Abstract
Background
This study examines the impact of confinement measures implemented to prevent the spread of COVID-19 on the anxiety and depression levels of college students, particularly focusing on how the extended period of confinement significantly contributed to the deterioration of their mood states.
Methods
The present quantitative study utilized a sample of 13,255 participants drawn from three universities located in Guangzhou City. To examine the impact of confinement, the sample included participants from two universities subject to confinement policies and one university without such restrictions. Data were collected via online surveys administered using Wenjuanxing, encompassing the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (ERQ), the PHQ-9 Depression Screening Scale, the GAD-7 Anxiety Screening Scale, and the Resilience Scale.
Results
The findings revealed that the effectiveness of cognitive reappraisal in mitigating anxiety (t = -8.132, p < 0.001) and depression (t = -8.423, p < 0.001) decreased in less confined environments, and could even reverse, becoming a factor contributing to increased anxiety (t = 2.794, p = 0.005) and depression (t = 2.332, p = 0.020) in highly confined settings with increasing levels of goal focus (t = 9.008, p < 0.001, anxiety; t = 7.408, p < 0.001, depression). Moreover, expressive suppression was found to positively correlate with both anxiety (t = 8.809, p < 0.001, highly confined; t = 3.001, p = 0.003, less confined) and depression (t = 8.324, p < 0.001, highly confined; t = 2.724, p = 0.007, less confined). Goal focus was observed to exacerbate its adverse effects on anxiety (t = 11.03, p < 0.001 in highly confined situations; t = 11.129, p < 0.001 in less confined situations) and on depression (t = 6.301, p < 0.001 in highly confined situations; t = 8.412, p < 0.001 in less confined situations).
Conclusion
This research contributes valuable knowledge to the understanding of the complex interplay between emotional regulation, goal focus, and psychological well-being during times of crisis.
Supplementary Information
The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12888-025-07303-3.
Keywords: Emotion regulation strategies, Goal focus, Depression, Anxiety, Confinement situation
Introduction
Over the past four years, the COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly impacted individuals’ finances, social relationships, and physical and psychological well-being globally. In response, the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) implemented confinement measures during the pandemic. When a specific area reached a certain threshold of COVID-19 cases or individuals in close contact with patients, it was designated as a confined area. Although this strategy effectively contained the spread of the virus, it restricted individuals’ physical mobility and disrupted their daily routines, leading to specific effects on residents’ psychological well-being [1, 2].
Prior to the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, the college students had already emerged as one of the susceptible groups affected by various psychological health issues. The academic pressure faced by college students [3], irregular lifestyle habits [4], intricate social relationships [5], and perceptions of uncertainty regarding future employment and life contributed to their vulnerability as one of the populations most prone to psychological health problems. In contrast, higher levels of positive mental health not only enhance students’ academic performance but also reduce future anxieties, prevent suicide [6], and elevate their sense of well-being. However, within the context of the unexpected COVID-19 pandemic and dynamic disease confinement, heightened levels of anxiety and depression was observed with social geographical confinement.
Given the adverse impacts of the pandemic on mental health, particularly among college students, it is imperative to explore viable strategies to mitigate these effects. Emotion regulation strategies refer to the means individuals employ to manage their emotions, effectively altering feelings, beliefs, and behaviors, thereby enriching daily life with meaning and enabling goal attainment [7]. In response to the negative impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, college students may utilize emotion regulation strategies to cognitively manage negative emotions. Emotion regulation steers emotional responses toward goal-oriented outcomes, reducing anxiety and depression levels, and enhancing mental well-being and happiness [8]. The two most frequently studied emotion-regulation strategies within the framework of the process model of emotion-regulation are cognitive reappraisal and expressive suppression [9, 10].
Cognitive reappraisal, an antecedent-focused strategy, involves reinterpreting emotion-eliciting situations to modify emotional outcomes. Conversely, expressive suppression, a response-focused strategy, entails deliberately inhibiting observable emotional expressions [11] Previous research indicates that cognitive reappraisal effectively mitigates anxiety and depression while promoting mental well-being [12]. However, the effects of expressive suppression remain contentious, with numerous studies suggesting it may exacerbate anxiety and depression while detracting from mental well-being [12]. Importantly, an individual’s ability to cope with negative emotions is influenced by the adversity they encounter in challenging circumstances [13, 14]. Consequently, the relationship between emotion regulation strategies and psychological well-being may vary between students in highly confined and less confined situations.
Although emotion regulation plays a significant role in psychological well-being, individual traits, particularly resilience, influence how individuals utilize emotion regulation strategies to cope with stress. In line with the definition of psychological resilience, the capacity to maintain health in the presence of adversity [15] reflects emotion regulation, as individuals with strong emotion regulation abilities tend to exhibit higher levels of psychological resilience. Other studies propose that resilience is a trait, whereby individuals with higher psychological resilience are better able to regulate their emotions [16]. Enhancing psychological resilience has proven effective in both preventing and treating mental health disorders, underscoring its vital role [17]. Notably, research has established a favorable link between the adept utilization of emotion regulation strategies and the cultivation of psychological resilience, implying that the appropriate application of such techniques positively contributes to resilience development and maintenance [18]. Consequently, emotion regulation strategies may exert their influence on mental well-being by modulating individuals’ resilience levels.
Within the multifaceted construct of psychological resilience, five dimensions stand out: self-awareness, mindfulness, self-care, positive social relationships, and goal focus. Amongst these, goal focus assumes paramount importance during periods of pandemic-induced isolation. By directing attention towards pre-existing goals and persevering in their pursuit amidst solitude, individuals foster psychological resilience. Goal focus serves as a pivotal indicator of commitment and belief in one’s objectives, embedded within the broader framework of resilience. Furthermore, its applicability extends beyond challenging times, resonating deeply in daily life contexts. Prior investigations have illuminated a correlation among goal focus, emotion regulation strategies, and negative psychological states, suggesting a nuanced interplay between these variables [19].
