Stay at Home Stressors and Coping Strategies of Students due to COVID-19
Lucille Y. Dominguez1
1 Department of Education, Cordillera Administrative Region, Schools Division of Benguet, Philippines
*Corresponding Author: [email protected] Accepted: 15 December 2021 | Published: 31 December 2021
DOI:https://doi.org/10.55057/ajress.2021.3.4.7
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Abstract: The study aims to look into the stressors of the stay at home order and their psychological effects as well as the adaptive and maladaptive coping strategies used by high school students. A total of 240 respondents participated in the descriptive quantitative study.
The study was conceptualized and conducted from May 2020 to March 2021 at the height of the stay at home order due to the COVID-19. The respondents completed a survey questionnaire with three parts. The study used simple random sampling. The quantitative data was treated with descriptive statistics; moreover, weighted mean and ranking were used.
Results revealed that the respondents were moderately affected by the stressors of stay at home order and their psychological effects with a grand mean of 2.74 (e.g. inadequate supplies and access to regular medical care etc.) Moreover, the respondents often use the adaptive coping strategies with a grand mean of 2.61 (e.g. performing with the use of online application such as TikTok, tending ornamental plants etc.). Finally, the respondents sometimes use the maladaptive coping strategies with a grand mean of 2.22 (e.g. being emotional, playing online games excessively etc.). In conclusion, the respondents moderately felt the stressors of stay at home order and their psychological effects, they often use the adaptive coping strategies and they sometimes use the maladaptive coping strategies.
Keywords: COVID-19, stress, cope, adaptive, maladaptive
_________________________________________________________________________
1. Introduction
On the 30th of January 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) declared Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC) for novel coronavirus, after the Chinese authorities confirmed that they identified a novel (new) coronavirus (COVID-19) in Wuhan City. In the same month, the first three cases were recorded in the Philippines, all with confirmed travel history to Wuhan City. On 5th of March, a first case of COVID-19 with no travel history abroad was confirmed, indicating the presence of local transmission (Covid-19 Humanitarian Response Plan Philippines, 2021). On the 14th of March, the government placed the National Capital Region (NCR) under community quarantine for 30 days. Two days later, the President announced a month-long lockdown of the entire island of Luzon from the 16th of March until the 12th of April to arrest the spread of COVID-19. At the same time, the country was placed under a state of calamity to allow the government to tap into emergency funds to respond to the crisis (Presidential Communications Operations Office, 2020). Since then, the movement of people in many parts of the country including the capital has been limited to accessing basic necessities and work. Land, domestic air, and sea travel in and out of the capital region have been restricted. Mass gatherings have been prohibited and classes have been
suspended. The lockdowns have engendered their own array of problems including the massive loss of livelihoods, the collapse of businesses especially micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs), the worsening plight of the poor, a drastic reduction in government revenues, numerous cases of police abuse, domestic violence, a rise in hunger and the universal disruption in learning (Quintos, 2020).
Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic has made mental health an even bigger issue. The quarantine, the economic effects of the pandemic, and the anxieties brought about by the virus unpredictability have had a negative effect on the mental health of many Filipinos (Angara, 2020). Ensuring the mental health of students and teachers during the COVID-19 pandemic is a big challenge for the Department of Education (DepEd), as Education Secretary Leonor Briones confirmed suicides of students (Aguilar, 2020). Amidst the COVID-19 pandemic, Evelio Javier Memorial National High School recorded two incidents of suicide. Multiple factors might have caused both suicides, but it cannot be denied that the incidents took place at the height of the stay at home order from April 2020 to March 2021.
This study generally aims to look into the extent of the stressors of stay at home order and their psychological effects as well as the adaptive and maladaptive coping strategies used by the students. It will give insight on the mental well-being of the respondents during the prolonged stay at home order for the teachers and stakeholders to be able to give intervention as needed.
In addition, the findings offer an initial, data-based glimpse into the mental health impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and shed light into opportunities for promoting mental health and well-being during this unprecedented and multifaceted crisis.
