Mediating role of negative meta-emotions on COVID stress and peritraumatic distress among adolescents in a post-pandemic era

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly affected adolescents’ psychological well-being through prolonged disruptions in social, academic, and emotional functioning. The present cross-sectional study examined the association between COVID-19-related stress and peritraumatic distress among adolescents and explored the mediating role of negative meta-emotions in this relationship. Participants were 508 high school students aged 14–17 years from Karnataka and Kerala, India, selected using purposive sampling. Data were collected using the COVID Student Stress Questionnaire (CSSQ), the Meta-Emotions Scale (MES), and the Peritraumatic Distress Inventory (PDI). The findings indicated that higher levels of COVID-19-related stress were associated with greater peritraumatic distress and higher negative meta-emotions. Negative meta-emotions were also significantly associated with peritraumatic distress and statistically mediated the relationship between COVID-19 stress and peritraumatic distress. These findings suggest that adolescents’ emotional responses toward their own emotions may play an important role in understanding psychological distress following pandemic-related experiences. The study contributes to the limited literature on meta-emotions in adolescent trauma-related research within the Indian context. The findings highlight the importance of interventions that promote meta-emotional awareness and adaptive emotional regulation strategies to reduce psychological distress among adolescents following large-scale stressful events.

Introduction

The COVID-19 pandemic, a novel global crisis that disrupted existing systems and created unprecedented challenges, generated overwhelming fear, uncertainty, and anxiety across populations regardless of age, gender, or geographical location¹. Individuals worldwide were compelled to rapidly alter their lifestyles by adapting to COVID-19 protocols such as social distancing, mask-wearing, quarantine, lockdowns, and isolation². These restrictions significantly affected multiple domains of life, including physical, economic, political, social, emotional, and psychological well-being^3–6. Consequently, heightened levels of stress, anxiety, and psychological distress became increasingly prevalent in the post-pandemic context. Although psychological consequences were observed across populations, adolescents emerged as a particularly vulnerable group due to their unique developmental characteristics.

Adolescence represents a critical developmental period marked by heightened emotional sensitivity, identity exploration, and increased dependence on peer interaction for psychosocial development⁷. The closure of schools and the abrupt transition to online learning disrupted routines and social interactions essential for healthy adolescent development^8,9. This disruption contributed to feelings of helplessness, loneliness, and relationship stress arising from peer isolation^10,11. In India, where interpersonal connectedness and collectivistic social structures play a central role in daily life, prolonged social isolation poses an even greater threat to adolescent mental health¹². Existing evidence indicates that adolescents experienced elevated emotional instability, academic stress, uncertainty regarding the future, and diminished coping resources during the pandemic.

This vulnerability can be theoretically understood through Cacioppo’s Evolutionary Theory of Loneliness, which proposes that perceived social disconnection activates psychological and physiological stress responses designed to signal threats to social survival¹³. During the pandemic, prolonged isolation and uncertainty intensified emotional dysregulation among adolescents. Even short quarantine durations were associated with persistent mood disruptions lasting several years¹⁴. These mood disruptions observed among students were found to increase from 7.07% to 30.77% during the lockdown, resulting in a decline in their psychological well-being and emotional stability^15,16. These findings suggest that adolescents may be particularly susceptible to COVID-related stress due to their developmental reliance on social connectedness and emotional validation.

COVID-related stress functioned as a multidimensional stressor encompassing fear of infection, uncertainty, financial instability, academic disruption, bereavement, and social isolation¹⁷. Exposure to these stressors contributed to the emergence of peritraumatic distress, defined as the emotional and physiological distress experienced during or immediately after a traumatic event¹⁸. Peritraumatic distress is considered an important predictor of later psychological difficulties, including PTSD, sleep disturbances, anxiety, and prolonged grief^19,20. Current evidence suggests that adolescents often experienced a progression from uncertainty and fear to emotional dysregulation and clinically significant distress during the pandemic^21–23. Physiologically, stress affects emotional functioning by disrupting emotional regulatory systems, thereby reducing the individual’s ability to manage distress effectively²⁴.

