Affect, Social Support and Gratitude among Ukrainian University Students in the Acute Phase of War, November 2022

<p>Research on the psychological impact of Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine has been dominated by distress instruments and by data collected retrospectively or through online snowball recruitment. Comparatively little is known about the resource side of the acute phase: what remained intact, and in what form.This study reports data collected in a single session on 15 November 2022, three weeks after the first sustained Russian strikes on Ukrainian energy infrastructure, from second- and fourth-year students at a private university in Dnipro (aged approximately 17-18 and 19-20). Four instruments were administered consecutively in a 20-minute window following a deliberately non-reassuring reflective framing: SoZU-14 (N = 146), PANAS (N = 103), GQ-6 (N = 117) and a 15-item proactive-position scale (N = 114).The affective profile did not correspond to acute distress. Negative affect was indistinguishable from the published normative mean (18.0 vs. 17.4, d = +0.10, p = .43), whereas positive affect was reduced (30.7 vs 33.3, d = -0.36, p = .001). Within negative affect the elevated items were those of chronic friction, while acute-threat and self-blame items sat at the floor (scared 1.40, ashamed 1.37); within positive affect, engagement was preserved (interested 3.47, active 3.44) while peak states were suppressed (proud 2.83, excited 2.47).The relational instruments showed a parallel asymmetry along an unexpected line. SoZU-14 items did not separate close from distant ties; they separated the presence of supportive relationships (4.39) from turning to them for help (3.83; dz = 1.00, 82% of respondents). The three items shared with the F-SozU K-3, near-identical in a German representative sample (4.29, 4.30, 4.21; range 0.09), spread across 0.63 here, with the presence item above the German mean and both mobilisation items below it, while the three-item total matched the German norm (12.27 vs 12.33). Support was normal in volume and atypical in structure. Gratitude fell below undergraduate norms (d = -0.52 to -0.62) and attached to life in general (6.27) rather than to a wide range of people (4.80; dz = 0.90). The three comparisons form a gradient ordered by how much outward investment each construct presupposes. No cohort difference appeared on any instrument.The dissociation was graded by resource state: the presence-mobilisation gap fell to near the German value in the highest quintile of support and followed an inverted-U, peaking not among the most deprived but among those with substantial close ties and limited overall resource (quadratic R2 = .205 vs .055 linear, p &amp;lt; .0001; replicated on gratitude).We interpret this configuration as resource conservation rather than depletion: the stock of affective and relational resources is intact while its expenditure is restricted. Conservation of Resources theory accounts for rationing of a preserved stock; Socioemotional Selectivity Theory for which states and network layers were retained.</p>