The aim of the study was to develop and validate the Multidimensional Covid-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Scale (CoVaH), a self-report measure to assess the beliefs and attitudes beneath vaccination hesitancy and reasons for vaccine refusal in the context of Covid-19. A sample of 1503 Hungarian respondents filled out the scale. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to identify latent constructs underlying participants′ responses. Findings show a robust three-factor solution for the 15-item CoVaH with high factor loadings on each factor: skepticism, risk perception and fear of Covid-19 vaccine. The CoVaH displayed very good fit indices (KMO = .94, RMSEA = 0.049, CFI = .983) and internal consistencies (α values > .89) and was found to have proper convergent, concurrent and discriminant validity in identifying Covid-19 vaccine hesitancy in the general population. The new scale adds to the literature through the identification of the fear of COVID-19 vaccines, as a newly highlighted explanatory variable of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy, besides the other formerly identified components. The scale, available in English and Hungarian, allows the assessment of vaccine uptake hesitancy and has the potential to help targeted interventions, considering individual factors that interfere with vaccination acceptance.

The emergence of the Ukraine-Russia war led to fear, worry and anxiety among individuals, mostly in the immediate neighbor countries of Ukraine. The purpose of the present study was to develop the Fear of War Scale (FOWARS), aiming to fill the gap in the literature that currently is scarce in valid assessment tools for measuring the fear of war. The sample of the study consisted of 722 Hungarian speaking participants, mainly from Romania and Hungary. Exploratory factor analysis evinced a two-factor model of the newly developed scale, and the final version fulfilled the criteria of the confirmatory factor analysis. The 13-items FOWARS has robust psychometric properties and proves to be appropriate for fear of war assessment in the general population. The phenomenon is measured on two factors, namely experiential and physiological dimensions of fear. The scale is available in the present paper in three languages: English, Hungarian and Romanian.

Studies provide evidence that distress, (health) anxiety, and depressive symptoms were high during the first weeks of COVID-19 lockdown restrictions, decreasing over time (possibly due to individuals’ protective psychological factors). Relations between different lockdown restrictions, mental health issues, and protective factors need to be explored, since even small lockdown effects might increase the risk of future mental health issues. We merged objective lockdown stringency data with individual data (N = 1001) to examine differences in lockdown effects in strict lockdown (Romania) and mild lockdown (Hungary) conditions between March and May 2020 on stressors and mental health symptoms, taking protective factors into account. The stricter lockdown in Romania revealed higher levels of perceived risk of infection, distress intolerance, and COVID-19 health anxiety. Protective psychological factors were not affected by the lockdown measures. Surpassing psychological flexibility and resilient coping, self-control proved to be the most promising protective factor. It is recommended that future research merge objective data with study data to investigate the effects of different COVID-19 lockdown measures on mental health and protective factors. Policy decisions should consider lockdown-dependent consequences of mental health issues. Intervention programs are suggested to mitigate mental health issues and to strengthen peoples’ protective psychological factors.

BackgroundAge related differences were found in prevention behavior, showing that older individuals tend to be the most proactive. The aim of the study was the identification of psychological predictors on COVID-19 prevention behavior in women, across four generations. In addition, the predictive role of the psychological variables was explored through the lens of negative and positive information processing perspective on total and domain-specific COVID-19 prevention behavior.MethodsA cross-sectional research was conducted. The sample included 834 Hungarian speaking women. The assessed variables were: COVID-19 knowledge, risk perception, COVID-19 health anxiety, negative automatic thoughts, psychological flexibility, and four domains of COVID-19 prevention behavior (social distancing, general hygiene, information seeking, health behavior). A three-level hierarchical linear regression analysis was conducted to investigate the predictors of preventive behavior in each generation.ResultsA diversity across generations was found. In case of baby boomer generation, the final model explained 32.4% of the variance for total prevention behavior [F(14,215) = 8.847, p < 0.001], and only perceived risk made a significant contribution. For Gen X the final model accounted for 21.1% of variance of total prevention behavior [F(14,341) = 7.788, p < 0.001], marital status, perceived risk, COVID-19 health anxiety, and negative automatic thoughts made significant contributions. In case of Gen Y the final model accounted for 6.2% of variance on total prevention behavior [F(14,147) = 1.761, p = 0.05], only perceived risk had a contribution to the final model. For Gen Z the final model accounted for 23.4% of variance on total preventive behavior [F(13,71) = 2.979, p = 0.002], and only psychological flexibility made a contribution to the model. The results on the distinct domains of COVID-19 prevention behavior emphasized details in the dissimilarity among generations.ConclusionThe role of generational identity on COVID-19 prevention behavior is relevant. The coexistence of negative and positive information processing may have its beneficial role in certain areas of prevention.

The emergence of the Ukraine-Russia war in 2022 led to fear, worry and anxiety among individuals, mostly in the immediate neighboring countries of Ukraine. The purpose of the present study was to develop the fear of war scale (FOWARS), aiming to fill the gap in the literature that currently is scarce in valid assessment tools for measuring the fear of war. The sample of the study consisted of N = 1131 participants (n = 670 for group A, for EFA and n = 461 for group B, for CFA). Hungarian speaking participants, mainly from Romania and Hungary. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) evinced a two-factor model of the newly developed scale, and the final version fulfilled the criteria of the confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). The 13-items FOWARS has robust psychometric properties and proves to be appropriate for a fear of war assessment in the general population. The phenomenon is measured by two factors, namely experiential and physiological dimensions of fear. The scale is available in the present paper in two languages: English and Hungarian.