2. Literature Review
The Philippines Omnibus Guidelines on Community Quarantine with Amendments (2021) defined community quarantine as the restriction of movement within, into, or out of the area of quarantine of individuals, large groups of people, or communities, designed to reduce the likelihood of transmission of an infectious disease among persons in and to persons outside the affected area. Quarantine is an unpleasant experience with loss of freedom, uncertainty over disease status, and boredom it can affect the health status of subjects (Nacoti et. al., 2020). This intensifies anxiety in people who have concerns about their own health. Survey studies on subjects who had been quarantined reported a high occurrence of psychological distress and disorder symptoms. These included emotional disturbance, depression, stress, low mood, irritability, insomnia, and post-traumatic stress (Di Giovanni et. al., 2003). Moreover, studies have shown that prolonged school closure and home confinement during a disease outbreak might have negative effects on children’s physical and mental health (Guessoum et al., 2020).
Stressors of Stay at Home and their Psychological Effects
A recent review study from Brooks et. al. (2020) showed that the adverse psychological effects of quarantine usually include confusion, anger, and post-traumatic stress symptoms, and also increase of the prevalence of anxiety and depressive symptoms in the general population.
Lengthy quarantine duration increases stress related to infection fears, inadequate supplies, and support. The common psychological and behavioral reactions on quarantine are irritability, nervousness, frustration, emotional disturbance, sadness, guilt, exhaustion, boredom, insomnia, inadequate information, poor concentration, and indecisiveness, detachment from others, deteriorating work performance, financial problems, and stigma. In addition, Ahorsu et. al.
(2020) stated that the fear of COVID-19 positively correlates with depression, anxiety, perceived infectability, and germ aversion. When compared activity of Weibo (popular social
media in China) users before and after the COVID-19 outbreak in China, Li et al. (2020) found an increase in negative emotions, such as anxiety, depression, and indignation, and also a higher sensitivity to social risks. A decrease in positive emotions and life satisfaction was also noted.
Adaptive responses to the stay at home orders
Some have coped with positive or adaptive responses, such as relying on increased social support (Cao et al., 2020) and adopting preventative measures to offset or minimize the health and financial risks presented by COVID-19 (Wang et al., 2020). Adaptive coping strategies traditionally benefit or positively affect the lives of those who use them. The examples of this approach includes religious/spiritual coping such as prayer, reading scripture, exercise, meditation; listening to music; and socializing with friends and family. Overall, researchers concluded prosocial behaviors like these effectively can help to combat the negative consequences of stress, including the mental health challenges (Raposa, et al., 2015).
Other forms of coping focus both on problems and emotions for example, the identified active coping/rational coping which is a higher order dispositional category encompassing both problem focused coping and positive reinterpretation and growth, acceptance as well as restraint coping. The adaptive coping strategies practiced by the respondents is related to problem solving which involves active cognitive and behavioral efforts to deal with problem.
Problem solving consists of acknowledging various thoughts concerning the problem, undertaking efforts to understand the situation, predicting the course of events, choosing the most appropriate solutions, planning to solve the problem and implementing this plan as well as taking consistent action to solve the problem (Stanisławski, 2019).
Several constructs that share some common characteristics with problem solving, are problem- focused coping (Folkman and Lazarus, 1980, 1985). Coping with stress: task-oriented, emotion-oriented, and avoidance-oriented coping (Endler and Parker, 1990) as well as active coping and planning (Carver et al., 1989).
Maladaptive responses to the stay at home orders
Other coping responses are maladaptive, such as heightened anxiety and fear about COVID- 19 and/or one's post-pandemic future (Rajkumar, 2020) and increased drug or alcohol use or breaking isolation rules (Clay & Parker, 2020). Maladaptive coping, refers to methods often leading to adverse consequences including some of the mental health challenges described earlier. Prior research divided maladaptive coping into two different categories, emotional, in which individuals respond to a situation confrontationally or with an excessive emotional response, and avoidance-based, where individuals actively delay response to a situation or completely evade a stressful situation through isolation or other maladaptive behaviors (Folkman & Lazarus, 1985). Maladaptive coping behaviors can include drinking, smoking, drug use, overeating, and other unbeneficial behaviors. Historically, these coping strategies can lead to negative effects on one’s life including but not limited to addiction (Furnari et al., 2015).
The maladaptive coping strategies of the respondents is related to the concept of problem avoidance. It consists of the avoidance of thinking about the problem (e.g., by engaging in substitute activities), reducing efforts to solve the problem, postponing task, or giving up attempts to attain goal. This coping style exhibits similarities to the constructs of problem avoidance (Tobin et al., 1989), escape-avoidance (Folkman et al., 1986), self-distraction (Carver, 1997), distraction (Endler and Parker, 1999) as well as mental disengagement, behavioral disengagement, and denial (Carver et al., 1989).