In essence, our understanding of how emotion regulation strategies modulate individuals’ psychological well-being, particularly in the context of stringent confinement measures, remains limited. Notably, prior research has often treated psychological resilience as a monolithic construct [20], overlooking the nuanced roles played by specific sub-dimensions like goal focus, which remains underexplored, especially in the context of prolonged adversity.
The aim of this study was to examine how the relationship between emotion regulation strategies and levels of anxiety and depression among college students is influenced by goal focus and the strictness of pandemic confinement measures during the COVID-19 pandemic. Additionally, we aim to explore whether different confinement conditions impact the interaction between goal focus and the effectiveness of emotion regulation strategies.
Materials and methods
Participants
This study was conducted in Guangzhou and focused on three universities. The research involved sending out survey invitations at the class level through university counselors. Participants complete the questionnaire online after providing informed consent. Inform consents were obtained from every participant who participated in our study. The survey and informed consents were conducted using the Wenjuanxing (www.wjx.com) platform. Among the three selected universities, two are in highly confined situations (where students cannot leave campus but can freely engage in activities within the school premises, with no gatherings of more than ten people allowed in enclosed spaces). In contrast, one university is in a less confined situation with no specific restrictions (For the specific isolation strategies, please refer to: Protocol for Prevention and Control of COVID-19). The procedures of the experiment were approved by local ethics in accordance with the standards of the Declaration of Helsinki. All participants had no obstacle in vision and reported no history of neurological or psychiatric disorders, and no current use of any medication or recreational drugs with online self-reported Survey. During our research, participants residing in constrained areas were not directly informed by the principal investigators regarding the specifics of confinement measures. However, electronic copies of the informed consent forms were disseminated via the online platform, and all data was collected only after participants had thoroughly reviewed and understood the content. The principal investigators remained available to address any inquiries and elaborate on the details of the experiment via telephone. Data collection took place from April 15th to April 30th, 2022 (See Table S1 in supplementary information).
Measurements
The emotion regulation questionnaire (ERQ)
The emotion regulation strategies were measured using the Emotion Regulation Questionnaire developed by Gross and John, as translated and revised by Wang et al., (2007) [21]. Based on Gross and John’s original work [22].The questionnaire consists of 10 items, divided into two subscales: cognitive reappraisal (6 items: 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 10) and expressive suppression (4 items: 2, 4, 6, 9). Participants rated each item on a 7-point scale (1 = “Strongly Disagree” to 7 = “Strongly Agree”). Higher scores on a subscale indicate a greater use of that specific emotion regulation strategy. In this study, both the cognitive reappraisal subscale (Cronbach’s α = 0.952) and the expressive suppression subscale (Cronbach’s α = 0.855) demonstrated high reliability, indicating strong internal consistency and stability of measurement for these subscales.
The PHQ-9 depression screening scale
The PHQ-9 Depression Screening Scale functions as a widely utilized self-assessment instrument for assessing and identifying the severity of depressive symptoms. This scale is structured in accordance with the DSM-IV diagnostic standards and encompasses nine items, each encompassing the essential symptoms or sentiments associated with depression. Beneath each item, four options are presented, depicting varying degrees of frequency in the occurrence of symptoms, spanning from “not at all” (signifying that the situation did not arise for more than a single day within the past week) to “almost every day” (indicating that the situation persisted for 5–7 days during the preceding week) [23].
Participants are prompted to select the option that most precisely represents their personal circumstances. Each option is aligned with a distinct score, typically ranging from 0 to 3. By aggregating the scores across all nine items, a cumulative score is derived, which can be employed to evaluate the intensity of depressive symptoms. Typically, a higher cumulative score is indicative of more severe depressive symptoms. Scores ranging from 0 to 4 Suggest the absence or presence of only mild depressive symptoms, while scores of 5–9 indicate mild depression, 10–14 point to moderate depression, 15–19 Suggest moderately severe depression, and scores of 20–27 signify severe depression. The PHQ-9 scale has demonstrated reliability and validity, making it a valuable tool for screening and assessing depression in various research and clinical settings. This scale has demonstrated strong reliability and validity (Cronbach’s α = 0.954).
GAD-7 anxiety screening scale
The GAD-7 Anxiety Screening Scale serves as a self-assessment tool designed to measure an individual’s anxiety level over the past two weeks. This scale comprises seven items, each describing distinct symptoms or sensations associated with anxiety. Each item offers four options corresponding to varying frequencies, ranging from “not at all” to “nearly every day,” with corresponding scores from 0 to 3. Participants are instructed to select the option that most accurately reflects their personal situation. By Summing the scores across all seven items, a total score is obtained, which can be utilized to assess the severity of anxiety. Typically, higher total scores indicate greater anxiety levels. Specifically, scores ranging from 0 to 4 Suggest normal levels of anxiety or the absence of clinically significant anxiety, while scores of 5–9 indicate mild anxiety, 10–13 moderate anxiety, 14–18 moderate to severe anxiety, and scores of either 15–21 or 19–21 signify severe anxiety. The GAD-7 scale has demonstrated reliability and validity, providing a useful tool for screening and assessing anxiety levels in various research and clinical settings. This scale has demonstrated strong reliability and validity (Cronbach’s α = 0.972) [24].
Resilience scale
The measure of goal focus was adapted from the Goal-directed Focus subscale of the Psychological Resilience Scale, validated by Zhang et al. (2010) and Yang et al. (2014). This subscale is a component of the larger scale, which consists of five dimensions, with goal-directed focus being one of them (items 3, 4, 11, 20, 24). The entire scale comprises 27 items, and responses are rated on a 5-point scale (ranging from 1 = “Completely Inconsistent” to 5 = “Completely Consistent”). This scale has demonstrated strong reliability and validity (Cronbach’s α = 0.76) [25].
