1. Introduction
The COVID-19 pandemic arose in early 2020, violently impacting European countries, especially Italy [1]. The Italian government imposed severe restrictions and a lockdown to limit the spread of the contagion over two different periods: from March 2020 to June 2020 and from October 2020 to May 2021 [2]. The limitations undertaken in this emergency included social distancing, self-isolation, and social avoidance to prevent any COVID-19 contagion [3]. However, these restrictions severely impacted daily life, constraining people from adapting to a number of limitations that could have worsened their mental health [4,5,6]. Consequently, a considerable number of studies have investigated the quality of life, anxiety levels, depression, stress, and similar variables during lockdown [7,8,9] and across different life stages [10,11].
A number of studies were conducted on young adults, which revealed them to be an age group at particular risk of developing mental health problems [12]. Indeed, the transitional period between adolescence and adulthood is characterized by feelings of uncertainty and challenge, and individuals at this stage need to juggle important developmental tasks [13]. Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic might have increased the difficulty of these challenges (e.g., job uncertainty, educational dropout), together with the levels of anxiety and depressive symptoms [14,15].
The rapid escalation of COVID-19 cases within the population has increased fear of COVID-19 and fear of contagion levels [16]. A meta-analysis by Luo et al. [17] reported that the fear of COVID-19 was higher in females than males, but no differences were found concerning age groups. Other studies also reported gender differences concerning the fear of COVID-19 [18,19]. Moreover, personality traits were associated with fear of COVID-19, and neuroticism has been indicated as a risk factor associated with mental health problems [20,21]. In other words, people with high levels of fear of COVID-19 and high levels of neuroticism seemed more at risk of developing mental health problems [22].
The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated anxiety and mood disorders among people who already suffered from these diseases [23], but also among the general population [24], where females tend to report higher anxiety levels than males [25]. In previous studies, fear of COVID-19 has been associated with anxiety, which, on the one hand, significantly predicted severe fear of COVID-19, and, on the other hand, high fear of COVID-19 predicted an increase in anxiety [26,27]. In addition, the university student population faced high levels of stress and anxiety, mainly caused by the closure of universities and the adoption of distance learning [28,29], and this impact was even bigger on freshmen [30] who were not able to manage the ability to regulate the emotions related to their studies because of the novelty of their studies. Conversely, older students tended to be more confident and reported higher scores in online learning readiness [31,32].
In relation to lifestyle choices during the pandemic, the fear associated with COVID-19 has certainly influenced daily practices, such as using social networks [33], technological devices [34], and sports practice. Despite several countries allowing outdoor PA during lockdown restrictions, scientific literature reported a decrease in PA amounts [35,36]. The decrease in PA amount might have had consequences not only for physical and mental health but also for the public health level for specific populations [35]. Notably, the practice of sports creates an educational environment for youth growth [37], which helps shape personality, cognition, and emotions [38]. Moreover, performing physical activity during quarantine had a protective effect on hospitalization for COVID-19 [39] and respiratory pathologies derived from the infection [40].
A number of studies about protective factors have found that physically active people tend to display lower levels of negative effects, such as stress, anxiety, and depression [41,42]. For example, a study by Kekäläinen et al. [43] reported that the more women engaged in PA, the lower their neuroticism level was. Another protective factor could be self-efficacy, which helps people keep their motivation high in stressful life situations and avoid permanent mental health damage after exposure to a traumatic situation like the pandemic [44]. It was observed that physically active people tend to report higher levels of general self-efficacy than sedentary people [45,46]. Additionally, other studies have indicated general self-efficacy as a protective factor against negative effects through the enhancement of psychological resilience [47,48]. General self-efficacy is impacted in cases of high levels of neuroticism since this personality trait impacts the evaluation of a new life event [49]. State and trait anxiety negatively influence self-efficacy, particularly in the academic domain and more so in the case of university students [50].
Finally, the relationship between PA and personality traits is considered unidirectional, i.e., a certain pattern of personality traits predicts engagement in PA, but it is also possible that, in the case of stressful life events, the practice of PA protects against the increase of neuroticism levels [51]. In this sense, it could be possible that people engaging in PA during the pandemic restrictions experienced protective effects for their mental health [52,53,54].
Furthermore, there were no previous studies that investigated the protective effect of PA on personality factors and anxiety and their influence on general self-efficacy during the COVID-19 pandemic in young adults. Therefore, the aim of the current study is to clarify if sports practice might have had a protective effect on young adults’ fear of COVID-19, anxiety levels, and neuroticism. We hypothesize that:
Youngsters who practiced outdoor sports or PA would display lower levels of fear of COVID-19, lower levels of anxiety, lower levels of neuroticism, and higher levels of self-efficacy compared to people who did not practice any PA.
Females would obtain higher scores of COVID-19 fear, state and trait anxiety, and neuroticism.
High levels of fear of COVID-19, being female, and not practicing any sport/PA negatively influence neuroticism levels, which in turn positively influence state and trait anxiety that determine a decrease in general self-efficacy level in young adults.
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Participants
The sampling was conducted online through social networks, using the “snowballing” procedure of spreading the link of the survey during the COVID second-wave Italian lockdown phase (from March to May 2021). During this period, students attended university classes through distance learning, and going out of the house was not allowed.
Further, out of an initial sample of 305 students, 29 questionnaires were disregarded due to incompleteness. The final sample consisted of 276 university students from the University of Palermo (176 females, 63.8%), whose mean age was 22.13 years (SD: ±3.94). The sample mainly consisted of students from the first year of study (48.6%), the second year (28.3%), and students with a bachelor’s degree (69.6%). A greater number of the students did not study and work at the same time (85.9%) and lived in a city apartment during the pandemic (53.3%) with their family (90.6%). The students mainly attended sport science (24%) and pedagogy classes (24%), followed by psychology (13%), engineering (13%), and philosophy (11%).
