Coping Strategies During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Self-Determination: A Review of Russian Studies

Kuznetsova, E.A. St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg, Russia

Moskvicheva, N.L. St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg, Russia

Zinovyeva, E.V. St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg, Russia

Kostromina, S.N. St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg, Russia

Introduction

In psychology, a pandemic is viewed as a multi-aspect stress factor, with hard-to-predict and far-reaching consequences for mental and physical health. Specialists evaluate the current situation around the COVID-19 pandemic as psycho-traumatizing, with such distinct characteristics as unpredictability and uncertainty, leading to elevated social and psychological risks (Bojko et al., 2020; Epishin et al., 2020; Grishina & Lupulyak, 2020; Malyh & Sitnikova, 2021; Pervushina & Shabalin, 2020).

A meta-analysis of studies published in 2020–2021 in the WSCC database showed that at the beginning of the pandemic in different countries, people were confused at the sudden onset of stress, unprecedented social restrictions, loss of a sense of security and stability (Kostromina et al., 2022). Many studies have described primarily emotional problems: symptoms of depression (27.5%), anxiety (26.9%), distress (26.5%) (Li, 2020; Sani et al., 2020), fear of COVID-19 infection and probability of death (Pakpour & Griffiths, 2020; Rasskazova & Tkhostov, 2021; Ravens-Sieberer et al., 2021), and such social problems as concern for the health of loved ones, uncertainty about fulfilling commitments (e.g., school, finances, work), difficulty adapting to remote work (Epishin et al., 2020; Kozhina & Vinokurov, 2020; Poluekhtova et al., 2020; Toscano et al., 2022), financial uncertainty (Cao et al., 2020; Islam et al., 2020; Khan et al., 2020; Sundarasen et al., 2020).

According to other studies, social restriction resulted in the following experiences: deprivation, dissatisfaction of needs , and low tolerance for uncertainty (Amin, 2020; Ausín et al., 2020; Brooks et al., 2020; Moore et al., 2020; Satici et al., 2020; Sood, 2020). A recent meta-analysis that included 123 systematic reviews of the prevalence of depression, anxiety, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) during the pandemic in different countries (December 2019 to August 2022; Russia was not included) showed heterogeneous data across populations. A slight but consistent deterioration of mental health was found at the beginning of the pandemic and during social restrictions in the general population and in people with chronic somatic diseases. Symptoms of depression increased during periods of social restriction, while signs of anxiety did not (Witteveen et al., 2023).

Many studies have focused on ways of coping with the pandemic. For example, a study of high-performance athletes during self-isolation and periods of uncertainty about competitions found that the athletes’ use of cognitive restructuring and emotional calming was significantly negatively correlated with negative emotional states such as depression, stress, anxiety, and fatigue. The reason may be that high-performing professional athletes are more experienced in coping with competition-related anxiety (Leguizamo et al., 2021). Other factors have had an important role in the occurrence of negative emotional states, including gender, type of sport, qualifications, nationality, and personality traits. The role of adaptive and maladaptive perfectionism in relation to dominant mental states during social isolation and the choice of preferred coping strategies has been shown (Iancheva, et al., 2020). A meta-review of articles with samples of healthcare workers and employees of other professions found that levels of psychological distress (stress or emotional burnout) differ in different countries. An important factor in reducing stress to a minimum was job involvement, such as helping employees to understand their contribution to organizational goals and their own personal growth (Adanaqué-Bravo et al., 2023). In another meta-survey, individual and group psychological strategies, family support, and professional training were the most frequently cited coping strategies for healthcare workers (Chutiyami et al., 2022).

In countries with different cultures and economic structures, people are simultaneously faced with uncertainty, unpredictability, novelty, the impossibility of realizing their aspirations, and everyday restrictions. Studies show that at the heart of social disadvantage is a blockage of fundamental psychological needs. As a stressful event, the pandemic has elicited a specific response: a set of actions to overcome conflict, ensure safety, and maintain a sense of “normality” in life.

Relying on Western studies (Kostromina et al., 2021; Ntoumanis et al., 2009), we suggest that self-determination has an important role in overcoming the negative psychological consequences of the pandemic, acting as an important personal resource for overcoming stress and reducing its negative impact (Bakker et al., 2021; Ntoumanis et al., 2009). Self-determination is a set of characteristics that provide free and autonomous regulation of one’s life. According to the self-determination theory (SDT) of E. Desi and R. Ryan (Ryan & Deci, 2000), the need for autonomy, competence, and relatedness are critical variables in behavioral regulation and psychological well-being. Self-determination requires a deep level of self-consciousness and makes for flexible aims and actions under stress (Amiot et al., 2008). Strategies of self-determination, such as helping those in need, searching for resources, taking initiative, and clear and transparent planning, help to overcome difficulties in the professional sphere caused by the COVID-19 pandemic (Klimochkina et al., 2022; Zinchenko et al., 2020; Zinovyeva et al., 2021).

This study conducted a meta-analysis of Russian studies during the pandemic to identify the main strategies for coping with the psychological threats of the pandemic and to analyze them in terms of self-determination and the realization of needs.

The aim of the study was to analyze strategies of coping with the experiences caused by the COVID-19 pandemic (2020–2022) as presented in Russian-language journals. We studied ways of coping with specific stressful experiences that emerged in the population during the pandemic and their dynamics over time.

Methods

A search of full-text publications in the RSCI database (Russian citation index) was performed on July 11, 2022. The search was limited to peer-reviewed articles of all types, published from January 1, 2020 to June 30, 2022.

In order to identify all possible publications relevant to the research topic, the query was for “All fields” by two groups of keywords, with the AND operator between them. The following steps represented the search algorithm:

1. First search line: All fields - Coping OR coping strategies OR coping behavior;

2. Second search line: All fields - Covid OR coronavirus infection OR coronavirus.

The exclusion criteria were: theoretical reviews, abstracts without study descriptions, articles without empirical data, without a focus on coping strategies, or those that described unique samples.

A total of 102 results were obtained. Theoretical reviews (10 articles), abstracts without study descriptions (5 articles), and duplicate articles (1 article) were then excluded, leaving 85 articles for further analysis. All of these articles were reviewed for relevance to the review’s aim. Two reviewers checked them for inclusion or exclusion from the primary analysis according to the defined criteria.

Furthermore, 61 articles that did not contain empirical data, did not focus on psychological coping, or described unique samples (pregnant women, people with disabilities) or a specific age group (children or the elderly) were excluded. The final sample included 24 publications whose full texts were suitable for the review analysis and were comprehensively studied. The selection process of articles is shown in the PRISMA flow chart in Table 1.