An important mechanism that may explain variations in adolescents’ responses to pandemic-related stress is through their effects on emotions, conceptualised as ‘meta-emotion’. Meta-emotions refer to individuals’ emotional reactions toward their own emotional experiences. For instance, an adolescent experiencing fear or sadness may additionally feel ashamed, guilty, frustrated, or overwhelmed by having those emotions²⁵. The nature of these secondary emotional responses plays a significant role in emotional regulation and psychological adjustment. Adaptive meta-emotions, such as emotional awareness and acceptance, may foster resilience and coping, whereas maladaptive or negative meta-emotions, including self-criticism, suppression, or shame toward one’s emotions, may intensify psychological distress²⁶.

Within the pandemic context, negative meta-emotions may have impaired adolescents’ ability to regulate COVID-related stress effectively, thereby exacerbating peritraumatic distress. Adolescents who negatively evaluated or suppressed their emotional experiences may have become increasingly vulnerable to emotional dysregulation and trauma-related symptoms²⁷. This suggests a cyclical process in which COVID-related stress contributes to maladaptive emotional responses, while negative meta-emotions further amplify distress reactions.

Conceptually, the present study proposes that COVID stress serves as a primary external stressor that directly contributes to peritraumatic distress among adolescents. Simultaneously, COVID stress may increase the likelihood of developing negative meta-emotions, such as shame, frustration, or self-criticism toward one’s emotional reactions. These maladaptive meta-emotions may, in turn, intensify peritraumatic distress by impairing emotional regulation capacities. Thus, negative meta-emotions are conceptualised as a potential psychological mechanism underlying the relationship between COVID stress and peritraumatic distress.

Despite the growing literature on the psychological impact of COVID-19, several important gaps remain. First, most existing studies have independently examined COVID stress, trauma-related distress, or emotional regulation difficulties, with limited attention to their integrated relationship. Second, although emotional regulation has been widely explored, the specific role of negative meta-emotions as a distinct emotional process remains underexplored, particularly in pandemic-related contexts. Third, much of the existing research has focused on adults, healthcare workers, or general populations, while adolescents who are developmentally more vulnerable to socio-emotional disruption remain comparatively understudied. Furthermore, there is limited evidence from collectivistic cultural contexts such as India, where family interdependence, academic expectations, and social connectedness may uniquely shape adolescents’ emotional experiences during crises.

The present study addresses these gaps by examining the theoretical and empirical relationship between COVID stress, negative meta-emotions, and peritraumatic distress among adolescents. By focusing specifically on adolescents, the study acknowledges adolescence as a sensitive developmental stage in which emotional regulation systems are still evolving, thereby increasing vulnerability to maladaptive emotional processing during large-scale crises. The novelty of the study lies in its integration of meta-emotion theory within the context of pandemic-related trauma and its attempt to explain how negative emotional responses toward one’s own emotions may contribute to peritraumatic distress. This framework offers a more nuanced understanding of adolescent psychological functioning during collective traumatic events and may provide implications for trauma-informed and emotion-focused interventions targeting adolescent mental health in post-pandemic settings.

Methods

Study design

This study employed a cross-sectional, quantitative design to examine the relationships among COVID-19-related stress, negative meta-emotions, and peritraumatic distress in adolescents. Given the cross-sectional nature of the data, all analyses were interpreted in terms of associations rather than causal effects. Data on COVID-19-related experiences and peritraumatic distress were collected retrospectively, based on participants’ recall of their experiences during the pandemic period.

Participants and sampling strategy

Participants were 508 high school students (276 males, 232 females) aged 14–17 years (M = 15.42, SD = 1.84) recruited from schools in the Indian states of Karnataka and Kerala. Data collection was conducted in early 2022, following major phases of the COVID-19 pandemic in India.

A non-probability purposive sampling approach was employed, wherein schools that granted access were included, and students were invited to participate voluntarily. Inclusion criteria comprised students who were enrolled in high school and of between the age group 14 and 17 years. Exclusion criteria included self-reported or school-reported diagnosis of a psychiatric disorder currently under clinical treatment, and inability to comprehend questionnaire items, as assessed by teachers or through initial screening instructions. These criteria were applied to minimise potential confounding influences on emotional and stress-related measures.

Measures

Standardised instruments were used to assess socio-demographic variables, negative meta-emotions, COVID-19-related stress, and peritraumatic distress.

Meta-emotions

Meta-emotions were assessed using the Meta-Emotions Scale (MES)²⁸, comprising 28 items that measure individuals’ emotional responses to their own emotions. The scale includes subdomains of negative meta-emotions (anger, contempt/shame, tough control, and suppression) and positive meta-emotions. In line with the study objectives, only negative meta-emotion scores were used in the primary analyses. The scale has demonstrated adequate reliability in prior research, and in the present study, internal consistency was high (Cronbach’s α = 0.86). The Meta-Emotions Scale has also been used in studies involving Indian populations and adolescent samples, supporting its applicability across diverse cultural contexts and younger age groups^7,29.