Statistical analysis
Item analysis was performed for the total of 31 items, and after Summation of these 31 items, they were divided into high and low groups with the 27% and 73% quartiles as the boundaries, and the differences were compared using the independent two sample T-test, and as can be seen from table S2 in supplementary information: the top and last groups showed significance for all of the above variables (p < 0.001), which means that the scales were well differentiated, and there was no need to remove the analyzed items.
The study employed IBM SPSS 24.0 and the SPSS PROCESS macro for data analysis. Initially, descriptive analysis was used to comprehend the distribution characteristics of the sample. Subsequently, an independent samples t-test was conducted to examine differences between the COVID-19 highly confined situation and the less confined situation, aiming to determine the situation of mental health scores in different measurement regions. Furthermore, Pearson correlation tests were utilized to validate the relationships between variables and assess their significance. Finally, the PROCESS macro (Model 1) was employed to investigate the moderating effect of goal-directed focus between variables. To further investigate whether the aforementioned associations differ in highly confined situation and less confined situation, we implemented Model 3 in PROCESS plugin to investigate the dual-moderating effect of goal-directed focus and confined conditions.
Ethics approval statement
All procedures performed in studies that involved human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee (Ethics Commission of Tsinghua University, 2022 Ethics Review No. 19) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Result
Demographic data analysis
In this study, a total of 13,255 valid questionnaires were collected. A total of 5,336 participants (40.3%) were from the highly confined situation, while 7,919 participants (59.7%) were from the less confined situation.
Comparison of differences in scores between highly confined and less confined situations
Our findings demonstrate that confinement measures during the COVID-19 pandemic compared to less confined conditions were associated with elevated levels of depression (t = 9.123, p < 0.001), anxiety (t = 10.511, p < 0.001), cognitive reappraisal (t = 13.952, p < 0.001), expressive suppression (t = 19.281, p < 0.001), and goal focus (t = 16.922, p < 0.001) (See Table S3 in supplementary information).
Demographic data analysis
This study conducted a multicollinearity test. If the Variance Inflation Factor (VIF) is greater than 10 with tolerance less than 0.1, it indicates strong multicollinearity in the model. In the model using Expressive Suppression and Goal Focus as predictors of anxiety and depression, Expressive Suppression (Tolerance = 0.138, VIF = 7.228) and Goal Focus (Tolerance = 0.133, VIF = 7.505) were analyzed. In the model using Cognitive Reappraisal and Goal Focus as predictors, Cognitive Reappraisal (Tolerance = 0.142, VIF = 7.038) and Goal Focus (Tolerance = 0.120, VIF = 8.356) were examined. All VIF values are below 10, indicating a certain degree of multicollinearity, but the multicollinearity is not severe.
The dual moderation effects of confined situations and goal focus relationship between emotion regulation strategies and anxiety
A similar dual moderating model analysis revealed a significant main effect (R² = 0.17, F = 253.30, p < 0.001) and a dual moderating effect (△R² = 0.009, F = 14.13, p = 0.002). There were significant interactions among cognitive reappraisal, confined situations, and goal focus in predicting anxiety. Significant interactions were also found between cognitive reappraisal and goal focus, and between goal focus and confined situations. However, the interaction between confined situations and cognitive reappraisal was not significant (p > 0.05).
Post - hoc analysis indicated cognitive reappraisal significantly correlated with reduced anxiety. Neither confined situations nor goal focus were significantly related to anxiety reduction. The cognitive reappraisal - confined situation interaction had no significant anxiety effect, while the cognitive reappraisal - goal focus, confined situation - goal focus interactions, and the three - way interaction were all significant.
When expressive suppression was used as the independent variable, the model had a significant main effect (R² = 0.18, F = 259.67, p < 0.001) but no significant dual moderating effect (△R² = 0, F = 0.09, p = 0.77).
The dual moderation effects of confined situations and goal focus relationship between emotion regulation strategies and depression
When depression was used as the dependent variable and cognitive reappraisal as the independent variable, the model had a significant main effect (R² = 0.19, F = 275.33, p < 0.001) and a dual moderating effect (△R² = 0.008, F = 13.77, p = 0.002). There were significant interactions among cognitive reappraisal, confined situations, and goal focus in predicting depression. There was also a significant interaction between cognitive reappraisal and goal focus, but the interactions between confined situations and cognitive reappraisal, and between confined situations and goal focus were not significant (p > 0.05).
Post - hoc analysis showed cognitive reappraisal significantly correlated with lower depression levels. Neither confined situations nor goal focus had significant associations with depression reduction or increase respectively. The cognitive reappraisal - confined situation interaction had no significant impact on depression, while the cognitive reappraisal - goal focus, confined situation - goal focus interactions and the three - way interaction were significant.
When expressive suppression was used as the independent variable, the model had a significant main effect (R² = 0.19, F = 277.44, p < 0.001) but no significant dual moderating effect (△R² = 0, F = 0.03, p = 0.86).
The main findings of the dual moderating model were that in the whole sample, cognitive reappraisal had a significant impact on anxiety and depression, and there were significant dual moderating effects of confined situations and goal focus. Expressive suppression had a significant impact on anxiety and depression, but the dual moderating effects of confined situations and goal focus were not significant. Therefore, a grouped moderating model analysis was carried out to further explore the effects in different situations and the moderating role of goal focus.
The moderate effect of goal focus on relationship between emotion regulation strategies and anxiety in different situations
As shown in Fig. 1, expressive suppression positively predicted anxiety both in highly confined (t = 8.809, p < 0.001) and less confined (t = 3.001, p = 0.003) situations. Goal focus significantly moderated these relationships (t = 11.03, p < 0.001 in highly confined; t = 11.129, p < 0.001 in less confined), with higher goal - focus strengthening the predictive effect on anxiety.
Fig. 1.