3. Methodology
This study used quantitative descriptive survey. According to Creswell (2012), survey research designs are procedure in quantitative research in which investigators administer a survey to a sample or to the entire population of people to describe the attitudes, opinions, behaviors, or characteristics of the population. The descriptive survey gave insight to represent a picture of the attitudes and characteristics of the respondents. Moreover, survey research tends to be a reliable method of inquiry because surveys are standardized in that the same questions, phrased in exactly the same way, were posed to respondents. Finally, the versatility of survey research was also an asset. Surveys were used by all kinds of people in all kinds of professions, age and status in life.
The population used simple random sampling. The basic characteristic of simple random sampling is that all members of the population have an equal and independent chance of being included in the random sample (Ary, et al., 2010). The respondents in this study were Grade 7 to 12 students. As of September 30, 2020 there were 612 recorded enrollees of Evelio Javier Memorial National High School; thus, with the use of Slovins formula the computed sample size was 242.
The data underlying the work presented in this study was collected using a questionnaire with three parts. The first part contains the stressors of stay at home order and the psychological effects being experienced by the respondents adapted from Brooks et al. (2020), the adaptive coping strategies and the maladaptive coping strategies. The questionnaire went through reliability and validity. The quantitative data gathered from the respondents was tallied and tabulated. The data and results of the study was treated with descriptive statistics.
Results and Discussion
The stressors of stay at home order and their psychological effects
Table 1 presents the stressors of the stay at home order and their psychological effects. Results reveled that generally the respondents were moderately affected by the stressors of stay at home order and their psychological effects with a grand mean of 2.74. This implies that although moderate, the respondents still felt the impact of the Covid-19 stressors and their psychological effects. This corroborates with the study which states that the widespread outbreaks of fatal infectious diseases have a substantial negative impact on people’s mental health and well-being (Bao et al., 2020). Concerns about the mental health and psychological adjustment of the public have been arising due to the COVID-19’s quick widespread and high mortality (Kang et al., 2020). Several studies have shown widespread and profound psychosocial impacts of the COVID-19 epidemic on mental health, such as stress-related symptoms, depression and anxiety among small samples of medical staff and community residents in China (Cao et al., 2020). The above studies found that some influencing factors such as having relatives or acquaintances infected with COVID-19, having contacted with an individual with suspected COVID-19 or infected materials and frequent exposure to information about COVID-19 on social media (Wang et al., 2020) were significantly associated with increased risk of COVID- 19-related mental health problems.
Specific results revealed that “fears about becoming infected and/or infecting others, which can manifest as increased attention to and worry about one’s health and physical symptoms,” with a weighted mean of 2.98 and a descriptive equivalent of moderate effect ranked first. This is supported by DiGiovanni et. al., (2003) as they stated that quarantine increases anxiety in
people who have concerns about their own health. Survey studies on subjects who had been quarantined reported a high prevalence of psychological distress and disorder symptoms. These included emotional disturbance, depression, stress, low mood, irritability, insomnia, and post- traumatic stress Moreover, studies have shown that prolonged school closure and home confinement during a disease outbreak might have negative effects on children’s physical and mental health (Guessoum et al., 2020).
Followed by “longer durations of the stay at home order (i.e., 1 month or longer),” with weighted mean of 2.86 and a descriptive equivalent of moderate effect. Fegert et. al., (2020) stated that Corona disease 2019 (COVID-19) is profoundly affecting lives around the globe.
Isolation, contact restrictions and economic shutdown impose a complete change to the psychosocial environment of affected countries. The current situation affects children, adolescents and their families in an exceptional way. Kindergartens and schools have been closed, social contacts strongly limited and out-of-home leisure time activities canceled.
Parents are asked to support their children with home schooling, while at the same time working from home.
Table 1: The stressors of stay at home order and their psychological effects
STATEMENTS MEAN D.E. RANK
Frustration and boredom related to the isolation, which involves loss of one’s usual routine (e.g., regular home and school activities, shopping for necessities) and limited social and physical contact with others.
2.77 ME 5
Inadequate supplies and access to regular medical care, including food, water, or change of clothes as well as masks, prescriptions, and thermometers.