Table 1

PRISMA flowchart of systematic literature review process

Identification	Records identified through database search (n  = 102)
	Records after removal of reviews, incomplete, and duplicate articles (n = 85)
Screening	Records screened  (n = 85)		Records excluded (n = 61) No empirical data (n = 39), children and adolescents (n = 2), special samples (psychiatric patients, patients with comorbidities, pregnant women, people with disabilities, caregivers, etc.) (n = 21)
Included	Records included in selective review (n = 24)
	Studies with standardized methods for diagnosing coping behavior  (n = 19)		Studies using non-standardized surveys, questionnaires, and qualitative description of coping behavior (n  = 5)

General Characteristics of the Selected Publications

Studies conducted during the pandemic’s two and a half years (2020, 2021, and the first half of 2022) were analyzed. Above all, we were interested in the variety of ways in which people overcome these specific experiences and how these change over time.

For analysis, the studies were divided according to the predominant methods for studying coping behavior (see Table 2):

1. Standardized methods for diagnosing coping strategies according to the theoretical framework;

2. Non-standardized methods, including surveys, questionnaires, and qualitative descriptions of coping behavior. Methods that had not been tested in Russia were included and interpreted as qualitative.

Table 2

Distribution of articles selected for review by type of study methods

Type of Study	Sample Size (N)	Time of the survey			Relevant Studies
Studies with standardized methods for diagnosing coping behavior
Brief COPE instrument (Carver, 1997), including national versions and selected subscales	558	Spring 2020			Kryukova, 2020
	310	Spring 2020			Opekina, 2020
	232	Spring 2020			Bojko, 2020
	70	Spring 2020			Sergeeva,2021
	1140	Spring 2021			Shpakov, 2021
Ways of Coping Questionnaire (Lazarus & Folkman, 1988), including national versions and selected subscales	218	Spring 2020			Kislyakov, 2020
	248	Spring 2020			Kuftyak, 2020
	119	Spring 2020			Shishkov, 2021
	629	Spring 2020			Korotkova, 2021
	169	Spring 2020			Pogonysheva, 2022
	64	Spring 2020			Kora, 2022
	736	Fall 2020			Kameristaya, 2021
	186	Spring 2021			Kuvaeva, 2021
	70	Fall 2021			Ochirova, 2022
	67	Fall 2021			Mamina, 2022
Other standardized methods for diagnosing coping strategies	55	Spring 2020			Yarmysh, 2020
	102	Fall 2020			Kozlova, 2020
	209	Fall 2020			Kovaleva, 2021
Studies using non-standardized methods, questionnaires, and qualitative description of coping behavior
Foreign methods that are currently in process of approbation in Russia	248	Spring 2020			Govorkova, 2020
Studies based primarily on qualitative research methods	279		Spring 2020	Prilutskaya, 2020
	306		Spring 2020	Frolova, 2021
	14		Spring 2020	Petrakova, 2021
	136		Spring 2020	Volodina, 2022

The results were rated according to the time of the survey and corresponded to one of the periods described in Table 3.

The largest number of Russian studies concerned the beginning of the pandemic; after that, there has been an apparent decrease in studies of coping strategies during the pandemic. This may be due to the gradual adaptation of society to the pandemic, a change in the main topics of research interest towards private issues not involving coping mechanisms, and, ultimately, a decline in interest in the topic of the pandemic as a whole.

Table 3

Number of articles selected for review depending on the time period of the survey

Time period	Total number of surveys in this period	Total sample size
Spring 2020	16	3486
Fall 2020	3	1047
Spring 2021	2	1326
Fall 2021	2	137

Researchers' data on coping behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic were analyzed in chronological order.

Results

Coping Strategies at the Beginning of the Pandemic (Spring 2020)

This period saw the largest number of Russian-language publications. We grouped them according to the methodological apparatus used by the authors. The studies using the following methods are presented below: Lazarus’ Ways of Coping Questionnaire (WCQ; these studies were the most numerous), the COPE methodology, the Proactive Coping Inventory, the Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations, and the Coping Flexibility Scale. Finally, studies using non-standardized methods are presented.

Analysis of Data on Coping Strategies Obtained with the WCQ

Among the standardized methods, the Ways of Coping Questionnaire in various Russian-language adaptations was the most frequently used, covering a total sample of 1,447 people.

A uniform quantitative analysis of the results of studies using the WCQ is rather complicated, since different data presentation formats were used. Some authors give the percentages of occurrence of each type of coping, while others present only the most popular coping strategies or average data for each of the coping mechanisms. Thus, each study using this questionnaire became practically unique in content. Therefore, the description of results below further summarizes and analyzes the prevalence of different coping strategies, coping mechanisms, and associated factors.

Most of the studies noted that in the first months of the pandemic, some of the most frequently encountered coping strategies were avoidance (Kislyakov, 2020; Kora, 2022; Korotkova et al., 2021; Pogonysheva & Protasova, 2022) and distancing (Kislyakov, 2020; Kora, 2022; Pogonysheva & Protasova, 2022). Thus, the primary reaction to stress was accompanied mainly by manifestations opposite to self-determination. But several works (Kislyakov, 2020; Shishkov et al., 2021) also indicated a high frequency of such coping strategies as “decision planning” and “search for social support” (Kislyakov, 2020; Korotkova et al., 2021; Pogonysheva & Protasova, 2022; Shishkov et al., 2021). These results were obtained in studies where the predominant sample was younger people (students and young adults). In general, it can be noted that multidirectional results may indicate a variety and mixed repertoire of coping strategies in the initial stage of the pandemic.

Several papers described the interrelation of the preferred coping strategies with life features before the pandemic. For example, Shishkov et al. (2021) found that people living alone most often used the strategies of “planning” (35.3%), “seeking social support” (33.6%), and “accepting responsibility” (27.7%), which are characteristic of self-determination. The authors attributed this to the fact that those living alone were used to planning their own time, and the onset of the pandemic had less of an impact on their daily routines and ability to plan their time. Respondents demonstrated similar results in objective isolation (associated with living alone, away from loved ones) or subjective isolation (related to the goal of shielding oneself or others from contact).

A relationship between stress level and preferred coping strategies was also found (Kuftyak & Bekhter, 2020). Participants with a low stress level more frequently chose proactive coping (p = 0.0001), and those with a high stress level searched for instrumental support (p = 0.04). Thus, the level of stress is associated with the ability to implement proactive coping strategies.

Analysis of Data on Coping Strategies Obtained with COPE

Using the COPE questionnaire (total sample of 1,170 people) showed great similarity of the results obtained by different authors (Bojko et al., 2020; Kryukova et al., 2020; Opekina & Shipova, 2020; Sergeeva & Kubekova, 2021). Generally, the prevalence of such strategies as acceptance, positive overestimation, emotional support, and active coping was noted. The most rarely encountered strategies were denial, avoidance, and substance use. It should be noted that the data on many coping strategies is close to that empirically deduced in the pre-pandemic norms. Differences are observed only for some nonconstructive strategies: denial, substance use, and self-blaming (their normative index is higher than that obtained in the present research).