The moderating effect of goal focus on emotion regulation strategies (expressive suppression, cognitive reappraisal) in relation to anxiety in both situations
Regarding cognitive reappraisal, it positively predicted anxiety in highly confined situations (t = 2.794, p = 0.005), and goal focus moderated this relationship (t = 9.008, p < 0.001), where higher goal - focus enhanced the predictive effect. In less confined situations, cognitive reappraisal negatively predicted anxiety (t = − 8.132, p < 0.001), and goal focus moderated it (t = 6.261, p < 0.001), weakening its negative impact.
For expressive suppression, its effect on anxiety varies depending on the environmental context and goal focus. In highly confined situations, expressive suppression had a significant positive effect on anxiety (β > 0.52, p < 0.05) when goal focus values exceeded 10.03. In less confined situations, the effect was more complex: expressive suppression showed a significant negative effect on anxiety (β<−0.03, p < 0.05) when goal focus was below 11.24, and a significant positive effect (β > 0.03, p < 0.05) when goal focus exceeded 13.48. Between these two points (i.e., when goal focus was between 11.24 and 13.48), the conditional effect of expressive suppression on anxiety was not significant (95% confidence interval included zero).
For cognitive reappraisal, its effect on anxiety also showed context-dependent variations. In highly confined situations, cognitive reappraisal had a significant negative effect on anxiety (β<−0.03, p < 0.05) when goal focus was below 12.15, and a significant positive effect (β > 0.02, p < 0.05) when goal focus exceeded 14.86. The conditional effect was non-significant when goal focus ranged between 12.15 and 14.86 (95% confidence interval included zero). In less confined situations, cognitive reappraisal only showed a significant negative effect on anxiety (β<−0.03, p < 0.05) when goal focus was below 22.16. Table 1.
Table 1.
Moderating effect of goal focus on emotion regulation strategies and anxiety in both situations
| Levels of Moderator Variables | Regression coefficient | SE | t | p | 95% CI | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Expressive Suppression | Highly Confined Situation | Average Value | 0.196 | 0.022 | 8.809 | <0.001 | 0.153 |
| High Level(+1SD) | 0.291 | 0.027 | 10.733 | <0.001 | 0.238 | ||
| Low Level(−1SD) | 0.102 | 0.026 | 3.866 | <0.001 | 0.050 | ||
| Less Confined Situation | Average Value | 0.058 | 0.019 | 3.001 | 0.003 | 0.020 | |
| High Level(+1SD) | 0.149 | 0.027 | 5.580 | <0.001 | 0.097 | ||
| Low Level(−1SD) | −0.034 | 0.018 | −1.904 | 0.057 | −0.069 | ||
| Cognitive Reappraisal | Highly Confined Situation | Average Value | 0.040 | 0.014 | 2.794 | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| High Level(+1SD) | 0.111 | 0.019 | 5.929 | <0.001 | 0.074 | ||
| Low Level(−1SD) | −0.031 | 0.016 | −1.896 | 0.058 | −0.063 | ||
|
Less Confined Situation |
Average Value | −0.102 | 0.013 | −8.132 | <0.001 | −0.127 | |
| High Level(+1SD) | −0.069 | 0.019 | −3.689 | <0.001 | −0.105 | ||
| Low Level(−1SD) | −0.135 | 0.011 | −12.649 | <0.001 | −0.156 |
The moderate effect of goal focus on relationship between emotion regulation strategies and depression in different situations
The results are shown in Fig. 2. In the highly confined situation, expression suppression positively predicted depression (t = 8.324, p < 0.001). Goal focus significantly moderated expression suppression and depression (t = 6.301, p < 0.001), i.e., the predictive effect of expression suppression on depression increased with increasing levels of goal focus, see Table 2. In the less confined situation, expression suppression positively predicted depression (t = 2.724, p = 0.007). Goal focus significantly moderated expression suppression and depression (t = 8.412, p < 0.001), i.e., the predictive effect of expression suppression on depression increased with increasing levels of goal focus.
Fig. 2.
The moderating effect of goal focuses on emotion regulation strategies (expressive suppression, cognitive reappraisal) in relation to depression in both situations
Table 2.
Moderating effect of goal focus on emotion regulation strategies and depression in both situations
| Levels of Moderator Variables | Regression coefficient | SE | t | p | 95% CI | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Expressive Suppression | Highly Confined Situation | Average Value | 0.229 | 0.028 | 8.324 | <0.001 | 0.175 |
| High Level(+1SD) | 0.317 | 0.034 | 9.379 | <0.001 | 0.251 | ||
| Low Level(−1SD) | 0.140 | 0.032 | 4.381 | <0.001 | 0.077 | ||
| Less Confined Situation | Average Value | 0.064 | 0.024 | 2.724 | 0.007 | 0.018 | |
| High Level(+1SD) | 0.149 | 0.033 | 4.604 | <0.001 | 0.086 | ||
| Low Level−1SD) | −0.022 | 0.022 | −0.974 | 0.330 | −0.065 | ||
| Cognitive Reappraisal | Highly Confined Situation | Average Value | 0.041 | 0.018 | 2.332 | 0.020 | 0.007 |
| High Level(+1SD) | 0.113 | 0.023 | 4.819 | <0.001 | 0.067 | ||
| Low Level(−1SD) | −0.031 | 0.020 | −1.544 | 0.123 | −0.070 | ||
| Less Confined Situation | Average Value | −0.128 | 0.015 | −8.423 | <0.001 | −0.158 | |
| High Level(+1SD) | −0.101 | 0.022 | −4.502 | <0.001 | −0.144 | ||
| Low Level(−1SD) | −0.155 | 0.013 | −11.613 | <0.001 | −0.182 |
In the highly confined situation, cognitive reappraisal positively predicted depression (t = 2.332, p = 0.020). Goal focus significantly moderated cognitive reappraisal and depression (t = 7.408, p < 0.001), i.e., the predictive effect of cognitive reappraisal on depression increased with increasing levels of goal focus. In the less confined situation, cognitive reappraisal negatively predicted depression (t = −8.423, p < 0.001). Goal focus significantly moderated cognitive reappraisal and depression (t = 4.185, p < 0.001), i.e., goal focus attenuated the negative effect of cognitive reappraisal on depression.
