Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively affected the mental health of university students. Objective: This study examined the psychological responses toward COVID-19 among university students from 3 countries—Indonesia, Taiwan, and Thailand. Methods: We used a web-based, cross-sectional survey to recruit 1985 university students from 5 public universities (2 in Indonesia, 1 in Thailand, and 1 in Taiwan) via popular social media platforms such as Facebook, LINE, WhatsApp, and broadcast. All students (n=938 in Indonesia, n=734 in Thailand, and n=313 in Taiwan) answered questions concerning their anxiety, suicidal thoughts (or sadness), confidence in pandemic control, risk perception of susceptibility to infection, perceived support, resources for fighting infection, and sources of information in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results: Among the 3 student groups, Thai students had the highest levels of anxiety but the lowest levels of confidence in pandemic control and available resources for fighting COVID-19. Factors associated with higher anxiety differed across countries. Less perceived satisfactory support was associated with more suicidal thoughts among Indonesian students. On the other hand, Taiwanese students were more negatively affected by information gathered from the internet and from medical staff than were Indonesian or Thai students. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that health care providers in Thailand may need to pay special attention to Thai university students given that high levels of anxiety were observed in this study population. In addition, health care providers should establish a good support system for university students, as the results of this study indicate a negative association between support and suicidal thoughts.

Because of the spread of novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-2019), preventive COVID-19 infection behaviors become important for individuals, especially those who are vulnerable. The present study proposes a model to explain the preventive COVID-19 infection behaviors among people with mental illness in Taiwan. A cross-sectional design was carried out and 414 patients with mental illness (230 males [55.6%]; mean age = 46.32 [SD = 10.86]) agreed to participate in the study. All the participants completed the Preventive COVID-19 Infection Behaviors Scale, Self-Stigma Scale-Short, Believing COVID-19 Information Scale, Fear of COVID-19 Scale, and Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21. Regression models and structural equation modeling (SEM) were applied to examine the factors associated with preventive COVID-19 infection behaviors. Both regression models and SEM showed that trust in COVID-19 information sources (standardized coefficient [β] = 0.211 in regression; β = 0.194 in SEM) and fear of COVID-19 (β = −0.128 in regression; β = −0.223 in SEM) significantly explained preventive behaviors among individuals with mental illness. The SEM further showed that fear of COVID-19 was significantly explained by trust in COVID-19 information sources (β = 0.220) and self-stigma (β = 0.454). Based on the results, healthcare providers should help individuals with mental illness reduce self-stigma and fear of COVID-19 which would consequently improve their preventive COVID-19 infection behaviors. Moreover, improving trust in COVID-19 information sources for individuals with mental illness may be another method to improve their preventive behaviors.

Given the negative consequences of weight bias, including internalized weight stigma, on health outcomes, two instruments-the Weight Self-Stigma Questionnaire (WSSQ) and Weight Bias Internalization Scale (WBIS)-have been developed. However, their psychometric properties are yet to be tested for Asian pediatric populations. Participants aged 8 to 12 years (N = 287; 153 boys) completed the WSSQ and the WBIS, and they were classified into either a group with overweight or a group without overweight based on self-reported weight and height. Both WSSQ and WBIS had their factor structures supported by confirmatory factor analyses (CFAs). The measurement invariance of two-factor structure was further supported for WSSQ across gender and weight status. The measurement invariance of single-factor structure was supported for WBIS across gender but not across weight status. WSSQ and WBIS were both valid to assess the internalization of weight bias. However, the two instruments demonstrated different properties and should be applied in different situations.