±±±±±± Comparison of students who had and did not have COVID-19 (Shpakov et al., 2021) showed significant differences in their use of individual coping strategies: students who did not have COVID-19 more often used acceptance strategies (5.8±1.44 and 5,5±1.44, respectively, p=00.1) and planning strategy (6.5±1.33 and 6.2±1.36, respectively, p = 0.05). The strategy of turning to religion was more common among students who recovered from Covid (3.7±1.81 among healthy students, 4.0±1.91 among recovered patients, p = 0.05).Analysis of Data on Coping Strategies Obtained with Other Standardized Methods

In addition to the preferred WCQ and COPE methods, researchers used other questionnaires to assess coping behavior. The Proactive Coping Inventory questionnaire (Greenglas et al., 1999), showed (Kuftyak & Bekhter, 2020) that the preferred types of proactive coping were:

• Proactive coping (a person’s attitude toward a problematic situation as a source of positive experience) (17.2%);
• Reflexive coping (representation of possible behavioral options, cognitive evaluation of resources, and prediction of outcomes) (14.3%); and
• Preventive coping (ability to anticipate difficult situations by relying on experience) (13.75%).

The least preferred coping method was strategic planning (the ability to plan future actions with differentiation of individual tasks) (7.55%). The authors found that coping strategies are related to the level of stress and the reaction to the stressful event. Thus, respondents with a low level of stress significantly more often used methods of proactive coping (18.3% in the group with a low level of stress, 16.1% in the group with a high level of stress, p = 0.0001). Respondents with high levels of stress significantly more often used instrumental support (9.6% in the low-stress group, 10.6% in the high-stress group, p = 0.04). The authors note that prolonged mental strain caused by self-isolation reduces a person’s ability to assess their resources and positively evaluate a stressful situation.

One of the studies (Yarmysh, 2020) provides data obtained using the Coping Inventory for Stressful Situations questionnaire (Endler & Parker, 1990). It showed that the predominant coping mechanisms in the COVID-19 pandemic are relatively adaptive ones. Cognitive coping mechanisms are the most popular (72%), and emotional coping mechanisms are the least popular (21%). The authors note that the identified coping mechanisms help to cope with difficulties, but only in situations with little stress and that are not very significant for the individual.

Another study (Govorkova et al., 2020) used the Coping Flexibility Scale (Gembeck & Skinner, 2018), which allows for assessing the degree of flexibility and stability of the coping system. The study showed that the frequency of different types of coping flexibility does not differ from the normal distribution. At the same time, the authors note that the flexible type of coping reduces stress level.

Analysis of Data on Coping Strategies Obtained with Non-Standardized Methods

Four studies used qualitative methods, including authors’ questionnaires (Frolova & Vysockaya, 2021; Prilutskaya et al., 2020; Volodina et al., 2022) and semi-structured interviews (Petrakova et al., 2021), with a total of 735 people.

The authors distinguish cognitive, emotional, and behavioral ways of coping with stress in a situation of self-isolation in connection with the pandemic. Cognitive ways include a search for new ideas, the ability to find meaning and positive aspects in the current situation, the actualization of their creative skills, the reflection of experiences and personal qualities, and the desire to understand other people (Frolova & Vysockaya, 2021; Petrakova et al., 2021), as well as self-organization and the selection of new priorities (Volodina et al., 2022). Emotional ways of coping with forced self-isolation are represented by the generation of new positively colored emotions in unfamiliar conditions, joy from the opportunity to do something that has long been planned, self-support of one’s sense of humor, empathy with other people, and a feeling of unity with the whole world (Frolova & Vysockaya, 2021). Behavioral ways of coping include communication with friends, family, and classmates (Petrakova et al., 2021; Volodina et al., 2022), sports and hobbies (Petrakova et al., 2021; Prilutskaya et al., 2020), video games, self-education, and a focus on professional (clinical) activities (Prilutskaya et al., 2020).

It has been shown that girls, in comparison with boys, have a more pronounced resource of communication; however, such resources as self-organization, volitional qualities, and self-motivation are similar (Volodina et al., 2022).

Coping Strategies Six Months After the Start of the Pandemic (Fall 2020)

There were considerably fewer studies conducted in the fall of 2020. We found three studies devoted to the chosen topic. The focus of such research had shifted from direct study of prevailing coping strategies to their connection with the level of stress and the intensity of the personal situation.

It was shown that six months after the beginning of the epidemic, young people more often used active coping strategies (reflexive and preventive coping, planning). Young people more often used strategies of seeking support, positive reassessment, confrontation, self-blaming, fantasizing, distancing, and avoidance. In adults, future orientation, predicting the situation, and planning actions based on available resources prevailed (Kameristaya, 2021).

Based on the data from the Coping Behavior in Stressful Situations questionnaire, it was shown that the most frequently used coping strategies were problem-solving, avoidance, and focusing on emotions (Kovaleva et al., 2021; Kozlova & Kostrigina, 2020). However, the authors note that these data hardly differ from normative parameters, which allows us to conclude that at the time of the survey, most of the respondents were in the phase of resistance to the stressful situation.

The study, which included four consecutive measurements from September to December 2020 showed that the number of respondents with a high degree of coping strategies focused on emotion and avoidance increased simultaneously with an increase in the use of distraction and social distraction strategies. According to the authors, this may be a sign of depletion of the individual’s adaptive resources (Kovaleva et al., 2021).

Finally, it was suggested that the preferred type of proactive coping may be related to the subjectively perceived level of tension in the situation (Kameristaya, 2021). This allows us to assume a growth of self-determination in prolonged stress during COVID-19.

Coping Strategies One Year After the Start of the Pandemic (Spring 2020)

We found only two studies analyzing preferred coping strategies a year after the pandemic’s beginning (Kuvaeva & Strel’nikova, 2021; Shpakov et al., 2021), indicating a steady decline in interest in the topic.

In the first study, “Coping Behavior in Stress Situations” by N. S. Endler and J. A. Parker, the questionnaire of coping methods by R. Lazarus and S. Folkman was used (Kuvaeva & Strel’nikova, 2021). It was shown that while coping with the pandemic, respondents most frequently used positive reassessment strategies (11.33 ± 3.89), self-control (9.05 ± 3.42), problem-solving planning (8.65 ± 3.04), and distancing (8.23 ± 2.83), which corresponded to the respondents’ stable coping styles. Furthermore, the authors concluded that respondents were more likely to turn to problem-solving-oriented coping (57.33 ± 10.00) during this period in stressful situations. On the other hand, respondents much less frequently used emotionally oriented (44.41 ± 12.69) and avoidant (41.94 ± 11.05) coping types. The persistent avoidance style was primarily manifested in visiting stores and restaurants, a tendency to sleep for a long time, overeating, watching TV, etc.

Another study was conducted by a team of authors using the COPE technique on an impressive sample of 1,140 people (Shpakov et al., 2021). It was shown that the preferred coping strategies were planning, active coping, positive reformulation, and personal growth, acceptance, seeking instrumental social support. The data presented by the authors allowed us to compare the scores on this methodology in 2020 and 2021 and to identify differences, which will be analyzed below.