COVID-19 student stress

COVID-19-related stress was measured using the COVID Student Stress Questionnaire (CSSQ)³⁰, which assesses stress across domains of relationships and academic life, isolation, and fear of contagion. Items are rated on a 5-point Likert scale, with higher scores indicating greater stress. The scale has demonstrated acceptable reliability (Cronbach’s α = 0.71) in previous studies and was suitable for assessing pandemic-specific stressors in adolescents³¹. In the present study, internal consistency was found to be satisfactory (α = 0.70).

Peritraumatic distress

Peritraumatic distress was assessed using the Peritraumatic Distress Inventory (PDI)³², a widely used instrument measuring emotional and physiological distress experienced during or immediately after a traumatic event. Although peritraumatic distress is classically defined as occurring during or immediately following a traumatic event, it has also been assessed retrospectively in cross-sectional trauma research designs. The Peritraumatic Distress Inventory has also been used in Indian trauma-related research and adolescent disaster studies, supporting its applicability in culturally diverse and younger populations affected by traumatic events^33,34. In the present study, participants reported retrospectively on their distress related to COVID-19 experiences. Internal consistency in the current sample was good (α = 0.83).

Overall, the selected measures were chosen based on theoretical alignment with study constructs, prior empirical use in stress and trauma research, and suitability for adolescent populations.

Procedure

For data collection, the school management of the selected institutions was initially approached and briefed regarding the objectives and procedures of the study. Upon obtaining approval from the concerned authorities, parental consent was obtained prior to student participation.

Subsequently, students were approached within the school setting and provided with a detailed explanation of the purpose and nature of the study. Participants were informed about the study objectives, their rights as participants, and the voluntary nature of participation, with assurance of confidentiality. Following this, assent was obtained from the students before proceeding with data collection.

Data were collected using standardised questionnaires administered through both offline (in-person classroom administration) and online (Google Forms) modes, depending on school accessibility. Identical instructions and instruments were used across both formats to ensure procedural consistency. The collected data were scored, assessed, and analysed.

Statistical analysis

The data were analysed using IBM SPSS Statistics, version 22.0 (IBM Corporation) and Jamovi (Version 2.3.18). Descriptive statistics and Pearson’s correlation analysis were conducted to examine the relationships among COVID stress, negative meta-emotions, and peritraumatic distress, following the recommendations of Cohen and colleagues³⁵ for interpreting effect sizes. Prior to analysis, assumptions of normality (p > .05) and the presence of outliers were assessed and found to be within acceptable limits. Multiple linear regression analysis was performed to assess the predictive influence of COVID stress and negative meta-emotions on peritraumatic distress, in accordance with the recommendations of Field³⁶. Standardised beta coefficients, confidence intervals (95% CI), and model fit indices (R² and F-statistics) were examined as indicators of effect size and model adequacy. Mediation analysis was conducted using Jamovi (Version 2.3.18) following the guidelines proposed by Hayes³⁷ to examine the mediating role of negative meta-emotions in the relationship between COVID stress and peritraumatic distress.

Results

Out of a total of 515 adolescents who participated in the study, 7 cases were excluded due to missing data after listwise deletion. The final sample (Table 1) comprised 508 cases, with 276 male and 232 female participants from urban (N = 327), semi-urban (N = 104), and rural (N = 77) backgrounds, with a mean age of 15 years (SD = 1.6).

Table 1.

Frequency Distribution of Demographic Variables.

Variables	Frequency
N	508
Gender
Male	276
Female	232
Residence
Urban	327
Semi-Urban	104
Rural	77

Pearson’s correlation coefficients were computed to examine associations among study variables after verifying assumptions of linearity, normality, and absence of significant outliers. COVID stress was positively correlated with peritraumatic distress (r = .607, p < .001), indicating a moderate association (Table 2).

Table 2.

Correlation Coefficients for Study Variables.

