*3.3. The Indirect Effect of Perceived Stress on Life Satisfaction via Coping Styles*

Cross-sectional parallel mediation analysis was conducted to examine the simultaneous mediation effect of all three coping styles on the relationship between perceived stress and life satisfaction (Figure 3). The analysis was performed separately for wave 1 (Model 1) and wave 2 (Model 2) of the COVID-19 pandemic. As shown in Table 5, all standardized estimates were statistically significant at both W1 and W2, which confirms the indirect effect of perceived stress on life satisfaction via task-oriented, emotion-oriented, and avoidance-oriented coping styles.

**Figure 3.** Path model of mediation of the effect of perceived stress on satisfaction with life, via coping styles; cross-sectional design (Model 1 and Model 2). \* *p* < 0.05, \*\* *p* < 0.01, \*\*\* *p* < 0.001.


**Table 5.** Parameter estimates for latent structural mediation models in cross-sectional approach.

Notes. W1 = wave 1 of the COVID-19 pandemic; W2 = wave 2 of the COVID-19 pandemic. The values in the table are standardized regression coefficients (β). \* *p* < 0.05, \*\* *p* < 0.01, \*\*\* *p* < 0.001.

The goodness-of-fit indices for the cross-sectional parallel mediation during W1 (Model 1) and W2 (Model 2) are shown in Table 6. Some indices show good fit (i.e., SRMR, CFI, and NFI), whereas others are less acceptable (ML X2/*df*, RMSEA, and TLI).


**Table 6.** Fit indices for alternative models.

Notes. ML = maximum likelihood; SRMR = standardized root mean square residual; root mean square error of approximation = RMSEA; CI–confidence interval; CFI = comparative fit index; normed fit index = NFI; the Tucker–Lewis index = TLI.