For expressive Suppression, the conditional effect on depression varied based on the situation type and goal focus. In highly confined situations, expressive Suppression had a significantly positive effect on depression when goal focus exceeded 9.00 (β > 0.09, p < 0.05). In less confined situations, the relationship was more nuanced. Expressive Suppression showed a significantly negative effect on depression when goal focus was below 10.35 (β<−0.04, p < 0.05). Conversely, a significantly positive effect emerged when goal focus Surpassed 13.41 (β > 0.03, p < 0.05). The conditional effect of expressive Suppression on depression was not significant when goal focus ranged between 10.35 and 13.41 (95% confidence interval included zero).
For cognitive reappraisal, the findings also depended on the situation type and goal focus. In highly confined situations, cognitive reappraisal had a significantly negative effect on depression when goal focus was below 11.74 (β<−0.04, p < 0.05). A significantly positive effect was observed when goal focus exceeded 15.09 (β > 0.03, p < 0.05). The conditional effect of cognitive reappraisal on depression was not significant when goal focus ranged between 11.74 and 15.09 (95% confidence interval included zero).
In less confined situations, although the overall interaction was significant, Johnson-Neyman analysis indicated no significant Johnson-Neyman points within the observed range of goal focus. This suggests that the conditional effect of cognitive reappraisal on depression was consistently negative and significant across all observed levels of goal focus in this environment.
Discussion
Although the COVID-19 pandemic is now three years in the past, this study remains significant as an examination of a large-scale, human-imposed control environment. Our findings shed light on the specific roles of emotion regulation strategies and goal focus in different confined settings. This research offers valuable insights into the psychological impact of isolation policies during public health crises, particularly in high-density living environments. We observed that the relationship between cognitive reappraisal and both anxiety and depression was significantly moderated by confinement situations and goal focus, thereby reducing the risk of anxiety and depression.
Dual moderating role of goal focus and confined situations in the relationship between emotion regulation strategies and anxiety and depression
The interaction between cognitive reappraisal and goal focus significantly influenced both anxiety and depression. This highlights the pivotal role of goal focus in mediating the relationship between cognitive reappraisal and emotional outcomes. Interestingly, under conditions of confinement, a strong focus on goals was significantly associated with increased depression, while a weaker focus correlated with reduced depression. This suggests that individuals who are highly goal-oriented might be more inclined to use cognitive reappraisal in stressful situations, potentially to mitigate their risk of depression.
The COVID-19 pandemic, with its associated confinement and social distancing, severely impacted people’s ability to pursue and achieve their goals [26]. This unique global health crisis may have neutralized other factors, like planfulness, that typically support goal pursuit [27]. Studies show that not only COVID-19 but also other health crises, such as SARS and Ebola, have disrupted goal striving [28, 29]. The widespread and prolonged nature of the pandemic could foster a chronic sense of threat and fear toward goals [30], potentially disrupting an individual’s focus. During COVID-19 confinement, people had to adjust and adapt their goals [31]. We suspect this period was particularly likely to result in “frozen goals”—where individuals remain committed despite reduced efforts [26]. A high level of goal focus makes it harder for people to abandon unattainable goals during a pandemic, which can negatively affect their well-being [27, 32]. Persisting in goal pursuit amidst a global pandemic can be detrimental, leading to rumination on unattainable goals and contributing to negative mental health outcomes [32].
Expressive suppression, as an alternative emotion regulation strategy, also showed impacts on anxiety and depression that were moderated by confinement and goal focus. Although we didn’t observe significant interactive effects in the model for expressive suppression, the significant main effects of confinement and goal focus suggest these two variables play a crucial role in the emotion regulation process.
The relationship between emotion regulation strategies and anxiety and depression in different situations
In less confined situations, our findings align with previous research, suggesting that emotion regulation strategies, especially cognitive reappraisal and expressive suppression, distinctly impact mental health [33, 34]. Our study indicates a significant association between these strategies and depression and anxiety [35–37].
Interestingly, for cognitive reappraisal, we observed an impaired pattern in highly confined situations that was inconsistent with our findings in less confined settings. This led us to explore the potential role of goal focus in understanding these divergent results. Unexpectedly, we found that cognitive reappraisal had an exacerbated effect on anxiety and depression in these highly confined situations, and this aggravating effect was even more pronounced among individuals with a higher level of goal focus.
Our study further supports the role of emotion regulation strategies in reducing negative emotions. Consistent with prior research [38] that examined a cohort of 127 healthy individuals with heightened trait anxiety before the pandemic, we found that reducing maladaptive emotion regulation strategies could alleviate depressive symptoms. Our results also confirm that emotion regulation strategies mediate the negative correlation between COVID-19 stress and depression [29], aligning with previous findings. Additionally, our findings resonate with prior research [39] suggesting that individuals with higher scores on goal-directed behavior when facing distress are more prone to emotion regulation failure, particularly in the context of sleep difficulties. Goal focus emerged as a key moderating variable in our study.
The moderating role of goal focus in expressive suppression and anxiety in different situations
The study revealed a positive association between expressive suppression and anxiety in both highly confined and less confined situations, suggesting that suppressing emotional expression may exacerbate anxiety levels. These findings align with our prior hypotheses and resonate with earlier research indicating that reducing expressive suppression can alleviate anxiety [40]. Specifically, for young college students, lessening expressive suppression acts as a protective factor by enhancing emotional expression [41], thereby preventing the accumulation of negative emotions and consequently reducing anxiety. Thus, minimizing the use of expressive suppression can mitigate anxiety.
However, the study also underscored the detrimental impact of goal focus on mental health under both confinement conditions, as it intensified the exacerbation of anxiety by expressive suppression. As anticipated, uncertainty due to the pandemic induced anxiety in both highly and less confined settings, and students employing expressive suppression generally experienced a passive increase in negative impact. Unexpectedly, the association between expressive suppression and anxiety levels was heightened with increased goal focus, contrary to our initial expectations.