2.65 ME 6
Insufficient information, such as lack of, or delayed, information from public health authorities, often due to poor coordination among health and government officials; unclear guidance; confusion about reasons for quarantine; and perceived lack of transparency
2.60 ME 7
Longer durations of the stay at home order (i.e., 1 month or longer). 2.87 ME 2 Fears about becoming infected and/or infecting others, which can
manifest as increased attention to and worry about one’s health and physical symptoms.
2.98 ME 1
Financial loss due to lessening/decline of family income. Absence from work, healthcare costs, and other unanticipated financial burdens can result in socioeconomic distress, particularly among those with lower incomes.
2.84 ME 3
Stigma from others. Stigmatization and rejection by neighbors, friends and even family members can manifest as being treated differently or with fear and suspicion, being avoided or excluded from leisure or school activities and experiencing stigmatizing comments.
2.38 SE 8
Getting back to one’s “normal” routine. Returning to usual work/school and social routines may take anywhere from several days to several weeks or even months
2.81 ME 4
Grand Mean 2.74 ME
Likert Scale Statistical Range Descriptive Equivalent
4 3.50-4.0 Much Effect
3 2.50-3.49 Moderate Effect
2 1.50-2.49 Slight Effect
1 1.0-1.49 No effect
Finally, “financial loss due to lessening/decline of family income because of absence from work, healthcare costs, and other unanticipated financial burdens which can result in socioeconomic distress, particularly among those with lower incomes,” with a weighted mean of 2.84 and a descriptive equivalent of moderate effect ranked third. Beside worries and anxieties related to COVID-19, the economic situation has worsened with high and rising levels of unemployment in all affected countries. This has put a lot of pressure on children, adolescents and their families which could result in distress, mental health problems and violence (Fegert et. al., 2020).
The three least stressors of the stay at home order and their psychological effects were
“inadequate supplies and access to regular medical care, including food, water, or change of clothes as well as masks, prescriptions, and thermometers,” with a weighted mean of 2.65 and a descriptive equivalent of moderate effect.” This is supported by Brooks et. al. (2020) when it showed in their study that prolonged quarantine duration increases stress related to infection fears, inadequate supplies, and support.
Followed by “insufficient information, such as lack of, or delayed, information from public health authorities, often due to poor coordination among health and government officials;
unclear guidance; confusion about reasons for quarantine; and perceived lack of transparency,”
with a weighted mean of 2.60 and a descriptive equivalent of moderate effect. This was explained by Sim and How (2020) in their study when they stated that due there is much anxiety and fear due to the high infectivity, severe morbidity and mortality, uncertainty, and changing knowledge and information brought about by this new virus. The changing knowledge and information brought by the new virus caused confusion among the public health authorities and government officials which caused the insufficient or delayed information to the public.
Lastly, “stigma from others or stigmatization and rejection by neighbors, friends and even family members can manifest as being treated differently or with fear and suspicion, being avoided or excluded from leisure or school activities and experiencing stigmatizing comments,” with weighted mean of 2.38 and a descriptive equivalent of slight effect. Brooks et. al. (2020) corroborated that the most common psychological and behavioral reactions on quarantine are irritability, nervousness, frustration, emotional disturbance, sadness, guilt, exhaustion, boredom, insomnia, inadequate information, poor concentration, and indecisiveness, detachment from others, deteriorating work performance, financial problems, and stigma.
Adaptive coping strategies
Table 2 presents the adaptive coping strategies. Results reveled that generally the respondents often use the adaptive coping strategies with a grand mean of 2.61. This implies that overall the respondents often used the adaptive coping strategies. This corroborates with the study of Cao et al. (2020) which states that individuals' responses to the virus and these government- imposed measures have varied widely. Some have coped with positive or adaptive responses, such as relying on increased social support and adopting preventative measures to offset or minimize the health and financial risks presented by COVID-19 (Wang et al., 2020).
