Objective: The current study investigated the experiences, wellbeing impacts, and coping strategies of frontline workers who participated in “Hotels for Heroes”, an Australian voluntary hotel quarantine program during the COVID-19 pandemic. The program was open to those who were COVID-19 positive or exposed to COVID-19 as part of their profession. Methods: Frontline workers who had stayed in voluntary quarantine between April 2020 and March 2021 were invited to participate in a voluntary, anonymous, cross-sectional online survey including both quantitative and qualitative responses. Complete responses were collected from 106 participants, which included data on sociodemographic and occupational characteristics, experiences of the Hotels for Heroes program, and validated mental health measures. Results: Mental health problems were prevalent amongst frontline workers (e.g., moderate anxiety symptoms, severe depression symptoms, and greater than usual impact of fatigue). For some, quarantine appeared to be helpful for anxiety and burnout, but quarantine also appeared to impact anxiety, depression, and PTSD negatively, and longer stays in quarantine were associated with significantly higher coronavirus anxiety and fatigue impacts. The most widely received support in quarantine was from designated program staff; however, this was reportedly accessed by less than half of the participants. Conclusions: The current study points to specific aspects of mental health care that can be applied to participants of similar voluntary quarantine programs in the future. It seems necessary to screen for psychological needs at various stages of quarantine, and to allocate appropriate care and improve its accessibility, as many participants did not utilise the routine support offered. Support should especially target disease-related anxiety, symptoms of depression and trauma, and the impacts of fatigue. Future research is needed to clarify specific phases of need throughout quarantine programs, and the barriers for participants receiving mental health supports in these contexts.

Objective: The study of spirituality, naturalism, and agnosticism has been hindered by assumptions about their organisation, where naturalism has been treated as a lack of spirituality, and agnosticism as a construct “in-between” spirituality and naturalism. The psychology of worldviews encourages conceptualisations of these belief systems as distinct constructs. The aim of this study was to develop conceptual definition and psychometric measurement for spirituality, naturalism, and agnosticism. Method: The current project used exploratory factor analysis (N = 412) to develop a measure for spirituality, naturalism, and agnosticism. Confirmatory factor analyses were then used in two further samples (N = 1056; 873) to refine and validate the measure. Results: The final inventory measured spirituality (and mysticism), naturalism, and agnosticism with 35-items across 8-factors. The measure showed good model fit and evidence of construct validity. Conclusions: Findings provide insight into the structural relationships between mysticism, spirituality, naturalism, and agnosticism. This study also provides a new tool for investigating these worldview constructs comprehensively. Rather than considered as mutually exclusive categories or linear positions on a unidimensional spectrum, they can be treated as distinct individual difference variables with both overlapping and diverse impacts. KEY POINTS What is already known about this topic: (1) Worldviews are systems of belief about fundamental aspects of reality. (2) Spirituality, naturalism, and agnosticism are three distinct worldviews. (3) Naturalism and agnosticism have been overlooked in psychological research due to assumptions about their structure. What this topic adds: (1) Conceptual differentiation of spirituality, naturalism, and agnosticism as distinct worldviews in psychology. (2) Psychometric scale development to measure spirituality, naturalism, and agnosticism.