Mental health, self-care and resilience in journalism

In this article series, we have so far provided insights from psychology that help to promote and realise a less biased, more solutions-oriented, nuanced and human approach to research and reporting. In this final article, we are shifting the focus: This article is dedicated to your well-being — as journalists, reporters, editors, and media-creators around the world, who dedicate their lifeblood, intellectual prowess and determination — at times even risking their own freedom and lives — to inform, investigate and uncover grievances, and to inspire and connect people and ideas around the world. 

In this article, you will… 

• get a short overview of the psychological understanding of job-related stress, demands and resources in the  journalism sector;
• learn about research into mental health issues among journalists, with a focus on burnout and post-traumatic stress disorder;
• get to know some concrete tools and tips to prevent or at least mitigate stress and mental health risks on different levels, and explore synergies with the mindset of constructive journalism;
• be provided with concrete resources  for self-assessment, “mental first aid”, and helpful links to approved websites.  

Every job has its rewards and demands. An appropriate balance between the two is an essential determinant of work motivation, satisfaction and performance, and is subject to a number of popular models in organisational psychology (1, 2). 

Media jobs are not all the same. They differ substantially in task-inherent pace and demands, depending on ressort or channel, team climate, seasonal and regional dynamics, political and legal conditions, and many more factors. It goes without saying that these factors, as well as rank and responsibility, also impact the quality and type of stress media professionals experience. Despite all these differences, there are some conditions of media jobs that can be considered typical or generally relevant to journalists’ stress and mental health. On the positive side, there are many factors that make journalistic work motivating and satisfying. Likely resources and rewards as well as demands are listed in the following box (3).

With increasing acceleration in societies, overall work-related stress levels also have gone up considerably over the last few decades (4). On top of that, mobile digital devices have created a demand for constant online availability, dissolved borders between work and private life, and made it harder for us to detach from work (5, 6). Teams and individuals are frequently required to shift plans to quickly adapt to (sudden) processes of organisational transformation; working environments have become increasingly complex, interconnected systems (7). In journalism, this might show up as content needing to be designed in a way that is compatible with multi-channel production, for example, or new platforms with special dynamics, formats, and user needs appearing on the scene. 

But, of course, stress has always been part of human life: Our stone-age ancestors did not know in advance when or where some wild beast may attack, or if weather breaks will force them to move on with the entire clan (8). Such truly existentially threatening events are of different quality from, say, a live-show guest cancelling on short notice, or one publication format dying and another one rising of course. We can thus assume that our species is evolutionarily well-prepared to deal with unforeseeable challenges and the stress they cause, as we descend from those who coped with it well, in one way or another (9). 

One important note: Whether something causes you stress is neither a result of environmental nor of personal factors alone: What seems like a nice challenge to one person is a major threat to others; what sounds interesting on a Monday morning can make you feel overwhelmed after a rough week on Thursday, though you are basically the same person.

Stress is not necessarily negative. In adequate doses, it can contribute to good performance and well-being, as its effects are “designed” to activate us physically and mentally (14). Problems arises, when it is “overdosed”: 

Moderate levels of temporary stress:  

• put us in a state of action-readiness, attention, and concentration; 
• open us up to new thoughts and facilitate more original and creative associations (15); 
• typically elicit feelings that include curiosity, eagerness to explore, joy and confidence (15); 
• can help us make new contacts more easily and thus expand our social network (16). 

All this makes a huge difference to how you get through a typical day when doing journalistic research, get in touch with interview partners, analyse evidence, and tell your stories.

In contrast, high levels of permanent stress (or stress that goes on for longer periods of time) can cause severe physical health problems, as well as cognitive, emotional, and social damage (14). They not only harm the cardio-vascular system, but also narrow human perception and thinking, presumably a protective mode against overstimulation. This may show up as  (14, 15):

• Becoming more sensitive, e.g., towards noise, and literally seeing and thinking in a tunnel-view mode (as peripheral vision as well as associations are narrowed; 15); 
• Temporary memory problems or trouble focusing;
• Avoiding complex analyses or failing to succeed on these, along with bad priority-setting;
• Bad decision-making and bad judgement (never make important decisions under acute stress!); 
• Feelings of weakness or anxiety, self-doubts or despair; 
• Becoming irritable, angry or aggressive; 
• Different emotional states coming up and changing rapidly, likely causing additional conflict in professional and private contexts; 
• Reduced openness and empathy for the concerns of others, leading to social retreat, or to hostile communication, when retreat is not possible. 