Specific results revealed that “I organized my room or generally help in household chores to pass the time,” with a weighted mean of 3.03 and a descriptive equivalent of often ranked first as the respondents’ adaptive coping strategy. This is explained by Endler & Parker (1990) with their task-oriented coping. This form of coping directly addresses the task or the situation and provides optimal results during stressful situations such as in performance settings. Followed
by “I strengthened my personal relationships with my friends and relatives using online applications,” with a weighted mean of 2.90 and a descriptive equivalent of often. In the study of Raposa, et al. (2015) they stated that prosocial behaviors like socializing with friends and family can help to combat the negative consequences of stress, including mental health challenges. As well as, “I watched a healthy dose of YouTube videos, movies and TV shows,”
with a weighted mean of 2.90 and a descriptive equivalent of often. This falls under avoidance- oriented coping (Endler and Parker, 1999) which mediates between antecedent stressful events and distressing consequences. This aims at avoiding the stressful situation and can be of a distraction or social diversion nature.
Table 2: Adaptive coping strategies
STATEMENTS MEAN D.E. RANK
I got involved in art related activities such as painting, drawing, sculpting, photography etc.
2.20 S 15
I took part in performances such as playing instruments, dancing and singing with the use of online applications e.g. TikTok.
2.33 S 13
I developed an interest in growing/tending ornamental plants (gardening).
2.31 S 14
I enjoyed swimming in the pool/river. 2.44 S 11
I enjoyed hiking or taking a walk. 2.67 O 7
I watched a healthy dose of YouTube videos, movies and TV shows. 2.90 O 2.5 I played online/mobile/computer games moderately. 2.61 O 8 I organized my room or generally help in household chores to pass
the time.
3.03 O 1
I read books, comics, wattpad, novels and mobile e-books. 2.73 O 6 I visited local attractions within our community. 2.51 O 10 I took care of our pets e.g. walk and groom our dog 2.58 O 9
I took part in church/spiritual activities. 2.79 O 4
I took care of myself by eating healthy, getting enough sleep and exercising regularly.
2.78 O 5
I got involved in worthy cause/volunteer jobs to help our community. 2.37 S 12 I strengthened my personal relationships with my friends and relatives
using online applications.
2.90 O 2.5
Grand Mean 2.61 O
The three least adaptive coping strategies used by the respondents were “I took part in performances such as playing instruments, dancing and singing with the use of online applications e.g. TikTok,” with a weighted mean of 2.33 and a descriptive equivalent of sometimes. Endler and Parker (1999) stated that avoidance-oriented coping uses distraction and diversion unrelated to the stressful situation to reduce stress. Followed by “I developed an interest in growing/tending ornamental plants (gardening),” with a weighted mean of 2.31 and a descriptive equivalent of sometimes. Lastly, “I got involved in art related activities such as painting, drawing, sculpting, photography etc.,” with a weighted mean of 2.20 and a descriptive equivalent of sometimes. The two least used adaptive coping strategies were related to task- oriented coping which attempts to solve or limit the impact of the stressful situation (Endler and Parker, 1999).
Likert Scale Statistical Range Descriptive Equivalent
4 3.50-4.0 Always
3 2.50-3.49 Often
2 1.50-2.49 Sometimes
1 1.0-1.49 Never
The adaptive coping strategies practiced by the respondents were related to problem solving which involves active cognitive and behavioral efforts to deal with problem. Problem solving consists of acknowledging various thoughts concerning the problem, undertaking efforts to understand the situation, predicting the course of events, choosing the most appropriate solutions, planning to solve the problem and implementing this plan as well as taking consistent action to solve the problem (Stanisławski, 2019). This implies that through the adaptive coping strategies performed by the respondents such as organizing their room or generally helping in household chores to pass the time, they were able to adapt to the problems brought by the long duration of the stay at home order. Several constructs that share some common characteristics with problem solving, are problem-focused coping (Folkman and Lazarus, 1980, 1985).
Coping with stress: task-oriented, emotion-oriented, and avoidance-oriented coping (Endler and Parker, 1999) as well as active coping and planning (Carver et al., 1989).
Maladaptive coping strategies
Table 3 presents the use of maladaptive coping strategies. Results reveled that generally the respondents sometimes use the maladaptive coping strategies with a grand mean of 2.22. This implies that the respondents sometimes use methods often leading to adverse consequences to cope with the stress. This corroborates with the study of Rajkumar (2020) which states that other coping responses have been more maladaptive, such as heightened anxiety and fear about COVID-19, fear of one's post-pandemic future, increased drug or alcohol use, breaking isolation rules etc. Moreover, maladaptive coping, refers to methods often leading to adverse consequences including some of the mental health challenges described earlier. Prior research divided maladaptive coping into two different categories, emotional, in which individuals respond to a situation confrontationally or with an excessive emotional response, and avoidance-based, where individuals actively delay response to a situation or completely evade a stressful situation through isolation or other maladaptive behaviors (Folkman & Lazarus, 1988). Maladaptive coping behaviors can include drinking, smoking, drug use, overeating, and other unbeneficial behaviors. Historically, these coping strategies can lead to negative effects on one’s life including but not limited to addiction (Furnari et al., 2015).