Comparative studies about people’s experiences during the pandemic became possible during this period. Thus, a comparison of preferred coping strategies among respondents infected and non-infected by COVID-19 was conducted (Kuvaeva & Strel’nikova, 2021). It was shown that the respondents who had contracted the coronavirus infection demonstrated increased social activity: they tried to be out in public, visited, spent time with a friend or loved one, and asked for advice from a significant other. According to the authors, the desire for social contact in stressful situations as a stable and habitual way to relieve stress may have contributed to COVID-19 infection and the spread of the disease. However, the study of interrelations between stable coping styles and strategies revealed a more complex structure in the group of respondents who had Covid-19.. Stress avoidance is associated with a more active search for social support and self-blaming: the more they immerse themselves in their experiences, the less they think about problem-solving. They are less likely to switch to other activities.

Coping Strategies at the End of the Pandemic (Fall 2021)

We found two studies (Mamina et al., 2022; Ochirova & Chuvasheva, 2022) devoted to the analysis of coping strategies at the end of the pandemic. The Coping Behaviors questionnaire by Lazarus was used in both studies. Both studies focused not on the coping strategies themselves, but on their interrelation with the level of stress and anxiety experiences of the individual.

Mamina et al. (2022) showed that the choice of coping strategy was connected with the person’s level of anxiety. Thus, among students with a high level of anxiety, the most frequent coping strategies were avoidance (67.1 ± 0.13) and distancing (65.8 ± 0.27). The authors note that using intellectual techniques characterizes distancing, for example, rationalization, shifting attention, detachment, humor etc. The avoidance strategy is characterized by denial of the problem, fantasizing, etc. Thus, non-adaptive coping is more typical for students with high situational anxiety.

Such coping strategies as distancing (61.6 ± 0.11) and solution planning (54.9 ± 0.26) were most common among students with an average level of anxiety. This group of students is characterized by a combination of constructive and non-constructive coping. Most researchers consider decision planning to be an adaptive strategy, as it promotes constructive resolution of difficulties. This group of students is more characterized by the mixed type of coping.

Finally, among students with a low level of anxiety, the strategies of solution planning (60.8 ± 0.19) and positive reevaluation (58.6 ± 0.32) are most expressed. These ways of coping with stress are fully adaptive.

Similar results were obtained by Ochirova and Chuvasheva (2022), who found that the most frequent coping strategies were avoidance, distancing, confrontation, and positive reassessment. However, the authors show that the preferred coping strategy is connected with the stress level and actual experiences. The higher the stress level of the subjects, the more they are inclined to use the strategy of avoidance; at a low level of stress, the participants choose the strategy of positive reassessment.

Discussion

Analysis of the Russian-language publications on coping strategies during COVID-19 demonstrates unstable interest. Most studies occurred at the beginning of the pandemic, and then their number decreased significantly. Studies at the end of the pandemic are characterized by location-based studies and small sample sizes. In contrast, a review of foreign studies showed a steady increase in surveys during the two years of the pandemic, some of which focused on the dynamics of coping strategies and others on their comparative analysis by age, country, and living conditions (Kostromina et al., 2022).

The Russian comparison studies mainly focused on predominant coping strategies and whether they differed from pre-pandemic distribution. In the late period, the researchers’ main focus shifted from the direct study of predominant coping strategies to their connection to stress and personal tension; comparative studies of coping strategies were carried out in groups with different stress levels. A year after the pandemic’s beginning, the researchers’ main interest was in comparing predominant coping strategies between those infected with COVID-19 and those not.

A comparison of Russian-language publications is difficult in part because of the lack of a common methodology in the study of predominant coping strategies, the lack of uniformity in methods and in processing of results. Nevertheless, it is possible to get a general idea of how the repertoire of coping strategies has changed during the pandemic in Russia. At the pandemic’s beginning, adaptive and relatively adaptive defense mechanisms were used a great deal. Some researchers note the predominance of non-constructive, escape-oriented coping strategies and a variety of coping strategies in general. It is worth noting that different coping strategies’ distribution frequency is the same as the normative and reiterates pre-pandemic norms. Foreign studies’ analysis yielded similar results, demonstrating a variety of coping strategies at the pandemic’s beginning (Maykrantz et al., 2021; Morales‐Rodríguez, 2021; Park et al., 2021).

With adaptation to the situation, there was a selection of effective coping strategies. Some of them were weakened, such as cooperative family activities or virtual communication (Adams & Smith, 2021). Others increased (e.g., active behavior strategies, seeking social support, or reframing) (Awoke et al., 2021; Babicka-Wirkus et al., 2021; Kryukova et al., 2021). In Russia, the dynamics were characterized by two trends. On the one hand, active coping strategies such as planning, reflexive, and preventive coping have increased. On the other, there was a slight increase in deprivation and avoidance strategies.

The worldwide trend of a gradual increase in proactive coping strategies during adaptation to COVID-19 (Diaz et al., 2021) further confirms that when basic psychological needs (autonomy, competence, and relatedness) have been blocked for a long time, people start looking for an outlet to satisfy them and choose those coping strategies that can do so (Ntoumanis et al., 2009). During the pandemic, social networking, peer support, teamwork, self-confidence, problem-solving, and self-care were the most frequently used coping strategies (Finstad et.al., 2021). This confirms the idea that in situations of isolation, preference is given to those coping strategies that directly or indirectly satisfy the need for self-determination. Overall, researchers note the effectiveness of proactive coping strategies among respondents with low stress and anxiety levels (Kameristaya, 2021; Kuftyak & Bekhter, 2020; Mamina et al., 2022; Ochirova & Chuvasheva, 2022). This result confirms prior observations that proactive coping relates to readiness to act purposefully (Schwarzer & Taubert, 2002). However, targeted action is difficult when stress levels are high, so focusing on the problem helps to reduce anxiety and depression (Finstad et.al., 2021). Perhaps this circumstance can explain the fact that after one year of the pandemic, there has been an increase in denial strategies (e.g., reluctance to acknowledge the existence or threat posed by COVID-19) and avoidance strategies (e.g., avoidance of discussing the danger posed by COVID-19) among Russians. Similar trends have been reported in foreign studies. In the early phases of the pandemic, avoidance strategies allowed workers to limit their sense of helplessness and incompetence, contributing to resilience (Maiorano et al., 2020). In later periods of the pandemic, this may be due to general societal fatigue with the situation.

In general, the review of both Russian and foreign studies shows that in a situation of coping with anxiety and stress, any of the coping strategies is somehow connected with the realization of the needs for self-determination (Kostromina et al., 2022). The use of emotional coping strategies is largely determined by the need to regulate the self in response to stressors assessed as threats (Amiot et al., 2008). These strategies focus on self-management through physical activity, meditative practices (Burch et al., 2021), and the release of emotions (Zimmer & Dunn, 2021). Coping with helping others, learning new activities, and organizing and communicating in the pandemic situation allowed for a sense of connection with others, “distraction from stress,” self-development, and increasing one’s own competence. Coping focused on situational awareness and reframing supported the need for autonomy by rethinking and giving meaning to what was happening. Such coping is recognized as one of the most successful means of promoting well-being (Kashdan & Rottenberg, 2010) in stressful and crisis situations.

