To Help or Not to Help? Prosocial Behavior, Its Association With Well-Being, and Predictors of Prosocial Behavior During the Coronavirus Disease Pandemic

This is a sel -a chi ed e sion o an o iginal a icle. This e sion may di e om he o iginal in pagina ion and ypog aphic de ails. Au ho (s): Ti le: Yea : Ve sion: Copy igh : Righ s: Righ s u l: Please ci e he o iginal e sion: CC BY 4.0 h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/ To Help o No o Help? P osocial Beha io , I s Associa ion Wi h Well-Being, and P edic o s o P osocial Beha io Du ing he Co ona i us Disease Pandemic © 2022 Halle , Lubenko, P es i, Squa i o, Cons an inou, Nicolaou, Papacos as, Aydın, Chong, Chien, Cheng, Ruiz, Ga cía-Ma ín, Obando-Posada, Segu a-Va gas, Vasiliou, McHugh, Hö e , Baban, Dias Ne o, da Sil a, Mones ès, Al a ez-Gal ez, Paez-Bla ina, Mon esinos, Valdi ia-Salas, O i, Kleszcz, Lappalainen, I ano ić, Gosa , Dionne, Me win, Ka ekla, Kassianos and Glos e . Published e sion Halle , Elisa; Lubenko, Jelena; P es i, Gio amba is a; Squa i o, Vale ia; Cons an inou, Ma ios; Nicolaou, Ch is iana; Papacos as, Sa as; Aydın, Gökçen; Chong, Yuen Yu; Chien, Wai Tong; Cheng, Ho Yu; Ruiz, F ancisco J.; Ga cía-Ma ín, Ma ía B.; Obando-Posada, Diana P.; Segu a-Va gas, Miguel A.; Vasiliou, Vasilis S.; McHugh, Louise; Hö e , S e an; Baban, Ad iana; Dias Ne o, Da id; da Sil a, Ana Nunes; Mones ès, Jean-Louis; Al a ez-Gal ez, Ja ie ; Paez-Bla ina, Ma isa; Mon esinos, F ancisco; Valdi ia-Salas, Sonsoles; O i, Do o ya; Kleszcz, Ba osz; Lappalainen, Raimo; I ano ić, I a; Gosa , Da id; Dionne, F ede ick; Me win, Rhonda M.; Ka ekla, Ma ia; Kassianos, Angelos P.; Glos e , And ew T. Halle , E., Lubenko, J., P es i, G., Squa i o, V., Cons an inou, M., Nicolaou, C., Papacos as, S., Aydın, G., Chong, Y. Y., Chien, W. T., Cheng, H. Y., Ruiz, F. J., Ga cía-Ma ín, M. B., Obando- Posada, D. P., Segu a-Va gas, M. A., Vasiliou, V. S., McHugh, L., Hö e , S., Baban, A., . . . Glos e , A. T. (2022). To Help o No o Help? P osocial Beha io , I s Associa ion Wi h Well-Being, and P edic o s o P osocial Beha io Du ing he Co ona i us Disease Pandemic. F on ie s in Psychology, 12, A icle 775032. h ps://doi.o g/10.3389/ psyg.2021.775032 2022 psyg-12-775032 Feb ua y 11, 2022 Time: 11:8 # 1 ORIGINAL RESEARCH published: 11 Feb ua y 2022 doi: 10.3389/ psyg.2021.775032 Edi ed by: Chia a Ruini, Uni e si y o Bologna, I aly Re iewed by: Pa izia Me ingolo, Uni e si y o Flo ence, I aly Belinda Juli ia Mu ani, Uni e si y o Indonesia, Indonesia Manuela Al ie i, Uni e si y o Campania ‘Luigi Van i elli, I aly *Co espondence: Elisa Halle [email p o ec ed] †These au ho s ha e con ibu ed equally o his wo k and sha e senio au ho ship Special y sec ion: This a icle was submi ed o Posi i e Psychology, a sec ion o he jou nal F on ie s in Psychology Recei ed: 13 Sep embe 2021 Accep ed: 21 Decembe 2021 Published: 11 Feb ua y 2022 Ci a ion: Halle E, Lubenko J, P es i G, Squa i o V, Cons an inou M, Nicolaou C, Papacos as S, Aydın G, Chong YY, Chien WT, Cheng HY, Ruiz FJ, Ga cía-Ma ín MB, Obando-Posada DP, Segu a-Va gas MA, Vasiliou VS, McHugh L, Hö e S, Baban A, Dias Ne o D, da Sil a AN, Mones ès J-L, Al a ez-Gal ez J, Paez-Bla ina M, Mon esinos F, Valdi ia-Salas S, O i D, Kleszcz B, Lappalainen R, I ano i ´ c I, Gosa D, Dionne F, Me win RM, Ka ekla M, Kassianos AP and Glos e AT (2022) To Help o No o Help? P osocial Beha io , I s Associa ion Wi h Well-Being, and P edic o s o P osocial Beha io Du ing he Co ona i us Disease Pandemic. F on . Psychol. 12:775032. doi: 10.3389/ psyg.2021.775032 To Help o No o Help? P osocial Beha io , I s Associa ion Wi h Well-Being, and P edic o s o P osocial Beha io Du ing he Co ona i us Disease Pandemic Elisa Halle 1*, Jelena Lubenko2, Gio amba is a P es i3, Vale ia Squa i o3, Ma ios Cons an inou4, Ch is iana Nicolaou5, Sa as Papacos as6, Gökçen Aydın7, Yuen Yu Chong8, Wai Tong Chien8, Ho Yu Cheng8, F ancisco J. Ruiz9, Ma ía B. Ga cía-Ma ín10, Diana P. Obando-Posada10, Miguel A. Segu a-Va gas9, Vasilis S. Vasiliou11, Louise McHugh12, S e an Hö e 13, Ad iana Baban14, Da id Dias Ne o15, Ana Nunes da Sil a16, Jean-Louis Mones ès17, Ja ie Al a ez-Gal ez18, Ma isa Paez-Bla ina19, F ancisco Mon esinos20, Sonsoles Valdi ia-Salas21, Do o ya O i22,23, Ba osz Kleszcz24, Raimo Lappalainen25, I a I ano i ´ c26, Da id Gosa 27, F ede ick Dionne28, Rhonda M. Me win29, Ma ia Ka ekla30†, Angelos P. Kassianos30†and And ew T. Glos e 1† 1Clinical Psychology and In e en ion Science, Depa men o Psychology, Uni e si y o Basel, Basel, Swi ze land, 2Depa men o Heal h Psychology and Pedagogy, Riga S adin¸ š Uni e si y, Riga, La ia, 3Ko e Uni e si y Beha io al Lab, Facul y o Human and Social Sciences, Ko e Uni e si y o Enna, Enna, I aly, 4Depa men o Social Sciences, School o Humani ies and Social Sciences, Uni e si y o Nicosia, Nicosia, Cyp us, 5Depa men o Nu sing, Cyp us Uni e si y o Technology, Limassol, Cyp us, 6Cyp us Ins i u e o Neu ology and Gene ics, Nicosia, Cyp us, 7Depa men o Psychological Counseling and Guidance, Facul y o Educa ion, Hasan Kalyoncu Uni e si y, Gazian ep, Tu key, 8The Ne he sole School o Nu sing, Facul y o Medicine, The Chinese Uni e si y o Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China, 9Depa men o Psychology, Fundación Uni e si a ia Kon ad Lo enz, Bogo á, Colombia, 10 Facul y o Psychology, Uni e sidad de La Sabana, Chía, Colombia, 11 Nu ield Depa men o O hopaedics, Rheuma ology and Musculoskele al Sciences, Uni e si y o Ox o d, Ox o d, Uni ed Kingdom, 12 School o Psychology, Uni e si