In present study, the detection rate of depression was 26.2%, the rate for mild and M/s depression were 16.4% and 9.8% respectively. Similar result was found for anxiety symptoms. That is, the detection rate of anxiety was 28.5%, the rate for mild and M/s anxiety were 19.4% and 9.1% respectively. The detection rate of depression was much higher than the study result among elementary student population conducted in Shenzhen City, China (depression rate was 14.1%) [16], and the result related to elementary school students conducted in Wuhan city, China (depression rate was 6.4%) [17]. Facing the severe pandemic, elementary school students lack of the related knowledge and skill on prevention and control. In addition, the data was collected at the peak of the pandemic at that period in China, the increasing number of confirmed and suspected cases, lack of effective treatment, and the restriction of outdoor activity also may be the leading reasons for the high detection rate of depression or anxiety symptoms. However, our result was lower than the study among Chinese adolescent population (for depression rate: 44%; for anxiety rate: 37%), which was conducted among adolescents aged 14–18 years rather than elementary school students [6].
Our study showed that high number of COVID-19-related stressors was a risk factor for elementary school student’ symptoms of depression and anxiety, which was consistent with previous findings among general public population during other infectious diseases (e.g., SARS) [5]. That is, large number of COVID-19-related stressors indicates that the important person of students (e.g., family members or friends) or students themselves were under the high risk of infection, or their daily life was changed completely due to the pandemic (e.g., cancelled the vocation trip). Those issues above are harmful to elementary school students physical or mental health.
Consistent with previous studies among public population during SARS[5], our findings showed that problem-based coping was a protector in predicting students’ psychological symptom, while emotion-based coping was a risk factor. The possible reason might be that problem-based coping might reduce individuals’ psychological symptoms by altering the unfavourable environment to support their physical or mental health (e.g., wearing mask when taking outdoor activities). However, individuals who use emotion-based coping (e.g., denial) frequently tend to ignore or avoid stressful events and leave the problematic situation unchanged or allow it to worsen. When individuals engage in emotional-based coping, stress is only temporarily ameliorated, and psychological problems often emerge or become more complex over time.
The result also showed that high level of online learning satisfaction could reduce the symptoms of anxiety. The possible reason might be that, on one hand, elementary school students who have high online learning satisfaction tend to have high self-esteem, and are more likely to use active coping or have high efficacy in coping with stressors [18], which could also promote individual mental health; on the other hand, students could receive social support (a protective e factor of individual psychological symptoms) from their teachers or classmates in online course during pandemic.
For demographic variables, no gender differences were found in the variables of students’ psychological symptoms, which was consistent with previous study [19]. It is possible that, when facing stressful event, girls and boys may be equally likely to develop symptoms of depression or anxiety because of their immaturity of their body or brain. With regard to the variables of family social status, the findings of this research are consistent with previous studies [20–21] and indicate that impoverished children are at risk of developing depressive symptoms or poor health. This phenomenon could be explained by evolutionary theory. That is, low social status might be regarded as a potential threat to survival because it could mean less access to resources and less opportunity to cooperate with others. In the modern world, however, low social status may be more connected to symbolic threats to the self and thus may provide a major source of chronic stress and increase the likelihood of obesity, which may presumably alter neuroendocrine functions associated with, for example, depression and untimely death.
Despite the importance of the findings, this study has several limitations. First, the cross-sectional design does not allow for the investigation of changes in individuals’ psychological symptoms across different periods of the COVID-19 pandemic and cannot provide a fuller picture of the psychological impact of the outbreak. Second, because all the constructs were assessed by self-report, the estimated relationships among stressors, coping, and psychological symptoms might be biased by the reporter effect. Future research should consider a longitudinal design or use multiple methods to examine the role of stressors, online learning satisfaction and coping in individuals’ psychological symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic. Third, there has been some speculation that Asian cultures tend to use avoidance strategies of emotion-based coping more frequently than Western cultures. Future studies should consider cultural factors when discussing the relationships among the variables in the present study.