Conclusion

The trends in the dynamics of coping strategies during the pandemic reflect their close relationship with basic psychological needs in the theory of personality self-determination. This review showed a transition from confusion and habitual, pre-pandemic coping strategies to more effective ones, confirming that when basic needs are blocked for a long time, people seek a way to satisfy them. A gradual increase in active coping is an actualization of the need for competence, realized in conditions of social restrictions. An increase in coping associated with the search for new activities and hobbies helps satisfy the basic need for connectedness. Positive thinking and reframing strategies allow one to shift the locus of control from external circumstances to internal ones, to feel one’s own role, thereby supporting the need for autonomy and competence, while setting clear goals and planning activity satisfies all three basic needs. The results of the studies reviewed confirmed the importance of self-determination as a dispositional variable in predicting patterns of coping with stress.

Limitations

As noted, most empirical publications could not be included in the final analysis because they needed to provide more empirical evidence. Difficulties in the analysis were also associated with the use of different variants of the Russian adaptation of the applied methods, as well as the presentation of results in different formats.

Author Contributions

S.K. conceived of the idea. E.Z. developed the theory. N.M. verified the analytical methods. E.K. wrote a first draft of the manuscript. All authors discussed the results and contributed to the final manuscript and agreed to be accountable for all aspects of their work.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by Russian Science Foundation (Project No. 22-28-00460 “Complementary model of personality self-determination: theoretical foundations, diagnostic tools, implementation practice”).

References

Adams, E. L., Smith, D., Caccavale, L. J., & Bean, M. K. (2021) Parents are stressed! Patterns of parent stress across COVID-19. Front. Psychiatry, 12, April, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.626456

Adanaqué-Bravo, I., Escobar-Segovia, K., Gómez-Salgado, J., García-Iglesias, J.J., Fagundo-Rivera, J., & Ruiz-Frutos, C. (2023) Relationship between psychological distress, burnout and work engagement in workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review. Int J Public Health, 67, 1605605. https://doi.org/10.3389/ijph.2022.1605605

Amin, S. (2020). Why ignore the dark side of social media? A role of social media in spreading corona-phobia and psychological well-being. International Journal of Mental Health Promotion, 22(1), 29–38. https://doi.org/10.32604/IJMHP.2020.011115

Amiot, C.E., Blanchard, C.M., & Gaudreau, P. (2008) The self in change: A longitudinal investigation of coping and self-determination processes. Self Identity, 7, 204–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298860701580793

Ausín, B., Castellanos, M.A., González-Sanguino, C., Vakhantseva, O.V., Almazova, O.V., Shaigerova, L.A., Dolgikh, A.G., & Muñoz, M. (2020). Le Psychological Impact of Six Weeks of Lockdown as a Consequence of COVID-19 and the Importance of Social Support: A Cross-Cultural Study Comparing Spanish and Russian Populations. Psychology in Russia: State of the Art, 13(4), 89–105. https://doi.org/10.11621/pir.2020.0406

Awoke, M., Mamo, G., Abdu, S., & Terefe, B. (2021) Perceived Stress and Coping Strategies Among Undergraduate Health Science Students of Jimma University Amid the COVID-19 Outbreak: Online Cross-Sectional Survey. Front. Psychol., vol. 12, no. March, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.639955

Babicka-Wirkus, A., Wirkus, L., Stasiak, K., & Kozłowski P. (2021) University students’ strategies of coping with stress during the coronavirus pandemic: Data from Poland. PLoS One, 7(16), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0255041

Bakker, A.B., Breevaart, K., Scharp, Y.S., & de Vries, J.D. (2021) Daily self-leadership and playful work design: Proactive approaches of work in times of crisis. J. Appl. Behav. Sci., 6, 1–23.

Boiko, O., Medvedeva, T., Enikolopov, S., Vorontsova, O., & Kaz’mina, O. (2020). Psikhologicheskoe sostoianie liudei v period pandemii COVID-19 i misheni psikhologicheskoi raboty [The psychological state of people during the COVID-19 pandemic and the targets of psychological work]. Psikhologicheskie issledovaniya [Psychological research], 13(70). https://doi.org/10.54359/ps.v13i70.196

Brooks, S. K., Webster, R.K., Smith, L.E., Woodland, L., Wessely, S., Greenberg, N., & Rubin, G.J. (2020). The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence. The Lancet, 395(10227), 912–920. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30460-8

Burch, A., Owens, R., Nisly, S. & Taylor S. R. (2021) Wellbeing during COVID-19: A social media takeover. Pharm. Educ., 20, 272–275. https://doi.org/10.46542/pe.2020.202.272275

Cao, W., Fang, Z., Hou, G., Han, M., Xu, X., Dong, J., & Zheng, J. (2020) The psychological impact of the COVID-19 epidemic on college students in China. Psychiatry Res., 287, 112934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.112934

Chutiyami, M, Cheong, A., Salihu, D, Bello, U.M., Ndwiga, D., Maharaj, R., Naidoo, K., Kolo, M.A., Jacob, P., Chhina, N., Ku, T.K., Devar, L., Pratitha, P., & Kannan, P. (2022) COVID-19 pandemic and overall mental health of healthcare professionals globally: A meta-review of systematic reviews. Front. Psychiatry 12:804525. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.804525

Deci, E.L., & Ryan, R.M. (2000) The ‘what’ and ‘why’ of goal pursuits: Human needs and the self-determination of behavior. Psychol. Inq., 11, 227–268. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_01

Diaz, K., Staffileno, B. A., & Hamilton, R. (2021). Nursing student experiences in turmoil: A year of the pandemic and social strife during final clinical rotations. Journal of Professional Nursing: Official Journal of the American Association of Colleges of Nursing, 37(5), 978–984. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.profnurs.2021.07.019

Epishin, V.E., Salikhova, A.B., Bogacheva, N.V., Bogdanova, M.D., & Kiseleva, M.G. (2020). Mental health and the COVID-19 pandemic: Hardiness and meaningfulness reduce negative effects on psychological well-being. Psychology in Russia: State of the Art, 13(4), 75–88. https://doi.org/10.11621/pir.2020.0405

Finstad, G.L., Giorgi, G., Lulli, L.G., Pandolfi, C., Foti, G., León-Perez, J.M., Cantero-Sánchez, F.J., & Mucci, N. (2021) Resilience, coping strategies and posttraumatic growth in the workplace following COVID-19: A narrative review on the positive aspects of trauma. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 18, 9453. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18189453

Frolova, S.V., & Vysotskaia, Kh. A. (2021) Cposoby sovladaniia s situatsiei samoizoliatsii vo vremia pandemii covid-19: pozitivnyi podkhod k analizu problemy [Ways to cope with the situation of self-isolation during the covid-19 pandemic: A positive approach to analyzing the problem]. Izvestiia Saratovskogo universiteta. Novaia seriia. Seriia Filosofiia. Psikhologiia. Pedagogika [News of Saratov University. New episode. Series Philosophy. Psychology. Pedagogy], 3(21), 326–333. https://doi.org/10.18500/1819-7671-2021-21-3-326-333

