key: cord-0983282-hy9sbcju
authors: Hudson, Joanne; Kuroda, Yusuke; Morel, Patrick C.
title: Personality and motivational predictors of well-being and coping during COVID-19: A reversal theory analysis
date: 2021-01-28
journal: Pers Individ Dif
DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2021.110703
sha: 6c4928b0f7e43190a9e0c28134a601549ac234e4
doc_id: 983282
cord_uid: hy9sbcju

This study used reversal theory to examine motivational predictors of well-being and coping during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020. 149 UK based respondents completed an online survey including measures of demographics, well-being, coping, motivational style, and dominance. Well-being was predicted by optimism (positively), autic and mastery (negatively) dominances, by alloic sympathy, optimism and paratelic motivation styles (positively), and, negatively by arousal seeking, arousability and pessimism. Coping was positively predicted by optimism and negativism dominances and by negativist, paratelic and telic motivations, and, negatively by arousability and pessimism. Using motivational dominances, indirect support was identified for the link between psychodiversity and well-being, but not coping. Findings suggest that well-being and, to a lesser degree, coping could be enhanced by encouraging individuals to experience a range of motivations, possibly focusing on those identified here as significant predictors. Future research needs to determine the context specificity of these findings and explore psychodiversity, well-being and coping using both metamotivational states and composite profiles incorporating the full range of motivational constructs.

The global pandemic caused by in March 2020 has currently (September, 2020) resulted in 25.8 million cases and 859,000 deaths, having changed and continuing to change people's lives. In the UK, people are experiencing months of national or local lockdown; at times being only permitted to leave their homes to meet essential needs.

Thousands of people have lost their jobs and the gap between rich and poor has widened.

School and workplace closures meant that children have been home-schooled by parents, and employees who can, have worked at home (e.g., see Hiscott et al., 2020) .

Inevitably, people have experienced fear, loss, physical illness, anxiety, depression, stress, living with uncertainty, and loneliness, potentially with long-term consequences (Dubey et al., 2020; Qiu et al., 2020) . Whilst the devastating impact of COVID-19 cannot be downplayed, there are benefits. For example, reduced global air pollution (Zambrano-Monserrate, Ruano, & Sanchez-Alcade, 2020), communities supporting the vulnerable, and home-working enabling more time with family and less work-related stress.

Not all individuals will respond in the same way to the same stressor (e.g., Lazarus & Folkman, 1984) and theories of personality suggest that individual difference factors can help explain this. There is ample evidence that personality is related to both well-being and coping (e.g., Carver & Connor-Smith, 2010; Diener, Oishi, & Lucas, 2003; Lucas, 2018) but insufficient scope to discuss this in detail here. Of note, however, Lucas (2018) highlights that individual differences are the most consistent and strongest predictor of subjective well-being, but this research has mainly focused on the Big Five Personality Dimensions (Costa & McCrae, 1992) , predominantly extraversion and neuroticism. In addition, further evidence identifies that personality is related to different responses to acute laboratoryinduced stress, societal transition (van den Burg & Pitariu, 2005; Xin et al., 2017) , and is more consistently remain in their preferred motivational states, will report lower well-being than individuals who demonstrate no extreme dominances. Thus we carried out an indirect test of psychodiversity based on extreme dominance (see Kuroda, Hudson, & Thatcher, 2015) .

Research has identified links between motivational style and dominance and various health-related variables, including stress responses, exercise, drug use, risky sexual activities, use of energy drinks, eating pathology, and social and emotional need fulfilment. Table 1 presents a summary of this research, that only one (Lustig & Cramer, 2015) has indirectly measured well-being and in a specific context. Thus there is a need for studies that explore the use of reversal theory for advancing understanding of the links between personality, well-being and coping. The present research is the first study to examine the role of reversal theory motivational constructs (Apter, 2001) for predicting well-being and coping during a global crisis. Exercise length was positively predicted by mastery dominance in males and negatively by autic dominance in both males and females. Exercise type was positively predicted by telic and autic dominance in males and by autic dominance in females. Mastery and negativist dominance negatively predicted exercise type in females. Exercise consistency was negatively predicted by negativist dominance in males and females and positively by telic dominance in females.