Specific results revealed that “I found myself misbehaving or acting-out,” with a weighted mean of 2.53 and a descriptive title of often ranked first as the maladaptive coping strategy used by respondents. Emotion-oriented coping which tries to limit the emotional impact of stress rather than resolve the stressful situation by Endler and Parker (1999) relates to this. The negative emotional coping includes self-criticism when dealing with problem, focusing attention on the negative aspects of stressful situation (e.g., rumination), and on negative emotions (e.g., feelings of tension, pressure, or anger). This was followed by “I played mobile/computer games excessively to escape or fantasy,” with a weighted mean of 2.46 and a descriptive equivalent of sometimes. “I mentally and physically avoided any COVID-19 related news or avoidance,” with a weighted mean of 2.45 and a descriptive equivalent of sometimes ranked third. As well as, “I focused on scientific information to understand the reasons behind all the adjustments that I have to make because of COVID-19 or intellectualizing,” with a weighted mean of 2.45 and a descriptive title of sometimes. These are all avoidance-oriented coping that involves activities and cognitions aimed at avoiding the stressful situation and can be of a distraction or social diversion nature (Endler and Parker, 1990).
The three least adaptive coping strategies used by the respondents were “I intentionally harmed myself physically or self-harming,” with a weighted mean of 2.02 and a descriptive equivalent of sometimes. Followed by “I got into fight or disagreements online to get a reaction from
others or provocation,” with a weighted mean of 2.00 and a descriptive equivalent of sometimes. Both are related to negative emotion which assumed to be related emotional discharge (Billings and Moos, 1984), venting (Carver, 1997), focus on and venting of emotions (Carver et al., 1989). Lastly, “I started to smoke, drink or gamble excessively,” with a weighted mean of 1.83 and a descriptive equivalent of sometimes. This maladaptive coping strategy of the respondents is related to the concept of problem avoidance. It consists of the avoidance of thinking about the problem e.g., by engaging in substitute activities. This coping style exhibits likenesses to the constructs of problem avoidance (Tobin et al., 1989), escape-avoidance (Folkman et al., 1986), self-distraction (Carver, 1997), distraction (Endler and Parker, 1999) as well as mental disengagement, behavioral disengagement, and denial (Carver et al., 1989).
Table 3: Maladaptive coping strategies
STATEMENTS MEAN D.E. RANK
I found myself misbehaving. 2.53 O 1
I mentally and physically avoided any COVID-19 related news. 2.45 S 3.5 I refused to acknowledge that COVID-19 was real. 2.16 S 8.5 I found myself getting angry, frustrated or generally being emotional
because I had to stay at home.
2.39 S 5
I played mobile/computer games excessively to escape. 2.46 S 2 I focused on scientific information to understand the reasons behind
all the adjustments that I have to make because of COVID-19.
2.45 S 3.5
I got into fight/disagreements online to get a reaction from others. 2.00 S 14 Because I kept thinking about the physical symptoms of COVID-19
positive, I developed some of the symptoms
2.04 S 12
I intentionally harmed myself physically. 2.02 S 13
I started to smoke, drink or gamble excessively. 1.83 S 15
I over eat. 2.22 S 7
I overspent money buying things online. 2.07 S 11
I blamed others who do not follow the protocols; thus, the number of COVID-19 positive continues to increase. (displacement)
2.31 S 6
I thought that COVID-19 in general had nothing to do with me. 2.15 S 10 I thought that COVID-19 does not affect me at all. I do not have a
problem with it.
2.16 S 8.5
Grand Mean 2.22 S
4. Conclusion
The students moderately felt the stressors of stay at home order and their psychological effects, they often use the adaptive coping strategies and they sometimes use the maladaptive coping strategies; thus, the following are recommended. First, mental health and psychological support within the community and school should be made accessible for students who are seriously in need. In addition, programs that encourages self-care and healthy adaptive coping strategies should be implemented. These programs should encompass healthy diet, sleep, physical and relaxation exercises, maintenance of social contact, and avoidance of unhealthy habits and substances. Moreover, educate students on when (i.e. red flags) and how to seek further help from community leaders, school teachers, social workers, counsellors and healthcare workers.
