COVID-19 vaccination motivation and underlying believing processes: A comparison study between individuals with affective disorder and healthy controls.

Background: Believing processes represent fundamental brain functions between cognition and emotion. Shortly before the introduction of a compulsory vaccination against COVID-19 in Austria, motives and underlying believing processes regarding the vaccination were collected in individuals with affective disorder (AD) and healthy controls (HC). Methods: 79 individuals with AD and 173 HC were surveyed online to assess believing processes with the parameters of the credition model (narratives, certainty, emotion, mightiness) about (1) the coronavirus itself and (2) why someone is vaccinated or not. In addition, we calculated congruence scores between content of narrative and type of emotion and divided the narrative content into positive, negative, and indifferent. Results: There were no differences in vaccination status between AD and HC. Higher levels of certainty were observed in HC compared to AD in both vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals. The effects were higher when asked about the motivation to vaccinate or not than about the coronavirus itself. In HC, more positive emotions and more congruence between emotions and narratives were reported during believing in their vaccination motives. No group differences were found in mightiness for both items. Independently from diagnosis, unvaccinated people had high levels of certainty and more negative emotions and narratives while believing in their motives for not getting vaccinated. Conclusion: When believing about the COVID-19 vaccination, individuals with AD were more uncertain and experienced fewer positive emotions than HC, although both groups did not differ in vaccination status. These effects were not that strong when believing about the coronavirus in general.

Believing Processes during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Analysis.

Cognition, emotion, emotional regulation, and believing play a special role in psychosocial functioning, especially in times of crisis. So far, little is known about the process of believing during the COVID-19 pandemic. The aim of this study was to examine the process of believing (using the Model of Credition) and the associated psychosocial strain/stress during the first lockdown in the COVID-19 pandemic. An online survey via LimeSurvey was conducted using the Brief Symptom Inventory-18 (BSI-18), the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), and a dedicated Believing Questionnaire, which assesses four parameters of credition (propositions, certainty, emotion, mightiness) between April and June, 2020, in Austria. In total, n = 156 mentally healthy participants completed all questionnaires. Negative credition parameters were associated with higher global symptom load (from BSI-18): narratives: r = 0.29, p < 0.001; emotions r = 0.39, p < 0.001. These findings underline the importance of credition as a link between cognition and emotion and their impact on psychosocial functioning and stress regulation in implementing novel strategies to promote mental health.

Believing processes during the COVID-19 pandemic in individuals with bipolar disorder: An exploratory study.

BACKGROUND: Believing or "credition" refers to psychological processes that integrate the cognitions and emotions that influence our behavior. In the credition model by Angel and Seitz, four parameters are postulated: proposition, certainty, emotion and mightiness. It is assumed that believing processes are influenced by both the individual as well as socio-cultural factors and external circumstances. External or environmental circumstances can include threatening situations such as the ongoing pandemic. It has been hypothesized that believing processes related to the pandemic differ between individuals with bipolar disorder (BD) and healthy controls (HC). AIM: To investigate credition in individuals with BD during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. METHODS: Psychiatrically stable individuals with BD (n = 52) and age- and sex matched HC (n = 52) participated in an online survey during the first lockdown of the COVID-19 pandemic. The survey took place between April 9th and June 4th, 2020, in Austria. Participants completed the Brief Symptom Inventory-18, the Beck Depression Inventory-II, the Altman Self-Rating Mania Scale, the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index and a dedicated Believing Questionnaire assessing four parameters of credition (proposition, certainty, emotion and mightiness). The MAXQDA software was used to analyze the qualitative data. Statistical analyses included analyses of variance, a multivariate analysis of variance and a multivariate analysis of co-variance. RESULTS: Individuals with BD reported significantly more negative propositions [F (1,102) = 8.89, P = 0.004, η2 p = 0.08] and negative emotions [Welch´s F (1,82.46) = 18.23, P < 0.001, η2 p = 0.18], while HC showed significantly more positive propositions [F (1,102) = 7.78, P = 0.006, η2 p = 0.07] and emotions [F (1,102) = 14.31, P < 0.001, η2 p = 0.12]. In addition, individuals with BD showed a higher incongruence between their propositions and their emotions [F (1,102) = 9.42, P = 0.003, η2 p = 0.08] and showed strong correlations between the parameters of the Believing Questionnaire and their psychiatric symptoms (r = 0.51-0.77, all P < 0.001). Positive as well as negative emotions and propositions were associated with scores measuring symptoms of depression, anxiety and sleep quality. CONCLUSION: Believing parameters were associated with psychiatric symptoms in BD during the pandemic. Findings broaden knowledge about the susceptibility of believing processes for ambient challenges in individuals with BD.