		1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9
1	Negative ME
2	Tough Control	0.786**
3	Contempt	0.92**	0.765**
4	Suppression	0.614**	0.546**	0.408**
5	Anger	0.892**	0.618**	0.695**	0.46**
6	Covid Stress	0.682**	0.687**	0.602**	0.446**	0.629**
7	Relationship and Academic Life	0.639**	0.658**	0.57**	0.395**	0.592**	0.932**
8	Fear of Contagion	0.374**	0.367**	0.300**	0.243**	0.386**	0.644**	0.441**
9	Isolation	0.617**	0.601**	0.548**	0.442**	0.547**	0.87**	0.663**	0.568**
10	Peritraumatic Distress	0.677**	0.626**	0.648**	0.339**	0.608**	0.607**	0.595**	0.312**	0.514**

Note: **Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

COVID stress was also positively associated with negative meta-emotions (r = .682, p < .001), and negative meta-emotions were positively correlated with peritraumatic distress (r = .677, p < .001). To reduce the likelihood of Type I error due to multiple comparisons, a Bonferroni-adjusted threshold was considered; however, all reported correlations remained statistically significant (Table 3).

Table 3.

Linear Regression analysis: of COVID Stress and Negative meta-emotions as predictors of Peritraumatic distress.

Outcome measure	Predictor variable	R	R²	F	β	t	95% CI
							LL	UL
Peritraumatic Distress	COVID Stress	0.706	0.498	251	0.271***	6.28	0.186	0.356
	Negative Meta- Emotions	-	-	-	0.493***	11.42	0.408	0.577

Note: N = 508. β = standardised coefficient. CI = confidence interval. ***p < .001.

At the domain level, all components of COVID stress and negative meta-emotions demonstrated significant positive associations with peritraumatic distress. Among these, peritraumatic distress was significantly associated with relationship and academic stress (r = .595, p < .001), fear of contagion (r = .312, p < .001), and isolation (r = .514, p < .001). Similarly, anger (r = .608, p < .001), tough control (r = .626, p < .001), contempt (r = .648, p < .001), and suppression (r = .339, p < .001) were positively correlated with peritraumatic distress. All domains of COVID stress were also significantly correlated with domains of negative meta-emotions. Given the intercorrelations among predictors, multicollinearity was examined in subsequent analyses (Table 4).

Table 4.

Mediating Effect of Negative Meta-emotions on COVID Stress and Peritraumatic Distress.

Type	Effect	B	SE	95% CI		β	z
				LL	UL
Indirect	CS ⇒ NM ⇒ PD	0.64	0.0597	0.524	0.758	0.396	10.75
Component	CS ⇒ NM	2.23	0.0944	2.041	2.411	0.723	23.57
	NM ⇒ PD	0.29	0.0239	0.241	0.335	0.547	12.07
Direct	CS⇒ PD	0.33	0.0735	0.185	0.473	0.203	4.48
Total	CS ⇒ PD	0.97	0.0577	0.857	1.083	0.599	16.83

Note: **p < .01; NM = Negative Meta-emotions; CS = Covid Stress; PD = Peri traumatic Distress.

A multiple linear regression analysis was conducted to examine the association of COVID stress and negative meta-emotions with peritraumatic distress. The overall model was statistically significant, explaining approximately 49.8% of the variance in peritraumatic distress (R = .706, R² = 0.498, p < .001). Both predictors were significantly associated with peritraumatic distress. COVID stress showed a positive association (β = 0.271, t = 6.28, p < .001, 95%), while negative meta-emotions demonstrated a stronger positive association (β = 0.493, t = 11.42, p < .001, 95%). These findings indicate that higher levels of COVID stress and negative meta-emotions are associated with higher levels of peritraumatic distress, with negative meta-emotions showing a comparatively larger effect. Variance inflation factors were within acceptable limits, indicating no concerns regarding multicollinearity.

A mediation analysis was conducted to examine the role of negative meta-emotions in the association between COVID stress and peritraumatic distress. The analysis revealed that the model’s path coefficients were significant. Specifically, COVID stress was positively associated with negative meta-emotions (β = 0.723, p < .001) and peritraumatic distress ( β = 0.203, p < .001). Negative meta-emotions were positively associated with peritraumatic distress ( β = 0.547, p < .001). The total effect of COVID stress on peritraumatic distress was also significant (β = 0.599, p < .001). The direct path from COVID stress to peritraumatic distress remained significant after including the mediator, indicating partial mediation (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1.