y College Dublin, Dublin, I eland, 13 Depa men o Medical Psychology, Innsb uck Medical Uni e si y, Innsb uck, Aus ia, 14 Depa men o Psychology, Babes-Bolyai Uni e si y (UBB), Cluj-Napoca, Romania, 15 ISPA—Ins i u o Uni e si á io, APPsyCI—Applied Psychology Resea ch Cen e Capabili ies and Inclusion, Lisbon, Po ugal, 16 Faculdade de Psicologia, Uni e sidade de Lisboa, Alameda da Uni e sidade, Lisbon, Po ugal, 17 LIP/PC2S Lab, Uni e si é G enoble Alpes, G enoble, F ance, 18 Depa men o Biomedicine, Bio echnology and Public Heal h, Uni e si y o Cadiz, Cadiz, Spain, 19 Ins i u o ACT, Mad id, Spain, 20 Depa men o Psychology, Eu opean Uni e si y o Mad id, Mad id, Spain, 21 Depa men o Psychology and Sociology, Uni e si y o Za agoza, Za agoza, Spain, 22 Depa men o Men al Heal h, Heim Pal Na ional Pedia ic Ins i u e, Budapes , Hunga y, 23 Ins i u e o Beha iou al Sciences, Semmelweis Uni e si y, Budapes , Hunga y, 24 Ba osz Kleszcz Psycho he apy and T aining, Sosnowiec, Poland, 25 Depa men o Psychology, Uni e si y o Jy äskylä, Jy äskylä, Finland, 26 Depa men o Child Psychia y, Ins i u e o Child en’s Diseases, Clinical Cen e o Mon eneg o, Podgo ica, Mon eneg o, 27 Depa men o Child, Adolescen and De elopmen al Neu ology, Uni e si y Child en’s Hospi al, Uni e si y Medical Cen e , Ljubljana, Slo enia, 28 Dépa emen de Psychologie, Uni e si é du Québec à T ois-Ri iè es, T ois-Ri iè es, QC, Canada, 29 Depa men o Psychia y and Beha io al Science, Duke Uni e si y, Du ham, CA, Uni ed S a es, 30 Depa men o Psychology, Uni e si y o Cyp us, Nicosia, Cyp us The co ona i us disease (COVID-19) pandemic undamen ally dis up ed humans’ social li e and beha io . Public heal h measu es may ha e inad e en ly impac ed how people ca e o each o he . This s udy in es iga ed p osocial beha io , i s associa ion well-being, and p edic o s o p osocial beha io du ing he i s COVID-19 pandemic lockdown and sough o unde s and whe he egion-speci ic di e ences exis . Pa icipan s (N= 9,496) F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 1Feb ua y 2022 | Volume 12 | A icle 775032 psyg-12-775032 Feb ua y 11, 2022 Time: 11:8 # 2 Halle e al. P osocial Beha io Du ing COVID-19 om eigh egions clus e ing mul iple coun ies a ound he wo ld esponded o a c oss-sec ional online-su ey in es iga ing he psychological consequences o he i s upsu ge o lockdowns in sp ing 2020. P osocial beha io was epo ed o occu equen ly. Mul iple eg ession analyses showed ha p osocial beha io was associa ed wi h be e well-being consis en ly ac oss egions. Wi h ega d o p edic o s o p osocial beha io , high le els o pe cei ed social suppo we e mos s ongly associa ed wi h p osocial beha io , ollowed by high le els o pe cei ed s ess, posi i e a ec and psychological lexibili y. Sociodemog aphic and psychosocial p edic o s o p osocial beha io we e simila ac oss egions. Keywo ds: p osocial beha io , well-being, COVID-19 pandemic, p edic o s o p osocial beha io , social suppo INTRODUCTION The ou b eak o he co ona i us disease (COVID-19) in la e 2019 quickly led na ions o decla e s a es o eme gency due o he o e whelming demands posed by he apid sp ead o he i us globally. As a esponse o he pandemic, a ange o beha io al measu es we e implemen ed, which d as ically impac ed people’s e e yday li e and unc ioning. In an a emp o cu ail COVID-19 ansmissions, many go e nmen s a ound he wo ld decla ed na ional lockdowns, en o ced cu ews and a el bans, empo a ily closed schools, businesses, cul u al and ec ea ional acili ies, and issued “s ay-a -home” ecommenda ions o o de s (Wo ld Heal h O ganiza ion [WHO], 2020). These physical dis ancing and qua an ine policies se e ely dis up ed daily social in e ac ions and esul ed in inc eased social isola ion (Ja is e al., 2020;Smi h and Lim, 2020), a si ua ion a odds wi h basic human needs o connec wi h o he s (Baumeis e and Lea y, 1995). The absence o social in e ac ions along wi h eme ging eelings o ea , insecu i y, and s ess (Luo e al., 2020;Wang e al., 2020) ha e limi ed he possibili ies o assis o he s and may gi e ise o sel -cen e ed conce n and dis ega d o o he s. Indeed, a a ie y o eac ions cha ac e ized as sel ish o an isocial we e obse ed as a esul o he pandemic and ela ed measu es. These included non-compliance wi h public heal h measu es (e.g., mask-wea ing), which inc eases isk o ansmission, and issues such as o e buying and ood s ockpiling (Dholakia, 2020; Wang e al., 2020), and e en a sha p ise o epo s and ac s o acism and xenophobia agains Asian people (Ng, 2020), when he co ona i us sp ead in sp ing 2020. Mo eo e , ecen esea ch poin s o he impo ance o social no ms when indi iduals in o m hei decisions abou beha ing mo e p osocially o in in a sel -in e es ed way (Abel and B own, 2020). Being exposed o posi i e ole models migh be cu ailed due o a limi ed pa icipa ion in social li e. Howe e , his unique es o ou social ab ic simul aneously e ealed p osocial esponses, which encompass a a ie y o a i udes and olun a y ac ions ha may be adop ed by indi iduals, all aiming a helping, suppo ing, com o ing, o ca ing o o he s (Ba son and Powell, 2003). Du ing he i s wa e o he pandemic in 2020, solida i y and coope a ion we e e lec ed in a ious indi idual beha io s and collec i e e o s. Fo example, measu es we e adhe ed o by la ge pa s o he popula ion in o de o p o ec he public heal h (Ma g a e al., 2021), as e lec ed by a apid su ge o millions o people ac oss he globe p ac icing scien i ically ecommended hygiene measu es and sel -isola ing. Coope a ion was u he mani es ed in musicians pe o