One possible explanation is that while increased goal focus is typically linked to utilizing social resources for stress coping, confinement prevented access to such support, hindering the remission of uncertainty and negative feelings through physical interaction. Another potential explanation arises from the instrument’s item descriptions. The goal focus subscale of the resilience scale primarily addresses life goal setting, motivation, attention focus, planning, and recovery post-stressful events. However, under pandemic circumstances, discerning the valence of students’ goals and attention focus proves challenging.The
Moderating effect of goal focus on the relationship between expressive suppression and depression in different situations
The study’s findings partially align with our initial hypotheses. We observed a positive correlation between expressive suppression and depression in both highly and less confined situations, consistent with prior research [42]. This suggests that reduced expressive suppression may allow for the release of accumulated stress, leading to decreased depression.
Additionally, goal focus appears to help students redirect attention from negative emotions, thereby mitigating their impact and lowering depression. Conversely, in less confined settings, the limited moderating effect of goal focus might be due to students having more diverse and simplified goals outside of school, which reduces the emphasis on specific objectives and diminishes the regulatory influence of goal focus.
The moderating role of goal focus in the relationship between cognitive reappraisal and anxiety in different situations
In highly confined situations, we observed a positive correlation between cognitive reappraisal and anxiety, which contradicts existing findings [43]. This discrepancy may arise from the unique challenges of confinement, where limited daily activities and social interactions can deprive individuals of positive experiences. This lack of accessible pleasures may exacerbate psychological stress, hindering the effectiveness of cognitive reappraisal in alleviating anxiety.
Conversely, in less confined situations, a negative correlation between cognitive reappraisal and anxiety was observed, consistent with prior research. Here, the impact of cognitive reappraisal on anxiety varies with levels of goal focus, acting as a moderator. Specifically, cognitive reappraisal shows a stronger influence on anxiety at average and low levels of goal focus, but its impact weakens at high levels, suggesting an attenuation of its anxiety-reducing effect as goal focus increases.
In highly confined settings, however, the significant moderating effect of goal focus could be attributed to the difficulty individuals face in reconstructing scenarios for cognitive reappraisal [44]. This can nullify or even reverse its effects. For instance, without positive current activities, individuals may struggle to envision new optimistic scenarios compared to past experiences [45]. Moreover, in highly confined situations and with high goal focus, individuals encounter uncertainties regarding achieving near-term goals. In such scenarios of high uncertainty and potential obstacles, those with high goal focus experience greater negative impacts [46]. Consequently, cognitive reappraisal strategies, instead of reducing anxiety, may trigger increased rumination and concerns [47]. These individuals tend to excessively focus on goal feasibility and potential negative consequences of failure, ultimately leading to elevated anxiety levels [48].
The moderating role of goal focus in the relationship between cognitive reappraisal and depression in different situations
Our study found that cognitive reappraisal negatively correlated with depression in less confined settings, aligning with prior hypotheses and Mogeda et al. (2021). Cognitive reappraisal helps individuals reframe negative thoughts, promoting flexible thinking. However, this relationship reversed in highly confined situations, showing a positive correlation, possibly because pandemic uncertainty and confinement challenges hindered reappraisal’s emotion-regulating effects [42]. This suggests goal focus can detract from cognitive reappraisal’s effectiveness in reducing depression. Notably, while high goal focus only slightly diminishes cognitive reappraisal’s benefits in general settings, it transforms reappraisal from a mitigating to an aggravating factor in highly confined situations [47]. This highlights goal focus’s significant influence; high goal focus not only fails to enhance reappraisal’s positive effects but undermines its role in inhibiting depression.
The moderating role of goal focus is crucial in highly confined situations. When individuals excessively focus on negative emotions and reactions, they can get trapped in an emotional amplification cycle, rendering reappraisal ineffective [48, 50]. We speculate that stress initially triggers an anxiety-like response, potentially leading to long-term depressive symptoms after two weeks of confinement. In public health emergencies, timely feedback can ease uncertainty-driven stress, while focusing on negative information worsens emotional issues [50]. Therefore, positive-focus guidance benefits mental health. Future interventions in such emergencies should prioritize reducing depression and anxiety in confinement through attention guidance or emotion regulation.
Limitations and future directions
Our study has several limitations. First, self-reported data inherently carry the risk of social desirability bias, potentially influencing participants’ responses. Second, relying solely on college student samples limits the generalizability of our findings, as this demographic may face unique pressures and psychological challenges compared to other age groups. Third, emotion regulation is a complex, multifaceted behavior. Our focus on a single strategy might overlook the interconnectedness and potential influences of other strategies, such as rumination, or various underlying psychological factors. Fourth, the use of quantitative scales restricts our ability to establish causality. Therefore, the correlations observed should be interpreted cautiously rather than as definitive causal links.
Future research should address these limitations by diversifying participant pools to include individuals from various age ranges, cultural backgrounds, and professional roles to enhance generalizability. Additionally, future studies could explore the influence of other psychological factors on mental well-being, such as the correlation with paranoia or the moderating effects of emotional focus, to improve comprehensiveness. Finally, employing longitudinal or experimental designs would be crucial for better understanding the causal mechanisms and providing a more accurate depiction of these interrelationships over time. Especially in the “post-pandemic era,” there is an urgent need for longitudinal research to reveal the long-term impact of control policies on college students. This is crucial for understanding the mental health issues brought on by pandemic-related restrictions and the secondary psychological problems stemming from the post-pandemic economic downturn.
Supplementary Information
Acknowledgements
We would like to express our thanks to all the workers who participated in this creation of this study.
Clinical trial number
Not applicable.