Finally, further researches are encouraged.
Likert Scale Statistical Range Descriptive Equivalent
4 3.50-4.0 Always
3 2.50-3.49 Often
2 1.50-2.49 Sometimes
1 1.0-1.49 Never
This study was funded by the Basic Education Research Fund (BERF) of the Department of Education Cordillera Administrative Region.
References
Aguilar, K., 2020. Mental health of students, teachers a ‘big challenge’ amid pandemic –
DepEd chief. [online] INQUIRER.net. Available at:
<https://newsinfo.inquirer.net/1329506/deped-confirms-one-student-died-by-suicide-says- mental-health-a-big-challenge-amid-pandemic> [Accessed 14 April 2021].
Ahorsu, D. K., Lin, C. Y., Imani, V., Saffari, M., Griffiths, M. D., & Pakpour, A. H. (2020).
The Fear of COVID-19 Scale: Development and Initial Validation. International journal of mental health and addiction, 1–9. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469- 020-00270-8
Angara, S., 2021. Addressing mental health amid a pandemic. [online] Manila Bulletin.
Available at: <https://mb.com.ph/2020/10/18/addressing-mental-health-amid-a- pandemic/>
[Accessed 14 April 2021].
Ary, D., Jacobs L., Sorensen, C. & Razavieh, A. (2010). Introduction to Research Education, 8th Edition. Wadsworth 10 Davis Drive, Belmont, CA 94002-3098 USA.
Bao, Y., Sun, Y., Meng, S., Shi, J., & Lu, L. (2020). 2019-nCoV epidemic: address mental
health care to empower society. Lancet (London, England), 395(10224), e37–e38.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30309-3
Billings, A. G., & Moos, R. H. (1984). Coping, stress, and social resources among adults with unipolar depression. Journal of personality and social psychology, 46(4), 877–891.
https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.46.4.877.
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. Lancet (London, England), 395(10227), 912–920. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140- 6736(20)30460-8
Brooks, SK., et al., (2020). The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence. The Lancet 2020; 395: 912–20. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140- 6736(20)30460-8.
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 research, 287, 112934. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.112934
Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F., & Weintraub, J. K. (1989). Assessing coping strategies: a
theoretically based approach. Journal of personality and social psychology, 56(2), 267–283.
https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.56.2.267
Carver C. S. (1997). You want to measure coping but your protocol's too long: consider the Brief COPE. Int. J. Behav. Med. 4, 92–100. 10.1207/s15327558ijbm0401_6
Chaturvedi S. K. (2020). Covid-19, Coronavirus and Mental Health Rehabilitation at Times of Crisis. Journal of psychosocial rehabilitation and mental health, 1–2. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40737-020-00162-z
Clay, J. M., & Parker, M. O. (2020). Alcohol use and misuse during the COVID-19 pandemic:
a potential public health crisis?. The Lancet. Public health, 5(5), e259.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S2468-2667(20)30088-8
Creswell, J. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating qualitative and quantitative research, 4th Ed. Toronto: Pearson.
DiGiovanni, C., et. al., 2004. Factors influencing compliance with quarantine in Toronto during the 2003 SARS outbreak. [online] Liebertpub.com. Available at:
<https://liebertpub.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1089/bsp.2004.2.265> [Accessed 14 April 2021].
Endler, N. S., & Parker, J. D. (1990). Multidimensional assessment of coping: a critical
evaluation. Journal of personality and social psychology, 58(5), 844–854.
https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.58.5.844
Endler N. S., Parker J. D. A. (1999). Coping inventory for Stressful Situations (CISS): Manual.
Toronto: MultiHealth Systems.
Fegert JM, Vitiello B, Plener PL, Clemens V. Challenges and burden of the Coronavirus 2019
(COVID-19) pandemic for child and adolescent mental health: a narrative review to highlight clinical and research needs in the acute phase and the long return to normality. Child Adolesc Psychiatry Ment Health. 2020 May 12;14:20. doi: 10.1186/s13034-020-00329-3. PMID:
32419840; PMCID: PMC7216870.