ming conce s om hei balconies o he common good and people applauding om hei windows o exp ess g a i ude o on line and heal hca e wo ke s (Taylo , 2020). Collec i e e o s o di ec ly help hose in need u he en ailed he es ablishmen o o mal olun ee ing endea o s and in o mal ini ia i es o suppo neighbo s in communi ies (Bea dmo e e al., 2020). Indeed, p e ious esea ch has desc ibed he eme gence o p osocial esponses o sha ed expe iences o ad e si y and su e ing (S aub, 2003, 2005). Acco ding o his pe spec i e, expe iencing auma gene a es a sense o sha ed a e and iden i y, which may lead o inc eased empa hy wi h and a g ea e mo i a ion o help hose in need. Impo an ly, hese ou bu s s o al uis ic and p osocial beha io s ha e been obse ed in he a ious con ex s o auma ic li e e en s, such as in e pe sonal con lic , wa , and na u al disas e s (Kanias y and No is, 1995;Ha man and Mo se, 2020). I has been sugges ed ha in he con ex o such ex eme and se e e disas e s, populous ac s o coope a ion and p osocial beha io a e likely acili a ed by a highe numbe o oppo uni ies o help o he s (Vollha d , 2009). The COVID-19 c isis p esen ed an eme gency si ua ion in which di e en helping beha io s we e di icul o accomplish. The go e nmen ally manda ed lockdowns in he wake o he pandemic hus p o ided a unique con ex o s udy o he -o ien ed beha io . Li le is known abou how pe iods o inc eased insecu i y, s ess, and social dis up ion – as expe ienced du ing he i s COVID-19 lockdowns – a e ela ed o indi iduals’ eadiness and oppo uni ies o demons a e p osocial beha io . Engaging in p osocial beha io may be a po en p o ec i e ac o du ing pe iods o global ad e si y, as i can be linked o bene i s on he indi idual and o socie y as a whole: Ac s ha ocus on bene i ing o he s a e pa icula ly impo an in he ace o widesp ead su e ing caused by he COVID-19 pandemic, in which many indi iduals we e con on ed wi h inancial ha dship, social isola ion, and he loss o lo ed ones. Fu he mo e, p osocial beha io is associa ed wi h pe sonal bene i s o he indi idual p o ide o help. This is suppo ed by moun ing e idence o di e en ypes o p osocial beha io being ela ed o g ea e physical and men al heal h wi h s udies showing ha olun ee ing, amily ca egi ing, and he p o ision o angible F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 2Feb ua y 2022 | Volume 12 | A icle 775032 psyg-12-775032 Feb ua y 11, 2022 Time: 11:8 # 3 Halle e al. P osocial Beha io Du ing COVID-19 help o close o he s a e associa ed wi h g ea e longe i y (Ha is and Tho esen, 2005;Poulin e al., 2013;Ro h e al., 2013) and ha spending money on o he s augmen s emo ional well-being (Aknin e al., 2013). Pas esea ch has shown ha p osocial beha io bu e s agains he nega i e e ec s o daily s ess on emo ional well-being (Raposa e al., 2016). Fu he mo e, i was ound ha ime spen olun ee ing a e a na u al disas e is associa ed wi h inc eased eelings o belongingness (Go don e al., 2011). In he con ex o he cu en global c isis, a ecen expe imen al s udy in a Uni ed S a es sample p o ides p elimina y e idence ha showing p osocial beha io du ing he COVID-19 pandemic inc eases posi i e a ec , empa hy, and social connec edness (Va ma e al., 2020), indica ing ha helping o he s has an immedia e impac on he helpe ’s mood. P osocial beha io is in pa d i en by eelings o empa hy and a conce n o he wel a e o o he s (Eisenbe g and Mille , 1987;Ca lo e al., 1996). Howe e , mos p e ious esea ch wi h ega d o p edic o s o p osocial beha io has ocused on indi idual emo ional compe encies, lea ing ou he si ua ional and social con ex . Simila ly, he majo i y o s udies ha examine p edic o s o p osocial beha io ha e been conduc ed du ing non-eme gency si ua ions. To he ex en ha indi iduals can show a ied emo ional and beha io al esponses o he COVID- 19 c isis, he ac o s in luencing p osocial beha io may di e in e ms o si ua ional con ex s, pa icula ly hose wi h an inc eased global bu den and in imes o (manda ed) social dis ancing. Unde s anding p osocial esponding du ing he COVID-19 pandemic he e o e necessi a es an examina ion o psychosocial a iables ha likely play an impo an ole wi h ega d o p osocial beha io . Pe cei ed Social Suppo The a ailabili y o suppo i e ela ionships has been linked o inc eased le els o p osocial beha io . The social ne wo k p o ides an essen ial con ex in which p osocial beha io can be displayed. Mo eo e , concep ual links be ween emo ional unc ioning and p osocial beha io ha e been sugges ed in ha expe iencing social suppo can os e social-emo ional compe encies (Eisenbe g and Fabes, 1990), such as p o iding help and suppo o o he s. In addi ion, he expe ience o social exclusion has been shown o be associa ed wi h dec eases in p osocial ac s (Twenge e al., 2007). While social in e ac ions ha e been comp omised d as ically du ing he i s wa e o COVID-19 lockdowns, he pe cep ion o social suppo o a lack he eo in a no el, encumbe ing si ua ion migh be sha pened. We he e o e hypo hesized ha a high le el o pe cei ed social suppo would p edic mo e p osocial beha io . Psychological Flexibili y Psychological lexibili y has been p oposed as a co ne s one o heal h and well-being (Kashdan and Ro enbe g, 2010;Leonidou e al., 2019). Psychological lexibili y comp ises a ange o in a- and in e pe sonal skills enabling an indi idual o shi hei mindse s and adap hei beha io al epe oi e o wha a si ua ion a o ds. I has been shown o p o ec om he nega i e e ec s o daily s ess (Glos e e al., 2017) and majo li e e en s (Fonseca e al., 2020) on well-being and dep