Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection logoLink to Springer Nature - PMC COVID-19 Collection
. 2023 Mar 10:1–12. Online ahead of print. doi: 10.1007/s40688-023-00457-5

Students’ Perceptions of COVID-19 Stress and Internalizing Problems: Is Social Support a Buffer?

Swapna Balkundi 1,✉, Stephanie S Fredrick 1
PMCID: PMC10000339  PMID: 37359145

Abstract

The current study investigated the associations among student perceptions of COVID-19 stress, internalizing problems, and school social support (teacher and classmate support) and how these relations differed across elementary/middle and high school students. Based on data from 526 4th- through 12th-grade students from a school district in the Northeast, we found that COVID-19-related stress was significantly related to internalizing problems for all students, regardless of grade level. We also found that teacher social support, but not classmate social support, buffered the positive relation between COVID-19 stress and internalizing problems. The results of the current study have implications for school psychologists, counselors, social workers, and other educators in alleviating COVID-19-related stress in students and associated symptoms of internalizing problems in students. As the pandemic unwinds, future research should examine the long-term impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, especially for students with marginalized identities, and how teacher and/or peer support may play a role in buffering these stressors for students.

Keywords: COVID-19 stress, Internalizing problems, Teacher social support, Classmate social support, Adolescents

The global outbreak and spread of the coronavirus disease starting in December of 2019 (COVID-19) adversely affected everyone worldwide in uniquely different ways. Preventative methods of curtailing its spread were taken in almost all countries worldwide which included measures such as social distancing, voluntary self-isolation, lockdowns, and vaccinations. While these measures were absolutely warranted, they were not devoid of consequences, including adverse effects on the mental health of individuals. These measures and the distress associated with them (e.g., major disruptions to daily life and routines) may have especially impacted children and adolescents’ well-being. Educational institutions all over the world underwent rapid changes to cater to the demands of safety and caution related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Educators had to transition effectively to online instruction with limited support within a short span of time. School closures due to the pandemic impacted about 55 million students in the USA (Kuhfeld et al., 2020). Recent research suggests that the impact of stressors related to COVID-19 (e.g., family financial distress, social isolation) has had a dramatic impact on children and adolescents’ psychological, emotional, and physical well-being as there has been a significant increase in mental health issues and rise in suicide rates among adolescents since the pandemic (Czeisler et al., 2020; Isumi et al., 2020; Sher, 2020; Tanaka & Okamoto, 2021). Though the shift from in-person to online ensured everyone’s safety at school, rules around social distancing and sudden school closings disrupted students’ daily routines and limited their interaction with their peers and educators due to the transition to an online mode of instruction (Wyse et al., 2020). There was no opportunity for students to personally contact or enjoy face-to-face interactions with their friends, peers, and teachers. This impacted the psychosocial adjustment and social relationships of youth across the world (Bernasco et al., 2021). A lot of children and adolescents likely experienced anxiety, fear, or worry and made increased demands on their parents/caregivers who themselves already may be under a lot of work, financial, personal, and emotional pressures (WHO, 2020).

Youth/younger adults are comparatively more vulnerable to drastic changes in their environment compared to older adults given that they have fewer resources and experiences at hand to handle stressful life events. Since 2020, most studies on the consequences of COVID-19 stressors have focused on adult mental health (Ettman et al., 2020; Giallonardo et al., 2020; Hamouche, 2020; Xie et al., 2020). Fewer studies have focused on the effects of COVID-19 stressors on child and adolescent mental health (Fegert et al., 2020; Guessoum et al., 2020; Imran et al., 2020; Racine et al., 2020). Even fewer studies among these have focused on the pandemic’s stressful effects on children and adolescents’ mental health due to school lockdowns and the transition to online instructional mode (Clemens et al., 2020; Loades et al., 2020; Wang et al., 2020). Given that this stress may have long-lasting impacts on youth mental and emotional health, research is needed which examines the impact of COVID-19-related stress and how it relates to youth well-being, as well as factors which may have had a buffering effect and promoted positive well-being for youth experiencing distress, such as social support (Chadi et al., 2022; Reuter et al., 2021).

COVID-19 Related Stress and Internalizing Problems

There is a need for studies that look at experiences of stress and well-being in children and adolescents, and the nature of the association between the two, within the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and resulting school closures. Serious infectious diseases may affect not just physical health but also create stressors that affect the mental health of youth and adults, similar to other traumatic experiences (Xie et al., 2020). A study that reviewed the literature on psychiatric disorders related to COVID-19 lockdown on adolescents found that they have a high risk of increased psychiatric disorders such as post-traumatic stress disorder, anxiety, and depressive disorders along with symptoms associated with grief (Guessoum et al., 2020). Stress in the current study is defined as a set of concerns and worries that the students experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic. These included stressors such as having to stay home, not being able to see friends or extended family in person, fear of loved ones or themselves getting sick, schoolwork-related stress, financial distress (e.g., parent losing job), and missing out on important events (e.g., prom, graduation). Styck et al. (2020) recently found COVID-19 stressor categories to include social isolation, fear of COVID-19 illness, stress of schoolwork, and missing events in a large sample of over 2000 4th- to 12th-grade students. They also found middle and high school students reported higher levels of stress related to schoolwork compared to elementary school students.

Internalizing problems involve psychopathology related to disturbances in emotion or mood. Specifically, depression and anxiety-related symptomatology including certain subclinical problems in these areas comprise of internalizing problems (Kovacs & Devlin, 1998; Zahn-Waxler et al., 2000). Prior research has found that COVID-19-related stress is associated with internalizing problems (Demaray et al., 2021; Styck et al., 2020), and longitudinal studies have shown COVID-19-related stress to predict anxiety and depression in children and adolescents (Cohen et al., 2021; Kwong et al., 2020). Demaray et al. (2021) looked at associations of internalizing problems such as anxiety and depression and COVID-19-related stress to see if the relationship differed by grade level or gender (Demaray et al., 2021) during remote learning. The findings reported more internalizing problems in secondary school students wherein stress related to schoolwork was associated with internalizing problems for all students regardless of grade level (Demaray et al., 2021). Despite adolescents’ concerns about the COVID-19 crisis and their pandemic stress leading to heightened internalizing problems, time with family, connecting virtually with friends, and physical activity were related to less reported internalizing problems during the initial COVID-19 crisis (Ellis et al., 2020). Although more time on social media and virtually connecting with friends was related to more reported depression, time engaging with family was related to less reported depression (Ellis et al., 2020). Thus, more studies are needed which examine associations among COVID-19-related stressors, internalizing problems, and potential factors which may buffer this relation for youth.