The participants expressed their consent to anonymously participate in the survey, respecting the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. The Bioethics Committee of the University of Palermo has approved the current study (n. 38/2021).
2.2. Measures
2.2.1. Pandemic Habits during COVID-19 Restrictions
The first section of the questionnaire collected information on participants’ habits during the COVID-19 pandemic (see Supplementary Materials). Information about the course year of study, working condition, living place during the pandemic, and practice of sports and physical activity were detected. Based on the answers to the question “did you practice any outdoor sport or physical activity during the pandemic restrictions?”, we categorized “active youngsters during the pandemic” and “sedentary youngsters during the pandemic.”
2.2.2. Fear of COVID-19
The Fear of COVID-19 [16] is a self-report questionnaire consisting of 7 items on a 5-point scale (from 1—“strongly disagree”—to 5—“strongly agree”). The questionnaire consists of a unique scale measuring the fear of COVID-19 in adults (e.g., “I am most afraid of Coronavirus-19”). The total score was calculated by calculating the sum of all the item scores (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.86), whose reliability is similar to that reported in the Italian version [55].
2.2.3. State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI)
The Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-S; [56]) is a questionnaire assessing state and trait anxiety levels in adults through two independent subscales of 40 items. For the purpose of the study, the Italian adaptation of the STAI was adopted, consisting of 10 items divided into two subscales. Five items measured state anxiety (e.g., “I feel that difficulties are piling up so that I cannot overcome them”), while the other five assessed trait anxiety (e.g., “I feel confused”) on a 4-point scale (1—not at all, 2—somewhat, 3—moderately so, and 4—very much so). A higher score indicates higher anxiety. Cronbach’s alphas were 0.85 for STAI-trait and 0.89 for STAI-state, which were similar to the original standardization [57].
2.2.4. Neuroticism
The personality inventory (PI; [58]) was used in measuring neuroticism. The PI which is a questionnaire consisting of 20 items and comprising five subscales corresponding to five personality dimensions: neuroticism (N), conscientiousness (C), extraversion (E), agreeableness (A), and openness (O). Each item is rated on a 5-point scale (from 1: strongly disagree to 5: strongly agree). In the present study, we referred to the total score for neuroticism only (Cronbach’s alpha coefficient: 0.75), whose reliability was similar to the one reported in the original study [58].
2.2.5. Self-Efficacy
The General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSE; [59]) is a self-reported measure of self-efficacy. It comprises items with good internal reliability (Cronbach’s alphas between 0.76 and 0.90). Each item is assessed on a 4-point scale (from 1: “Not at all true” to 4: “Exactly true”). The total score was obtained by calculating the sum of all items. The score ranges between 10 and 40, with a higher score corresponding to a more general SE. In the present study, the standardized Cronbach’s α coefficient of general SE was 0.85, similar to other studies [60].
2.3. Data Analysis
The data were analyzed through the R software (version 4.0.5.). Additionally, descriptive statistics were performed on habits during the pandemic and on fear of COVID-19, anxiety, neuroticism, and self-efficacy.
The differences between genders and between sedentary and active students were estimated by performing a 2 (gender: male vs. female) × 2 (physical activity: sedentary vs. active) factorial ANOVA concerning fear of COVID-19, state anxiety and trait anxiety, neuroticism, and self-efficacy. A post-hoc test for the ANOVAs was performed using Tukey’s test.
For the estimation of the influence among the considered variables (i.e., gender, sport/PA practice, fear of COVID-19, state and trait anxiety, neuroticism, and self-efficacy), we first calculated Pearson’s r. Finally, a path analysis model was performed to better clarify the relationship occurring among the overmentioned variables.
3. Results
3.1. Descriptive Statistics
In outdoor sport/PA practices, 164 participants (59.4%) declared themselves to be sedentary during the pandemic. Figure 1 shows the percentages of males and females distinguished by being physically active or sedentary during the pandemic. The chi-squared test did not evidence any association between the outdoor sport/PA practice and gender (χ2 = 0.13, p = 0.71).
Descriptive statistics were also performed for the scores of COVID-19 fear, state and trait anxiety, neuroticism, and self-efficacy. Table 1 reports descriptive statistics of fear of COVID-19, state and trait anxiety, neuroticism, and self-efficacy scores distinguished for gender and sport/PA practice.
3.2. Differences between Genders and Sport/PA Practice
3.2.1. Fear of COVID-19
The ANOVA model (see Figure 2) showed a significant difference in terms of fear of COVID-19 between males and females (F1,272 = 22.26, p < 0.001, η2p = 0.08), but not in physical activity (F1,272 = 0.27 ns). The interaction between gender and physical activity was significant (F1,272 = 4.91, p = 0.03, η2p = 0.02).
In the post-hoc test, a nonsignificant difference emerged between active and sedentary females (t = −1.40, df = 272 ns), as well as active and sedentary males (t = 1.72, df = 272 ns), but not between sedentary females and sedentary males (t = 1.95, df = 272 ns). However, significant differences emerged between active males and females (t = 4.52, df = 272, p < 0.001), where active females reported a higher level of fear of COVID-19 than active males, active females, and sedentary males (t = 3.01, df = 272, p = 0.02), and between sedentary females and active males (t = 3.65, df = 272, p = 0.02).