essi e symp oms. Resea ch on psychological lexibili y pos ula es ha esponding lexibly o si ua ional demands allows indi iduals o p io i ize a eas in li e ha a e meaning ul and consis en wi h pe sonal alues (Hayes e al., 2006;Villanue a e al., 2020). Addi ionally, esea che s s a ed o e alua e psychological lexibili y as a po en ial public heal h a ge wi h p elimina y e idence o i s po ency: In a ecen s udy, i was ound ha a b ie in e en ion s eng hening psychological lexibili y led o an inc ease in p osocial choices in couples (Glos e e al., 2020c). Ano he ecen s udy om ou esea ch g oup has suppo ed he dual oles o psychological lexibili y and p osocial beha io s in mi iga ing he impac o illness pe cep ion owa d COVID-19 on men al heal h in a sample o Hong Kong adul s du ing he ea ly phase o he pandemic (Chong e al., 2021). Gi en ha he COVID-19 lockdown measu es may make i ha de o indi iduals o shape hei daily li es in acco dance wi h hei pe sonally held alues, we hypo hesized ha high le els o psychological lexibili y would be posi i ely associa ed wi h he occu ence o p osocial beha io . Pe cei ed S ess A g owing body o esea ch suppo s he hypo hesis ha expe iencing s ess elici s p osocial beha io (Buchanan and P es on, 2014). P oponen s o his pe spec i e pos ula e ha a ilia i e beha io s p esen a way o coping wi h he ad e se expe iences o s ess (Midla sky, 1991;Taylo e al., 2000). This iew is suppo ed by empi ical da a showing an inc ease in p osocial beha io unde s ess in some si ua ions. Fo example, s udies ha e shown ha people exhibi p osocial beha io unde ime p essu e (Rand e al., 2012). In an expe imen al s udy, he expe ience o an acu e s esso led o inc eases in us wo hiness and p osocial beha io in social in e ac ions ( on Dawans e al., 2012), sugges ing ha eeling s essed con ibu es o he eme gence o p osocial beha io s due o i s s ess- bu e ing p ope ies. Al e na i ely, engaging in ac i i ies such as olun ee ing, helping, and suppo ing o he s equi e pe sonal esou ces, which may inc ease s ess (Glos e e al., 2020a). Wi hin he pandemic, p osocial beha io s migh be one way o o e come expe iences o s ess ha esul om being a ec ed o by obse ing o he peoples’ su e ing du ing he pandemic. We he e o e hypo hesized ha high le els o pe cei ed s ess would be posi i ely ela ed o p osocial beha io . Posi i e A ec A as amoun o e idence suppo s he associa ion be ween posi i e mood and p osocial beha io . One p e ailing heo e ical assump ion explaining his ela ionship is ha p osocial beha io is a s a egy o main ain posi i e mood. Expe imen al e idence shows ha he induc ion o posi i e mood acili a es helping beha io (Rosenhan e al., 1981) and ha posi i e s a e a ec leads o inc eased p osocial beha io in he wo k con ex (Geo ge, 1991). Suppo o his associa ion is p o ided by nume ous s udies manipula ing posi i e a ec in di e en ways, which show, o example, ha p osocial beha io occu s ollowing he ecep ion o a su p ise paymen (Isen and Le in, 1972) o a e lis ening o happy hough s (O’Malley and And ews, 1983). We he e o e hypo hesized ha posi i e a ec would con ibu e F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 3Feb ua y 2022 | Volume 12 | A icle 775032 psyg-12-775032 Feb ua y 11, 2022 Time: 11:8 # 4 Halle e al. P osocial Beha io Du ing COVID-19 o he eme gence o p osocial beha io du ing his ime o ele a ed s ess. The P esen S udy The posi i e impac o p osocial beha io on happiness has been documen ed in Wes e n and non-Wes e n socie ies and ac oss socioeconomic s a us (Dunn e al., 2008;Aknin e al., 2013). Howe e , i emains unexplo ed whe he his associa ion exis s du ing a long-las ing incisi e e en limi ing humans’ social beha io aced by almos he en i e wo ld popula ion concu en ly. The cu en s udy aimed o ex end ou unde s anding o p osocial beha io in he ace o an ad e se global si ua ion, which dis up s social li e and e e yday social in e ac ions. Fi s , he p esen s udy examined whe he and o which ex en people engage in p osocial beha io s du ing he i s COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns. Second, his s udy in es iga ed he ela ionship be ween p osocial beha io and well-being du ing he i s wa e o COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns. Thi d, we aimed a iden i ying p edic o s o p osocial beha io du ing he COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns by es ing he ela ionships be ween sociodemog aphic and psychosocial a iables and p osocial beha io . Las ly, we we e in e es ed in in es iga ing egion-speci ic di e ences in he ex en o p osocial beha io , i s associa ion wi h well-being, and p edic o s o p osocial beha io . MATERIALS AND METHODS P ocedu e The cu en s udy was pa o he COVID-Impac p ojec , an in e na ional c oss-sec ional online su ey conduc ed in 78 coun ies wo ldwide (Glos e e al., 2020b). The aim o he COVID-Impac p ojec was o explo e he beha io al, emo ional, and psychological esponse o he COVID-19 pandemic and ela ed lockdown measu es. Be ween Ap il and June 2020, da a we e collec ed h ough social media, uni e si y mailing lis s, and ad e isemen s in p o essional associa ions using a secu ed google pla o m. Pa icipan s we e i s in o med abou he s udy aim, he p ocedu e, and abou isks and bene i s o aking pa . Those who chose o pa icipa e ga e in o med consen elec onically. The su ey was a ailable in 22 di e en languages. E hical app o al was g an ed by he Cyp us Na ional Bioe hics Commi ee ( e .: EEBK E52020.01.60 on 3 d Ap il 2020) and by he local e hics boa ds om he esea ch eams in ol ed