Theoretical Orientation

To address this gap in research, the current study examined how perceived COVID stress is associated with child and adolescent internalizing problems through the lens of social cognitive theory. The social cognitive theory posits that cognitive perceptions, behaviors, environmental, and other personal factors function as interacting contributing factors of an individual’s adjustment outcomes that have a bidirectional influence on one another (Bandura, 1989). Based on this theory in the context of student internalizing problem outcomes, it can be argued that students’ subjective cognitions (perceptions) of COVID-19 stress play a vital role in the outcome of internalizing problems. The diathesis-stress model (Beck & Dozois, 2011) for depression also guided this study which states that an individual’s risk for depression is dependent on the vulnerability (diathesis). Specifically, COVID-19 stressors in the current study are looked at as the diathesis in having implications for youth internalizing problems. Beck believed that cognitive symptoms of depression precede affective/mood symptoms of depression and not the other way around (Beck’s cognitive theory). The cognitive triad describes that the underlying dysfunctional beliefs of individuals could serve as a diathesis for depression (Beck & Dozois, 2011). These beliefs are centered on a (negative) cognitive triad, which could be made of thoughts about oneself, surroundings, or the future, serving as a diathesis for depression.

Social Support

Social support is defined as the feeling that one is cared for, esteemed, and has access to a network of concerned people (Pearson, 1986). Based on Tardy’s comprehensive framework (Tardy, 1985), social support can be conceptualized as “an individual’s perceptions of general support or specific supportive behaviors (available or enacted on) from people in their social network, which enhances their functioning or may buffer them from adverse outcomes” (Demaray et al., 2002, p. 215). Social support for children can be accessed from varied sources in the child’s network such as the child’s peers, parents, teachers, and other school personnel. When students face academic or school-related problems or setbacks, they are likely to approach and seek support from school-based support systems, such as their teachers and classmates (Bernasco et al., 2021; Demaray & Malecki, 2003; Pouwelse et al., 2011; Rigby, 2000), and studies have found that school-based sources of support (e.g., from teachers and classmates) are associated with a variety of positive academic, social, and emotional outcomes for youth (Aldrup et al., 2018; Fernández-Lasarte et al., 2020; Fredrick et al., 2016; Mikami et al., 2017; Rucinski et al., 2018). However, in the context of schools trying to implement COVID-19 pandemic safety measures (through social distancing, school closures, and online instructional modalities), there has been a hindrance in students’ access to their teachers, classmates, and other resources that provide them with social support at school. For example, in their sample of middle and high school students, Lessard and Puhl (2021) found that students reported less teacher support during the COVID-19 pandemic and two-thirds of the sample (69%) indicated reduced communication from teachers.

This is concerning, as there is research suggesting that social support acts as a protective factor against internalizing symptoms in children and adolescents (Chu et al., 2010; Demaray et al., 2002). According to stress buffering theory (Cohen et al., 2000), the perceived social support of individuals is assumed to weaken or eliminate the negative relationship between their perceived stress and their well-being. There have been studies whose key findings have found support for the stress-buffering model (Rueger et al., 2016), where researchers found that social support acts as a protective factor among youth in buffering against internalizing disorders (Cavanaugh & Buehler, 2015; Chu et al., 2010; Ciarrochi et al., 2017; Demaray & Malecki, 2003; Forster et al., 2020). Based on the stress-buffering model (Cohen et al., 2000), it is reasonable to believe that students’ perceived social support from their classmates and teachers might mitigate the relation between COVID-19-related stressors and youth internalizing problems. Bernasco et al., (2021) longitudinally examined whether pre-COVID-19 friend support predicted self-reported and parent-reported adolescent internalizing problems during COVID-19 (while controlling for pre-COVID-19 internalizing problems) with a sample of 245 Dutch adolescents. They found that higher pre-COVID-19 friend support predicted less (self-reported and parent-reported) internalizing problems during COVID-19, and this effect was not moderated by the time adolescents spent with friends or COVID-19-related stress. Thus, findings suggest that friend support may protect against developing internalizing symptoms in times of crisis, such as the COVID-19 pandemic; however, social support in school settings is important to examine as it relates to youth wellbeing.

Current Study

The COVID-19 pandemic has probably been one of the most challenging periods for educators and students. The social distancing measures because of the pandemic have caused major disruptions to the routines and lives of youth and their families. School closures resulted in a lack of access to the set of resources that children and adolescents had through their schools such as peer support, teacher support, and other face-to-face services (e.g., mental health support). Severe staff shortages, absenteeism and quarantines, rolling school closures, and mental health challenges all add to the above impacts on learning. Children and adolescents reported stress related to social isolation, fear of illness, schoolwork, and missing important events (Styck et al., 2021). It has been established that COVID-19-related stress is a likely risk factor for internalizing problems among youth (Cohen et al., 2021; Demaray et al., 2021; Kwong et al., 2020; Styck et al., 2020). However, as students across developmental periods may experience COVID-19 stressors differently, research is needed to examine how this relation may differ among elementary, middle, and high school students. Furthermore, research is needed to examine the moderating effects of school-based sources of social support (e.g., teachers, classmates) in the association between COVID-19 stress and youth internalizing problems. Thus, the main goal of the current study was to seek answers to the following research questions: (1) What is the relation between COVID-19-related stress and student internalizing problems? (2) How does this relationship differ by grade level? (3) Does teacher support and classmate support moderate the relation between COVID-19-related stress and student internalizing problems? The current study utilized social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1989), the Diathesis-stress model (Beck, 1967; Beck & Dozois, 2011), and the stress-buffering theory (Cohen et al., 2000), to inform and guide these study aims.

It was hypothesized that student’s perception of COVID-19-related stress would be associated with their internalizing problems, where students who report higher levels of COVID-19-related stress would report higher levels of internalizing problems (Cohen et al., 2021; Demaray et al., 2021; Guessoum et al., 2020; Kwong et al., 2020; Styck et al., 2020; Xie et al., 2020) and that this relation would be more robust among high school students compared to elementary and middle school students (Demaray et al., 2021; Green et al., 1991; Merikangas et al., 2010). It is also hypothesized that the relationship between COVID-19 stress, and student internalizing problems will be moderated by the students’ perceived school social support; such that a weaker association will be seen between COVID-19-related stress and internalizing problems in students who report higher levels of perceived teacher and classmate support (Bernasco et al., 2021; Pouwelse et al., 2011; Henrich & Shahar, 2008; Demaray et al., 2002; Malecki & Demary, 2002; Rigby, 2000).