Again, all of this seriously endangers the overall quality of professional performance and interactions in all stages of everyday (journalistic) work. Therefore, employers as well as employees and all kinds of co-workers should have a common interest in preventing an atmosphere of chronic stress at work.

On top of that, stress may contribute to serious mental health problems. So-called vulnerability-stress models suggest that an acute phase of very high stress can act as a trigger for mental health issues, given there is a genetic or socio-biographic predisposition; while without that acute stress, the same predisposition (e.g., for depression or anxiety disorder) may eventually have gone unnoticed for a lifetime (17). It is an inherent problem that one loses the sense for or may even neglect one’s own limits and health status under severe stress (e.g., when approaching a burnout, see below), so that people are often caught by surprise and only realise they had a breakdown (coming) in hindsight. Staying sensitive towards environmental risk factors, as well as early symptoms of permanent or chronic stress is thus essential to allow for timely prevention and intervention, especially regarding the somewhat precarious constellation of factors in journalistic professions. 

The daily grind of covering conflicts, wars, natural disasters, injustice and corruption, the consequences of the climate crisis and just general human suffering does not leave journalists unscathed. In general, whatever is worth reporting on is usually emotionally charged in some way or other, often in a negative way (for the Primate of Negativity, see also article 1 of this series). Mental health issues are thus likely to affect every journalist regularly dealing with news — including editors and other professionals who hardly ever leave the newsroom, but spend their day in a continuous flow of pictures and headlines from around the world. In fact, the distance inherent in desk reporting may even be more challenging at times, because journalists may feel an even larger lack of control with regard to the news. 

We would like to spotlight two fields of mental issues which are particularly well-studied as impacting journalists: so-called burnout syndrome and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). 

Burnout

Officially (i.e., according to the World Health Organization’s International Classification of Diseases, ICD-11; 22), burnout is still explicitly not a disease, yet can be coded as a work-related factor that influences a person’s health status. This reflects the understanding that burnout is an occupational hazard, not a health hazard – it is a state of otherwise healthy people who can’t handle chronically stressful working conditions (which can include unpaid care or voluntary work, but does not include being worn out from excessive leisure time activities). Maslach and colleagues have defined burnout as a syndrome of emotional exhaustion, depersonalization of others, and reduced personal accomplishment (23). Professionals thus often diagnose it as exhaustion depression, so that sick-leave or treatment will be covered by health insurance. 

There are a number of factors well known to enhance burnout risk (24). These are very often part of journalistic job profiles as already outlined in the introduction, such as 

• A combination of extreme and long-term stress; 
• High performance standards;
• Being exposed to severe human suffering on a regular basis; 

As well as inherent to the type of people that are often attracted to this field, as 

• Having a strong desire for recognition and success;
• Experiencing it rather as a passion or “calling” than a job (and, similar to social work, also being expected to do it not for the money, but for a higher cause);
• Bringing with them a readiness to ignore personal limits and exploit oneself.

Systematic literature reviews point out that these and related factors can explain the high rates of burnout or exhaustion depression among journalists (25). In contrast to other professions prone to burn out, such as nurses or social workers, journalists usually cannot directly act on the suffering they bear witness to and thus on top might experience learned helplessness (see article 8 of this series). 

Even under extreme circumstances, burnout does not come on overnight, and knowing about typical early symptoms will help to escape the vicious cycle and prevent worse. The following box gives a brief summary of a widely cited model of twelve phases of burnout (26; cf. 27). It identifies typical symptoms for different stages, which, however, does not mean that one has to experience all of these —  and/or strictly as described —, as some might very much depend on the specific working environment.

Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)

On top of ticking many boxes in “burnout risk factors”, the professional routine of journalists often requires them to be confronted with potentially traumatising images, events and experiences, be it as a field reporter or in the newsroom. Post-traumatic stress disorder describes a possible reaction to traumatic experiences of violence, war, natural disasters, accidents, severe illness, sexual assault or torture. It can also arise as a reaction to indirect exposure, i.e., as an observer or through others’ reports (30). Reporters and journalists are prone to both, and the high risk of trauma exposure has encouraged extensive psychological research on post-trauma reactions among journalists (for recent comprehensive reviews, see 31, 32). There is also substantial evidence for risks of indirect or secondary trauma in audiences (33), which, however, is not the focus of this article (see article 5 of this series for further information). 