in da a collec ion. Measu es Well-Being The Men al Heal h Con inuum-Sho Fo m (MHCS-SF) was employed, which is a widely used and alida ed measu e o posi i e men al heal h (Lame s e al., 2011). The ins umen comp ises 14 i ems desc ibing a ious eelings, which a e a ed on a 6-poin Like scale ela ing o he equency o occu ence (0 = “ne e ” o 6 = “e e y day”). The MHC-SF con ains h ee subscales wi h h ee i ems measu ing emo ional, six i ems measu ing psychological, and i e i ems measu ing social well- being. The scale e ealed a C onbach’s alpha o 0.91 in his sample. The o al sco e is comp ised o he sum sco e o all i ems ( anging om 0 o 70). P osocial Beha io P osocial beha io was measu ed using six ou o 16 i ems o he P osocialness Scale o Adul s (PSA) (Cap a a e al., 2005). We we e no able o include all i ems o he scale in o de o a oid bu dening esponden s. The six i ems e e o s a emen s abou helping and sha ing wi h iends and o he s, being a ailable o olun ee ac i i ies, being empa he ic wi h hose in need, and spending ime wi h lonely people. Pa icipan s we e asked o a e he equency o occu ence o he s a ed beha io on a 5- poin Like scale (1 = “ne e /almos ne e ” o 5 = “always/almos always”). We used a sum sco e o he six i ems ( ange: 6–36), wi h highe alues indica ing mo e p osocial beha io . In his sample, C onbach’s alpha was 0.83 o he scale. Sociodemog aphic S a us Sociodemog aphic p edic o s included age, gende , educa ion le el, employmen s a us, ma i al s a us, and li ing si ua ion. Cha ac e is ics Rela ed o Qua an ine/Sel -Isola ion Pa icipan s esponded o ques ions ela ed o he amoun o ime in lockdown (in weeks) and he impac o he lockdown on hei inancial si ua ion (“ha e go be e ,” “s ayed he same,” “ha e go en wo se”) and on daily ac i i ies (“did no lea e house,” “le house once only,” “le house a couple o imes,” “le house mo e han h ee imes pe week”). Social Suppo The Oslo 3-i em Social Suppo Scale (OSSS-3) was used o measu e he a ailabili y o social suppo by asking abou he numbe o close people, he ex en o conce n and in e es , and he app aised ease o ge ing help om neighbo s (Dalga d e al., 2006). Analysis o he in e nal consis ency e ealed C onbach’s alpha o 0.54. The sum sco e is classi ied in g oups o di e en le els o social suppo : low (3–8), mode a e (9–11), and high (12–14). Psychological Flexibili y Psy-Flex is a 6-i em ins umen ha measu es psychological lexibili y, a cons uc e e ing o a ange o in a- and in e indi idual skills ha allow an open and p esen ly awa e mindse as well as he cla i ica ion and pu sui o deeply held, pe sonal alues (Glos e e al., 2021). I ems we e a ed on a 5-poin Like scale ela ed o he equency o occu ence (1 = “ e y seldom” o 5 = “ e y o en”). We used a sum sco e o all i ems. The in e nal consis ency o he scale e ealed a C onbach’s alpha o 0.84 in his sample. Pe cei ed S ess The 10-i em Pe cei ed S ess Scale (PSS) was used o measu e he deg ee o which li e si ua ions o he pas week a e app aised as s ess ul (Cohen e al., 1983). Responden s we e asked o a e he equency o eeling o hinking abou li e si ua ions o e en s in a ce ain manne on a 5-poin Like scale (0 = “ne e ” o 4 = “ e y F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 4Feb ua y 2022 | Volume 12 | A icle 775032 psyg-12-775032 Feb ua y 11, 2022 Time: 11:8 # 5 Halle e al. P osocial Beha io Du ing COVID-19 o en”). The sum sco e o all i ems was used in his sample wi h in e nal consis ency (α= 0.89). The sco es a e classi ied in o g oups o low (0–13), mode a e (14–26), and high s ess (27–40). Posi i e A ec The subscale o he Posi i e and Nega i e A ec Scale (PANAS; Wa son e al., 1988) was used o measu e posi i e a ec . The subscale is comp ised o 10 i ems ha a e sco ed on a 5-poin Like scale (1 = “ e y sligh ly/li le” o 5 = “ex emely”). Sum sco e o all i ems was calcula ed; in e nal consis ency analysis e ealed a C onbach’s alpha o 0.90. S a is ical Analysis Desc ip i e s a is ics included ela i e equencies, means and s anda d de ia ions (SDs), o medians and in e qua ile anges (IQR) o sociodemog aphic a iables (age, gende , educa ion le el, employmen s a us, ma i al s a us, child en, and li ing si ua ion), cha ac e is ics ega ding he sel -isola ion/qua an ine measu es (weeks in qua an ine, ha ing been in ec ed by COVID-19, impac o social isola ion on inancial si ua ion and daily ac i i ies), and p edic o and ou come a iables o he o e all sample and o all egions. Coun ies we e g ouped in o eigh geo-cul u al egions (Sou he n Eu ope (=SE) includes Cyp us, G eece, Spain, I aly, Po ugal, and Ando a; Eas e n Eu ope (=EE) includes La ia, Poland, Czech Republic, Hunga y, Slo akia, Slo enia, C oa ia, Uk aine, Romania, Se bia, Mon eneg o, and No h Macedonia; Wes e n Eu ope (=WE) includes Aus ia, Swi ze land, Liech ens ein, Ge many, Belgium, Ne he lands, Luxembou g, F ance, Uni ed Kingdom, and I eland; No he n Eu ope (=NE) includes Finland, Denma k, Sweden, No way, and Iceland; Wes e n Asia (=WA) includes Tu key, Aze baijan, Lebanon, Is ael, Jo dan, I an, Pakis an, Kuwai , Saudi-A abia, and Uni ed A ab Emi a es; and Eas Asia (=EA) includes Hong Kong, China, and Taiwan; La in Ame ica (=LA) includes Mexico, El Sal ado , Guadeloupe, Panama, Colombia, Ecuado , B azil, Pe u, U uguay, Pa aguay, A gen ina, and Chile; No h Ame ica (=NA) includes Canada, Uni ed S a es. In o de o analyze egional a ia ions o p osocial beha io , we compa ed he egions’ mean o he mean o he o e all sample wi h a linea eg ession model o p osocial beha io cen e ing a ound he g and mean and egion as a