Method

Participants

The current study included 526 4th- through 12th-grade students from a school district in the Northeast region of the USA. The sample was split equally by gender, primarily White (84.9%), and included students in grades fourth (12.7%), fifth (13.7%), sixth (11.12%), seventh (14.8%), eighth (14.6%), ninth (8.6%), tenth (9.9%), eleventh (7%), and twelfth (7.2%). Detailed demographic information for the sample is presented in Table 1.

Table 1.

Participant demographics

Variable n %
Gender
 Missing 1 <1
 Male 234 44.5
 Female 275 52.3
 Transgender 3 <1
 None of these 3 <1
 Prefer not to answer 10 1.9
 Total 526 100
Race/ethnicity
 Missing 1 <1
 American Indian 5 1
 Asian 9 1.7
 Black 6 1.1
 Native Hawaiian 2 <1
 White 481 91.4
 Hispanic 5 1
 Prefer not to answer 17 3.2
Grade
 Missing 1 <1
 4th 67 12.7
 5th 72 13.7
 6th 59 11.2
 7th 78 14.8
 8th 77 14.6
 9th 45 8.6
 10th 52 9.9
 11th 37 7
 12th 38 7.2
Total 526 100
Open in a new tab

Procedure

Data for this study were collected via a partnership between a research team at the first author’s university and a school in the Northeast of United States during the 2020–2021 academic year. Parent permission letters and a brief description of the survey were sent via email to all 4th- to 12th-grade students. Students in 4th to 12th grade with parent permission were invited to complete the survey via Google classroom between March to May 2021. At the beginning of the survey, a brief description of the partnership was provided and told that all information would be confidential, identifying information removed, and that the survey was voluntary. Students could skip any items they did not want to answer. Of the 766 students with parent permission to complete the survey, 49 students (6%) chose not to take the survey, 92 students (12%) only completed demographic information, and 99 cases were deleted due to less than 50% item level response. Thus, the final sample size utilized for the current study was 526.

Measures

COVID-19 Related Stress

A modified version of the COVID-19 Adolescent Symptom and Psychological Experience Questionnaire (CASPE; Ladouceur, 2020) was adapted to assess stress related to COVID-19. The original CASPE consists of 42 questions distributed in four major categories of (1) emotional experience, (2) cognitive experience, (3) social experience, and (4) experience related to COVID-19 and physical distancing. Items asked adolescents to indicate their emotions and perceptions of events that have been negative and positive for them regarding the pandemic. In the current study, we utilized items within the emotional experience section of the CASPE. Students indicated on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (No Concern) to 4 (A Lot of Concern), their level of concern about the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic regarding 16 events and/or experiences (e.g., family member might get sick). The CASPE has been utilized in prior research and validated for use with 4th- to 12th-grade students (Cohen et al., 2021; Demaray et al., 2021; Porter et al., 2021; Styck et al., 2021).

Because this study was a university-school partnership, slight modifications were made to the measure to increase students’ understanding of the questionnaire and to tailor information for school purposes. All modifications were made as requested by the school. The original CASPE consisted of a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1(Very Little or Not at all) to 5 (A Great Deal). The school district thought that students would find it challenging to distinguish between 4 (A Lot) and 5 (A Great Deal); thus, a 4-point Likert scale was utilized for the current study. Furthermore, the original CASPE instructions were “In the past 7 days, including today, what has been your level of concern about the impact of COVID-19 outbreak about the following?” We changed this to “How much have you been concerned or worried about the following since the COVID-19 pandemic?”

Items were also modified. The items “Not seeing (extended) family members as often,” “having to do remote instruction,” “having technology or wifi issues,” and “missing sports or clubs” were added. There were two items which asked about conflict with parents and conflict with sibling(s) which was changed to one item “conflict with family member.” Three items were deleted (i.e., not getting into college, conflict between parents, and people might die if they get sick). Regarding word modifications, the word “more” was added to “Having to stay at home more” and “as often” was added to “Not seeing friends in person as often.” The final scale consisted of 16 experiences. Styck et al. (2021) found these experiences to load across four subcategories: social isolation (3 items), sick from COVID-19 (3 items), schoolwork stress (2 items), and missing events (2 items). Styck et al. (2021) did not include items related to financial stress (e.g., having enough to eat, parent will lose their job); thus, we added a financial stress subcategory (5 items). Due to a low factor loading, the item “Having to spend more time with family” was deleted. Because we were interested in COVID-19 stress as a latent construct, we examined COVID-19 stress as a second-order model, with the items as indicators for the five subcategories (as latent constructs) and the five subcategories as indicators for the COVID-19 stress latent construct and found good model fit for the second-order model (χ2 [85] = 334.22, p < .001, RMSEA = .075, CFI = .917, SRMR = .078), with factor loadings for items and subcategories all > .40.

Teacher and Classmate Social Support

The Child and Adolescent Social Support Scale (CASSS; Malecki & Demary, 2002) is a 60-item measure which assesses youth perceptions of parent, teacher, peer, classmate, and school social support. Only the classmate support and teacher support subscales (12 items each) were utilized in the current study to capture students’ perceptions of a classmate and teacher support related to instrumental, emotional, and communication support. Specifically, adolescents were asked to indicate how frequently they get support or help from their teachers/classmates. Some examples of items include, my teachers “…care about me,” “…explain things that I don’t understand,” and “…spend time with me when I need help.” My classmates “…treat me nicely,” “…nicely tell me when I make mistakes,” and “…ask me to join activities.” Response items range from 1 (Never) to 7 (Always). CASSS is a well-established scale with strong reliability and construct validity. Prior research has found that the reliability scores for elementary and middle school students as measured in terms of teacher and classmate support were α=.91 and α=.92 respectively (CASSS Manual Revised; Malecki et al., 2014). The subdimensions of CASSS, teacher and classmate support, have shown strong construct validity (CASSS Manual Revised; Malecki et al., 2014).

Internalizing Problems

The Youth Internalizing Problem Screener (YIPS; Renshaw & Cook, 2018) was utilized to assess student perceptions of their depressive symptoms and anxiety, including somatic complaints to create an overall internalizing problems score. This self-report questionnaire has 10 items. For example, “I feel nervous or afraid,” “I find it hard to relax,” “I feel moody or grumpy.” The questionnaire utilizes a 4-point Likert scale on a relative frequency-based response scale ranging from “Almost Never” to “Almost Always,” with higher scores reflecting higher levels of internalizing distress. YIPS is a well-established scale with strong reliability and construct validity. Prior research has found that the reliability scores for the 10-item scale across two different studies were α=.82 and α=.84 (YIPS; Renshaw & Cook, 2018). The 10 items exhibited high concurrent validity with theoretically related scales (Renshaw & Cook, 2018).

Data Analysis

Structural Equation Modeling using Mplus 8.8 (Muthén & Muthén, 2012) was utilized for the current study, and IBM SPSS Statistics 24 was used for preliminary analyses (i.e., correlations, descriptive statistics, and one-way ANOVAs). Average scores for each measure were utilized for descriptive statistics and one-way ANOVAs. Overall model fit was established prior to examining the structural components of each model. The models consisted of four latent variables: COVID-19 stress, internalizing problems, teacher support, and classmate support. The 10 items on the YIPS were utilized as indicators of the internalizing problems latent construct. A second-order model was examined for the CASPE (assessing COVID-19 stress), with items as indicators of the five subcategories (i.e., social isolation, sick from COVID-19, schoolwork stress, missing events, financial stress) and the five subcategories as indicators of COVID-19 stress. Given the number of items on the CASSS teacher support and classmate support subscales (12 per subscale), items were parceled for each scale and used as indicators. Item parceling can be beneficial for scales that have several items, as parcels are more reliable and tend to improve model stability (Little et al., 2022). Since we were not primarily interested in item-level analyses, item parceling was deemed appropriate for the current study (Little et al., 2013). Full information maximum likelihood estimation (FIML) was used for handling missing data. The majority of students in the final sample of 526 students did not have any missing data (92%) and the remaining students with missing data which ranged between 2 and 37% missing at the item level, was accounted for by FIML. Measurement models were examined prior to examining structural paths. Due to teacher support and classmate support being examined in separate models, two separate measurement models were examined. The first model consisted of the COVID-19 stress, teacher support, and internalizing problems latent constructs. The second model consisted of the COVID-19 stress, classmate support, and internalizing problems latent constructs.

To examine the first study aim, COVID-19 stress was included in the model as the exogenous latent variable, and internalizing problems was included as the endogenous latent variable. Grade-level differences (study aim two) were examined with multiple group analyses (i.e., elementary/middle school and high school) using the Wald test of parameter constraints via the MODEL TEST command in Mplus. A significant Wald test indicates a significant difference between males and females on the specified parameter. To examine the third study aim, teacher support was included in the model as an exogenous latent variable and an interaction term was created between the latent variable COVID-19 stress and teacher support. A similar procedure was done to examine classmate support as a moderator in a separate model. Post hoc testing of significant interactions involved testing the significance of simple slopes (Hayes, 2017).

Results

Means, standard deviations, and correlations among all variables are presented in Tables 2 and 3. Collinearity was examined among the main study variables and was not detected; all squared multiple correlations were less than .40 (Kline, 2011). Tolerance values were above the recommended value of .10 (Kline, 2011). Skewness/Kurtosis values for endogenous variables (i.e., teacher support, classmate support, internalizing problems) were within recommended ranges (−.81/−.05, .06/−1.0, 1.2/.86, respectively).

Table 2.

Means and standard deviations for all variables by grade level and total sample

Elementary/middle school High school Total
M SD N M SD N M SD N

COVID-19 stress

Range: 1–4

 1.99 .53 352 2.04 .52 172 2.01 .53 524

Internalizing problems

Range: 1–4

 1.62 .61 334 1.89 .73 159 1.71 .66 493

Teacher support

Range: 1–6

 5.01 1.00 353 4.47 1.08 172 4.83 1.06 525

Classmate support

Range: 1–7

 4.82 1.57 351 4.19 1.48 170 4.61 1.57 521
Open in a new tab

Table 3.

Bivariate correlations for total sample. **p < .01

graphic file with name 40688_2023_457_Tab3_HTML.jpg

Open in a new tab

Descriptive Statistics and Measurement Models

A series of one-way ANOVAs was conducted to compare the effect of grade level (elementary/middle school, high school) on the variables of interest (i.e., COVID-19 stress, internalizing problems, teacher support, and classmate support). A significant difference was found between grade level and internalizing problems (F [1, 491) = 18.142, p<.001), as high school students perceived higher levels of internalizing problems than elementary/middle school students. Additionally, a significant difference was found between grade level and teacher support (F [1, 523] = 31.342, p <.001), as elementary/middle school students perceived higher levels of teacher support than high school students. Furthermore, a significant difference was found for classmate support (F [1, 519] = 19.071, p <.001), elementary/middle school students found higher levels of classmate support than did high school students. No significant difference was found for COVID-19 stress, (F [1, 522] = 1.217, p= .271). Fit indices for teacher support measurement model (χ2 [369] = 909.86, p < .001, RMSEA = .053, CFI = .931, SRMR = .066), and the classmate support measurement model (χ2 [369] = 880.936, p < .001, RMSEA = .051, CFI = .936, SRMR = .066) indicated good fit to the data.

Relation Between COVID-19 Stress and Internalizing Problems

To examine the first study aim, COVID-19 stress was included in the model as an exogenous variable and internalizing problems was included as an endogenous variable. Fit indices were within their respective recommended ranges for acceptable model fit, (χ2 [269] = 748.62, p < .001, RMSEA = .058, CFI = .919, SRMR = .070). As expected, path coefficients indicated that COVID-19 stress was positively associated with internalizing problems (b = .54, B = .43, p < .001, R2 = .18). To examine the second study aim, we utilized the Wald test of parameter constraints to examine whether the relation between COVID-19 stress and internalizing problems differed across elementary/middle school and high school students. The Wald test was not significant (Wald = 2.37, df = 1, p < .124), indicating that the relation between COVID-19 stress and internalizing problems was similar across elementary/middle school (B = .36, p <.001) and high school students (B = .54, p <.001).

Teacher Support and Classmate Support as Moderators

To examine the third study aim, teacher support and the COVID-19 stress × teacher support interaction were included in the model as endogenous variables (see Fig. 1). Teacher support was negatively related to internalizing problems (B = −.30, p < .001). The COVID-19 stress × teacher support interaction term was significantly associated with internalizing problems (b = −.21, p =.01); see Table 4. Post hoc testing of the significant two-way interaction involved testing the significance of simple slopes at low (one standard deviation below the mean), medium (mean), and high (one standard deviation above the mean) levels of teacher support (Fig. 2). These analyses indicated that COVID-19 stress was positively associated with internalizing problems across all levels of teacher support: low (.68, p < .001), medium (.48, p < .001), and high (.27, p = .007).

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1

Open in a new tab

Standardized estimates of teacher support as a moderator in the relation between COVID-19 stress and internalizing problems. Note: Circles represent latent constructs and rectangles represent observed indicators. ***p < .001, **p < .01

Table 4.