Gordeeva, T.O., & Sychev, O.A. (2021) Psikhologicheskie prediktory blagopoluchiia i sledovaniia pravilam zdorovogo povedeniia vo vremia epidemii koronavirusa COVID-19 v Rossii [Psychological predictors of well-being and following the rules of healthy behavior during the COVID-19 epidemic in Russia]. In Yu. Zinchenko (Ed.), Psikhologicheskoe soprovozhdenie pandemii COVID-19 [Psychological support for the COVID-19 pandemic] (pp. 19–30). Izdatel’stvo Moskovskogo universiteta [Moscow University Press]

Gordeeva, T.O., Sychev, O.A., & Semenov, Yu.I. (2020). COVID-19: Constructive optimism, defensive optimism, and gender as predictors of autonomous motivation to follow stay-at-home recommendations during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychology in Russia: State of the Art, 13(4), 38–54. https://doi.org/10.11621/pir.2020.0403

Govorkova, A.M., Kryukova, T.L., & Ekimchik, O.A.(2020) Stress v situatsii novoi ugrozy zdorov’iu (pandemii COVID-19) i sovladanie s nim [Stress in the situation of a new health threat (COVID-19 pandemic) and coping with it]. In T. Banshchikova, E. Fomina, & V. Morosanova (Ed.), Lichnostnye i reguliatornye resursy dostizheniia obrazovatel’’nykh i professional’’nykh tselei v epokhu tsifrovizatsii [Personal and regulatory resources for achieving educational and professional goals in the digital age], (pp. 843–852). Izdatel’stvo Znanie-M [Znanie-M Press], https://doi.org/10.38006/907345-50-8.2020.843.852

Grishina, N.V., & Lupulyak, P.V. (2020). COVID-19 experience: Features of culture and belonging in the context of peoples native to a country and migrants. Psychology in Russia: State of the Art, 13(4), 119–133. https://doi.org/10.11621/pir.2020.0408

Iancheva, T., Rogaleva, L., García-Mas, A., & Olmedilla, A. Perfectionism, mood states, and coping strategies of sports students from Bulgaria and Russia during the pandemic COVID-19. Journal of Applied Sports Sciences 2020, 1, 22 – 38. https://doi.org/10.37393/JASS.2020.01.2

Iarmysh, I.A. (2020) Sovladaiushchee povedenie studentov pri distantsionnom obuchenii v usloviiakh pandemii Covid-19 [Coping behavior of students in distance learning in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic]. In A. Gordeeva & E. Angelina (Ed.), Lichnostnye i situatsionnye determinanty povedeniia i deiatel’nosti cheloveka [Personal and situational determinants of human behavior and activities] (pp. 228–234). Izdatel’stvo Donetskogo universiteta [Donetsk University Press]

Islam, S. (2020) Covid-19-related infodemic and its impact on public health: A global social media analysis. American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene, 103, 1621–1629. https://doi.org/10.4269/ajtmh.20-0812

Kameristaia, K.A. (2021) Osobennosti sovladaiushchego povedeniia v usloviiakh pandemii COVID-19: vozrastnoi aspekt [Features of coping behavior in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic: Age aspect]. In E.A. Sergienko, & N.E. Kharlamenkova (Eds.), Psikhologiia – nauka budushchego [Psychology is the science of the future] (pp. 167–170). Izdatel’stvo Institutа psikhologii RAN [RSA Psychology Institute Press]

Kashdan, T. B., & Rottenberg, J. (2010) Psychological flexibility as a fundamental aspect of health. Clin. Psychol. Rev., 30(4), 865–878. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2010.03.001

Khan, S., Siddique, R., Li, H., Ali, A., Adnan, M., & Bashir, N. (2020) Impact of coronavirus outbreak on psychological health. J Glob Health. 10, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.7189/jogh.10.010331

Kisliakov, P.A. (2020) Psikhologicheskaia ustoichivost’ studencheskoi molodezhi k informatsionnomu stressu v usloviiakh pandemii COVID-19 [Psychological resistance of students to informational stress in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic]. Perspektivy nauki i obrazovaniia [Prospects of science and education]. 5(47), 343–356. https://doi.org/10.32744/pse.2020.5.24

Klimochkina, A.Y., Nekhorosheva, E.V., & Kasatkina, D.A. (2022). Existential wellbeing, mental health, and COVID-19: Reconsidering the impact of lockdown stressors in Moscow. Psychology in Russia: State of the Art, 15(2), 14–31. https://doi.org/10.11621/pir.2022.0202

Kora, N.A. (2022) Koping-resursy i koping-strategii zreloi lichnosti v usloviiakh koronavirusnoi infektsii [Coping resources and coping strategies of the mature personality in the context of coronavirus infection]. Vestnik Amurskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seriia: gumanitarnye nauki [Bulletin of Amur State University. Series: Humanities], 96, 86–91. https://doi.org/10.22250/20730284_2022_96_86

Korotkova, I.S., Iakovleva, M.V., Shchelkova, O.Yu., & Eremina, D.A. (2021) Osovennosti psikhologicheskogo reagirovaniia i mekhanizmy adaptatsii k stressu, vyzvannomu pandemiei covid-19 pandemiei [Psychological response and mechanisms of adaptation to stress caused by the Covid-19 pandemic. Konsul’tativnaya psikhologiya i psikhoterapiya [Counseling Psychology and Psychotherapy], 1(29), 9–27. https://doi.org/10.17759/cpp.2021290102

Kostromina, S., Moskvicheva, N., Zinovyeva, E., Odintsova, M., & Zaitseva, E. (2022) Self-determination as a mechanism for personality sustainability in conditions of daily stress. Sustainability, 14, 5457. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14095457

Kovaleva, K.V., Golodenko, O.N., & Almeshkina, A.A. (2021) Sovladaiushchee povedenie lits molodogo vozrasta v usloviiakh dezadaptivnogo vozdeistviia pandemii Covid-19 [Coping behavior of young persons under conditions of the maladaptive impact of the COVID-19 pandemic]. In S.T. Kokhan (Ed.), Sostoyanie zdorov’ya: meditsinskie, social’nye i psikhologicheskie aspekty [Health status: medical, social and psychological aspects] (pp. 160–166). Izdatel’stvo Zabaikal’skogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta [Transbaikalian University Press].

Kozhina, A.A., & Vinokurov, L.V. (2020). Work alienation during COVID-19: Main factors and conditions (an example of university professors). Psychology in Russia: State of the Art, 13(4), 106–118. https://doi.org/10.11621/pir.2020.0407

Kozlova, L.V., & Kostrigina, A.A. (2020) Stress, vyzvannyi ugrozoi zarazheniia koronavirusom, i preobladaiushchie koping-strategii u molodezhi [Stress caused by the threat of coronavirus infection and the prevailing coping strategies among young people] Vestnik po pedagogike i psikhologii Iuzhnoi Sibiri [Bulletin of Pedagogy and Psychology of Southern Siberia], 4, 33–48.