p edic o . Cohen’s d o he s anda dized di e ence was used o measu e he magni ude o he e ec wi h alues. Bi a ia e co ela ion analysis ( ) o he en i e sample was used o assess associa ions be ween all s udy a iables (p edic o s and ou come) wi h ≤0.10 e e ing o e y small, ≤0.20 o small, ≤0.30 o mode a e, ≤0.40 o la ge and >0.40 o e y la ge e ec sizes (Funde and Oze , 2019). Fi s , simple linea eg essions we e pe o med wi h p osocial beha io as p edic o and well-being as ou come in he o al sample and in each egion’s subsample. Nex , sepa a e mul iple eg ession analyses wi h he o al sample and wi h he egion-samples we e pe o med wi h p osocial beha io as he dependen a iable and each se o p edic o s (sociodemog aphic and psychosocial a iables) as he independen a iables. S anda dized eg ession coe icien s (Be a) wi h 95% Con idence In e als (CI) we e compu ed as indices o e ec size in o de o measu e he s eng h o he associa ion be ween each p edic o and ou come a iable. Va iance In la ion Fac o s (VIF) we e used o check o mul icollinea i y be ween he p edic o s. All analyses we e i s conduc ed wi h he o e all sample and subsequen ly wi h he subsamples o each egion. All analyses we e compu ed using R so wa e e sion 1.3.959 (R Co e Team). RESULTS The sample comp ised N= 9,496 pa icipan s om 60 coun ies g ouped in o eigh egions: Sou he n Eu ope (n= 2,820), Eas e n Eu ope (n= 2,269), Wes e n Eu ope (n= 2,107), No he n Eu ope (n= 172), Wes Asia (n= 720), and Eas Asia (n= 520), La in Ame ica (n= 560), and No h Ame ica (n= 328). Regions wi h n<100 we e no conside ed in he sample. Table 1 p esen s ela i e equencies and, whe e app op ia e, measu es o cen al endency o he sociodemog aphic a iables and cha ac e is ics ela ed o qua an ine/sel -isola ion o he en i e sample and indi idual egions. F equency and Types o P osocial Beha io O e all, p osocial beha io was epo ed o occu o en on a e age in he o al sample (M= 22.8, SD = 4.2). Di e en ypes o p osocial beha io s we e epo ed wi h simila equency on a e age. On a desc ip i e le el, lowes le els we e epo ed o being a ailable o olun ee ing ac i i ies (M= 3.2, SD = 1.2) and spending ime wi h iends who eel lonely (M= 3.4, SD = 1.0), highe le els o sha ing wi h iends (M= 3.9, SD = 0.92), willing o help (M= 4.1, SD = 0.8), ying o help o he s (M= 4.1, SD = 0.8), and being empa he ic wi h hose in need (M= 4.1, SD = 0.8). Wi h ega d o egional a ia ions, he epo ed le els o p osocial beha io we e la gely simila ac oss egions. Howe e , wo egions epo ed sligh ly highe le els o p osocial beha io (Sou he n Eu ope, medium e ec ; Wes e n Asia, la ge e ec ), and o he wo egions demons a ed lowe le els o p osocial beha io (Eas e n Eu ope, medium e ec ; Eas e n Asia, e y la ge e ec ) han he a e age sample. A e age le els o p osocial beha io and di e ences be ween egions and hei e ec sizes can be ound in Table 2. Regional a ia ions we e obse ed wi h ega d o speci ic ypes o p osocial beha io . In mos egions, abou 45–55% o he esponden s indica ed being a ailable o olun ee ac i i ies as “o en” o “almos always”, whe eas his was he case o only 20.8% in Eas e n Eu ope, 27.3% in No he n Eu ope, and 26.1% in Eas Asia. A simila pa e n eme ged on spending ime wi h iends who eel lonely: In mos egions, be ween 47 and 62% indica ed ha his ype o beha io occu ed as “o en” o “almos always”, while his was ue o 34% in Eas e n Eu ope, 37.8% in No he n Eu ope, and 36% in Eas Asia. Rela ionship Be ween P osocial Beha io and Well-Being Sca e plo and Pea son’s co ela ion showed a mode a e associa ion be ween p osocial beha io and well-being ( = 0.32). F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 5Feb ua y 2022 | Volume 12 | A icle 775032 psyg-12-775032 Feb ua y 11, 2022 Time: 11:8 # 6 Halle e al. P osocial Beha io Du ing COVID-19 TABLE 1 | Sociodemog aphic and cha ac e is ics ela ed o qua an ine/sel -isola ion o he o al sample and subsamples o each egion. All SE EE WE NE WA EA LA NA N= 9,496 n= 2,820 n= 2,269 n= 2,107 n= 172 n= 720 n= 520 n= 560 n= 328 Sociodemog aphic cha ac e is ics Sex, % Female 77.6 77.3 81.1 76.9 82.0 68.8 73.7 78.4 83.2 Male 22.0 22.4 18.8 22.5 16.9 30.9 26.0 21.4 15.5 O he 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.6 1.2 0.3 0.4 0.2 1.2 Age, mean (SD) 37.2 (13.3) 37.2 (13.3) 37.7 (12.9) 39.1 (15.9) 35.9 (14.0) 30.8 (11.1) 32.7 (11.5) 34.5 (13.5) 39.6 (15.9) Educa ion, % P ima y school 0.8 0.5 1.3 0.4 0.6 2.1 0.0 0.7 1.5 High school 11.7 9.9 14.9 5.9 22.1 28.3 8.5 10.9 6.1 College/Uni e si y 12.9 15.6 9.7 14.6 16.3 4.9 9.4 17.5 15.9 G adua ed om College/Uni e si y 29.0 28.1 30.8 18.5 26.2 45.8 46.5 29.5 26.8 Mas e /Pos g adua e 34.4 36.2 35.4 42.1 22.1 11.1 28.8 34.6 27.7 Doc o al le el 8.6 7.2 6.7 13.5 7.6 6.0 6.5 3.8 20.7 O he 2.6 2.6 1.2 5.0 5.2 1.8 0.2 3.0 1.2 Employmen , % Wo king ( ull- ime) 53.7 53.8 64.2 46.9 49.4 42.9 63.1 45.9 51.2 Wo king (pa - ime) 17.6 16.4 12.2 30.1 18.6 6.4 14.6 17.3 14.6 Unemployed 22.7 23.5 17.1 17.0 25.0 47.2 19.8 32.5 22.3 On pa en al lea e 2.3 2.6 3.4 1.8 1.7 1.2 0.4 0.9 2.4 Re i ed 3.7 3.7 3.2 4.2 5.2 2.2 2.1 3.4 9.5 Ma i al s a us, % Single 30.8 35.0 24.9 27.5 24.7 44.8 45.9 44.5 26.2 Ma ied 36.1 40.3 39.3 36.3 28.3 36.9 31.8 31.5 48.2 Rela ionship/engaged 25.7 22.6 31.5 33.8 45.8 17.3 21.9 21.5 23.0 Di o ced 5.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Widowed 1.1 0.8 2.5 0.8 1.2 0.3 0.2 0.8 1.6 Child en, % Yes 40.7 40.7 47.4 42.3 33.1 31.8 23.3 37.8 41.8 No 59.3 59.3 52.6 57.7 66.9 68.2 76.7 62.7 58.2 Li ing si ua ion, % Alone 14.6 14.4 17.5 19.3 32.3 8.9 7.8 9.3 15.9 Wi h pa en s 20.8 24.3 13.7 10.4 6.0 54.5 47.8 30.5 10.6 Wi h one pa en 5.1 4.9 5.6 3.5 0.0 4.5 7.0 15.3 3.6 Wi h own amily 54.1 56.4 63.1 66.8 61.7 32.3 37.3 44.9 69.9 Wi h iends/ oomma es 5.