Climate Change, Natural Resources Depletion, COVID-19, and Wars are some of the great challenges of our time. The consequences will affect psychological well-being and could have a harmful impact on mental health. This study aimed to assess the level of preoccupation and fears surrounding issues of the 21st-century and the implication for psychological well-being of the general population from Central/Southern Italy among different age groups. A questionnaire that included sociodemographic characteristics, topics formulated ad-hoc about preoccupation, fears, habits, and willingness to change habits in the future related to the 21st-century challenges, and the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales 21 (DASS-21) was administered online. A sample of 1831 participants (61% F; mean age 47.71 ± 17.30) was obtained. Results showed that young adults and older adults, respectively, reported greater and less psychological well-being. Young adults reported higher scores for preoccupation, changing habits, and willingness to change habits in the future, while older adults reported the lowest scores except for changing habits, also controlling for gender. Results for this variable, as well as correlations between the many variables described, rely on the specificity of age, and 21st-century challenges. Moreover, the main fears related to the 21st-century concerns were different based on both age and gender. In conclusion, the various stresses of the 21st-century discussed in this study have a relationship with personal well-being, and it is important to consider potential global mental health issues resulting from these stressors.

Most studies on well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic have focused on the mental health of the general population; far less attention has been given to more specific populations, such as patients with mental illness. Indeed, it is important to examine the psychiatric population, given its vulnerability. The present study aimed at assessing the psychological and emotional impact of isolation on patients in Residential Rehabilitation Communities, compared to healthy controls. A questionnaire was administered cross-sectionally on an online survey platform and both psychiatric patients and healthy controls accessed via a designed link. The results showed significant differences between psychiatric patients and controls on Anxiety, Stress, Worry, and Risk Perception variables. Psychiatric patients scored lower on Stress compared to healthy controls and higher on Anxiety, Perceived Risk of getting infected with COVID-19 and Worry about the emergency situation. The results showed that, during the Italian lockdown, psychiatric patients living in residential communities received unbroken support from peers and mental health professionals, maintained their usual medication treatment, and were informed of COVID-19 consequences. This finding provides insight into the differences between residential and healthy populations and highlights the importance of continuous support for psychiatric patients, especially during stressful situations such as a pandemic.

Background: As a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, since March 2020, the Italian population was forced into lockdown to prevent the spread of the virus. The restrictive measures imposed forced many organizations and workers to work through online platforms and no longer in-person. Smart working, enjoyed by some workers for its flexibility, affected several professional categories. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether there are differences in the psychological variables related to four groups of professional categories (practitioners, managers, executive employees, teachers), particularly the teachers group. Methods: A total sample of 628 individuals was recruited through a random probability sample across Italy. Due to the lockdown, an online questionnaire was developed; several validated scales were chosen, and some ad hoc constructed items related to the smart working experience were included. Results: The results showed statistically significant differences between the four groups of examined smart workers. Conclusions: All workers have had to readjust to this new way of working, but our results show that teachers were the most affected, both in the perception of their psychological well-being and in the management of the smart working mode.

On 24 February, Russian President Vladimir Putin gave the order to invade neighbouring Ukraine; a typical trend during the war is considering events in a one-sided way, emphasising the exclusive contribution of one opponent over the other for the outbreak of war. War may trigger the experience of emotions, such as anger, shame, and disgust. The present study reproduces previous studies on the influence of emotional regulation in support of aggressive reactions (AR) in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. A questionnaire referring to the Russian–Ukrainian conflict has been implemented and spread in the Italian territory. A multiple moderated mediation model was proposed to evaluate the effect of emotional cognitive reappraisal on the propensity for AR, including conflict-related emotions (anger, shame, disgust) as mediators and political alignment and the appraisal of one’s own emotions subscale of the brief emotional intelligence scale as moderators. The results show that cognitive reappraisal of emotions has a negative effect on AR; moreover, recognising and regulating emotions decreases anger, while taking sides with Ukraine or not siding seems to have an effect on AR depending on the emotion felt (anger or shame). The results are discussed according to the current literature on the topic, highlighting the practical implications and limits of the research.

The restrictions imposed by the Italian government because of the coronavirus outbreak have been shown to be demanding on the Italian population. Data were collected at four different time points from 29 March 2020 to 3 May 2020 and during the final follow-up survey on 12 October 2020. In the present study, we provided longitudinal evidence on the relationship between the lockdown and mental health dimensions, such as emotional state, perceived stress, and time perspective, for three age groups. The results allowed us to observe their psychological status from different perspectives at five different time points. Notably, a negative effect of the lockdown individual well-beings emerged as a trend, and differences in individual adaptation strategies to a prolonged stressful situation were observed at the follow-up. Indeed, pairwise comparisons between age groups showed that the young adult group (18–23 years old) seemed to be the most psychologically affected by the lockdown. The findings are discussed according to the most recent literature on the topic. To the best of our knowledge, this is one of the first longitudinal studies carried out in Italy concerning the general psychological effects of the coronavirus lockdown.