Our hypotheses were:

(1) well-being will be positively predicted by telic, conformist, alloic, sympathy, optimism, and arousal avoidance dominances;

(2) well-being will be positively predicted by telic, conformist, alloic sympathy, optimistic, effortfulness, and, arousal avoiding motivational styles, and, will be negatively predicted by arousability;

(3) coping will be positively predicted by paratelic, negativistic, autic, mastery, optimism, and, arousal seeking dominances; J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f Journal Pre-proof (4) coping will be positively predicted by paratelic, negativist, autic mastery, optimism, and, arousal seeking motivational styles, and, negatively predicted by effortfulness and arousability, and, (5) well-being and coping will be significantly higher in individuals with no extreme dominances than those with multiple extreme dominances.

Participants were 149 individuals residing in the UK, aged 16 to 79 years, including 89 females and 58 males (2 non-responses). At the time of responding, the majority had not contracted COVID-19 (n = 140), nor had anyone in their household (n = 135), were currently working from home (n = 104), lived in households of 2-4 people (n = 123), without schoolaged children (n = 106), and were not home-schooling children (n = 112).

The College Research Ethics Committee granted study approval and the research adhered to the British Psychological Society ethical principles. Participants were recruited via email and social media campaigns during May/June 2020 which was a period of lockdown in the UK. The invitation email included a link to the survey which provided an information sheet requiring informed consent prior to completing the online survey, described below.

Regression analyses using proc Stepwise in SAS at 0.1 to be included were conducted separately for each set of predictor variables and each dependent variable to identify if motivational characteristics and dominance scores predicted well-being and coping.

Linearity, multicollinearity, homoscedasticity, and multivariate normality assumptions were met in all analyses.

We calculated the mean dominance score for each motivational pair, and participants were identified as dominant in one of the two motivational characteristics if they scored either more than 1 standard deviation above the mean, or less than 1 standard deviation below the mean (as used previously; Kuroda, Hudson, & Thatcher, 2015) . Table 2 presents descriptive data and thresholds used to define dominance groups. We then identified the number of dominance groups each participant belonged to (range: 0 to 6) and used an independent t-test to compare well-being in participants who belonged to 0 dominance groups with those who belonged to 4 or 5 dominance groups (none belonged to 6, and only 3 participants belonged to 5 therefore we combined them with the 4 dominances group; 1 outlier for well-being was removed). To compare groups on coping, we used a Wilcoxon Two-Sample Test. 

As shown in Table 3 , and according to Ursachi, Horodnic, and Zait (2015) , most measures have at least acceptable reliability (Cronbach's  = 0.6-0.7) whilst some demonstrate very good reliability (  0.80). Table 3 Descriptive data for motivational, well-being and coping measures Well-being was significantly, albeit not strongly, correlated with all motivational characteristics apart from arousal avoidance, negativism, conformity, autic mastery and autic sympathy. Similarly, small but significant correlations were evident between coping and all motivational characteristics apart from conformity, alloic mastery, alloic sympathy, and arousal avoidance (see Table 4 ). were negative predictors (see Table 5 ).

Five motivational characteristics significantly predicted coping, accounting for 33% of the variance (Model R 2 = 0.33; F(5, 139) = 5.83, p < 0.01), with 17% predicted by pessimism.

Telic, paratelic and negativism positively predicted coping, and, pessimism and arousability were negative predictors (see Table 5 ).

Apart from telic, mastery and negativist dominances, the remainder shared significant relationships with well-being, displaying low to medium correlations. Coping was not related to autic and telic dominance but shared small, significant relationships with all other dominances.

Optimism, mastery and autic dominance were significant predictors of well-being, accounting for 53% of its variance (Model R 2 = 0.53; F(3, 141) = 53.79, p < 0.01), mostly predicted by optimism dominance (50%). Optimism dominance was a positive predictor, and mastery and autic dominances were negative predictors of well-being, although mastery did not independently add to the variance in well-being (see Table 5 ). Coping was positively predicted by optimism and negativist dominance, accounting for 22% of its variability (Model R 2 = 0.22; F(2, 142) = 19.45, p < 0.01; see Table 5 ) with the majority predicted by optimism dominance (19%).

Well-being was significantly higher in participants belonging to 0 dominance groups (n = 25) than those belonging to 4 or 5 dominance groups (n = 16): t(18.12) = 2.12, p = 0.048.

The former group mean was 49.84 ± 6.11 and the latter was 41.44 ± 15.09. Coping did not

Journal Pre-proof differ between the 0 (n = 32) and 4/5 dominances (n = 21) groups: Z = -0.40, p > 0.05 (mean = 14.38 ± 2.23 and 14.20 ± 3.53, respectively). 

This study explored the value of motivational constructs described in reversal theory (Apter, 2013) for predicting well-being and coping during a global health crisis when people's lifestyles, work and social contexts were severely disrupted.