3.2.2. Anxiety
Gender differences emerged in state-anxiety (Figure 3; F1,272 = 9.30, p = 0.003, η2p = 0.03), where females reported higher levels of state-anxiety (t = 3.05, df = 272, p = 0.003). Youth practicing sports/physical activity reported a lower level of state-anxiety compared to their sedentary counterparts (F1,272 = 13.85, p < 0.001, η2p = 0.05). The interaction between gender and physical activity was nonsignificant (F1,272 = 0.01 ns).
Additionally, in the trait anxiety (Figure 4), gender differences emerged (F1,272 = 15.21, p < 0.001, η2p = 0.05), where females reported higher levels of anxiety (t = 3.90, df = 2 72, p < 0.001). It was observed that there were significant differences between sedentary and active people, where sedentary people reported higher anxiety levels than active people (t = 3.61, df = 272, p < 0.001, η2p = 0.05). Further, the interaction between gender and physical activity was nonsignificant (F1,272 = 0.03 ns).
3.2.3. Neuroticism
On neuroticism (Figure 5), gender differences emerged (F1,272 = 20.34, p < 0.001, η2p = 0.07), where females reported higher levels of neuroticism than males (t = 4.51, df = 272, p = 0.04, η2p = 0.05). Additionally, significant differences emerged between sedentary and active people (F1,272 = 4.18, df = 272, p = 0.04, η2p = 0.02), where sedentary people reported higher levels of neuroticism than physically active people (t = 2.04, df = 272, p = 0.04). Further, no significant interaction emerged between gender and physical activity (F1,272 = 0.01 ns).
3.2.4. Self-Efficacy
There were no gender differences in terms of self-efficacy (Figure 6; F1,272 = 3.13 ns), while there were significant differences between active and sedentary people (F1,272 = 11.15, p < 0.001, η2p = 0.04), where physically active people reported higher levels of self-efficacy (t = −3.54, df = 272, p < 0.001). No interactions were retrieved concerning gender and physical activity (F1,272 = 0.02 ns).
3.3. Relationships among Variables
3.3.1. Correlations among Variables
The considered variables showed a good intercorrelation, apart from sport and PA practice, that does not have a direct relation with fear of COVID-19, while gender does not have any relation with self-efficacy or with PA practice (Table 2).
3.3.2. Path Analysis Model
The path analysis model showed a good fit (χ2 = 198.92, df = 81, p < 0.001; RMSEA = 0.07, 90% CI: 0.06–0.08; CFI = 0.93, TLI: 0.91; SRMR: 0.05). The results of the model reported a positive relationship between fear of COVID-19 and neuroticism (β = 0.29, p < 0.001), which in turn is related to state anxiety (β = 0.58, p < 0.001) and trait anxiety (β = 0.29, p < 0.001). The trait of anxiety, in turn, is negatively related to self-efficacy (β = −0.52, p < 0.001). The male (1 = female, 2 = male; β = −0.19, p < 0.001) and physically active (0 = sedentary, 1 = active; β = −0.12, p < 0.05) are negatively associated with neuroticism as well. In addition, no relationship between state anxiety and self-efficacy or neuroticism and self-efficacy was found (Figure 7).
4. Discussion
The aim of the current study was to clarify if the sport/PA practice could have had a protective effect on youth psychological health, limiting the negative impact of COVID-19. Specifically, we detected the scores of COVID-19 fear, neuroticism, anxiety, and self-efficacy for both physically active and sedentary youth and between males and females in the university student population.
The initial hypothesis predicted that youngsters who practiced outdoor sports or PA would have displayed lower levels of fear of COVID-19, lower levels of anxiety, lower levels of neuroticism, and higher levels of self-efficacy compared to people who did not practice any PA. In our results, we found lower levels of state and trait anxiety and neuroticism, as well as higher levels of self-efficacy, in youth practicing outdoor physical activity. However, similar results were reported on a sample of adolescents by Wright, Williams, and Veldhuijzen van Zanten [52], where physical activity counteracted the negative effects of fear of COVID-19 on anxiety, stress, and depression levels. Moreover, a study by Puccinelli et al. [61] found that high levels of anxiety were associated with sedentary behavior during the COVID-19 quarantine, while another study by Marashi et al. [62] found that a decrease in aerobic and strength-based physical activity during the pandemic was associated with higher levels of anxiety and depressive symptoms.
According to our second hypothesis, females would have obtained higher scores of COVID-19 fear, state and trait anxiety, and neuroticism, and our results were in this direction. It is well known that females display higher levels of neuroticism, anxiety, and fear [63,64]. In addition, having a higher level of neuroticism could determine higher levels of fear of COVID-19 when exposed to situations interpreted as being at risk of contagion. From the other side, females usually report higher levels of fear of COVID-19 [19,65].
Furthermore, our study found a significant interaction between the practice of sport/PA and gender concerning fear of COVID-19: while PA seemed to be protective for males, the same apparently did not happen for sedentary females, who reported lower levels of fear of COVID-19. A number of studies found that being male and practicing physical activity were protective factors against the development of mental issues [66], but no studies in the literature reported PA as a protective factor for males only. In addition, females were more likely to comply with COVID-19 limitations than males [67,68]. It can be that the fear of COVID-19 increases due to the high levels of neuroticism and anxiety, combined with the attempt to respect COVID-19 limitations. However, gender differences emerged in anxiety and neuroticism levels and between sedentary and physically active youngsters, but the protection effect of PA similarly acted for both genders. In our third hypothesis, we stated that high levels of fear of COVID-19, being female, and not practicing any sport/PA negatively influence neuroticism levels, which in turn positively influence state and trait anxiety that determine a decrease in general self-efficacy level in young adults. From the path analysis model, high fear of COVID-19 and being sedentary during the pandemic were related to a higher level of neuroticism, which in turn was related to higher levels of state and trait anxiety, and trait anxiety was related to lower levels of general self-efficacy. Conversely, being physically active was associated with lower levels of neuroticism, which in turn was related to lower trait anxiety and then higher self-efficacy.
