LAUSR

This article presents the results of three surveys conducted during the initial stage of the COVID-19 pandemic, in March 2020 and in late June/early July 2020, when pandemic restrictions were in force. The surveys covered patients who had used psychological assistance before the pandemic. two were cross-sectional and one was longitudinal. The first survey involved 270 people (age: M = 29.59, SD = 10.74, women 79.3%), and the second one covered 117 subjects (age: M = 29.40, SD = 11.49, women 85.5%). The third, longitudinal, survey covered 83 subjects (age: M = 26.61, SD = 7.17, women 89.2%). In our research we used the Conservation of Resources Evaluation questionnaire, the abbreviated version of the Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced, the WHO Quality of Life Scale, and a questionnaire for collecting sociodemographic information. Our analysis of the quality-of-life correlates in the two cross-sectional studies leads to an observation that for people using psychological help, the constant determinants of quality of life during a pandemic are high gain in resources and little loss of resources. In the first phase of the pandemic, active strategies were not linked to the sense of quality of life. This sense, however, was diminished by a number of negative strategies, such as denial, venting, substance use, restraint, and self-blame. After 3 months of the ongoing pandemic, perceived quality of life was positively correlated with strategies related to seeking instrumental support and active coping. this most likely points to a process of adapting to a difficult situation. The results of our longitudinal surveys demonstrate increasing escapism. Our attempt at explaining which factors determined the quality of life after 3 months of the ongoing pandemic showed that the crucial factors are: a sense of quality of life before the occurrence of the pandemic, changes in the distribution of resilience-oriented resources, changed frequency of using passive strategies, and active ways of coping—but only after 3 months into the pandemic. The results thus obtained can be used both in prevention and in work with persons affected by the negative consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic.