No abstract

A number of studies have focused on Bicultural Identity Integration (BII) to explore whether and how migrants and ethnic minorities, who experience multiple cultural belongings, perceive their two cultural backgrounds as compatible (vs. conflictual) and to study the impact of these differences on their psychosocial well-being. Nevertheless, there is a lack of research on BII among transracial adoptees, who also experience unique conditions of dual cultural belonging. Relying on a sample of 170 adopted adolescents born in Latin American countries and subsequently adopted in Italy (aged between 15 and 25) and both of their parents, the aim of the present study was twofold: to explore whether and the extent to which BII is related to adoptees’ behavioral problems and to analyze the influence of specific family and social identity variables on BII. Multivariate analyses using the structural equation modeling indicated that adoptive filiation (i.e., belonging to the adoptive family) and parents’ cultural socialization strategies are significant protective factors for national identity and ethnic identity, respectively, which in turn influences adoptees’ behavioral problems, but this relation is mediated by differences in BII.

The worldwide outbreak of COVID-19, the ensuing pandemic, and the related containment measures pose considerable challenges to psychological resilience and well-being. Researchers are now forced to look for resources to cope with negative experiences linked to this health emergency. According to the salutogenic approach proposed by Antonovsky, the sense of coherence (SOC) is a major source of resilience. Thus, this study aimed at assessing the role of SOC in moderating the link between illness experiences (in terms of knowing persons diagnosed with COVID-19 and fear of contracting COVID-19) and psychological well-being. 2,784 participants, taken from a large sample of the Italian population (65.4% females) and aged between 18 and 85 years, filled in an anonymous online survey during the 3rd week of the lockdown. Findings supported the moderating role of SOC in shaping the link between illness experiences and psychological well-being. Specifically, participants who knew at least one person diagnosed with COVID-19 showed lower levels of psychological well-being at low levels of SOC. The negative relation between participants' fear of contracting COVID-19 and psychological well-being was stronger for those who showed higher levels of SOC. This study discusses the implications of these results for interventions aimed at reducing the pandemic's detrimental effects and promoting resilience.

The situation caused by the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has been representing a great source of concern and a challenge to the psychological well-being of many individuals around the world. For couples in particular, this extraordinary rise in concern, combined with the stress posed by the virus containment measures, such as prolonged cohabitation and lack of support networks, may have increased the likelihood of couple problems. At the same time, however, COVID-19 concerns may have been a stimulus to activate couples’ stress management processes. A couple’s resource, which may have an important role in dealing with COVID-19 concerns and stress, is dyadic coping, i.e., the process through which partners face stress together. Drawing on a sample of 1,823 Italian individuals involved in a couple relationship, the current study tested a serial mediation model in which concerns about COVID-19 predicted psychological well-being, through both explicit stress communication and perceived partner dyadic coping responses. In addition, the study explored whether this dyadic coping process functioned the same way in satisfied and dissatisfied couples. Results showed that concerns about the situation related to COVID-19 significantly threatened individuals’ psychological well-being. However, these concerns positively predicted explicit stress communication, which in turn positively predicted perceived partner’s dyadic coping responses, which finally positively predicted psychological well-being. In addition, in the group of dissatisfied individuals, the association between explicit stress communication and perceived partners’ dyadic coping responses was not significant. The present study adds to the research on couples’ coping by testing for the first time the whole theoretical model of dyadic coping and does so during a global emergency situation. The study also suggests key components of preventive interventions for individuals in couples.

No abstract