on the part of mental healthcare practitioners allows professionals to be aware of the possibility of aggravating crises and symptoms that already existed during the pandemic period. | |