Findings lent partial support for hypothesis one, as well-being was significantly predicted by optimism (positively), mastery and autic (negatively) dominances, but, contrary to our hypothesis, not by telic, conformist, and arousal avoidance dominances. There was J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f greater support for hypothesis two as well-being was positively predicted by alloic sympathy and optimism, and, negatively by arousal seeking, arousability and pessimism. However, conformity and effortfulness did not predict well-being, and, contrary to expectations, paratelic motivation positively predicted well-being.

Similar levels of support were identified for hypotheses three and four. Coping was significantly positively predicted by negativist and optimism dominances but, contrary to hypothesis three, not by paratelic, autic, mastery and arousal seeking dominances.

Supporting hypothesis 4, paratelic and negativist motivations positively predicted, and arousability and negatively predicted, coping. Whilst optimism did not positively predict coping as hypothesised, pessimism was a negative predictor. Contrary to our hypothesis, autic mastery, arousal seeking and effortfulness did not predict coping, whereas telic motivation was a positive predictor. Hypothesis five garnered mixed support; well-being was significantly lower in people belonging to multiple dominance groups, than those who did not belong to an extreme dominance group, but no differences were observed in coping.

Explaining these findings, optimism is consistently related to higher levels of wellbeing, hope, physical well-being, and coping with stress, mainly through the use of social support (Conversano et al., 2010) . Thus pessimism, was, logically negatively related to wellbeing. The Covid-19 pandemic has caused a change in lifestyle for many, and opportunities for variety, excitement and elevated arousal are diminished. This helps explain the link between low arousal seeking and well-being. Similarly, the situation requires a collective effort, where personal needs are not always foremost, and people are spending increased time with a small group of people. Thus, it makes sense that higher alloic sympathy and lower autic and mastery dominance were associated with higher well-being. Not surprisingly, in such a volatile, emotion provoking, and possibly adverse situation, a lesser J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f Journal Pre-proof tendency to be easily emotionally aroused, appears helpful for well-being. We postulated that telic motivation would be associated with higher well-being as the current situation requires a focus on long-term goals with actions viewed as a means to an end (e.g., isolating

to prevent infecting others). However, paratelic motivation was associated with higher wellbeing, suggesting that enjoying the moment for its own sake without need to focus on purposeful activities with long-term consequences, was associated with higher well-being.

On reflection this makes sense, as the pandemic has affected the capacity to plan and engage in some purposeful activities (e.g, work, competitions, volunteering) . This also provides a potential explanation for the finding that effortfulness, telic and arousal avoiding dominances did not predict well-being, although this was hypothesised. The lack of predictive power of conformity is at first surprising given that the situation required strict adherence to rules. Possibly though this in fact rendered conformity irrelevant as everyone was compelled to conform, regardless of their degree of conformity.

Although not all predictors of coping were supported, optimism (and by extension pessimism) negativism, paratelic motivation and low arousability significantly predicted coping as hypothesised. Optimism is needed to approach problems positively and is associated with adaptive coping (Sinclair & Wallston, 2004) , and low arousability will likely enable the cognitive processing needed for tenaciously approaching problems with adaptive coping. This latter relationship possibly helps to explain the lack of support for arousal seeking as a predictor of coping, although this contradicts our hypothesis. Resilience coping also involves creatively addressing problems (ibid) therefore it is logical that higher levels of coping are associated with greater negativism, a willingness to deviate from norms and conventions and with higher levels of paratelic motivation and a willingness to be spontaneous. This does not, however, correspond with the finding that paratelic dominance J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f was not a significant predictor. Considering the focus on personal agency in our measure of resilience coping, it is surprising that effortfulness, autic and mastery motivations and dominances did not predict coping. Possibly this could be because of the lack of personal control and agency presented by the pandemic, and therefore under normal circumstances, this relationship would be evident. It is clear that future studies are needed when the pandemic has ended to enable us to discern if the findings here are upheld in normal circumstances or if a different pattern of relationships is identified.

Higher levels of well-being observed in people with no extreme dominances compared with those with multiple extreme dominances suggest indirect support for the link between psychodiversity and well-being, adding to initial evidence (Thomas et al., 2018) . Based on this, examining dominances independently from each other, as in the present study, might not provide a full account of their influence. Instead, our data suggest the need to use a composite profile of dominances, as Apter et al. (1998) suggest. Although Apter (2013) suggests that psychodiversity is associated with enhanced coping in a dynamic environment, coping did not differ in relation to number of dominance group affiliations.