Kriukova, T.L., Ekimchik, O.A., Opekina, T.P., & Shipova, N.S. (2020) Stress i sovladanie v sem’e v period samoizoliatsii vo vremia pandemii COVID-19 [Stress and coping in a self-isolated family during the COVID-19 pandemic]. Sotsial’naya psikhologiya i obshchestvo [Social Psychology and Society], 4(11), 120–134. https://doi.org/10.17759/sps.2020110409

Kuftiak, E.V. & Bekhter, A.A. (2020) Stress i proaktivnoe sovladaiushchee povedenie v period pandemii COVID-19: dannye on-lain oprosa [Stress and proactive coping behavior during the COVID-19 pandemic: Online survey data]. Meditsinskaia psikhologiia v Rossii [Medical psychology in Russia], 6(65).

Kuvaeva, I.O., & Strel’nikova, A.M. (2021). Osobennosti sovladaniia so spetsificheskoi trudnoi situatsiei: pandemiia COVID-19 [Features of coping with a specific difficult situation: The COVID-19 pandemic] Izvestiia Ural’skogo federal’nogo universiteta. Ser. 1, Problemy obrazovaniya, nauki i kul’tury [News of the Ural Federal University. Ser. 1, Problems of education, science and culture], 2(27), 84–91. https://doi.org/10.15826/izv1.2021.27.2.032

Leguizamo, F., Olmedilla, A., Núñez, A., Verdaguer, F.J.P., Gómez-Espejo, V., Ruiz-Barquín, R. and Garcia-Mas, A. (2021) Personality, coping strategies, and mental health in high-performance athletes during confinement derived from the COVID-19 pandemic. Front. Public Health 8:561198. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2020.561198

Li, S., Wang, Y., Xue, J., Zhao, N., & Zhu, T. (2020). The impact of COVID-19 epidemic declaration on psychological consequences: A study on active Weibo users. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(6), 2032. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17062032

Maiorano, T., Vagni, M., Giostra, V., & Pajardi, D. (2020) COVID-19: Risk factors and protective role of resilience and coping strategies for emergency stress and secondary trauma in medical staff and emergency workers—an online-based inquiry. Sustainability, 12(21), 9004 https://doi.org/10.3390/su12219004

Malykh, S.B., & Sitnikova, M.A. (2021). Psikhologicheskie riski pandemii koronavirusa COVID-19 [Psychological risks of the COVID-19 coronavirus pandemic]. In Yu. Zinchenko (Ed.), Psikhologicheskoe soprovozhdenie pandemii COVID-19 [Psychological support for the COVID-19 pandemic] (pp. 31–61). Izdatel’stvo Moskovskogo universiteta [Moscow University Press]. https://doi.org/10.11621/rpo.2021.02

Mamina, V., Busurina, L., & Kubekova, A. (2022) Osobennosti koping-strategii u studentov meditsinskogo universiteta v period pandemii [Features of coping strategies among medical students during the pandemic]. Kazanskii pedagogicheskii zhurnal [Kazan Pedagogical Journal], 1(150), 212–217. https://doi.org/10.51379/KPJ.2022.151.1.027

Maykrantz, S.A., Nobiling, B.D., Oxarart, R.A., Langlinais, L.A., & Houghton, J.D. (2021), Coping with the crisis: The effects of psychological capital and coping behaviors on perceived stress. International Journal of Workplace Health Management, 14(6), 650–665. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJWHM-04-2021-0085

Mazilov, V.A., & Belan, E.A. (2022) Situatsionnaia aktivnost’ lichnosti v vynuzhdennoi samoizoliatsii: sotsial’no-psikhologicheskii aspekt [Situational activity of a person in forced self-isolation: The socio-psychological aspect]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriia 14. Psikhologiia [Moscow University Bulletin. Psychology], 1(14), 158–180. https://doi.org/10.11621/vsp.2022.01.07

Moore, R.C., Depp, C.A., Harvey, P.D., & Pinkham, A.E. (2020). Assessing the real-time mental health challenges of COVID-19 in individuals with serious mental illnesses: Protocol for a quantitative study. JMIR Research Protocols, 9(5), e19203. https://doi.org/10.2196/19203

Morales‐Rodríguez, F. M. (2021) Fear, stress, resilience and coping strategies during covid‐19 in Spanish university students. Sustain., 11(13), 5824. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13115824

Ntoumanis, N., Edmunds, J., & Duda, J. L. (2009). Understanding the coping process from a self-determination theory perspective. British Journal of Health Psychology, 14, 249–260. https://doi.org/10.1348/ 135910708X349352.

Ochirova, L.I., & Chuvasheva, S.A. (2022) Psikhoemotsional’noe sostoianie lichnosti i osobennosti sovladaniia s trudnoi situatsiei (pandemiia COVID-19) [The psycho-emotional state of the individual and features of coping with a difficult situation (COVID-19 pandemic)]. Mir nauki. Pedagogika i psikhologiia [World of Science. Pedagogy and psychology], 10(1): 25PDMN122. https://mir-nauki.com/PDF/25PDMN122.pdf

Opekina, T.P., & Shipova, N.S. (2020) Sem’ia v period samoizoliatsii: stressy, riski i vozmozhnosti sovladaniia [Family in lockdown: Stress, risks and coping opportunities]. Vestnik Kostromskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Seria: Pedagogika. Psikhologiia. Sotsiokinetika [Bulletin of Kostroma State University. Series: Pedagogy. Psychology. Sociokinetics], 3(26), 121–128. https://doi.org/10.34216/2073-1426-2020-26-3-121-128

Pakpour, A.H., & Griffiths, M.D. (2020). The fear of COVID-19 and its role in preventive behaviors. Journal of Concurrent Disorders, 20, 2922–2933. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-021-00557-4

Park, C. L., Finkelstein-Fox, L., Russell, B. S., Fendrich, M., Hutchison, M., & Becker, J. (2021). Americans’ distress early in the COVID-19 pandemic: Protective resources and coping strategies. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice and Policy, 13(4), 422–431. https://doi.org/10.1037/tra0000931

Pervushina, O. N., & Shabalin, A. P. (2020) Pandemiia COVID-19: obzor pervykh publikatsii [The COVID-19 pandemic: An overview of first publications] Reflexio, 2(13), 5–29. https://doi.org/10.25205/2658-4506-2020-13-2-5-29

Petrakova, A. V., Kanonir, T. N., Kulikova, A. A., & Orel, E. A. (2021) Osobennosti psikhologicheskogo stressa u uchitelei v usloviiakh distantsionnogo prepodavaniia vo vremia pandemii COVID-19 [Features of psychological stress in teachers in distance teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic]. Voprosy obrazovaniia [Educational Studies Moscow], 1, 93–114. https://doi.org/10.17323/1814-9545-2021-1-93-114

Pogonysheva, I.A., & Protasova, V.S. (2022) Realizatsiia koping-strategii pri distantsionnoi forme obucheniia [Implementation of coping strategies for distance learning]. Vestnik NTsBZhD [Science Center of Life Safety Bulletin], 1, 65–72

Poluekhtova, I.A., Vikhrova, O.Yu., & Vartanova, E.L. (2020). Effectiveness of online education for the professional training of journalists: students’ distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychology in Russia: State of the Art, 13(4), 26–37. https://doi.org/10.11621/pir.2020.0402

Prilutskaia, M., Mendualieva, T., & Corazza, O. (2020) Emotsional’noe reagirovanie i koping-strategii sredi. studentov-medikov vo vremia pandemii koronavirusnoi infektsii: poperechnoe onlain issledovanie [Emotional reactions and coping strategies of medical students during the COVID-19 pandemic: An online cross-sectional study]. Nauka i Zdravookhranenie [Science and Healthcare], 22(4), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.34689/SH.2020.22.4.001

Rasskazova, E.I., & Thostov, A.Sh. (2021) Psikhologicheskoe soderzhanie trevogi i profilaktiki v situatsii infodemii: zashchita ot koronavirusa ili «Porochnyi krug» trevogi? [The psychological content of anxiety and prevention in an infodemic situation: Protection against coronavirus or a “vicious circle” of anxiety?] In Yu. Zinchenko (Ed.), Psikhologicheskoe soprovozhdenie pandemii COVID-19 [Psychological support for the COVID-19 pandemic] (pp. 70–89). Izdatel’stvo Moskovskogo universiteta [Moscow University Press]. https://doi.org/10.11621/rpo.2021.02

Ravens-Sieberer, U., Kaman, A., Erhart, M., Devine, J., Schlack, R., & Otto, C. (2021) Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on quality of life and mental health in children and adolescents in Germany. Eur. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry 6(31), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-021-01726-5

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000) The darker and brighter sides of human existence: Basic psychological needs as a unifying concept. Psychol. Inquiry, 11, 319–338. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327965PLI1104_03

Samokhvalova, A.G., Saporovskaia, M.V., Khazova, S.A., Tikhomirova, E.V., & Shipova, N.S. (2022). Coping with the forced separation of close relationships during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychology in Russia: State of the Art, 15(3), 75–90. https://doi.org/10.11621/pir.2022.0305

Sani, G., Janiri, D., Di Nicola, M., Janiri, L., Ferretti, S., & Chieffo, D. (2020). Mental health during and after the COVID-19 emergency in Italy. Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, 74(6), 372. https://doi.org/10.1111/pcn.13004

Satici, B., Saricali, M., Satici, S. A., & Griffiths, M.D. (2020). Intolerance of uncertainty and mental wellbeing: Serial mediation by rumination and fear of COVID-19. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 20, 2731–2742. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00305-0

Schwarzer, R., & Taubert, S. (2002). Tenacious goal pursuits and striving toward personal growth: Proactive coping. In E. Frydenberg (Ed.), Beyond coping: Meeting goals, visions and challenges (pp. 19–35). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/med:psych/9780198508144.003.0002

Sergeeva, M.A., & Kubekova, A.S. (2021) Otsenka psikhoemotsional’noi sfery u studentov v period pandemii koronavirusa [Assessment of the psycho-emotional sphere of students during the coronavirus pandemic]. Psikhologiia. Istoriko-kriticheskie obzory i sovremennye issledovaniia [Psychology. Historical-critical reviews and contemporary research], 2(10), 130–137.

Shishkov, V., Novikova, Ia., Kokurenkova, P., & Ul’ianova, M. (2021) Stress-sovladaiushchee povedenie vo vremia samoizoliatsii, vvedennoi v sviazi s pandemiei COVID-19 [Stress coping behavior during COVID-19 lockdown]. Sotsial’nye aspekty zdorov’ia naseleniia [Social aspects of public health], 67(4), 5. http://vestnik.mednet.ru/content/view/1284/30/lang,ru/

Shpakov, A.I., Klimatskaia, L.G., Bocharova, Iu.Iu., D’iachuk, A.A., Shik, O.Iu., Naumov, I.A., & Sivakova, S.P. (2021) Tsenarii koping-strategii studentov vo vremia pandemii Covid-19 [Scenarios of students’ coping strategies during the COVID-19 pandemic]. Sovremennye problemy gigieny, radiatsionnoi i ekologicheskoi meditsiny [Modern problems of hygiene, radiation and environmental medicine], 11, 76–89

Sood, S. (2020). Psychological effects of the coronavirus disease-2019 pandemic. Research & Humanities in Medical Education, 7, 23–26. https://www.rhime.in/ojs/ index.php/rhime/article/view/264.

Sundarasen, S., Chinna, K., Kamaludin, K., Nurunnabi, M., Baloch, G.M., Khoshaim, H.B., Hossain, S.F.A., & Sukayt, A. (2020). Psychological impact of COVID-19 and lockdown among university students in Malaysia: Implications and policy recommendations. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(17), 6206. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17176206

Toscano, F., Bigliardi, E., Polevaya, M.V., Kamneva, E.V., & Zappalà, S. (2022). Working remotely during the COVID-19 pandemic: Work-related psychosocial factors, work satisfaction, and job performance among russian employees. Psychology in Russia: State of the Art, 15(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.11621/pir.2022.0101

Volodina, K.A., Ragulina, A. A., & Rusiaeva, I. A. (2022) Psikhologicheskoe sostoianie studentov v usloviiakh distantsionnogo obucheniia v period pandemii COVID-19 [The psychological state of students in distance learning during the COVID-19 pandemic]. Lichnost’ v meniaiushchemsia mire: zdorov’e, adaptatsiia, razvitie [Personality in a changing world: Health, adaptation, development], 1 (10), 59–72. https://doi.org/10.23888/humJ202210159-72

Witteveen, A.B., Young, S.Y., Cuijpers, P., Ayuso-Mateos, J.L., Barbui, C., & Bertolini, F. (2023) COVID-19 and common mental health symptoms in the early phase of the pandemic: An umbrella review of the evidence. PLoS Med 20(4), e1004206. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004206

Zimmer, C., & Dunn, J.C. (2021) A developmental perspective of coping with stress: Potential for developmental coordination disorder research, Adv. Neurodev. Disord., 5(4), 351–359. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41252-021-00211-z

Zinchenko, Yu.P., Morosanova, V.I., Kondratyuk, N.G., & Fomina, T.G. (2020). Conscious self-regulation and self-organization of life during the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychology in Russia: State of the Art, 13(4), 168–182. https://doi.org/10.11621/pir.2020.0411

Zinov’eva, E.V., Iskra, N.N., Kuznetsova, E.A. & Kostromina, S.N. (2021) «Skaip doveriia»: opyt volonterskoi raboty studentov psikhologov vo vremia pandemii (proekt Psikhologicheskoi kliniki SPbGU) [‘Skype of trust’: The experience of volunteer work of psychology students during the pandemic (project of the Psychological Clinic of St. Petersburg State University)]. In Yu. Zinchenko (Ed.), Psikhologicheskoe soprovozhdenie pandemii COVID-19 [Psychological support for the COVID-19 pandemic], Izdatel’stvo Moskovskogo universiteta [Moscow University Press] (pp. 19–30). https://doi.org/10.11621/rpo.2021.02