ArticlePloS one2025
Emotional distress and affective knowledge representation one year after the COVID-19 outbreak.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Interoceptive grounding of conceptual knowledge: new insight from an interoceptive-exteroceptive categorization task of concepts.Psychological research · 2026Article
- The Inner Road to Happiness: A Narrative Review Exploring the Interoceptive Benefits of Exercise for Well-Being.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study examines whether the detrimental effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the affectivity of the population extend one year after the outbreak. In an online-mobile session, participants completed surveys (i.e., demographic characteristics, positive-negative affectivity, interoceptive awareness) and a similarity judgment task of triplets of emotional concepts, from which we derived 2D maps of their affective knowledge representation. Compared with pre-pandemic data derived from a comparable population, we report three main findings. First, we observed enhanced negative affectivity during the pandemic, but no changes in positive affectivity levels. Second, increased self-reported interoceptive awareness compared to pre-pandemic data, with greater attention to bodily sensations and adaptive aspects of interoceptive sensitivity. Furthermore, female participants reported higher scores than males on the questionnaire subscales of Emotional Awareness and Attention Regulation. Third, the effect of pandemic-related conditions is also apparent in the mental organization of emotional concepts, especially for female participants (i.e., reduced coherence in the organization of the concepts along the arousal dimension and more misclassification of concepts based on arousal) and participants who did not perform physical activity (a collapse of the arousal dimension). Some of the effects of the pandemic, thus, persist about a year after the outbreak. These results advise providing programs of psychological and emotional assistance throughout the pandemic beyond the outbreak, and that age-dependent gender differences should be accounted for to define tailored interventions. Physical activity might relieve pandemic-related stressors, so it should be promoted during particularly stressful periods for the population.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.