Abbreviations
- COVID-19
Coronavirus Disease 2019
- CDC
Center for Disease Control and Prevention
- PHQ-9
Patient Health Questionnaire 9-item
- DSM-IV
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition
- GAD-7
Generalized Anxiety Disorder 7-item
- VIF
Variance Inflation Factor
Authors’ contributions
Xiao M., contributed to Conceptualization of the research. Xu J., as the corresponding authors, made significant contributions to investigation and oversaw the overall direction of the research. Gao D., Xu J., contributed to writing and revision. Zhang C., provided valuable input in data curation. Chen X., contributed to the methodology refinement and application. Su Y., assisted in supervision of experimental work and project oversight. Wei J., was responsible for formal Analysis of the collected data. Zhuang Y., contributed to project administration tasks and ensured smooth execution of the research plan. Wu J., played a key role in validation of the research findings.All authors, including those mentioned above, contributed to writing, reviewing and editing of the manuscript. Additionally, Xiao M., were involved in funding acquisition and management of resources, as well as visualization of research outputs.
Funding
The 2023 Philosophy and Social Sciences Planning Volunteer Service Research Special Commissioned Project of Guangdong Province: ‘Research on the Contemporary Value and Practice of the Lei Feng Spirit - Based on the Practical Strategy of Linkage of Advanced Volunteer Service Projects in Universities in Guangzhou and Shenzhen, Approval Number: GD23ZYF21.
Data availability
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation, to any qualified researcher upon request.
Declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by the Ethics Commission of Tsinghua University (2022 Ethics Review No. 19). Written informed consent for participation was not required for this study in accordance with the national legislation and the institutional requirements.
Consent for publication
All data in this study were anonymized, and no personal data in any form of this study.
Competing interests
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.Su S, Zhao Y, Zeng N, Liu X, Zheng Y, Sun J, et al. Epidemiology, clinical presentation, pathophysiology, and management of long COVID: an update. Mol Psychiatry. 2023;28(10):4056–69. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Su SZ, Gong YM, Zhao YM, Ni SY, Shi L, Bao YP, et al. [Challenges of and responses to mental health problems in the Post-COVID-19 era]. Sichuan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban. 2023;54(2):217–22. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Pedrelli P, Nyer M, Yeung A, Zulauf C, Wilens T. College students: mental health problems and treatment considerations. Acad Psychiatry J Am Assoc Dir Psychiatr Resid Train Assoc Acad Psychiatry. 2015;39(5):503–11. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Haas J, Baber M, Byrom N, Meade L, Nouri-Aria K. Changes in student physical health behaviour: an opportunity to turn the concept of a healthy university into a reality. Perspect Public Health. 2018;138(6):316–24. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Cook EC. Perceived changes in peer relationships and behavioral health among college students during covid-19. J Am Coll Health J ACH. 2022;1–8. [DOI] [PubMed]
- 6.Keyes CLM, Dhingra SS, Simoes EJ. Change in level of positive mental health as a predictor of future risk of mental illness. Am J Public Health. 2010;100(12):2366–71. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Gross JJ. Emotion regulation: current status and future prospects. Psychol Inq. 2015;26(1):1–26. [Google Scholar]
- 8.Mennin DS, Holaway RM, Fresco DM, Moore MT, Heimberg RG. Delineating components of emotion and its dysregulation in anxiety and mood psychopathology. Behav Ther. 2007;38(3):284–302. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Gross, J. J.The Emerging Field of Emotion Regulation: An Integrative Review. Review of General Psychology. 1998;2(3):271-299.
- 10.Kelley NJ, Glazer JE, Pornpattananangkul N, Nusslock R. Reappraisal and suppression emotion-regulation tendencies differentially predict reward-responsivity and psychological well-being. Biol Psychol. 2019;140:35–47. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Gross JJ, Thomson RA. Emotion regulation: conceptual foundations. Jjgross Handb. 2007;21(3):431–41. [Google Scholar]
- 12.Gresham D, Gullone E. Emotion regulation strategy use in children and adolescents: the explanatory roles of personality and attachment. Personal Individ Differ. 2012;52(5):616–21. [Google Scholar]
- 13.Langer K, Hagedorn B, Stock LM, Otto T, Wolf OT, Jentsch VL. Acute stress improves the effectivity of cognitive emotion regulation in men. Sci Rep. 2020;10(1):11571. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Kinner VL, Het S, Wolf OT. Emotion regulation: exploring the impact of stress and sex. Front Behav Neurosci. 2014;8. Available from: http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/. [cited 2025 Feb 17]. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- 15.Denckla CA, Cicchetti D, Kubzansky LD, Seedat S, Teicher MH, Williams DR, et al. Psychological resilience: an update on definitions, a critical appraisal, and research recommendations. Eur J Psychotraumatology. 2020;11(1):1822064. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Kay SA. Emotion regulation and resilience: overlooked connections. Ind Organ Psychol. 2016;9(2):411–5. [Google Scholar]
- 17.Davydov DM, Stewart R, Ritchie K, Chaudieu I. Resilience and mental health. Clin Psychol Rev. 2010;30(5):479–95. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Ursu A, Măirean C. Cognitive emotion regulation strategies as mediators between resilience and stress during COVID-19 pandemic. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022;19(19):12631. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Fredericks B, Uliaszek A, Daros A, Goal Orientation. Emotion regulation strategies, and affective responses. North Am J Psychol. 2017;19:21–34. [Google Scholar]
- 20.Luthar SS, Cicchetti D, Becker B. The construct of resilience: A critical evaluation and guidelines for future work. Child Dev. 2000;71(3):543–62. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Wang L, Liu H, Li Z. Reliability and validity of emotion regulation questionnaire Chinese revised version. China J Health Psychol. 2007;15:503–5. [Google Scholar]
- 22.Gross JJ, John OP. Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2003;85(2):348–62. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Yin L, Teklu S, Pham H, Li R, Tahir P, Garcia ME. Validity of the Chinese Language patient health questionnaire 2 and 9: A systematic review. Health Equity. 2022;6(1):574–94. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Zeng QZ, He YL, Liu H, Miao JM, Chen JX, Xu HN, et al. Reliability and validity of Chinese version of the generalized anxiety disorder 7-item (GAD-7) scale in screening anxiety disorders in outpatients from traditional Chinese internal department. Chin Ment Health J. 2013;27(3):163–8. [Google Scholar]
- 25.Chen Yu, et al. Reliability and validity of Connor-Davidson resilience scale in Chinese college students. Chinese Journal of Behavioral Medicine and Brain Science. 2013:1040–3.