In our model, state anxiety was not related to self-efficacy. In addition, previous studies highlighted that the link between state anxiety and self-efficacy is controversial, especially if state anxiety refers to an academic context, probably because state anxiety encourages students to express their potential [69,70].
University students particularly suffered from increased anxiety and depression, especially freshmen and sophomores compared to senior students, and this was mainly due to the sudden transition to distance learning [71]. However, in our model, the contribution of physical activity to protecting youngsters’ mental health is very small. The current study attempts to create a picture about the interactions among gender, personality factors, mood, and PA practice.
Finally, the study comes out with several limitations: first of all, we lack information about the frequency and intensity of PA during the week and before the pandemic, nor the type of sport/physical activity performed, so we cannot estimate the extent to which exercise increases mental health. Moreover, we could not assess contextual variables, such as socioeconomic status, that could have affected our results. Finally, the correlational nature of the study does not allow inferences on causal relations among the variables.
5. Conclusions
The COVID-19 pandemic restrictions have severely impacted daily life, increasing mental health issues at different life stages. The COVID-19 pandemic represented a challenge, especially for young adults that face important change at this life stage. Additionally, for students approaching university, the adoption of distance learning and staying home with their families could have increased anxiety and neuroticism levels due to familiar dynamics [72], changing routines [73], and sharing small spaces. The results of the current paper highlight a potential role of physical activity in protecting university students’ mental health while also finding some controversial results concerning females’ fear of COVID-19. Women’s mental health is another important topic that needs to be further investigated, since it is well known that they usually report higher levels of anxiety, neuroticism, and fear than their male counterparts. A disruptive event such as the pandemic might have worsened women’s mental health.
Given the importance of this topic, future research should collect more detailed information about the protective effect of PA at different ages and clarify better what variables can protect females from the detrimental effects of negative life events.
Conceptualization, A.G., B.C. and M.A. methodology, B.C.; software, A.G.; validation, M.A. and B.C., formal analysis, A.G.; investigation, B.C.; resources, M.A.; data curation, A.G.; writing—original draft preparation, A.G. and M.A.; writing—review and editing, B.C.; supervision, B.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
The Bioethics Committee of the University of Palermo has approved the current study (n. 38/2021).
Participants signed an informed consent to complete the study.
Data are available under formal request to the Bioethics Committee of the University of Palermo.
The authors declared no conflict of interest.
Footnotes
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Enlarge this image.Figure 2. Differences between male and female students and between sedentary and active students concerning fear of COVID-19. (*** p < 0.001).
Enlarge this image.Figure 3. Differences between male and female students, and between sedentary and active students concerning state anxiety. (*** p < 0.001; ** p < 0.01).
Enlarge this image.Figure 4. Differences between male and female students and between sedentary and active students concerning trait anxiety. (*** p < 0.001; ** p < 0.01).
Enlarge this image.Figure 5. Differences between male and female students and between sedentary and active students concerning neuroticism. (*** p < 0.001;; * p < 0.05).
Enlarge this image.Figure 6. Differences between male and female students and between sedentary and active students concerning self-efficacy. (*** p < 0.001).
Descriptive statistics of fear of COVID-19, anxiety, neuroticism, and self-efficacy scores.
| Gender | Sport/PA Practice | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Female (n = 176) | Male (n = 100) | Sedentary (n = 164) | Active (n = 112) | |||||||
| Mean | SD | Mean | SD | t | Mean | SD | Mean | SD | t | |
| Fear of COVID-19 | 17.11 | 6.53 | 13.79 | 5.16 | 4.37 *** | 15.91 | 6.24 | 15.90 | 6.34 | 0.02 |
| State Anxiety | 13.36 | 4.27 | 11.74 | 3.90 | 3.13 ** | 13.57 | 4.02 | 11.61 | 4.22 | 3.91 *** |
| Trait Anxiety | 13.55 | 3.75 | 11.74 | 3.55 | 3.93 *** | 13.57 | 3,75 | 11.90 | 3.60 | 3.70 *** |
| Neuroticism | 12.07 | 3.28 | 10.24 | 3.24 | 4.59 *** | 11.76 | 3.32 | 10.90 | 3.24 | 2.12 * |
| Self-efficacy | 27.17 | 5.20 | 28.28 | 3.83 | −1.86 | 26.75 | 4.97 | 28.78 | 4.20 | −3.54 *** |
*** p < 0.001. ** p < 0.01. * p < 0.05.
Correlation among the considered variables.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fear of COVID-19 (1) | - | ||||||
| State Anxiety (2) | 0.27 *** | - | |||||
| Trait Anxiety (3) | 0.25 *** | 0.73 *** | - | ||||
| Neuroticism (4) | 0.34 *** | 0.58 *** | 0.70 *** | - | |||
| Self-efficacy (5) | −0.10 | −0.26 *** | −0.37 *** | −0.42 *** | - | ||
| Sport/PA (6) | 0.00 | −0.23 *** | −0.22 *** | −0.13 * | 0.21 *** | - | |
| Gender (7) | −0.26 *** | −0.19 *** | −0.23 *** | −0.27 *** | 0.11 | 0.02 | - |
*** p < 0.001. * p < 0.05.
Supplementary Materials
The following are available online at
References
1. Gabutti, G.; d’Anchera, E.; De Motoli, F.; Savio, M.; Stefanati, A. The Epidemiological Characteristics of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Europe: Focus on Italy. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health; 2021; 18, 2942.Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/6/2942 (accessed on 13 March 2021). [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18062942]
2. Chirico, F.; Sacco, A.; Nucera, G.; Ferrari, G.; Vinci, M.R.; Zaffina, S.; Szarpak, L.; Ilesanmi, O.S. Lockdown measures and COVID-19 related deaths during the first and second COVID-19 waves in Italy: A descriptive study. J. Health Soc. Sci.; 2021; 6, pp. 379-390.