Tentatively, we suggest that experiencing different states helps to maintain well-being but not coping because the pandemic was under mass, not personal control. Future research that untangles these issues would appear to be important.

Results from this study support established relationships that personality shares with wellbeing and coping (e.g., Carver & Connor-Smith, 2010; Lucas, 2018) indicate that motivational styles might be more influential predictors than motivational dominances, which also appeared to be the case in Lustig and Cramer's (2015) study, as only telic and arousal avoidance dominances were significant predictors. Although within different contexts, the outcomes of both studies are well-being oriented, thus future research is needed to identify if this phenomenon is replicated.

Our findings indicate that the motivational constructs proposed within reversal theory's structural phenomenological framework are useful for predicting well-being, and, to a lesser degree, coping. To optimise well-being, in line with the concept of psychodiversity, we should encourage the experience of a wide range of motivational states. Those people with extreme dominances, who are likely to spend the majority of their time in preferred motivational states, thus might benefit from actively inducing reversals to their non-preferred states. Recently, authors have discussed the feasibility of self-induced reversals (e.g., Apter, 2013; Thomas et al., 2018) including methods to do so (Desselles & J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f Journal Pre-proof Apter, 2013) such as the threat of performance evaluation and imagery (e.g., Legrand & Thatcher, 2011; Hudson & Day, 2012) . However, more research is needed across the whole range of motivational states, to illustrate their efficacy.

Within the context of a shared global crisis, people reporting higher well-being displayed the following motivational profile: paratelic, optimistic, alloic sympathy, low arousability, pessimism and low arousal seeking, with optimism and alloic sympathy dominance. Those reporting optimism and negativist dominance, high negativist, paratelic and telic motivations, and low arousability and pessimism displayed higher levels of resilience coping. These motivational profiles support their adaptive value for well-being and coping in such a situation, thus we might suggest encouraging their experience in similar situations.

This study was conducted within a specific crisis, included only a UK based sample with internet access. Thus, future research should explore whether these findings are replicated and can be generalised to other samples, adverse contexts and to non-adverse situations. Also, as our study was correlational, we cannot state with certainty that encouraging these motivational experiences will lead to enhanced well-being and coping;

longitudinal studies are required to explore this. If confirmed, studies need to establish if interventions that manipulate motivational states do lead to enhanced well-being and coping. In addition, this study used a proxy measure of psychodiversity, thus, to further advance theory, future research needs to measure metamotivational states. Nevertheless, by predicting well-being and coping using reversal theory motivational constructs (Apter, 2001) , this study makes a novel contribution and extends the line of inquiry beyond the Big Five Personality Dimensions (Costa & McCrae, 1992) .

J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f

Motivational styles in everyday life: A guide to reversal theory

Developing reversal theory: Some suggestions for future research

The development of the motivational style profile

Predicting resistance to health education messages for cannabis use: The role of rebelliousness, autic mastery, health value and ethnicity

Personality and coping

Optimism and its impact on mental and physical well-being

Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual

Manipulating motivational states: A review

Personality, culture, and subjective well-being: Emotional and cognitive evaluations of life

Psychosocial impact of COVID-19. Diabetes and Metabolic Syndrome

The global impact of the coronavirus pandemic

Athletes' experiences of expressive writing about sports stressors

Personality and motivational correlates of energy drink consumption and misuse among female undergraduate students

Journal of risky behavior: Metamotivational and temperamental predictors of risk-taking in older adolescents

Stress, appraisal, and coping

Acute mood responses to a 15min-long walking session at self-selected intensity: Effects of an experimentally-induced telic or paratelic state

The relationship between personality traits and coping styles among first-time and recurrent prisoners in Poland

Exploring the associations between personality and subjective well being

Characteristics of pet owners: Motivation and need fulfilment

Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale (WEMWBS)

Metamotivational tendencies, sociocultural attitudes, and risky eating behaviors

A nationwide survey of J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f Journal Pre-proof psychological distress among Chinese people in the COVID-19 epidemic: implications and policy recommendations

Exploring rural palliative care patients' experiences of accessing psychosocial support through telehealth: A longitudinal approach

The development and psychometric evaluation of the brief resilient coping scale

Motivational and personality predictors of body esteem in high-and low-frequency exercisers

Modelling motivational dynamics: Demonstrating when, why, and how we self-regulate motivation

How reliable are measurement scales? External factors with indirect influence on reliability estimators

The relationships between personality and wellbeing during societal change

The relationship between J o u r n a l P r e -p r o o f Journal Pre-proof personality and the response to acute psychological stress

Indirect effects of COVID-19 on the environment