Abstract
The article attempts to determine the current psychological state of the population, which has been under the pressure of wartime stressors for a long time, and also to clarify the contribution of negative and positive expectations as predictors and protectors of distress. To measure stressful conditions, a brief test for measurement of psychological distress “SCL-9-NR” was used. New tools were created to measure psychological stability and the impact of continuous stress. The results of the study confirmed the generally high level of psychological resilience of the population - a high level of distress was recorded in only 10% of respondents. It has been determined that continuous stress creates high psychological tension and its consequences are felt by the majority of the population, which gives grounds to consider it as a negative psychological state that precedes the onset of distress. Psychological resilience has been confirmed to be both a predictor of distress and a predictor of increased continuous stress. Positive expectations in the form of generalized dispositional optimism are associated with greater activity and communication. Dispositional optimism is negatively associated with age; the level of optimism is lower in the younger age group. In general, expectations act in different directions: negative ones create additional psychological stress, positive ones partially inhibit the effect of stressors. Overall, at the time of the research, the psychological state of the population is at a level that ensures normal life in extreme conditions. Constant monitoring of the situation using developed tools is required.
Publisher
Lesya Ukrainka Volyn National University
Reference26 articles.
1. Cohen, S., & Williamson, G. (1988). Perceived Stress in a Probability Sample of the United States. In S.Spacapan, & S. Oskamp (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Health: Claremont Symposium on AppliedSocial Psychology (pp. 3-67). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
2. Dembitskyi, S. (2022). Index of psychological distress SCL-9-NR. In E. Golovakhy, & S. Dembitskyi (Eds.), Complex measuring instruments in sociological researches: Development, adaptation, justification of reliability (pp. 292-330). Kyiv: Institute of Sociology of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine.
3. Diamond, G. M., Lipsitz, J. D., Fajerman, Z., & Rozenblat, O. (2010). Ongoing traumatic stress response (OTSR) in Sderot, Israel. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 41(1), 19-25. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017098 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017098
4. Dougall, A. L., Hyman, K. B., Hayward, M. C., McFeeley, S., & Baum, A. (2001). Optimism and traumatic stress: The importance of social support and coping. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31(2), 223-245. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2001.tb00195.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2001.tb00195.x
5. Eagle, G., & Kaminer, D. (2013). Continuous traumatic stress: Expanding the lexicon of traumatic stress. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 19(2), 85-99. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032485 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032485