3. Abuhammad, S.; Alzoubi, K.H.; Khabour, O. Fear of COVID-19 and stigmatization towards infected people among Jordanian people. Int. J. Clin. Pract.; 2021; 75, e13899. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ijcp.13899]
4. Panchal, U.; Salazar de Pablo, G.; Franco, M.; Moreno, C.; Parellada, M.; Arango, C.; Fusar-Poli, P. The impact of COVID-19 lockdown on child and adolescent mental health: Systematic review. Eur. Child Adolesc. Psychiatry; 2021; pp. 1-27. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00787-021-01856-w]
5. Townsend, E. Debate: The impact of school closures and lockdown on mental health in young people. Child Adolesc. Ment. Health; 2020; 25, pp. 265-266. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/camh.12428] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33049100]
6. Kaparounaki, C.K.; Patsali, M.E.; Mousa, D.-P.V.; Papadopoulou, E.V.; Papadopoulou, K.K.; Fountoulakis, K.N. University students’ mental health amidst the COVID-19 quarantine in Greece. Psychiatry Res.; 2020; 290, 113111. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113111] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32450416]
7. Prati, G.; Mancini, A.D. The psychological impact of COVID-19 pandemic lockdowns: A review and meta-analysis of longitudinal studies and natural experiments. Psychol. Med.; 2021; 51, pp. 201-211. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0033291721000015]
8. Oliveira Carvalho, P.; Hülsdünker, T.; Carson, F. The Impact of the COVID-19 Lockdown on European Students’ Negative Emotional Symptoms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Behav. Sci.; 2021; 12, 3. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/bs12010003] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35049614]
9. Melo-Oliveira, M.E.; Sá-Caputo, D.; Bachur, J.A.; Paineiras-Domingos, L.L.; Sonza, A.; Lacerda, A.C.; Mendonça, V.; Seixas, A.; Taiar, R.; Bernardo-Filho, M. Reported quality of life in countries with cases of COVID19: A systematic review. Expert Rev. Respir. Med.; 2021; 15, pp. 213-220. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17476348.2021.1826315]
10. Panda, P.K.; Gupta, J.; Chowdhury, S.R.; Kumar, R.; Meena, A.K.; Madaan, P.; Sharawat, I.K.; Gulati, S. Psychological and behavioral impact of lockdown and quarantine measures for COVID-19 pandemic on children, adolescents and caregivers: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J. Trop. Pediatr.; 2021; 67, fmaa122. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/tropej/fmaa122]
11. Guessoum, S.B.; Lachal, J.; Radjack, R.; Carretier, E.; Minassian, S.; Benoit, L.; Moro, M.R. Adolescent psychiatric disorders during the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown. Psychiatry Res.; 2020; 291, 113264. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113264] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32622172]
12. Wiedemann, A.; Stochl, J.; Neufeld, S.A.; Fritz, J.; Bhatti, J.; Hook, R.W.; Goodyer, I.M.; Dolan, R.J.; Bullmore, E.T.; Chamberlain, S.R. The impact of the initial COVID-19 outbreak on young adults’ mental health: A longitudinal study of risk and resilience factors. Sci. Rep.; 2022; 12, pp. 1-14.
13. Southerland, D.; Casanueva, C.E.; Ringeisen, H. Young adult outcomes and mental health problems among transition age youth investigated for maltreatment during adolescence. Child. Youth Serv. Rev.; 2009; 31, pp. 947-956. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2009.03.010]
14. Ganson, K.T.; Tsai, A.C.; Weiser, S.D.; Benabou, S.E.; Nagata, J.M. Job insecurity and symptoms of anxiety and depression among US young adults during COVID-19. J. Adolescent Health; 2021; 68, pp. 53-56. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2020.10.008] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33183926]
15. Watkins-Martin, K.; Orri, M.; Pennestri, M.-H.; Castellanos-Ryan, N.; Larose, S.; Gouin, J.-P.; Ouellet-Morin, I.; Chadi, N.; Philippe, F.; Boivin, M. Depression and anxiety symptoms in young adults before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: Evidence from a Canadian population-based cohort. Ann. Gen. Psychiatry; 2021; 20, pp. 1-12. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12991-021-00362-2]
16. Ahorsu, D.K.; Lin, C.Y.; Imani, V.; Saffari, M.; Griffiths, M.D.; Pakpour, A.H. The Fear of COVID-19 Scale: Development and Initial Validation. Int. J. Ment. Health Addict.; 2020; 20, pp. 1537-1545. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00270-8]
17. Luo, F.; Ghanei Gheshlagh, R.; Dalvand, S.; Saedmoucheshi, S.; Li, Q. Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Fear of COVID-19. Front. Psychol.; 2021; 12, 661078. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.661078]
18. Alsalhe, T.A.; Aljaloud, S.O.; Chalghaf, N.; Guelmami, N.; Alhazza, D.W.; Azaiez, F.; Bragazzi, N.L. Moderation effect of physical activity on the relationship between fear of COVID-19 and general distress: A pilot case study in Arabic countries. Front. Psychol.; 2020; 11, 570085. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.570085]
19. Metin, A.; Erbiçer, E.S.; Şen, S.; Çetinkaya, A. Gender and COVID-19 related fear and anxiety: A meta-analysis. J. Affect. Disord.; 2022; 310, pp. 384-395. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2022.05.036]
20. Nudelman, G.; Kamble, S.V.; Otto, K. Can personality traits predict depression during the COVID-19 pandemic?. Soc. Justice Res.; 2021; 34, pp. 218-234. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11211-021-00369-w]