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cha ac e is ics ela ed o lockdown/sel -isola ion Weeks in lockdown/sel -isola ion, median (IQR) 5 (3) 6 (3) 5 (3) 6 (3) 6 (4) 4 (2) 12 (8) 5 (3) 5 (2) In ec ed by COVID-19, % Yes 1.4 0.7 0.7 0.7 10.5 8.1 0.2 0.0 2.4 No 88.0 92.8 85.4 83.5 70.3 86.2 98.5 95.4 78.4 Symp oms, unsu e 10.6 6.5 14.0 15.8 19.2 5.7 1.3 4.6 19.2 Changes in inancial si ua ion, % Has go en be e 8.9 9.4 6.6 12.9 5.8 6.7 7.5 5.9 8.8 S ayed he same 57.9 51.5 64.0 59.5 73.8 59.4 62.7 43.8 63.1 Has go en wo se 33.3 39.1 29.4 27.6 20.4 33.9 29.8 50.4 28.0 Le house since isola ion, % No 47.7 52.7 44.5 33.8 55.2 63.7 33.8 70.7 59.8 Once only 7.6 8.2 7.5 5.4 9.9 11.7 9.4 5.9 7.9 A couple o imes 23.7 23.4 22.8 30.8 13.4 14.0 29.0 16.4 18.3 > h ee imes pe week 20.9 15.7 25.2 30.0 21.5 10.6 27.7 7.0 14.0 Coun ies we e clus e ed in egions as ollows: Sou he n Eu ope (=SE) includes Cyp us, G eece, Spain, I aly, Po ugal, and Ando a; Eas e n Eu ope (=EE) includes La ia, Poland, Czech Republic, Hunga y, Slo akia, Slo enia, C oa ia, Uk aine, Romania, Se bia, Mon eneg o, and No h Macedonia; Wes e n Eu ope (=WE) includes Aus ia, Swi ze land, Liech ens ein, Ge many, Belgium, Ne he lands, Luxembou g, F ance, Uni ed Kingdom, and I eland; No he n Eu ope (=NE) includes Finland, Denma k, Sweden, No way, and Iceland; Wes e n Asia (=WA) includes Tu key, Aze baijan, Lebanon, Is ael, Jo dan, I an, Pakis an, Kuwai , Saudi-A abia, and Uni ed A ab Emi a es; and Eas Asia (=EA) includes Hong Kong, China, Taiwan; La in Ame ica (=LA) includes Mexico, El Sal ado , Guadeloupe, Panama, Colombia, Ecuado , B azil, Pe u, U uguay, Pa aguay, A gen ina, and Chile; No h Ame ica (=NA) includes Canada, Uni ed S a es. Simple linea eg ession e ealed ha p osocial beha io explained a signi ican amoun o a iance in well-being, F(1,9483) = 1,096, p<0.001, R2adjus ed = 0.104. The eg ession coe icien [B= 1.07, CI (1.01, 1.13)] indica es ha well-being inc eases by 1.07 o each uni o inc ease in p osocial beha io [β= 0.32, CI (0.30, 0.34), p<0.001]. Wi h ega d o egional a ia ions, p osocial beha io signi ican ly posi i ely p edic ed well-being in all egions wi h he la ges e ec in La in Ame ica [β= 0.41, CI (0.29, 0.36), p<0.001], Wes Asia [β= 0.38, CI (0.31, 0.45), p<0.001] and Eas Asia [β= 0.35, CI (0.27, 0.44), p<0.001] ollowed by Sou he n Eu ope [β= 0.32, CI (0.29, 0.36), p<0.001], F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 6Feb ua y 2022 | Volume 12 | A icle 775032 psyg-12-775032 Feb ua y 11, 2022 Time: 11:8 # 7 Halle e al. P osocial Beha io Du ing COVID-19 TABLE 2 | A e age le els o p osocial beha io ac oss egions. M (SD) Di e ence be ween coun y mean and o e all mean (95% CI) E ec size Regions To al sample 22.8 (4.2) Sou he n Eu ope 24.0 (3.8) 1.27 (1.02, 1.35) 0.295 Eas e n Eu ope 21.0 (4.3) −1.74 (−2.03, −1.64) 0.433 Wes e n Eu ope 23.2 (3.8) 0.45 (0.17, 0.53) 0.088 No he n Eu ope 22.4 (3.8) −0.31 (−0.99, 0.17) 0.102 Wes Asia 24.1 (3.9) 1.38 (0.99, 1.59) 0.319 Eas Asia 20.7 (4.0) −2.06 (−2.51, −1.80) 0.529 La in Ame ica 23.2 (4.3) 0.46 (−0.00, 0.74) 0.087 No h Ame ica 23.3 (3.9) 0.55 (0.03, 0.89) 0.114 M, mean; SD, s anda d de ia ion; CI, con idence in e al, Cohen’s d o s anda dized di e ence be ween egion mean and o e all mean; mode a e and la ge e ec s a e p in ed in bold. No he n Eu ope [β= 0.32, CI (0.23, 0.32), p<0.001], Eas e n Eu ope [β= 0.27, CI (0.24, 0.32), p<0.001] and Wes e n Eu ope [β= 0.27, CI (0.23, 0.31), p<0.001], and No h Ame ica [β= 0.24, CI (0.14, 0.35), p<0.001]. Figu e 1 p esen s he associa ion be ween p osocial beha io and well- being ac oss egions. P edic o s o P osocial Beha io Desc ip i e s a is ics o all psychosocial a iables can be ound in Table 3, displaying means and SDs o he ou come and p edic o a iables o he o al sample and subsamples o each egion. Table 4 p esen s means and SDs, as well as bi a ia e co ela ions among all psychological a iables – p edic o s and ou come(s) – ac oss he en i e sample. Well-being showed a s ong posi i e co ela ion wi h psychological lexibili y, and posi i e a ec , and a mode a e o s ong nega i e associa ion wi h pe cei ed s ess. P osocial beha io showed mode a e posi i e co ela ions wi h well-being, social suppo , and posi i e a ec ; a weak posi i e co ela ion wi h psychological lexibili y; and a weak nega i e co ela ion wi h pe cei ed s ess. Table 5 displays he esul s o he mul iple eg ession analysis o he o e all sample [F(24, 9407) = 88.92, p<0.001, R2adjus ed = 0.183]. Bo h sociodemog aphic and psychosocial p edic o s we e signi ican , wi h se e al psychosocial p edic o s showing he la ges e ec s on p osocial beha io in he o e all sample. A anged in o de o p edic o s eng h, a high le el o pe cei ed social suppo was he p edic o ha bes explained p osocial beha io ( ela i e o low le els o social suppo ). Highe le els o pe cei ed s ess and posi i e a ec also con ibu ed signi ican ly o a ia ion in p osocial beha io . This was ollowed by emale gende ( ela i e o male), being e i ed ( ela i e o wo king ull ime), and li ing wi h iends o oomma es ( ela i e o li ing alone) as posi i e p edic o s. Signi ican posi i e p edic o s o p osocial beha io we e highe le els o psychological lexibili y, being e i ed, being unemployed ( ela i e o wo king ull ime), li ing wi h pa en s, and li ing wi h oomma es ( ela i e o li ing