Mediating Effect of Negative Meta-emotions on COVID Stress and Peritraumatic Distress. The figure depicts the hypothesised structural model examining the relationships among pandemic-related stressors, COVID-19 stress, negative metacognitions, and peritraumatic distress. The model illustrates Covid Stress as a latent construct informed by three indicators: Relationship and Academic Life, Fear of Contagion, and Isolation. The path coefficients indicate the predictive relationship between COVID-19 stress and Peritraumatic Distress, as well as the influence of Negative Meta-emotions (Anger, Tough Control, Contempt, and Suppression) on the distress outcome. The model illustrates both direct and indirect pathways, highlighting the mediating role of maladaptive metacognitive processes in the association between COVID-19 stress and trauma-related distress outcomes, consistent with structural equation modelling approaches used in pandemic-related psychological research.

Discussion

The present study explored the interplay between COVID-related stress, negative meta-emotions, and peritraumatic distress among adolescents during the pandemic period. The findings suggest that adolescents experiencing higher levels of COVID-related stress were more likely to report elevated peritraumatic distress, particularly in the presence of negative emotional responses toward their own emotions. The prominent role of negative meta-emotions highlights the importance of metacognitive-emotional processes in shaping adolescents’ psychological adjustment during stressful and uncertain circumstances. Further, the partial mediating role of negative meta-emotions suggests that the manner in which adolescents interpret and respond to their emotional experiences may intensify the impact of COVID-related stress on distress outcomes. Collectively, these findings support a metacognitive-emotional framework emphasising the significance of emotional self-appraisal in adolescent psychological functioning.

Within this framework, COVID stress can be conceptualised as an external stressor, peritraumatic distress as the immediate emotional and physiological response, and negative meta-emotions as secondary evaluative processes directed toward one’s own emotional states. This distinction helps address conceptual overlap and clarifies the functional roles of each construct. The observed associations align with prior research demonstrating that pandemic-related stressors such as uncertainty, fear of contagion, and social disruption are linked with heightened psychological distress^38,39. Adolescents may be particularly vulnerable due to the developmental salience of peer relationships and emotional regulation processes during this stage^40,41.

At the domain level, all components of COVID stress, including isolation, fear of contagion, and disruptions in relationships and academic functioning, were significantly associated with peritraumatic distress. These findings are consistent with evidence indicating that social isolation and loneliness during the pandemic were strongly associated with adverse mental health outcomes among young people^19,20. From a theoretical perspective, these results can be understood in light of the evolutionary theory of loneliness, which posits that perceived social disconnection activates psychological and physiological responses that increase vulnerability to distress¹³. Thus, pandemic-related disruptions may have intensified adolescents’ sensitivity to social and environmental stressors, contributing to elevated distress levels.

The role of negative meta-emotions provides further insight into the mechanisms underlying these associations. Constructs such as anger, contempt, suppression, and difficulties in emotional control were significantly associated with both COVID stress and peritraumatic distress. Rather than representing primary emotional responses, these constructs reflect how individuals interpret and regulate their own emotional experiences, consistent with metacognitive theory^26,42. Previous research has shown that maladaptive meta-emotional processes, such as suppression and experiential avoidance, are associated with increased psychological distress and reduced emotional regulation capacity^28,43. The present findings extend this literature by demonstrating that such processes are also closely linked with pandemic-related distress among adolescents.

The regression analysis further supports this interpretation by showing that both COVID stress and negative meta-emotions were significant predictors of peritraumatic distress, with negative meta-emotions demonstrating a stronger standardised effect. This suggests that while external stressors are important, internal evaluative processes may play a more central role in shaping distress outcomes. This is consistent with evidence that emotional responses to stress are influenced not only by the stressor itself but also by cognitive and metacognitive appraisals^25,44.

The mediation findings provide additional support for this mechanism. The indirect effect of COVID stress on peritraumatic distress through negative meta-emotions was significant, while the direct effect remained significant, indicating partial mediation. Importantly, mediation was interpreted based on the significance of the indirect effect and its confidence interval, rather than changes in the magnitude of the direct effect. These results suggest that negative meta-emotions may function as an intervening process through which stress is associated with distress, rather than as a sole explanatory factor. However, given the cross-sectional design, these findings should be interpreted as evidence of associative pathways rather than causal relationships.