21. Modersitzki, N.; Phan, L.V.; Kuper, N.; Rauthmann, J.F. Who is impacted? Personality predicts individual differences in psychological consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany. Soc. Psychol. Personal. Sci.; 2021; 12, pp. 1110-1130. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1948550620952576]
22. Yao, N.; Nazari, N.; Veiskarami, H.A.; Griffiths, M.D. The role of healthy emotionality in the relationship between fear of COVID-19 and mental health problems: A cross-sectional study. Cogn. Process.; 2022; 23, pp. 569-581. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10339-022-01101-5] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35790620]
23. Asmundson, G.J.G.; Paluszek, M.M.; Landry, C.A.; Rachor, G.S.; McKay, D.; Taylor, S. Do pre-existing anxiety-related and mood disorders differentially impact COVID-19 stress responses and coping?. J. Anxiety Disord.; 2020; 74, 102271. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2020.102271] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32673930]
24. Pan, K.-Y.; Kok, A.A.; Eikelenboom, M.; Horsfall, M.; Jörg, F.; Luteijn, R.A.; Rhebergen, D.; van Oppen, P.; Giltay, E.J.; Penninx, B.W. The mental health impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on people with and without depressive, anxiety, or obsessive-compulsive disorders: A longitudinal study of three Dutch case-control cohorts. Lancet Psychiatry; 2021; 8, pp. 121-129. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(20)30491-0]
25. Kolakowsky-Hayner, S.A.; Goldin, Y.; Kingsley, K.; Alzueta, E.; Arango-Lasprilla, J.C.; Perrin, P.B.; Baker, F.C.; Ramos-Usuga, D.; Constantinidou, F. Psychosocial Impacts of the COVID-19 Quarantine: A Study of Gender Differences in 59 Countries. Medicina; 2021; 57, 789.Available online: https://www.mdpi.com/1648-9144/57/8/789 (accessed on 31 July 2021). [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/medicina57080789]
26. Nürnberger, P.; von Lewinski, D.; Rothenhäusler, H.-B.; Braun, C.; Reinbacher, P.; Kolesnik, E.; Baranyi, A. A biopsychosocial model of severe fear of COVID-19. PLoS ONE; 2022; 17, e0264357. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0264357]
27. Rodríguez-Hidalgo, A.J.; Pantaleón, Y.; Dios, I.; Falla, D. Fear of COVID-19, Stress, and Anxiety in University Undergraduate Students: A Predictive Model for Depression. Front. Psychol.; 2020; 11, 591797. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.591797]
28. Batra, K.; Sharma, M.; Batra, R.; Singh, T.P.; Schvaneveldt, N. Assessing the psychological impact of COVID-19 among college students: An evidence of 15 countries. Healthcare; 2021; 9, 222. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/healthcare9020222]
29. Kaurani, P.; Batra, K.; Hooja, H. Psychological impact of COVID− 19 lockdown (Phase 2) among Indian general population a cross sectional survey. Int. J. Sci. Res.; 2020; 8, pp. 51-56. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.36106/ijsr/2439876]
30. Coughenour, C.; Gakh, M.; Pharr, J.R.; Bungum, T.; Jalene, S. Changes in depression and physical activity among college students on a diverse campus after a COVID-19 stay-at-home order. J. Community Health; 2021; 46, pp. 758-766. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10900-020-00918-5]
31. Baruth, O.; Gabbay, H.; Cohen, A.; Bronshtein, A.; Ezra, O. Distance learning perceptions during the coronavirus outbreak: Freshmen versus more advanced students. J. Comput. Assist. Lear.; 2021; 37, pp. 1666-1681. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jcal.12612]
32. Hung, M.-L.; Chou, C.; Chen, C.-H.; Own, Z.-Y. Learner readiness for online learning: Scale development and student perceptions. Comput. Educ.; 2010; 55, pp. 1080-1090. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.004]
33. Montag, C.; Sindermann, C.; Rozgonjuk, D.; Yang, S.; Elhai, J.D.; Yang, H. Investigating links between fear of COVID-19, neuroticism, social networks use disorder, and smartphone use disorder tendencies. Front. Psychol.; 2021; 12, 682837. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.682837]
34. Yam, F.C.; Korkmaz, O.; Griffiths, M.D. The association between fear of COVID-19 and smartphone addiction among individuals: The mediating and moderating role of cyberchondria severity. Curr. Psychol.; 2021; pp. 1-14. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-02324-z]
35. Stockwell, S.; Trott, M.; Tully, M.; Shin, J.; Barnett, Y.; Butler, L.; McDermott, D.; Schuch, F.; Smith, L. Changes in physical activity and sedentary behaviours from before to during the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown: A systematic review. BMJ Open Sport Exerc. Med.; 2021; 7, e000960. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjsem-2020-000960] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34192010]
36. Violant-Holz, V.; Gallego-Jiménez, M.G.; González-González, C.S.; Muñoz-Violant, S.; Rodríguez, M.J.; Sansano-Nadal, O.; Guerra-Balic, M. Psychological health and physical activity levels during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health; 2020; 17, 9419. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17249419] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33334073]
37. Brown, K.A.; Patel, D.R.; Darmawan, D. Participation in sports in relation to adolescent growth and development. Transl. Pediatr.; 2017; 6, 150. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.21037/tp.2017.04.03] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28795005]
38. Howells, K.; Sarkar, M.; Fletcher, D. Can athletes benefit from difficulty? A systematic review of growth following adversity in competitive sport. Prog. Brain Res.; 2017; 234, pp. 117-159.
