1. Introduction
The COVID-19 pandemic and the related lockdowns led to an explosion of new research and data collection that further investigated the effects of specific restrictive measures adopted by different countries, on psychological health [
1,
2,
3,
4]. Recent studies have found that negative effects on mental health were particularly evident among psychiatric patients [
5], individuals with previously diagnosed post-traumatic stress disorder [
6], and COVID-19 patients [
7], all of whom reported higher levels of anxiety, depression, and stress, as compared to healthy controls. Further research reported that restrictive measures forced individuals to modify their lifestyles; their risk perceptions; their confidence in others and in institutions; their sense of community; and their perceived self-efficacy [
8,
9]. Female gender, younger age, occupational status (employed), lower perceived wellbeing, and health risk factors and diseases, such as cancer, were predictors of mental health symptoms that were correlated with the COVID-19 pandemic and restrictive measures for public safety [
10,
11,
12].
Extraordinary isolation and quarantine measures suddenly imposed drastic changes and limitations on the lifestyles and established routines of the general population. Individual and households had to responsibly manage the difficulties and problems caused by the restrictions on their mobility, such as interrupted work schedules, insecure food supplies, and the procurement of services and health care.
The perceptions of risk as well as the fear of disease have been strongly linked to worry, which is defined as a sequence of uncontrolled thoughts that evoke negative emotions and elevated levels of anxiety and distress related to fears about uncertainties and potential negative outcomes [
13,
14]. Triggered by anxious thoughts as well as by environmental events, worry is considered an apprehensive expectation about real-life issues such as health, relations, finances, work, and so on. On the continuum from normal to pathological, the severity of worry is determined by the frequency of uncontrollable, pervasive, and excessive thoughts, with high levels of worry being associated with negative health outcomes and somatic health complaints [
15,
16,
17].
Within the set of an individual’s thoughts of concern, the source of concern towards which their attention is predominantly directed should also be considered, such as whether the source is internal (e.g., anxiety, physical tension, fear, boredom, sense of isolation and vulnerability) or external (e.g., limitations of economic resources and personal assets, etc.). A predominantly internal or external source of concern, with a related predominantly internal vs. external focus, is likely to influence the management and the perception of personal control over it [
18].
Some scholars, referring to the theory of resource conservation [
19,
20], have argued that people with greater self-efficacy were able to acquire more resources to manage situations of actual or potential loss, as well as their consequences in the future [
21]. Other studies have long confirmed the protective role of self-efficacy in stressful situations [
22]. For example, transversal studies have demonstrated the medium-to-large effects of self-efficacy on the general discomfort, severity, and frequency of the symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), while longitudinal studies have shown larger effects on the general discomfort and severity of PTSD symptoms, as self-efficacy was also related to improved somatic health (self-reported symptoms, including less pain, fatigue, and disability) [
23,
24].
With reference to SARS and other infectious diseases, further research has stressed the need, especially in European countries, to take action to increase self-efficacy, because low self-efficacy has led to a lack of motivation for protection [
25]. Regarding the COVID-19 pandemic, recent studies have stressed the protective role of self-efficacy in limiting anxiety, the perception of fatigue in healthcare workers, and the signs of post-traumatic stress disorder [
26,
27,
28,
29,
30,
31,
32].
In other subgroups of the general population, the moderating role of self-efficacy on the psychological well-being of college students and adolescents when managing their fears about COVID-19 has also emerged [
33,
34], as well as an inverse association between psychological distress and perceived self-efficacy in people who were pregnant during the pandemic [
35]. A recent study using a large population sample confirmed that self-efficacy acted as a mediator in reducing perceived COVID-19-related stress, and in conjunction with its direct effects, self-efficacy partially mediated all other COVID-19-related beliefs (perceptions of disruption, health importance, and response effectiveness). Overall, it was determined that boosting self-efficacy was the most crucial component of resilience against experiencing high levels of stress [
36].
Based on Bandura’s social cognitive theory that defined self-efficacy as one’s perceived ability to perform a target behavior, evidence has shown that higher self-efficacy has been linked to taking preventive measures during pandemic (e.g., handwashing, respiratory hygiene, wearing a mask when having symptoms). A major source of compliance and adherence to prescribed measures was related to having a sense of self-efficacy, as it promoted being amendable to change and adopting protective behaviors. Moreover, fear had minimal impact on people who had a sense of autonomy, which encouraged their fearless compliance [
37,
38,
39]. Within the context of adolescents, their perceived abilities (self-efficacy) proved to be the strongest predictors of protective behaviors, suggesting that strategies to promote self-efficacy in adolescents should be carefully considered in order to assist them in enhancing their protective behaviors [
40]. Research on the general population has also reported a simultaneous mediating effect co-produced by avoidance-based coping and self-efficacy, this may indicate an interactive relationship or interaction between these two psychological constructs that may influence a person’s perceived capability of adhering to COVID-19 precautionary measures [
41].