- 26.Davydenko M, Werner KM, Milyavskaya M. Frozen Goals: Identifying and Defining a New Type of Goal. Donnellan MB, Donnellan MB, editors. Collabra Psychol. 2019;5(1):17.
- 27.Watkins ER, Roberts H. Reflecting on rumination: consequences, causes, mechanisms and treatment of rumination. Behav Res Ther. 2020;127:103573. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Chew Q, Wei K, Vasoo S, Chua H, Sim K. Narrative synthesis of psychological and coping responses towards emerging infectious disease outbreaks in the general population: practical considerations for the COVID-19 pandemic. Singap Med J. 2020;61(7):350–6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Roy J, Jain R, Golamari R, Vunnam R, Sahu N. COVID-19 in the geriatric population. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2020;35(12):1437–41. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Bavel JJV, Baicker K, Boggio PS, Capraro V, Cichocka A, Cikara M, et al. Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response. Nat Hum Behav. 2020;4(5):460–71. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Knepple Carney A, Graf AS, Hudson G, Wilson E. Age Moderates Perceived COVID-19 Disruption on Well-Being. Meeks S, editor. The Gerontologist. 2021;61(1):30–5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
- 32.Wrosch C, Scheier MF, Miller GE, Schulz R, Carver CS. Adaptive Self-Regulation of unattainable goals: goal disengagement, goal reengagement, and subjective Well-Being. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2003;29(12):1494–508. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Aldao A, Nolen-Hoeksema S, Schweizer S. Emotion-regulation strategies across psychopathology: A meta-analytic review. Clin Psychol Rev. 2010;30(2):217–37. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Gruber J, Prinstein MJ, Clark LA, Rottenberg J, Abramowitz JS, Albano AM, et al. Mental health and clinical psychological science in the time of COVID-19: challenges, opportunities, and a call to action. Am Psychol. 2021;76(3):409–26. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Eastabrook J, Flynn J, Hollenstein T. Internalizing symptoms in female adolescents: associations with emotional awareness and emotion regulation. J Child Fam Stud. 2014;23(3):487–96. [Google Scholar]
- 36.Lanteigne DM, Flynn JJ, Eastabrook JM, Hollenstein T. Discordant patterns among emotional experience, arousal, and expression in adolescence: relations with emotion regulation and internalizing problems. Can J Behav Sci Can Sci Comport. 2014;46(1):29–39. [Google Scholar]
- 37.Dryman MT, Heimberg RG. Emotion regulation in social anxiety and depression: a systematic review of expressive suppression and cognitive reappraisal. Clin Psychol Rev. 2018;65:17–42. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Brehl AK, Schene A, Kohn N, Fernández G. Maladaptive emotion regulation strategies in a vulnerable population predict increased anxiety during the Covid-19 pandemic: A pseudo-prospective study. J Affect Disord Rep. 2021;4:100113. [Google Scholar]
- 39.Yang CC, Llamas-Díaz D, Bahena YA, Cabello R, Dahl RE, Magis-Weinberg L. Emotion regulation difficulties and sleep quality in adolescence during the early stages of the COVID-19 lockdown. J Affect Disord. 2023;338:92–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.El Keshky MES, Basyouni SS, Al Sabban AM. Getting through COVID-19: the pandemic’s impact on the psychology of sustainability, quality of life, and the global Economy – A systematic review. Front Psychol. 2020;11:585897. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Gross JJ. Emotion regulation: taking stock and moving forward. Emotion. 2013;13(3):359–65. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Dawel A, Shou Y, Gulliver A, Cherbuin N, Banfield M, Murray K, et al. Cause or symptom? A longitudinal test of bidirectional relationships between emotion regulation strategies and mental health symptoms. Emotion. 2021;21(7):1511–21. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Cludius B, Mennin D, Ehring T. Emotion regulation as a transdiagnostic process. Emotion. 2020;20(1):37–42. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Ford JL, Ildefonso K, Jones ML, Aryinen-Barrow M. Sport-related anxiety: current insights. Open Access J Sports Med. 2017;8:205–12. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Nowrouzi-Kia B, Osipenko L, Eftekhar P, Othman N, Alotaibi S, Schuster AM, et al. The early impact of the global lockdown on post-secondary students and staff: A global, descriptive study. SAGE Open Med. 2022;10:20503121221074480. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Deci EL, Ryan RM. The what and why of goal pursuits: human needs and the Self-Determination of behavior. Psychol Inq. 2000;11(4):227–68. [Google Scholar]
- 47.Gray JS, Ozer DJ, Rosenthal R. Goal conflict and psychological well-being: A meta-analysis. J Res Personal. 2017;66:27–37. [Google Scholar]
- 48.Sanjuán P, Ávila M. The mediating role of coping strategies on the relationships between goal motives and affective and cognitive components of subjective Well-Being. J Happiness Stud. 2019;20(4):1057–70. [Google Scholar]
- 49.El Keshky MES, Alsabban AM, Basyouni SS. The psychological and social impacts on personal stress for residents quarantined for COVID-19 in Saudi Arabia. Arch Psychiatr Nurs. 2021;35(3):311–6. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 50.Folkman S, Moskowitz JT. Positive affect and the other side of coping. Am Psychol. 2000;55(6):647–54. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.
Supplementary Materials
Data Availability Statement
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation, to any qualified researcher upon request.