39. Maltagliati, S.; Sieber, S.; Sarrazin, P.; Cullati, S.; Chalabaev, A.; Millet, G.P.; Boisgontier, M.P.; Cheval, B. Muscle strength explains the protective effect of physical activity against COVID-19 hospitalization among adults aged 50 years and older. J. Sport. Sci.; 2021; 39, pp. 2796-2803. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02640414.2021.1964721]
40. Latorre-Román, P.Á.; Guzmán-Guzmán, I.P.; Delgado-Floody, P.; Herrador Sanchez, J.; Aragón-Vela, J.; García Pinillos, F.; Párraga Montilla, J.A. Protective role of physical activity patterns prior to COVID-19 confinement with the severity/duration of respiratory pathologies consistent with COVID-19 symptoms in Spanish populations. Res. Sport. Med.; 2021; pp. 1-12. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15438627.2021.1937166]
41. Stults-Kolehmainen, M.A.; Sinha, R. The effects of stress on physical activity and exercise. Sport. Med.; 2014; 44, pp. 81-121. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40279-013-0090-5]
42. Gianfredi, V.; Blandi, L.; Cacitti, S.; Minelli, M.; Signorelli, C.; Amerio, A.; Odone, A. Depression and objectively measured physical activity: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health; 2020; 17, 3738. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17103738]
43. Kekäläinen, T.; Laakkonen, E.K.; Terracciano, A.; Savikangas, T.; Hyvärinen, M.; Tammelin, T.H.; Rantalainen, T.; Törmäkangas, T.; Kujala, U.M.; Alen, M. Accelerometer-measured and self-reported physical activity in relation to extraversion and neuroticism: A cross-sectional analysis of two studies. BMC Geriatr.; 2020; 20, pp. 1-11. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12877-020-01669-7] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32727379]
44. Schwarzer, R.; Warner, L.M. Perceived self-efficacy and its relationship to resilience. Resilience in Children, Adolescents, and Adults; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2013; pp. 139-150.
45. Reigal, R.; Videra, A.; Gil, J. Physical exercise, general self-efficacy and life satisfaction in adolescence. Revista Internacional de Medicina y Ciencias de la Actividad Física y del Deporte; 2014; 14, pp. 561-576.
46. Han, S.-S.; Li, B.; Wang, G.-X.; Ke, Y.-Z.; Meng, S.-Q.; Li, Y.-X.; Cui, Z.-L.; Tong, W.-X. Physical fitness, exercise behaviors, and sense of self-efficacy Among college students: A descriptive correlational study. Front. Psychol.; 2022; 13, 932014. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.932014] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35910985]
47. Zeng, W.; Wu, X.; Xu, Y.; Wu, J.; Zeng, Y.; Shao, J.; Huang, D.; Zhu, Z. The impact of general self-efficacy on psychological resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic: The mediating role of posttraumatic growth and the moderating role of deliberate rumination. Front. Psychol.; 2021; 12, 684354. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.684354]
48. Joie-La Marle, C.; Parmentier, F.; Vinchon, F.; Storme, M.; Borteyrou, X.; Lubart, T. Evolution and impact of self-efficacy during French COVID-19 confinement: A longitudinal study. J. Gen. Psychol.; 2021; 148, pp. 360-381. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00221309.2021.1904815]
49. Şahin, F.; Çetin, F. The mediating role of general self-efficacy in the relationship between the big five personality traits and perceived stress: A weekly assessment study. Psychol. Stud.; 2017; 62, pp. 35-46. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12646-016-0382-6]
50. Alemany-Arrebola, I.; Rojas-Ruiz, G.; Granda-Vera, J.; Mingorance-Estrada, Á.C. Influence of COVID-19 on the perception of academic self-efficacy, state anxiety, and trait anxiety in college students. Front. Psychol.; 2020; 11, 570017. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.570017]
51. Allen, M.S.; Laborde, S. The Role of Personality in Sport and Physical Activity. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci.; 2014; 23, pp. 460-465. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0963721414550705]
52. Wright, L.J.; Williams, S.E.; Veldhuijzen van Zanten, J.J. Physical activity protects against the negative impact of coronavirus fear on adolescent mental health and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic. Front. Psychol.; 2021; 12, 580511. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.580511] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33776827]
53. Wolf, S.; Seiffer, B.; Zeibig, J.-M.; Welkerling, J.; Brokmeier, L.; Atrott, B.; Ehring, T.; Schuch, F.B. Is Physical Activity Associated with Less Depression and Anxiety During the COVID-19 Pandemic? A Rapid Systematic Review. Sports Med.; 2021; 51, pp. 1771-1783. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40279-021-01468-z] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33886101]
54. Brailovskaia, J.; Cosci, F.; Mansueto, G.; Miragall, M.; Herrero, R.; Baños, R.M.; Krasavtseva, Y.; Kochetkov, Y.; Margraf, J. The association between depression symptoms, psychological burden caused by COVID-19 and physical activity: An investigation in Germany, Italy, Russia, and Spain. Psychiatry Res.; 2021; 295, 113596. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113596] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33261924]
55. Conti, A.; Clari, M.; Arese, S.; Bandini, B.; Cavallaro, L.; Mozzone, S.; Vellone, E.; Frigerio, S.; Campagna, S. Validation and psychometric evaluation of the Italian version of the Spinal Cord Injury Secondary Conditions Scale. Spinal Cord; 2020; 58, pp. 496-503. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41393-019-0384-z]
56. Spielberger, C.D. State-Trait Anxiety Inventory for Adults; Mind Garden: Palo Alto, CA, USA, 1983.
57. Zsido, A.N.; Teleki, S.A.; Csokasi, K.; Rozsa, S.; Bandi, S.A. Development of the short version of the spielberger state—Trait anxiety inventory. Psychiatry Res.; 2020; 291, 113223. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113223]
58. Caci, B.; Cardaci, M.; Tabacchi, M.E.; Scrima, F. Personality variables as predictors of Facebook usage. Psychol. Rep.; 2014; 114, pp. 528-539. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2466/21.09.PR0.114k23w6]
59. Schwarzer, R.; Jerusalem, M. Generalized self-efficacy scale. Measures in Health Psychology: A User’s Portfolio, Causal and Control Beliefs; Weinman, J.; Wright, S.; Johnston, M. Nfer-Nelson: Windsor, UK, Volume 35, 37.
60. Scholz, U.; Doña, B.G.; Sud, S.; Schwarzer, R. Is general self-efficacy a universal construct? Psychometric findings from 25 countries. Eur. J. Psychol. Assess.; 2002; 18, 242. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1027//1015-5759.18.3.242]
61. Puccinelli, P.J.; da Costa, T.S.; Seffrin, A.; de Lira, C.A.B.; Vancini, R.L.; Nikolaidis, P.T.; Knechtle, B.; Rosemann, T.; Hill, L.; Andrade, M.S. Reduced level of physical activity during COVID-19 pandemic is associated with depression and anxiety levels: An internet-based survey. BMC Public Health; 2021; 21, pp. 1-11.
62. Marashi, M.Y.; Nicholson, E.; Ogrodnik, M.; Fenesi, B.; Heisz, J.J. A mental health paradox: Mental health was both a motivator and barrier to physical activity during the COVID-19 pandemic. PLoS ONE; 2021; 16, e0239244. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0239244]
63. Lynn, R.; Martin, T. Gender differences in extraversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism in 37 nations. J. Soc. Psychol.; 1997; 137, pp. 369-373. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00224549709595447]
64. McLean, C.P.; Anderson, E.R. Brave men and timid women? A review of the gender differences in fear and anxiety. Clin. Psychol. Rev.; 2009; 29, pp. 496-505. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2009.05.003] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19541399]
65. Maslakçı, A.; Sürücü, L. Gender Effects on Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Regarding the Fear of COVID-19. Trends Psychol.; 2022; pp. 1-13. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s43076-022-00227-x]
66. Silva Moreira, P.; Ferreira, S.; Couto, B.; Machado-Sousa, M.; Fernández, M.; Raposo-Lima, C.; Sousa, N.; Picó-Pérez, M.; Morgado, P. Protective elements of mental health status during the COVID-19 outbreak in the Portuguese population. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health; 2021; 18, 1910. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18041910] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33669453]
67. Zhao, S.Z.; Wong, J.Y.H.; Wu, Y.; Choi, E.P.H.; Wang, M.P.; Lam, T.H. Social distancing compliance under COVID-19 pandemic and mental health impacts: A population-based study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health; 2020; 17, 6692. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17186692] [PubMed: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32937929]
68. Paramita, W.; Rostiani, R.; Winahjoe, S.; Wibowo, A.; Virgosita, R.; Audita, H. Explaining the voluntary compliance to COVID-19 measures: An extrapolation on the gender perspective. Glob. J. Flex. Syst. Manag.; 2021; 22, pp. 1-18. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40171-021-00261-1]
69. Butki, B.D.; Rudolph, D.L.; Jacobsen, H. Self-efficacy, state anxiety, and cortisol responses to treadmill running. Percept. Mot. Ski.; 2001; 92, pp. 1129-1138. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2466/pms.2001.92.3c.1129]
70. Ferreira, É.d.M.R.; Pinto, R.Z.; Arantes, P.M.M.; Vieira, É.L.M.; Teixeira, A.L.; Ferreira, F.R.; Vaz, D.V. Stress, anxiety, self-efficacy, and the meanings that physical therapy students attribute to their experience with an objective structured clinical examination. BMC Med. Educ.; 2020; 20, pp. 1-9. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02202-5]
71. Wang, X.; Hegde, S.; Son, C.; Keller, B.; Smith, A.; Sasangohar, F. Investigating mental health of US college students during the COVID-19 pandemic: Cross-sectional survey study. J. Med. Internet Res.; 2020; 22, e22817. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2196/22817]
72. Ross, C.E.; Mirowsky, J.; Huber, J. Dividing work, sharing work, and in-between: Marriage patterns and depression. Am. Sociol. Rev.; 1983; 48, pp. 809-823. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2095327]
73. Cusinato, M.; Iannattone, S.; Spoto, A.; Poli, M.; Moretti, C.; Gatta, M.; Miscioscia, M. Stress, resilience, and well-being in Italian children and their parents during the COVID-19 pandemic. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health; 2020; 17, 8297. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17228297]
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Details
; Alesi, Marianna
; Caci, Barbara