alone). Signi ican nega i e p edic o s o p osocial beha io we e li ing wi h own amily ( ela i e o li ing alone), as well as being in a ela ionship and being widowed ( ela i e o being ma ied). Table 6 demons a es a simpli ied e sion o he mul iple eg ession analyses o each egion. Wi h ega d o egional a ia ion, he mul iple eg ession analyses e ealed he ollowing esul s: The s onges p edic o s o p osocial beha io we e high le els o pe cei ed social suppo in all egions wi h Eas Asia [β= 0.84, CI (0.44, 1.23), p<0.001], Wes Asia [β= 0.75, CI (0.55,0.95), p<0.001], No he n Eu ope [β= 0.72, CI (0.24, 1.20), p<0.001], Eas e n Eu ope [β= 0.67, CI (0.55,0.80), p<0.001], No he n Ame ica [β= 0.64, CI (0.33, 0.95), p<0.001], La in Ame ica [β= 0.58, CI (0.33, 0.82), p<0.001], Wes e n Eu ope [β= 0.57, CI (0.43, 0.70), p<0.001] and Sou he n Eu ope [β= 0.53, CI (0.43, 0.64), p<0.001]. The second s onges p edic o was a high le el o pe cei ed s ess in Eas Asia [β= 0.55, CI (0.22, 0.89), p<0.001], No h Ame ica [β= 0.44, CI (0.08, 0.79), p<0.001], Sou he n Eu ope [β= 0.35, CI (0.21, 0.50), p<0.001], Wes e n Eu ope [β= 0.32, CI (0.15, 0.49), p<0.001], La in Ame ica [β= 0.24, CI (−0.09, 0.56), p<0.001], and Eas e n Eu ope [β= 0.23, CI (0.14, 0.43), p<0.001]; and he hi d one was posi i e a ec in La in Ame ica [β= 0.29, CI (0.18, 0.40), p<0.001], Sou he n Eu ope [β= 0.27, CI (0.23, 0.31), p<0.001], No h Ame ica [β= 0.24, CI (0.11, 0.38), p<0.001], Wes Asia [β= 0.24, CI (0.16, 0.31), p<0.001], Eas Asia [β= 0.24, CI (0.15, 0.33), p<0.001], Eas e n Eu ope [β= 0.23, CI (0.19, 0.28), p<0.001] and Wes e n Eu ope [β= 0.15, CI (0.10, 0.20), p<0.001]. Las ly, psychological lexibili y posi i ely p edic ed p osocial beha io in Eas Asia [β= 0.18, CI (0.09, 0.27), p<0.001], No h Ame ica [β= 0.17, CI (0.04, 0.31), p<0.001], Wes e n Eu ope [β= 0.15, CI (0.12, 0.22), p<0.001], Sou he n Eu ope [β= 0.11, CI (0.07, 0.16), p<0.001], La in Ame ica [β= 0.10, CI (0.00, 0.20), p<0.001], and Eas e n Eu ope [β= 0.07, CI (0.02, 0.12), p<0.001] and Wes e n Asia [β= 0.07, CI (0.00, 0.14), p<0.001]. DISCUSSION The COVID-19 pandemic undamen ally changed humans’ social li es and day- o-day beha io s. The lockdown measu es – imposed in many coun ies as a means o con ol he ou b eak o he i us – was a concep -unhea d o by mos people a he ime. Cu ews, bans on ga he ings, and he s ands ill o he public li e d ama ically impac ed he equency and quali y o social in e ac ions and esul ed in he social isola ion o many indi iduals. On he one hand, hese es ic ions con lic wi h he humans’ need o connec wi h o he s and o engage in posi i e social in e ac ions, such as p osocial beha io . On he o he hand, he se e i y o his c isis highligh s he impo ance o p osocial beha io o a unc ioning socie y and he public men al heal h. This is why his s udy’s objec i e was o in es iga e he ex en o p osocial beha io , i s ela ion o well-being and ac o s p edic ing p osocial ac s. P osocial Beha io Du ing he Pandemic The p esen s udy e ealed ha , o e all, p osocial beha io was epo ed o occu equen ly du ing he i s COVID-19 ela ed F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 7Feb ua y 2022 | Volume 12 | A icle 775032 psyg-12-775032 Feb ua y 11, 2022 Time: 11:8 # 8 Halle e al. P osocial Beha io Du ing COVID-19 FIGURE 1 | Associa ion be ween p osocial beha io and well-being ac oss egions. lockdown in sp ing 2020. This inding la gely suppo s he no ion ha in esponse o he social dilemma indi iduals do no shy away om suppo ing each o he . Con a y o commonly held belie s o panic and egois ic ac s ollowing disas e s, humans end o engage in a ious ypes o bene olen beha io s, as obse ed in di e se ca as ophes (Zaki, 2020). Ou esul s u he indica ed ha helping beha io migh occu uni e sally gi en ha he ex en o epo ed p osocial beha io was compa able ac oss eigh egions co e ing 60 di e en coun ies a ound he wo ld. Lowe le els o p osocial beha io we e obse ed in Eas e n Eu ope and Eas Asia, which is likely explained by a combina ion o cul u al, his o ic and poli ical ac o s as well as coun y-speci ic egula ions due o he pandemic. Indeed, when compa ed wi h Wes e n amilies, adi ional Asian amilies a e mo e likely o emphasize amily obliga ions and espec o hie a chical ela ions, implying ha he p osocial endencies a e mo e likely o be displayed owa d amily membe s and pee s (e.g., senio s), a he han o he communi y membe s and s ange s (Padilla-Walke e al., 2018). Fo Asian amilies, hese mo i es may ha e been unde ep esen ed in he P osocialness Scale o Adul s. On he o he hand, lowe le els o p osocial beha io in Eas e n Eu ope compa ed o he o e all sample migh be explained by lowe le els o social us ha has p e iously been obse ed in pos -communis coun ies (e.g., Bjø nsko , 2007, 2021). I a socie y is cha ac e ized by doub s ha mos o he people a e beha ing acco ding o social no ms, his migh educe he demons a ion o p osocial beha io s. Howe e , un il eplica ed and speci ically es ed, hese in e p e a ions mus emain specula i e. Looking in o speci ic ypes o p osocial beha io , ou esul s show ha spending ime wi h iends who eel lonely and being a ailable o olun ee ing we e epo ed o occu he leas equen ly on a e age, a pa e n obse ed ac oss all egions. Gi en ha s a e egula ions in ol ed es ic ions d as ically impac ing social li e, i is plausible ha esponden s e ained om spending ime wi h iends. Resea ch in a ep esen a i e sample in he Uni ed Kingdom has shown ha he F on ie s in Psychology | www. on ie sin.o g 8Feb ua y 2022 | Volume 12 | A icle 775032