Scholars have pointed out that cognitive appraisal may play an important role in the individual problem orientation of COVID-19 disruptions [
42,
43,
44,
45]. The influential transactional theory of stress and coping developed by Lazarus and Folkman contended that an individual’s assessment of a stressor significantly affected how they later coped with stressful situations [
46]. Challenge appraisals have been linked to a perceived future benefit and show an adaptive response to stress in which the person perceives their situation as an opportunity for potential improvement and growth. Threat appraisals, on the other hand, have been linked to a perceived future loss or harm and are a sign of a maladaptive approach to stress in which the person emphasizes the situation’s potentially negative implications [
47,
48]. Challenge and threat appraisals have also been closely related to problem orientation, that is, an individual’s cognitive schemas that describe their thoughts and feelings about a particular problem, as well as their own ability to overcome the problem. People who framed problems cognitively as positive “opportunities” were more likely to use adaptive coping strategies than those who framed problems as “threats” [
49]. When the relationship between stress appraisals and negative experiences during the pandemic was investigated, threat appraisals were associated with higher negative effects and more frequent stressors [
42,
50,
51].
In considering the distinctiveness between maladaptive and adaptive approaches to difficulties, it has been helpful to consider the theory of protective motivation (PMT), which explicitly distinguishes between threat and coping appraisals, as concerning the multidimensional determinants of motivation [
52]. Threat appraisal combines the perceived severity (perceptions about the severity of the harm) and perceived vulnerability (perceptions about likelihood of the harm) of a situation, without considering the perceived rewards (the potential positive outcomes). Coping appraisal is the sum of response efficacy (the perceived effectiveness of the recommended behavior in removing or preventing potential harm) and self-efficacy (the perception of an individual’s ability to successfully carry out the recommended behavior), less the response costs (the perceived or actual costs resulting from engaging in the recommended behavior) [
53]. This model has also been used in recent studies focused on assessing predictors of COVID-19-related preventive behaviors [
54,
55,
56].
Threat appraisal in a lockdown situation was linked to a maladaptive fear-oriented pattern, which is characterized by avoidant closure, increased inflexibility of behaviors and thoughts, and a tendency for social withdrawal. Coping appraisal, on the other hand, has been differentiated into two further adaptive patterns: the first is an approach-oriented coping strategy that focuses on increasing one’s knowledge of the problematic scenario in order to adopt functional ways of adapting to the new situation; and the second is growth-oriented and focuses on remaining open towards and actively supporting others in a similar situation while viewing the circumstances as an opportunity for personal growth and development. Thus, it could be said that these appraisal patterns activate an individual’s avoidance motivation and two different approach motivations for the situation, respectively.
On the basis of these arguments, the hypotheses that guided the implementation of the present study were the following:
Prevalence of internal concerns (e.g., anxiety, tension, fear, boredom, sense of isolation and vulnerability) and external concerns (e.g., general economic crisis, limitations of economic resources and personal assets) during difficult lockdown conditions could produce differential effects on the activation of the three identified appraisal patterns (i.e., fear-oriented; awareness and learning-oriented; growth-oriented);
Activated appraisal patterns could have differential effects on perceptions of self-efficacy;
Higher self-efficacy could be associated with a lower level of perceived distress during COVID-19 lockdowns.
These hypotheses were tested by a general path analysis model and by a sample of residents in the central/southern regions of Italy.
Figure 1 shows the proposed conceptual model; based on a direct relationship between an individual’s concerns and perceived distress, the moderating roles of both types of appraisals and the individual’s perceived self-efficacy during lockdown conditions were highlighted.