Taken together, the findings can be integrated into a cohesive conceptual model in which COVID-related stressors contribute to peritraumatic distress both directly and indirectly through negative meta-emotional processes. This model emphasises the importance of distinguishing between primary stress responses and secondary evaluative mechanisms, thereby addressing previous conceptual ambiguity. It also highlights the relevance of adolescence as a developmental context in which emotional and metacognitive processes are still evolving, potentially increasing susceptibility to maladaptive responses.

From an applied perspective, these findings suggest that interventions targeting adolescent mental health during large-scale crises should focus not only on reducing stress exposure but also on improving meta-emotional awareness and regulation strategies. Approaches that reduce maladaptive suppression, enhance emotional monitoring, and promote adaptive responses to internal emotional states may be particularly beneficial. Prior research supports the role of such strategies in improving emotional regulation and psychological well-being^45,46.

Conclusion

The findings of this study suggest that the pandemic’s anguish has a negative impact on the psychological well-being of adolescents in India. Given that adolescence is a crucial period in individual development, these negative impacts can have significant societal repercussions, as the well-being of the young population is essential for the overall functioning and progress of the community. The strain on adolescent mental health could lead to long-term social challenges, including increased interpersonal conflict, decreased productivity, and weakened social cohesion.

However, certain limitations should be acknowledged while interpreting the findings. The cross-sectional design limits conclusions regarding causality and temporal directionality among the study variables. Additionally, the use of self-report measures may have introduced response-related biases. Future research employing longitudinal and multi-method approaches across more diverse populations may help further clarify these relationships and strengthen understanding of the long-term psychological effects of pandemic-related stress among adolescents.

In conclusion, the present study contributes to the literature by demonstrating that negative meta-emotions are closely associated with the relationship between COVID stress and peritraumatic distress among adolescents. By integrating these constructs within a metacognitive-emotional framework, the findings provide a more nuanced understanding of how adolescents respond to large-scale stressors and highlight potential pathways for intervention.

Recommendations

The study highlights the importance of prioritising mental health and psychological well-being, emphasising the need to efficiently address individuals’ concerns regarding their psychological state. To help students overcome the psychological distress experienced during the pandemic, effective psychological counselling, community services, and recreational activity groups should be promoted to build strong social bonds. Educational institutions can play a vital role by providing counselling services and implementing interactive community-building programs that actively engage students in social and interpersonal relationships. Given the serious implications of peritraumatic distress, it is crucial to ensure that the COVID-related stress and distress that emerged during the pandemic do not escalate into PTSD, which could have a more profound negative impact on individuals and their families. Specifically designed interventions should be developed to help students regulate negative meta-emotions. Finally, it is essential that students are trained to employ meta-emotional strategies to enhance their meta-emotional knowledge, enabling them to effectively manage COVID-related stress and mitigate peritraumatic distress, fostering resilience in challenging times. Moreover, increased awareness of meta-emotions can improve interpersonal relationships by encouraging individuals to shift perspectives, adopt a more collaborative attitude, and transform introspection on meta-emotional experiences into meta-emotional knowledge that enhances their overall emotional strategies.

With the abrupt transition from online to offline learning, some students struggle with adjusting to the demands of physically attending and participating in classes which still persist, making it essential to take steps to ensure a smooth and supportive transition. Policies need to be implemented to provide interventions that focus on developing meta-emotional strategies, facilitating a smooth transition for children facing adjustment issues, and ultimately enhancing their psychological well-being.

Abbreviations

PTSD

Post-traumatic stress disorder

MES

Meta-emotion scale

CSSQ

Covid student stress questionnaire

PDI

Peritraumatic distress inventory

Author contributions

All authors contributed to the conception and design of the study. JJ and DE participated in data collection. JJ, RE conducted the statistical procedures. JJ, DE interpreted the data and drafted the manuscript that was edited and proofread by RJ. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Data availability

The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Declarations

Consent for publication

With assurances of privacy and confidentiality, informed consent was obtained from all participants and their guardians for the use of their data for research and publication.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethics declaration

Ethical approval was granted by the Departmental Ethical Review Board for the protection of Human subjects in Research (DERB), Central University of Karnataka (Reference No. CUK/DREB/PSY/EC/2021-22/62 Dt.1-02-2022). Throughout the research, proper ethics and etiquette were maintained. Informed consent and assent were obtained from all participants and their guardians, and participants were assured of confidentiality. Before the administration of all the research tools, the participants were informed of their rights to withdraw at any point in time, without giving a reason. They were also told that there was no monetary or other remuneration for the research participation.