Introduction Helping professionals are at high risk of being affected by the negative aspects of helping such as compassion fatigue. To date, no study has provided a comprehensive overview of compassion fatigue and compared the prevalence among different helping professions. Objectives The aim of this study was to explore the prevalence and differences in compassion fatigue among different helping professions. We also wanted to explore the relationship between compassion, self-compassion, self-criticism and compassion fatigue. Methods Six hundred and seven participants working in the helping professions were recruited. The sample consisted of 102 nurses, 44 doctors, 57 paramedics, 39 home nurses, 66 teachers, 103 psychologists, 40 psychotherapists and coaches, 76 social workers, 39 priests and pastors and 41 police officers. The data were collected using an online questionnaire battery measuring levels of compassion, self-compassion, self-criticism, compassion fatigue and compassion satisfaction. Results We found significant differences in compassion fatigue levels among various helping professions. No large differences were found in the compassion and self-compassion levels exhibited by professionals with medium versus low compassion fatigue scores. However, participants with higher levels of compassion fatigue scored higher in self-criticism. Self-criticism was found to be the best predictor of compassion fatigue. The effect of profession on compassion fatigue as mediated by self-criticism and self-compassion was significant. Conclusions Based on the results, we recommend designing programs to combat compassion fatigue that teach helping professionals to better manage their work time and workload (hours per week with clients/patients) and learn healthier inner talk (less self-critical and more self-compassionate).

Background: Historically social connection has been an important way through which humans have coped with large-scale threatening events. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, lockdowns have deprived people of major sources of social support and coping, with others representing threats. Hence, a major stressor during the pandemic has been a sense of social disconnection and loneliness. This study explores how people’s experience of compassion and feeling socially safe and connected, in contrast to feeling socially disconnected, lonely and fearful of compassion, effects the impact of perceived threat of COVID-19 on post-traumatic growth and post-traumatic stress.Methods: Adult participants from the general population (N= 4057) across 21 countries worldwide, completed self-report measures of social connection (compassion for self, from others, for others; social safeness), social disconnection (fears of compassion for self, from others, for others; loneliness), perceived threat of COVID-19, post-traumatic growth and traumatic stress.Results: Perceived threat of COVID-19 predicted increased post-traumatic growth and traumatic stress. Social connection (compassion and social safeness) predicted higher post-traumatic growth and traumatic stress, whereas social disconnection (fears of compassion and loneliness) predicted increased traumatic symptoms only. Social connection heightened the impact of perceived threat of COVID-19 on post-traumatic growth, while social disconnection weakened this impact. Social disconnection magnified the impact of the perceived threat of COVID-19 on traumatic stress. These effects were consistent across all countries.Conclusions: Social connection is key to how people adapt and cope with the worldwide COVID-19 crisis and may facilitate post-traumatic growth in the context of the threat experienced during the pandemic. In contrast, social disconnection increases vulnerability to develop post-traumatic stress in this threatening context. Public health and Government organizations could implement interventions to foster compassion and feelings of social safeness and reduce experiences of social disconnection, thus promoting growth, resilience and mental wellbeing during and following the pandemic.

There is considerable evidence that self-criticism plays a major role in the vulnerability to and recovery from psychopathology. Methods to measure this process, and its change over time, are therefore important for research in psychopathology and well-being. This study examined the factor structure of a widely used measure, the Forms of Self-Criticising/Attacking & Self-Reassuring Scale in thirteen nonclinical samples (N = 7510) from twelve different countries: Australia (N = 319), Canada (N = 383), Switzerland (N = 230), Israel (N = 476), Italy (N = 389), Japan (N = 264), the Netherlands (N = 360), Portugal (N = 764), Slovakia (N = 1326), Taiwan (N = 417), the United Kingdom 1 (N = 1570), the United Kingdom 2 (N = 883), and USA (N = 331). This study used more advanced analyses than prior reports: a bifactor item-response theory model, a two-tier item-response theory model, and a non-parametric item-response theory (Mokken) scale analysis. Although the original three-factor solution for the FSCRS (distinguishing between Inadequate-Self, Hated-Self, and Reassured-Self) had an acceptable fit, two-tier models, with two general factors (Self-criticism and Self-reassurance) demonstrated the best fit across all samples. This study provides preliminary evidence suggesting that this two-factor structure can be used in a range of nonclinical contexts across countries and cultures. Inadequate-Self and Hated-Self might not by distinct factors in nonclinical samples. Future work may benefit from distinguishing between self-correction versus shame-based self-criticism.

Background: The COVID‐19 pandemic is a massive global health crisis with damaging consequences to mental health and social relationships. Exploring factors that may heighten or buffer the risk of mental health problems in this context is thus critical. Whilst compassion may be a protective factor, in contrast fears of compassion increase vulnerability to psychosocial distress and may amplify the impact of the pandemic on mental health. This study explores the magnifying effects of fears of compassion on the impact of perceived threat of COVID‐19 on depression, anxiety and stress, and social safeness.Methods: Adult participants from the general population (N = 4057) were recruited across 21 countries worldwide, and completed self‐report measures of perceived threat of COVID‐19, fears of compassion (for self, from others, for others), depression, anxiety, stress and social safeness.Results: Perceived threat of COVID‐19 predicted increased depression, anxiety and stress. The three flows of fears of compassion predicted higher levels of depression, anxiety and stress and lower social safeness. All fears of compassion moderated (heightened) the impact of perceived threat of COVID‐19 on psychological distress. Only fears of compassion from others moderated the effects of likelihood of contracting COVID‐19 on social safeness. These effects were consistent across all countries.Conclusions: Fears of compassion have a universal magnifying effect on the damaging impact of the COVID‐19 pandemic on mental health and social safeness. Compassion focused interventions and communications could be implemented to reduce resistances to compassion and promote mental wellbeing during and following the pandemic.

Nurses are considered to be at risk of experiencing compassion fatigue, which can affect their personal and professional lives. The aim of this study was to investigate stressful factors contributing to the development of compassion fatigue in nurses, their experiences of compassion fatigue, and the coping strategies they used to cope with compassion fatigue. The convenience sample of 86 nurses from Central Europe was recruited via social networking sites during the pandemic of COVID-19. Data collection was conducted via an online battery of questionnaires which included open-ended questions on the stressful factors, experiences, and coping strategies for compassion fatigue. The data were analysed using a theoretical thematic analysis based on Figley’s descriptions of compassion fatigue. The initial data was read several times to identify recurring statements. Each statement was then categorized into the emerging domains, subdomains, categories, and subcategories. The results of our study show that stressful factors, experiences, and coping strategies for compassion fatigue in nurses in Central Europe could be related to cognitive, emotional, behavioural, somatic, personal relations, spiritual, and work-related symptoms of compassion fatigue as identified by Figley and that these may resemble experiences of nurses in North America, Japan, and Spain. This study provides a detailed overview of the stressful factors, experiences, and coping strategies for compassion fatigue, which could be used to develop an early screening tool and interventions for alleviating compassion fatigue and for preventive adaptation of the health care system.