Standardized and unstandardized coefficients, with 95% confidence intervals, standard errors, and p values for teacher support and classmate support as moderators

Internalizing problems β B SE 95% CI p
Lower Upper
COVID-19 stress (CS) .39 .48 .09 .27 .51 < .001
Teacher support (TS) −.30 −.37 .07 −.39 −.21 < .001
CS × TS −.17 −.21 .08 −.29 −.05 .01
COVID-19 stress (CS) .41 .50 .09 .32 .68 < .001
Classmate support (CLS) −.33 −.40 .07 −.53 −.26 < .001
CS × CLS −.12 −.14 .08 −.30 .02 .08
Open in a new tab

CI, confidence interval

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2

Open in a new tab

Teacher support as a moderator in the relation between COVID-19 stress and internalizing problems

Next, classmate support and the COVID-19 stress × classmate support interaction were included in the model as endogenous variables. Classmate support was negatively related to internalizing problems (B = −.33, p < .001). The COVID-19 stress × classmate support interaction term was not significantly associated with internalizing problems (b = −.14, p = .08); see Table 4. In other words, classmate support was not a significant moderator in the relation between COVID-19 stress and internalizing problems.

Discussion

The current study examined the association between COVID-19 stress and internalizing problems for children and adolescents and how these relations differed across elementary/middle and high school students. Furthermore, we also explored whether the association between COVID-19 stress and student internalizing problems was moderated by student perceptions of a classmate and teacher social support. COVID-19 stress and its associated internalizing problems in youth were examined through the lens of social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1989), as well as the diathesis-stress model (Beck, 1967; Beck & Dozois, 2011). Overall, we found that COVID-19-related stress was significantly related to internalizing problems for all students, regardless of grade level. We also found that teacher social support, but not classmate social support, buffered the positive relation between COVID-19 stress and internalizing problems.

COVID-19 Stress and Internalizing Problems

The first research question investigated the association between students’ perception of COVID-19 stress and their internalizing problems. Consistent with Styck et al. (2021), we found COVID-19 stressors categories in the areas of social isolation, getting sick, schoolwork-related stress, missing important events, and financial stress. The study found support for hypothesis one where COVID-19 stress was positively associated with internalizing problems such that students who report higher levels of COVID-19-related stress would report higher levels of internalizing problems. These study findings align with the guiding theories of social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1989) and the diathesis-stress model (Beck & Dozois, 2011). The findings are consistent with prior research indicating a positive association of COVID-19 stress with youth internalizing problems (Cohen et al., 2021; Demaray et al., 2021; Guessoum et al., 2020; Kwong et al., 2020; Styck et al., 2020; Xie et al., 2020).

The second research question examined how the relationship between perceived student COVID-19-related stress and their internalizing problems differs by students’ grade level. The study findings did not yield significant differences, indicating that the strength of the relation between COVID-19 stress and internalizing problems was similar across elementary/middle school students and high school students. We hypothesized that this relation would be more robust for high school students than for elementary or middle school students based on research that has found greater associations between COVID-19 stress or disasters in general and mental health problems for older than younger children (Demaray et al., 2021; Green et al., 1991; Merikangas et al., 2010). Specifically in the context of COVID-19 stressors, Demaray et al. (2021) found that high school students demonstrated significantly higher anxiety scores when compared to either elementary or middle school students (Demaray et al., 2021). However, our hypothesis was not supported. This may be because the COVID-19 pandemic was a novel health threat that brought with it novel challenges, which all students were trying to cope with, regardless of their age or grade level.

Social Support as a Buffer

The third research question looked at how the relationship between perceived COVID-19-related stress and internalizing problems differed by students’ perception of teacher and classmate social support. The findings of the current study revealed that teacher support moderated the association between student COVID-19 stress and their internalizing problems. Hypothesis three was partially supported indicating that teacher support was a significant moderator but not classmate support. Prior studies have focused on teacher-student associations and classmate-student associations in a general mental health context. Since the current study focuses on the COVID-19-specific context, it could be that though classmate support does alleviate some amount of distress, the core concerns leading to internalizing problems of students may remain unaddressed. This may have been due to students having less opportunities to access and interact with their classmates. Specifically, changes related to social distancing and online/hybrid mode of instruction reduced the quality and quantity of interactive opportunities between students and their classmates to access their company and support. Teachers, on the other hand, likely possess actual resources, skills, and ability to meet the needs of students during the pandemic that could address their core school-related COVID-19 stressors leading to internalizing problems. Even though a lack of in-person access to teachers was also in place, various modes of one-on-one communication options such as during online/hybrid instructional mode, phone, and/or emails made it possible for students to reach out to their teachers. This access to teacher support, even though limited, may have acted as a possible buffer in the association between student COVID-19 stressors and their internalizing problems.

Implications of the Current Study

The results of the current study have implications for school psychologists, counselors, social workers, and other educators in alleviating COVID-19-related stress in students and associated symptoms of internalizing problems in students such as anxiety and depression. It is important for educators and parents to be aware of the associated outcomes of the COVID-19 stressors that students may be suffering from, as a result of the pandemic. Timely screening and monitoring of the social and emotional well-being of students are needed to counteract the ill effects of COVID-19 stress, even as students are now back to school full-time. Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic has adversely affected various populations in different ways. For example, the pandemic has added additional layers of stress and trauma for students from marginalized backgrounds (Grooms & Childs, 2021; Kantamneni, 2020), as well as students from low socioeconomic status (Hammerstein et al., 2021; Van Lancker & Parolin, 2020) and both high- and low-achieving students (Grewenig et al., 2021). Addressing these issues (COVID-19 stress, internalizing problems, and available school support systems) in student populations at risk may help with finding ways to provide needed resources to students and their families. As such, providing mental health services and support to students who may have lingering stress from the pandemic is crucial. This has implications for teachers and other school personnel (school psychologists, counselors, and social workers) in addressing the persistent stressful impacts on students because of school closures during the pandemic (Hoffman & Miller, 2020; Song et al., 2022; Sullivan et al., 2021).

Furthermore, since the current study found teacher support to be a buffer in the association between COVID-19 stress and student internalizing problems, teacher support in this post-pandemic time may help alleviate students’ lingering stress from the pandemic. For example, providing support to students in various ways to counteract the lingering effects of COVID-19 stress to enhance their social, emotional, behavioral, and academic development, which was not feasible during the pandemic. These supports may include identifying signs of distress in students which could manifest in behaviors (e.g., withdrawal, poor concentration, irritability, poor academic achievement, behavioral issues), introducing and participating in activities to reduce stress (e.g., relaxation techniques) which could be built in within the class period, and promoting student well-being by doing frequent emotional check-ins or referring them to school psychologists, counselors, or social workers for additional support if need be.

Limitations and Future Directions

Although the results of the study are encouraging and have important implications as elaborated above, they should be considered within the scope of certain limitations. A major limitation of the study is the use of cross-sectional data, which does not give us the ability to establish the direction of relationships. For example, students’ internalizing problems could very likely contribute to the perceptions of COVID-19-related stress (i.e., someone with depressive symptoms would find COVID-19-related experiences to be more stressful than someone who does not have depressive symptoms), but the cross-sectional nature of the data does not allow for establishing directionality of relationships between variables. The second limitation of the current study is the use of a modified measure of COVID-19 stressors, which is a novel measure. However, prior studies have utilized this measure within elementary, middle, and high school settings (Demaray et al., 2021; Styck et al., 2021). The third limitation of the study is the use of self-report measures where the participant biases may affect the results; however, since we were interested in student experiences and perceptions of school social support, the use of self-report measures was appropriate for our study. The fourth limitation was the amount of missing data and the number of participants which were deleted from analyses due to significant missingness in their responses.

Future research should focus on the long-term and prolonged effects of COVID-19 stress on the well-being of children and adolescents. Specifically, examining the effects of isolation from classmates, lack of opportunities to socialize, lack of physical exercise, and lack of intended exposure to academic curriculum via the intended mode (in person) may be important. A study by Bernasco et al., (2021) found that the association between COVID-19 stress and internalizing problems of students was moderated by peer/classmate or close friend support. Therefore, future studies need to explore the separate effects of a classmate and a close friend. Future research should also examine the long-term impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, especially for students with marginalized identities, and how teacher and/or peer support may play a role in buffering these stressors for students. As students are now back in school full-time, peer and classmate support may be an important buffer against lingering stressors related to COVID-19.

Biographies

Swapna Balkundi

is a third year doctoral student in the combined doctoral program of Counseling and School Psychology and a Graduate Assistant at the Alberti Center for Bullying Abuse Prevention at the University at Buffalo, SUNY. Her research interests include looking at factors that influence the association between social emotional challenges in Youth that lead to their academic decline.

Stephanie Fredrick

is an Assistant Professor of School Psychology and Associate Director of the Alberti Center for Bullying Abuse Prevention in the Graduate School of Education at the University at Buffalo, SUNY. Her research focuses on risk and protective factors for youth involved in bullying and cyberbullying, as well as school-based strategies for promoting mental health and reducing victimization in person and online.

Declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Footnotes

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

  1. Aldrup, K., Klusmann, U., Lüdtke, O., Göllner, R., & Trautwein, U. (2018). Social support and classroom management are related to secondary students’ general school adjustment: A multilevel structural equation model using student and teacher ratings. Journal of Educational Psychology, 110(8), 1066–1083. 10.1037/edu0000256
  2. Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American Psychologist, 44(9), 1175–1184. 10.1037/0003-066x.44.9.1175 [DOI] [PubMed]
  3. Beck AT. Depression: Clinical, experimental and theoretical aspects. Harper & Row; 1967. [Google Scholar]
  4. Beck AT, Dozois DJA. Cognitive therapy: Current status and future directions. Annual Review of Medicine. 2011;62(1):397–409. doi: 10.1146/annurev-med-052209-100032. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Bernasco, E. L., Nelemans, S. A., van der Graaff, J., & Branje, S. (2021). Friend support and internalizing symptoms in early adolescence during COVID-19. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 31(3), 692–702. 10.1111/jora.12662 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  6. Cavanaugh AM, Buehler C. Adolescent loneliness and social anxiety: The role of multiple sources of support. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships. 2015;33(2):149–170. doi: 10.1177/0265407514567837. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  7. Chadi N, Ryan NC, Geoffroy M-C. COVID-19 and the impacts on youth mental health: Emerging evidence from longitudinal studies. Canadian Journal of Public Health. 2022;113(1):44–52. doi: 10.17269/s41997-021-00567-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Chu PS, Saucier DA, Hafner E. Meta-analysis of the relationships between social support and well-being in children and adolescents. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology. 2010;29(6):624–645. doi: 10.1521/jscp.2010.29.6.624. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  9. Ciarrochi J, Morin AJS, Sahdra BK, Litalien D, Parker PD. A longitudinal person-centered perspective on youth social support: Relations with psychological wellbeing. Developmental Psychology. 2017;53(6):1154–1169. doi: 10.1037/dev0000315. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Clemens V, Deschamps P, Fegert JM, Anagnostopoulos D, Bailey S, Doyle M, Eliez S, Hansen AS, Hebebrand J, Hillegers M, Jacobs B, Karwautz A, Kiss E, Kotsis K, Kumperscak HG, Pejovic-Milovancevic M, Christensen AM, Raynaud J-P, Westerinen H, Visnapuu-Bernadt P. Potential effects of “social” distancing measures and school lockdown on child and adolescent mental health. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. 2020;29(6):739–742. doi: 10.1007/s00787-020-01549-w. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Cohen S, Gottlieb BH, Underwood LG. Social Support Measurement and Intervention. 2000. Social relationships and health; pp. 3–26. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Cohen, Z. P., Cosgrove, K. T., DeVille, D. C., Akeman, E., Singh, M. K., White, E., Stewart, J. L., Aupperle, R. L., Paulus, M. P., & Kirlic, N. (2021). The impact of covid-19 on adolescent mental health: Preliminary findings from a longitudinal sample of healthy and at-risk adolescents. Frontiers in Pediatrics, 9. 10.3389/fped.2021.622608 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  13. Czeisler, M. É., Lane, R. I., Petrosky, E., Wiley, J. F., Christensen, A., Njai, R., Weaver, M. D., Robbins, R., Facer-Childs, E. R., Barger, L. K., Czeisler, C. A., Howard, M. E., & Rajaratnam, S. M. W. (2020). Mental health, substance use, and suicidal ideation during the COVID-19 pandemic — United States, June 24–30, 2020. MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 69(32), 1049–1057. 10.15585/mmwr.mm6932a1 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  14. Demaray, M. K., & Malecki, C. K. (2003). Perceptions of the frequency and importance of social support by students classified as victims, bullies, and bully/victims in an urban middle school. School Psychology Review, 32(3), 471–489. 10.1080/02796015.2003.12086213
  15. Demaray MK, Malecki CK, Secord SM, Lyell KM. Promoting social support. 2002. p. 215. [Google Scholar]
  16. Demaray, M. K., Ogg, J. A., Malecki, C. K., & Styck, K. M. (2021). Covid-19 stress and coping and associations with internalizing problems in 4th through 12th grade students. School Psychology Review, 51(2), 150–169. 10.1080/2372966x.2020.1869498
  17. Ellis WE, Dumas TM, Forbes LM. Physically isolated but socially connected: Psychological adjustment and stress among adolescents during the initial COVID-19 crisis. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science / Revue Canadienne Des Sciences Du Comportement. 2020;52(3):177–187. doi: 10.1037/cbs0000215. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  18. Ettman, C. K., Abdalla, S. M., Cohen, G. H., Sampson, L., Vivier, P. M., & Galea, S. (2020). Prevalence of depression symptoms in US adults before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. JAMA Network Open, 3(9). 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.19686 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  19. 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(1). 10.1186/s13034-020-00329-3 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  20. Fernández Lasarte, O., Ramos Díaz, E., Goñi Palacios, E., & Rodríguez Fernández, A. (2020). The role of social support in school adjustment during Secondary Education. Psicothema, 32(1), 100–107. 10.7334/psicothema2019.125 [DOI] [PubMed]
  21. Forster M, Grigsby TJ, Gower AL, Mehus CJ, McMorris BJ. The role of social support in the association between childhood adversity and adolescent self-injury and suicide: Findings from a statewide sample of high school students. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 2020;49(6):1195–1208. doi: 10.1007/s10964-020-01235-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Fredrick SS, Demaray MK, Jenkins LN. Multidimensional perfectionism and internalizing problems: Do teacher and classmate support matter? The Journal of Early Adolescence. 2016;37(7):975–1003. doi: 10.1177/0272431616636231. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  23. Giallonardo, V., Sampogna, G., Del Vecchio, V., Luciano, M., Albert, U., Carmassi, C., Carrà, G., Cirulli, F., Dell’Osso, B., Nanni, M. G., Pompili, M., Sani, G., Tortorella, A., Volpe, U., & Fiorillo, A. (2020). The impact of quarantine and physical distancing following COVID-19 on mental health: Study protocol of a multicentric Italian population trial. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 11. 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00533 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  24. Green BL, Korol M, Grace MC, Vary MG, Leonard AC, Gleser GC, Smitson-Cohen S. Children and disaster: Age, gender, and parental effects on PTSD symptoms. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. 1991;30(6):945–951. doi: 10.1097/00004583-199111000-00012. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Grewenig, E., Lergetporer, P., Werner, K., Woessmann, L., & Zierow, L. (2021). Covid-19 and educational inequality: How school closures affect low- and high-achieving students. European Economic Review, 140, 103920. 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2021.103920 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  26. Grooms, A. A., & Childs, J. (2021). “we need to do better by kids”: Changing routines in U.S. schools in response to covid-19 school closures. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR), 26(2), 135–156. 10.1080/10824669.2021.1906251
  27. Guessoum SB, Lachal J, Radjack R, Carretier E, Minassian S, Benoit L, Moro MR. Adolescent psychiatric disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown. Psychiatry Research. 2020;291:113264. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113264. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Hammerstein, S., König, C., Dreisörner, T., & Frey, A. (2021). Effects of covid-19-related school closures on Student Achievement-A systematic review. Frontiers in Psychology, 12. 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.746289 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  29. Hamouche S. COVID-19 and employees’ mental health: Stressors, moderators and agenda for organizational actions. Emerald Open Research. 2020;2:15. doi: 10.35241/emeraldopenres.13550.1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  30. Hayes, A. F. (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford publications.
  31. Henrich, C. C., & Shahar, G. (2008). Social support buffers the effects of terrorism on adolescent depression: Findings from Sderot, Israel. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 47(9), 1073–1076. 10.1097/chi.0b013e31817eed08 [DOI] [PubMed]