Typical symptoms of PTSD may be (34)

• Persistent memories or vivid re-experiencing of the stressful event (so-called flashbacks) or repetitive dreams; 
• Avoidance of stimuli associated with the traumatising situation, e.g., places, means of transport, smells, sounds or similar, which were not avoided before the stressful experience;
• Difficulty falling asleep or sleeping through the night;
• Emotional numbness;
• Increased irritability, tension and jumpiness;
• Dejection, deep exhaustion, listlessness, feeling of powerlessness, futility or despair; 
• Severe mood swings;
• Considerable change in eating behaviour (overeating, loss of appetite); increased alcohol, drug or tobacco consumption;
• Fears, feelings of guilt or shame, self-reproaches (e.g., not having intervened more strongly).

It is important to note that single traumatic experiences, direct or indirect, do not automatically lead to PTSD symptoms, as there are various protective factors (35). However, journalists are a high-risk group for PTSD, due to the repeated, if not permanent, exposure to severe crises, war, natural disasters, etc., and almost as prone as firefighters, coroners or ambulance staff to face traumatic events (36). Based on numerous studies with large samples of journalists from many different countries, news journalists are estimated to be at a considerably enhanced risk of developing PTSD (among other issues, such as depression, anxiety disorders or substance abuse), with rates ranging from 12% to over 90%, depending on the particular research sample, country, and survey circumstances (37; 38). 

In one of the studies reviewed by Aoki and colleagues (38), about 40% of respondents expressed concern about losing the trust of their employer and colleagues if they admit to being traumatised, in another, only 20% stated that support structures existed in their media house for such cases (38). Taking this fear of stigmatisation into account, much of the self-reported data on psychological stress and illness should be viewed critically, as it is likely to underestimate true rates of impact.

Another important factor is “institutional betrayal”, referring to organisations (e.g., employers) that fail to responsibly prepare or support those prone to trauma exposure (39, 40, 41). Compared to other high-risk professions such as firefighters, military or ambulance staff, supportive resources for journalists are extremely scarce (42, 43, 44; cf. 3). For instance, a US-American dissertation study found that only very few journalism training programs offered a class on trauma-related outcomes (45). In addition, as stated above, the issue is often swept under the rug (38, 41), an aspect that might be rooted in professional ideals of objectivity, neutrality and emotional detachment (31), and further fed by organisational climate (46), and journalists’ fear of appearing weak and thus not suitable for the (tough) job (47, 48). Those who report having addressed their need for support often seem to face prejudice and discouragement; and if support is provided at all, it often aims rather at re-establishing the ability to work than at prevention (38). 

Media organisations clearly need to look inward and consider the degree to which their workplace climate is providing a healthy environment or rather perpetuating mental health stigmata and adding to the emotional distress experienced by those covering crisis and traumatic news events (49). A recent review of 33 studies with journalists from a huge variety of different countries (37; cf. 50, 3) concludes that situational factors such as stressful working conditions or the (un-)availability of social support have about as much influence on the risk of developing PTSD as personality factors or individual coping strategies. This finding is very much in line with decades of psychological research in other fields: Many studies show that early intervention is an extremely effective protective factor against PTSD in professional contexts (e.g., among early responders; 51). According to the law in many countries as well as the European Union, employers hold a legal responsibility to protect their staff against physical as well as psychological harm, and it seems that media houses have some catching up to do when it comes to prevention and low-threshold support concepts/offerings. 

Does a constructive approach make a difference?

