*2.1. Participants and Procedure*

A total of 1176 individuals from Spain participated in the present descriptive and cross-sectional research study. The participants were aged between 18 and 67 years (M = 35.35 years; SD = 11.900), with 457 (38.9%) being male and 719 (61.1%) being female. The sample was selected through a process of random sampling. In order to be selected, individuals had to be in full possession of their psychological faculties, provide informed consent, be of adult age, not be retired, and not suffer from any type of condition that would impede participation in the research. These requirements made up the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The sample was obtained from all Spanish cities, requesting participation from all those who agreed to do so voluntarily. The study sample was collected in two periods depending on the different states of lockdown. The first period was from 15 to 22 March (*n* = 727; 61.8%) and the second period was from 23 to 31 March (*n* = 449; 38.2%).Two questions from the self-reported survey were duplicated to avoid bias in the responses and to check that they were not filled in randomly. We excluded 171 questionnaires after detecting that they had been incorrectly filled out or that the recipients did not meet the inclusion criteria.

The participants were contacted through various calls placed on social networks in diverse social groups so that the sample would be as random as possible. Once contact was made, the potential participants were informed regarding how to fill out the document, informing them that all collected data would be kept totally anonymous and used only for research purposes. The researchers were present in a virtual way during data collection in order to guarantee correct implementation of the process and resolve any doubts. This was achieved by providing a personal Google Meets link associated with the group of researchers, to enable users to connect with the researchers and resolve any questions they might have. The present research received approval from the ethics committee of the University of Granada (641/CEIH/2018).

#### *2.2. Variables and Instruments*

The self-registration form (ad-hoc questionnaire), collected data in relation to sex (male or female), age, whether the respondents were responsible for dependents during confinement (older individuals or relatives), whether the respondents knew somebody in their environment who had suffered from or had COVID-19, occupation prior to confinement (student, neither working nor studying, state employee, works with the public, self-employed, or works for a private company), the highest academic level achieved (basic studies, professional training, higher studies (up to baccalaureate), postgraduate studies, or doctorate studies), whether they work in emergency services (categorized as yes or no), and the period of study completion structured according to period 1 (from the 15–22 March) and period 2 (from the 23–31 March).

Resilience test. The Spanish version of the 10-item resilience scale developed by Connor-Davidson (CD-RISC) was used. This comes from the original version of the CD-RISC proposed by Connor and Davidson [35] and adapted into Spanish by Notario-Pacheco et al. [36] and Soler-Sánchez, Meseguer-de Pedro, and García-Izquierdo [37]. The scale is formed by 10 items which request respondents to provide ratings along a Likert type scale thatruns from 0 (totally disagree) to 4 (totally agree). Questions include the example: "I am capable of adapting to changes". Initial studies obtained Cronbach alpha values higher than 0.80, with α = 0.87 reported by Soler-Sánchez et al. [37], and α = 0.85 reported by Notario-Pacheco et al. [36], whilst the present study obtained a value of α = 0.89.