5. Discussion
The SEM analysis confirmed the hypotheses of the study. The direct effect of the concerns on perceived distress was evident, but contextually, it should be noted that the individual’s perceived self-efficacy could positively moderate the level of distress, as has already been noted in the literature. Of particular interest was the role of the type of cognitive appraisal chosen to interpret and control the activations an individual received from the sources of concern. In this case, we also distinguished internal sources (negative emotional experiences such as anxiety, boredom, agitation, tension, pessimism) from external sources (concerns associated with the identification of economic difficulties, interference with future plans, difficulties in the provision of basic necessities, problems in accessing care services, and signs of a general crisis for the entire target community). The model showed that the type of prevailing concern could produce differential effects on the available appraisal models. Internal worries could interact with a threat appraisal, which directed the person towards a fear-and-closure response, which could substantially contribute to increasing the individual’s overall state of distress. The individuals, infected by emotions related to fear and anger, accumulated food, drugs and information, including fake news, they got angry, did not make themself available to help anyone and considered anyone outside home a potential plague-spreader to be accused and/or denounced if seen violating the enforced rules. Several studies highlighted the significant and lasting impact of personal limitations due to the pandemic condition on wellbeing and the mental health of individuals of all age groups, but also especially in young people. More specifically, an increase in stress, worry, insomnia, disorientation, pessimism, obsessive-compulsive symptoms and even gambling disorders has been reported [
60,
61,
62,
63,
64,
65,
66,
67,
68].
Instead of a dysfunctional adaptation of neurotic closure and fear, a more functionally oriented appraisal of coping with the problem could be activated as an alternative. With reference to the well-known distinction between threat and coping appraisals, we distinguished a coping model more focused on the problem and less so on the management of emotional states. While overwhelmed by internal concerns, people could be inclined to have a more conscious approach to the situation by activating functional and concrete action plans. This could also be described as an adaptive learning-oriented assessment through which the person becomes aware of the situation, considers behaviors and adaptions for this new condition, identifies a daily goal, plans future goals commensurate with the new situation, and remains aware of their emotions. The model tested in this study showed that people who had been triggered by external concerns employed either the learning-oriented appraisal (previously described) or an additional functional appraisal model oriented towards growth and supporting others during the emergency, which was a solidarity-based type of openness that encouraged active intervention. They seek out ways to be useful to others while discovering a new way of adapting to change and becoming more self-empathetic [
69,
70,
71]. Based on the observation of the model, while the response of fear and neurotic closure negatively affected perceived self-efficacy, the other two appraisals (adaptive and supportive) contributed significantly to nourishing the individual’s sense of self-efficacy. Openness to others showed a direct effect on self-efficacy that also provided an indirect effect by mediating their level of awareness. In this pattern, it was possible to identify an opportunity for personal growth by not withdrawing into their anxieties but, instead, externalizing their attention via consistent pro-social and networking initiatives, which then enabled them to screen relevant information and plan appropriately for the present situation.
An interesting observation was the reinforcement by the solidarity/openness appraisal on the learning/awareness appraisal. This indicated that the action-oriented appraisal also prompted further learning and the acquisition of greater personal awareness in coping with stressful situations. Overall, the study model showed that the activation of functional appraisals played a significant role in both the direct effect on self-efficacy and also indirectly by helping to contain the level of perceived distress. However, the activation of the appraisal style was based on both the individual’s disposition and experiential modeling [
72,
73,
74,
75,
76]. For the purposes of prevention and distress containment, it would be appropriate to enhance and promote psycho-educational interventions that urge the adoption of appraisal strategies that would be functional and beneficial for perceived self-efficacy at all developmental stages of the life cycle, including in the elderly and in those who are chronically or acutely ill [
77,
78,
79,
80,
81].
Several studies on home–life organization during lockdowns have shown the benefits of an active response and daily planning, which not only promoted a reduction in anxiety, boredom, stress, and the perceived overall discomfort, but also contributed to the perceived self-efficacy and resilience for managing the emergency [
82,
83,
84,
85]. The promotion active daily management and future planning leads to a relevant protective and preventive approach. Therefore, it would be desirable for educational agencies, health care facilities, as well as local and national institutions to promote the establishment of new services for improved psychological support with a focus on increasing personal and community self-efficacy.
The descriptive analyses of the study highlighted the most vulnerable groups affected by distress during lockdowns: younger people; people with chronic illness; those living with elderly and people with chronic illnesses; women with a particular burden of domestic duties during lockdown; people living in overcrowded settings; and those living alone. Based on the findings of the study, developing a plan for preventative and supportive actions when restrictions are needed should be designed for these vulnerable groups to assist them in internalizing adaptive and functional appraisals and enhancing their self-efficacy. This would enable them to overcome pandemic distress and to increase their coping and resilience in order to overcome future issues.