Fegert, J. M., Vitiello, B., Plener, P. L., & Clemens, V. (2020). Challenges and burden of the
Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic for child and adolescent mental health: a narrative review to highlight clinical and research needs in the acute phase and the long return to normality. Child and adolescent psychiatry and mental health, 14, 20.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13034-020-00329-3
Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1985). If it changes it must be a process: study of emotion and
coping during three stages of a college examination. Journal of personality and social psychology, 48(1), 150–170. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.48.1.150
Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1980). An analysis of coping in a middle-aged community sample. Journal of health and social behavior, 21(3), 219–239.
Folkman S., Lazarus R. S., Dunkel-Schetter C., DeLongis A., Gruen R. J. (1986). Dynamics
of a stressful encounter: cognitive appraisal, coping, and encounter outcomes. J. Pers. Soc.
Psychol. 50, 992–1003. 10.1037/0022-3514.50.5.992
Furnari, M., Epstein, D. H., Phillips, K. A., Jobes, M. L., Kowalczyk, W. J., Vahabzadeh, M.,
& ... Preston, K. L. (2015). Some of the people, some of the time: Field evidence for associations and dissociations between stress and drug use. Psychopharmacology, 232(19), 3529-3537. doi: 10.1007/s00213-015-3998-7.
Guessoum, S. B., Lachal, J., Radjack, R., Carretier, E., Minassian, S., Benoit, L., & Moro, M.
R. (2020). Adolescent psychiatric disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown. Psychiatry research, 291, 113264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113264 Kang, L., Li, Y., Hu, S., Chen, M., Yang, C., Yang, B. X., Wang, Y., Hu, J., Lai, J., Ma, X.,
Chen, J., Guan, L., Wang, G., Ma, H., & Liu, Z. (2020). The mental health of medical workers in Wuhan, China dealing with the 2019 novel coronavirus. The lancet. Psychiatry, 7(3), e14.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(20)30047-X
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
Nacoti, N. et.al., 2021. At the epicenter of the covid-19 pandemic and humanitarian crises in
Italy: changing perspectives on preparation and mitigation. [online] Catalyst.nejm.org.
Available at: <https://catalyst.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/CAT.20.0080> [Accessed 14 April 2021].
Official Gazette of the Republic of the Philippines. 2021. Omnibus Guidelines on the
Implementation of Community Quarantine in the Philippines with Amendments as of April 3,
2021 | GOVPH. [online] Available at:
<https://www.officialgazette.gov.ph/2021/04/03/omnibus-guidelines-on-the-implementation- of-community-quarantine-in-the-philippines-with-amendments-as-of-april-3-2021/>
[Accessed 14 April 2021].
Presidential Communications Operations Office (2020). Covid-19 timeline. Laging Handa.
https://www.covid19. gov.ph/mar-covid-19-timeline/
Quintos, P., 2021. The Philippines’ COVID-19 Response: Symptoms of Deeper Malaise in the Philippine Health System*. [online] Ncpag.upd.edu.ph. Available at:
<https://ncpag.upd.edu.ph/wp-content/uploads/covid19response.pdf> [Accessed 14 April 2021].
Rajkumar R. P. (2020). COVID-19 and mental health: A review of the existing literature. Asian journal of psychiatry, 52, 102066. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajp.2020.102066
Raposa, E. B., Laws, H. B., & Ansell, E. B. (2016). Prosocial Behavior Mitigates the Negative
Effects of Stress in Everyday Life. Clinical psychological science: a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 4(4), 691–698. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167702615611073
Sim, H. S., & How, C. H. (2020). Mental health and psychosocial support during healthcare
emergencies - COVID-19 pandemic. Singapore medical journal, 61(7), 357–362.
https://doi.org/10.11622/smedj.2020103
Stanisławski K. (2019). The Coping Circumplex Model: An Integrative Model of the Structure of Coping With Stress. Frontiers in psychology, 10, 694.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00694
Tobin D. L., Holroyd K. A., Reynolds R. V., Wigal J. K. (1989). The hierarchical factor structure of the coping strategies inventory. Cognitive Ther. Res. 13, 343–361. 10.1007/bf01173478 Wang, C., Horby, P. W., Hayden, F. G., & Gao, G. F. (2020). A novel coronavirus outbreak of
global health concern. Lancet (London, England), 395(10223), 470–473.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30185-9
