Improvements in Compassion and Fears of Compassion throughout the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Multinational Study

During large-scale disasters, social support, caring behaviours, and compassion are shown to protect against poor mental health outcomes. This multi-national study aimed to assess the fluctuations in compassion over time during the COVID-19 pandemic. Respondents (Time 1 n = 4156, Time 2 n = 980, Time 3 n = 825) from 23 countries completed online self-report questionnaires measuring the flows of compassion (i.e., Compassionate Engagement and Action Scales) and fears of compassion toward self and others and from others (i.e., Fears of Compassion Scales) and mental health at three time-points during a 10-month period. The results for the flows of compassion showed that self-compassion increased at Time 3. Compassion for others increased at Time 2 and 3 for the general population, but in contrast, it decreased in health professionals, possibly linked to burnout. Compassion from others did not change in Time 2, but it did increase significantly in Time 3. For fears of compassion, fears of self-compassion reduced over time, fears of compassion for others showed more variation, reducing for the general public but increasing for health professionals, whilst fears of compassion from others did not change over time. Health professionals, those with compassion training, older adults, and women showed greater flows of compassion and lower fears of compassion compared with the general population, those without compassion training, younger adults, and men. These findings highlight that, in a period of shared suffering, people from multiple countries and nationalities show a cumulative improvement in compassion and reduction in fears of compassion, suggesting that, when there is intense suffering, people become more compassionate to self and others and less afraid of, and resistant to, compassion.

The role of social connection on the experience of COVID-19 related post-traumatic growth and stress

BACKGROUND

Historically social connection has been an important way through which humans have coped with large-scale threatening events. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, lockdowns have deprived people of major sources of social support and coping, with others representing threats. Hence, a major stressor during the pandemic has been a sense of social disconnection and loneliness. This study explores how people's experience of compassion and feeling socially safe and connected, in contrast to feeling socially disconnected, lonely and fearful of compassion, effects the impact of perceived threat of COVID-19 on post-traumatic growth and post-traumatic stress.

METHODS

Adult participants from the general population (N = 4057) across 21 countries worldwide, completed self-report measures of social connection (compassion for self, from others, for others; social safeness), social disconnection (fears of compassion for self, from others, for others; loneliness), perceived threat of COVID-19, post-traumatic growth and traumatic stress.

RESULTS

Perceived threat of COVID-19 predicted increased post-traumatic growth and traumatic stress. Social connection (compassion and social safeness) predicted higher post-traumatic growth and traumatic stress, whereas social disconnection (fears of compassion and loneliness) predicted increased traumatic symptoms only. Social connection heightened the impact of perceived threat of COVID-19 on post-traumatic growth, while social disconnection weakened this impact. Social disconnection magnified the impact of the perceived threat of COVID-19 on traumatic stress. These effects were consistent across all countries.

CONCLUSIONS

Social connection is key to how people adapt and cope with the worldwide COVID-19 crisis and may facilitate post-traumatic growth in the context of the threat experienced during the pandemic. In contrast, social disconnection increases vulnerability to develop post-traumatic stress in this threatening context. Public health and Government organizations could implement interventions to foster compassion and feelings of social safeness and reduce experiences of social disconnection, thus promoting growth, resilience and mental wellbeing during and following the pandemic.

Fears of compassion magnify the harmful effects of threat of COVID-19 on mental health and social safeness across 21 countries

Background

The COVID‐19 pandemic is a massive global health crisis with damaging consequences to mental health and social relationships. Exploring factors that may heighten or buffer the risk of mental health problems in this context is thus critical. Whilst compassion may be a protective factor, in contrast fears of compassion increase vulnerability to psychosocial distress and may amplify the impact of the pandemic on mental health. This study explores the magnifying effects of fears of compassion on the impact of perceived threat of COVID‐19 on depression, anxiety and stress, and social safeness.

Methods

Adult participants from the general population (N = 4057) were recruited across 21 countries worldwide, and completed self‐report measures of perceived threat of COVID‐19, fears of compassion (for self, from others, for others), depression, anxiety, stress and social safeness.

Results

Perceived threat of COVID‐19 predicted increased depression, anxiety and stress. The three flows of fears of compassion predicted higher levels of depression, anxiety and stress and lower social safeness. All fears of compassion moderated (heightened) the impact of perceived threat of COVID‐19 on psychological distress. Only fears of compassion from others moderated the effects of likelihood of contracting COVID‐19 on social safeness. These effects were consistent across all countries.

Conclusions

Fears of compassion have a universal magnifying effect on the damaging impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on mental health and social safeness. Compassion focused interventions and communications could be implemented to reduce resistances to compassion and promote mental wellbeing during and following the pandemic.

Not all types of meditation are the same: Mediators of change in mindfulness and compassion meditation interventions

BACKGROUND

The general aim of the study was to examine the relative effectiveness and mediators of change in standardized mindfulness and compassion interventions.

METHODS

A sample of 431 participants enrolled in a Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction program (MBSR = 277) and a Compassion Cultivation Training (CCT = 154). The assessment before and after the program included a set of outcomes and mediators measures. A three-step data analysis plan was followed: ANCOVAs, Reliable Change Index, and mediations (simple and multiple).

RESULTS

Both interventions yielded increased mindfulness, decentering, body awareness, and self-compassion. Yet, present-moment awareness improvements (i.e., decentering, and body awareness) were significantly larger in the MBSR than in CCT, whereas socio-emotional changes (i.e., common humanity and empathic concern) were larger in the CCT than in MBSR. The magnitude of effect sizes ranged from medium to large. Furthermore, both mindfulness and compassion interventions yielded similar changes in psychological distress (i.e., stress, anxiety, and depression), maladaptive cognitive processes (i.e., rumination and thought suppression), and well-being. The mediation models showed that although the MBSR program seemingly relies on changes in present-moment awareness mechanisms (i.e., decentering and body awareness) to reduce psychological distress and to improve well-being, the CCT program seemingly achieves the same positive outcomes through changes in socio-emotional mechanisms (i.e., common-humanity and empathy concern).

LIMITATIONS

Due to our naturalistic design in real-world community setting, it was infeasible to randomly assign participants to conditions.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that mindfulness and compassion programs operate through different pathways to reduce psychological distress and to promote well-being.

Understanding the concept of compassion from the perspectives of nurses

BACKGROUND

The high level of satisfaction of users of a health service is largely due to the fact that they receive excellent care from healthcare professionals. Compassionate care is an essential component of excellent care. But what do nurses understand compassion to be?

RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

To analyse the concept of compassion from the perspective of nurses in the Andalusian Public Health System, Spain.

RESEARCH DESIGN

This is a qualitative study following the grounded theory model. Four focus groups and 25 in-depth interviews were conducted.

PARTICIPANTS AND RESEARCH CONTEXT

A total of 68 nursing professionals working in the Andalusian Public Health System (Spain) participated. Theoretical sampling was used, with participants being recruited using the snowball technique.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

This research was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Centro-Almería Health District (CEICA 27/9/17).

FINDINGS

From the analysis of the data, four themes emerged that helped to understand the concept of compassion according to nurses: 'Negative perception of the term compassion', 'Compassion and empathy as synonyms', 'Beyond empathy', and 'Effects of having a compassionate attitude'.

DISCUSSION

Nurses perceive the concept of compassion differently to each other and even contradictorily. This concept is imbued with cultural elements, which adds confusion to understanding it, and is even perceived as something negative similar to pity.

CONCLUSION

Nurses confuse the concepts of empathy and compassion as if they were synonymous. Before considering training in compassion for healthcare professionals, it is essential to clarify the concept of compassion through educational interventions.