  32. Hoffman, J. A., & Miller, E. A. (2020). Addressing the consequences of school closure due to Covid‐19 on children's physical and mental well‐being. World Medical & Health Policy, 12(3), 300–310. 10.1002/wmh3.365 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  33. Imran, N., Zeshan, M., & Pervaiz, Z. (2020). Mental health considerations for children & adolescents in COVID-19 pandemic. Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences, 36(COVID19-S4). 10.12669/pjms.36.covid19-s4.2759 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  34. Isumi, A., Doi, S., Yamaoka, Y., Takahashi, K., & Fujiwara, T. (2020). Do suicide rates in children and adolescents change during school closure in Japan? the acute effect of the first wave of covid-19 pandemic on child and Adolescent Mental Health. Child Abuse & Neglect, 110, 104680. 10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104680 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  35. Kantamneni, N. (2020). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on marginalized populations in the United States: A research agenda. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 119, 103439. 10.1016/j.jvb.2020.103439 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  36. Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford Press; 2011. [Google Scholar]
  37. Kovacs, M., & Devlin, B. (1998). Internalizing disorders in childhood. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 39(1), 47–63. 10.1017/s0021963097001765 [PubMed]
  38. Kuhfeld, M., Soland, J., Tarasawa, B., Johnson, A., Ruzek, E., & Liu, J. (2020). Projecting the potential impact of covid-19 school closures on academic achievement. Educational Researcher, 49(8), 549–565. 10.3102/0013189x20965918
  39. Kwong, A. S., Pearson, R. M., Smith, D., Northstone, K., Lawlor, D. A., & Timpson, N. J. (2020). Longitudinal evidence for persistent anxiety in young adults through covid-19 restrictions. Wellcome Open Research, 5, 195. 10.12688/wellcomeopenres.16206.1
  40. Ladouceur, C. D. (2020). COVID-19 adolescent symptom and psychological experience questionnaire (CASPE). 
  41. Lessard LM, Puhl RM. Adolescent academic worries amid COVID-19 and perspectives on pandemic-related changes in teacher and peer relations. School Psychology. 2021;36(5):285–292. doi: 10.1037/spq0000443. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Little TD, Rhemtulla M, Gibson K, Schoemann AM. Why the items versus parcels controversy needn’t be one. Psychological Methods. 2013;18(3):285–300. doi: 10.1037/a0033266. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Little TD, Rioux C, Odejimi OA, Stickley ZL. Parceling in structural equation modeling. 2022. [Google Scholar]
  44. Loades, M. E., Chatburn, E., Higson-Sweeney, N., Reynolds, S., Shafran, R., Brigden, A., Linney, C., McManus, M. N., Borwick, C., & Crawley, E. (2020). Rapid systematic review: The impact of social isolation and loneliness on the mental health of children and adolescents in the context of covid-19. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 59(11). 10.1016/j.jaac.2020.05.009 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  45. Malecki CK, Demaray MK, Elliott SN. A working manual on the development of the child and adolescent social support scale. 2 2014. [Google Scholar]
  46. Malecki, C. K., & Demary, M. K. (2002). Measuring perceived social support: Development of the Child and Adolescent Social Support Scale (CASSS). Psychology in the Schools, 39(1), 1–18. 10.1002/pits.10004
  47. Merikangas KR, He J, Burstein M, Swanson SA, Avenevoli S, Cui L, Benjet C, Georgiades K, Swendsen J. Lifetime prevalence of mental disorders in U.S. adolescents: Results from the national comorbidity survey replication–adolescent supplement (NCS-A) Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. 2010;49(10):980–989. doi: 10.1016/j.jaac.2010.05.017. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Mikami AY, Ruzek EA, Hafen CA, Gregory A, Allen JP. Perceptions of relatedness with classroom peers promote adolescents’ behavioral engagement and achievement in secondary school. Journal of Youth and Adolescence. 2017;46(11):2341–2354. doi: 10.1007/s10964-017-0724-2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Muthén LK, Muthén BO. Mplus User’s Guide. 7. Muthén; 2012. [Google Scholar]
  50. Pearson J. E. (1986). The definition and measurement of social support. Journal of Counseling & Development, 64(6), 390–395. 10.1002/j.1556-6676.1986.tb01144.x
  51. Porter BM, Douglas IJ, Larguinho TL, Aristizabal M, Mitchell ME, Roe MA, Church JA. Examination of pre-pandemic measures on youth well-being during early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic. Biological Psychiatry Global Open Science. 2021;1(4):252–260. doi: 10.1016/j.bpsgos.2021.08.003. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Pouwelse M, Bolman C, Lodewijkx H, Spaa M. Gender differences and social support: Mediators or moderators between peer victimization and depressive feelings? Psychology in the Schools. 2011;48(8):800–814. doi: 10.1002/pits.20589. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  53. Racine N, Cooke JE, Eirich R, Korczak DJ, McArthur BA, Madigan S. Child and adolescent mental illness during COVID-19: A rapid review. Psychiatry Research. 2020;292:113307. doi: 10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113307. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Renshaw, T. L., & Cook, C. R. (2016). Initial development and validation of the youth internalizing problems screener. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 36(4), 366–378. 10.1177/0734282916679757
  55. Reuter, P. R., Forster, B. L., & Kruger, B. J. (2021). A longitudinal study of the impact of COVID-19 restrictions on students’ health behavior, mental health and emotional wellbeing. PeerJ, 9. 10.7717/peerj.12528 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  56. Rigby, E. K. (2000). Effects of peer victimization in schools and perceived social support on adolescent well-being. Journal of Adolescence, 23(1), 57–68. 10.1006/jado.1999.0289 [DOI] [PubMed]
  57. Rucinski CL, Brown JL, Downer JT. Teacher–child relationships, classroom climate, and children’s social-emotional and academic development. Journal of Educational Psychology. 2018;110(7):992–1004. doi: 10.1037/edu0000240. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  58. Rueger SY, Malecki CK, Pyun Y, Aycock C, Coyle S. A meta-analytic review of the association between perceived social support and depression in childhood and adolescence. Psychological Bulletin. 2016;142(10):1017–1067. doi: 10.1037/bul0000058. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  59. Sher, L. (2020). The impact of the covid-19 pandemic on suicide rates. QJM: An International Journal of Medicine, 113(10), 707–712. 10.1093/qjmed/hcaa202 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  60. Song, S. Y., Wang, C., Espelage, D. L., Fenning, P. A., & Jimerson, S. R. (2022). Covid-19 and School Psychology: Research reveals the persistent impacts on parents and students, and the promise of school telehealth supports. School Psychology Review, 51(2), 127–131. 10.1080/2372966x.2022.2044237
  61. Styck, K. M., Malecki, C. K., Ogg, J., & Demaray, M. K. (2020). Measuring COVID-19-related stress among 4th through 12th grade students. School Psychology Review, 1–16.
  62. Styck KM, Malecki CK, Ogg J, Demaray MK. Measuring COVID-19-related stress among 4th through 12th grade students. School Psychology Review. 2021;50(4):530–545. doi: 10.1080/2372966x.2020.1857658. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  63. Sullivan, A. L., Harris, B., Miller, F. G., Fallon, L. M., Weeks, M. R., Malone, C. M., Kulkarni, T., Proctor, S. L., Johnson, A. H., Rossen, E., Nguyen, T., & Shaver, E. (2021). A call to action for school psychology to address COVID-19 health disparities and advance social justice. School Psychology, 36(5), 410–421. 10.1037/spq0000463 [DOI] [PubMed]
  64. Tanaka, T., & Okamoto, S. (2021). Increase in suicide following an initial decline during the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan. Nature Human Behaviour, 5(2), 229–238. 10.1038/s41562-020-01042-z [DOI] [PubMed]
  65. Tardy, C. H. (1985). Social Support Measurement. American Journal of Community Psychology, 13(2), 187–202. 10.1007/bf00905728
  66. Van Lancker, W., & Parolin, Z. (2020). Covid-19, school closures, and Child poverty: A social crisis in the making. The Lancet Public Health, 5(5). 10.1016/s2468-2667(20)30084-0 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  67. Wang, G., Zhang, Y., Zhao, J., Zhang, J., & Jiang, F. (2020). Mitigate the effects of home confinement on children during the covid-19 Outbreak. The Lancet, 395(10228), 945–947. 10.1016/s0140-6736(20)30547-x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  68. World Health Organization. (2020). Mental health and psychosocial considerations during the covid-19 outbreak, 18 March 2020. World Health Organization.https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/331490
  69. Wyse AE, Stickney EM, Butz D, Beckler A, Close CN. The potential impact of COVID-19 on student learning and how schools can respond. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice. 2020;39(3):60–64. doi: 10.1111/emip.12357. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  70. Xie, Q., Fan, F., Fan, X.-P., Wang, X.-J., Chen, M.-J., Zhong, B.-L., & Chiu, H. F.-K. (2020). Covid-19 patients managed in psychiatric inpatient settings due to first-episode mental disorders in Wuhan, China: Clinical characteristics, treatments, outcomes, and our experiences. Translational Psychiatry, 10(1). 10.1038/s41398-020-01022-x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  71. Zahn-Waxler, C., Klimes-Dougan, B., & Slattery, M. J. (2000). Internalizing problems of childhood and adolescence: Prospects, Pitfalls, and progress inunderstanding the development of anxiety and depression. Development and Psychopathology, 12(3), 443–466. 10.1017/s0954579400003102 [PubMed]

Articles from Contemporary School Psychology are provided here courtesy of Nature Publishing Group

RESOURCES