Taken together, and as so often, the problem seems to be pretty well described. However, to the best of our knowledge, there is only very little research available about solutions, i.e., on approaches aiming to prevent and treat mental health issues tailored to the journalism sector, and on their effectiveness. It would seem that there is a general acceptance that working conditions for reporters in disaster or conflict zones basically“are the way they are”, and that nothing can be done about newsroom rules either. The review by Monteiro and colleagues from 2016 concluded that among the 28 studies published between 2002 and 2015, “only one research study focused on an in-depth analysis of the most commonly used coping strategies by journalists. The impacts of occupational stress among these professionals were sorely negative (e.g., burnout, PTSD), and no study was found to address the design and assessment of preventive interventions for these impacts on the health and well-being of journalists.” (3, p. 751)

Despite this striking lack of research on protective or supportive factors, the recent rise of constructive reporting and according evaluative studies shows that a more solutions-oriented and nuanced reporting style successfully protects audiences from helplessness, anxiety, depression, news fatigue and news avoidance and can foster hope, self-efficacy, engagement and well-being (52). Might this also work on the journalists’ side? There is some preliminary evidence from singular experiences as documented in autobiographical experiences (53) as well as from a study built on a series of semi-structured in-depth interviews with war reporters and newsroom experts from various media houses (54). Many of these journalists claim to considerably profit from a more constructive approach in research and reporting with regard to how they experience stress and mental well-being, and also with regard to job motivation and long-term job commitment, which would otherwise have suffered severely. 

The above mentioned publication by Lilly and Dadouch (31) is among the few to explicitly address the role of thought patterns on developing PTSD in journalistic contexts. As expected, their results indicate that a mindset that is built around humanist values and focuses on constructive, solutions-oriented approaches to the challenges we face comes with a sense of safety and higher resilience towards PTSD compared to a “shattered world” view  (55) that comes with a higher risk of developing PTSD symptoms (cf. 56). 

Many authors call for a more open discussion of mental health issues in journalism and for including education on early signs of trauma and stress, as well as how to deal with it, in the regular curriculum at journalism schools (e.g., 41; 44).

To preserve joy and energy in journalistic work in the long run requires us to differentiate stress and mental issues in order to determine what can be done about what and by whom. Some aspects of stress and mental strain depend on general circumstances, organisational structures and processes or leadership styles. Others are rather a matter of personal mindsets. Some can be altered, others can’t be neither altered nor avoided, but only counter-balanced. It is extremely wise to distinguish one from the other. 

What can be done on a personal level

From the many models that have been suggested to structure the complex field of stress and stress management, we chose one by Kaluza (14), as it is scientifically solid and at the same time extremely practical in its implications. Kaluza suggests differentiating three “pillars” of stress competence, each aiming to help buffer and cope with a different aspect of experiencing stress: 

External stress factors, as depicted on the left, refer to whatever (work-)life throws at you that may cause stress, such as, for example, high levels of noise, or unclear responsibilities within the team. These can be reduced by so-called instrumental stress competence. Such a problem-focussed (rather than emotion-focussed) approach to lower or handle these demands, so that they consume less resources and do less damage, may include a noise-cancelling headset or clarifying communication (for more instrumental tips and tools, see box below). 

As we have already seen, stress is not just a matter of how much life throws at you, but rather of how you perceive the demands on the side relative to how you perceive your (current) resources, skills and capacities to handle these challenges. If you find yourself well-equipped, and have realistic goals and measures for appropriate results, you will be fine. The subjective assessment of one’s own resources is heavily affected by individual beliefs or fears. These can become personal stress enhancers, if they contain ideas of perfection, independence or control at all costs that make the external stress factors even worse than they might otherwise appear. Learning how to tame such beliefs is a matter of mental stress competence, as can be practised in several ways (see below).

At the same time, personal stress enhancers may also interact with the bodily stress reactions as depicted on the right of Figure 1: thoughts and feelings can further increase (as well as decrease) stress symptoms, such as heart-rate or blood pressure, bad sleep, loss of appetite, concentration or memory problems. Recreational stress competence such as working out regularly/participating in sports, good sleeping hygiene, etc. (see below) will lower the proneness to overly strong physical stress reactions and buffer negative health consequences. At the same time, physical well-being may positively feed back on the mental assessment of current stressors and one’s available resources to cope with these (14). 

In addition, each of the three components that affect stress may interact with the others, and prevention and intervention is possible on all three “levels”. Concrete tools and tips on how to build these pillars of good stress competence in order to maintain mental and physical well-being are provided in the following boxes (cf. 14; 28), starting with instrumental stress competence: 

How to strengthen instrumental stress competence

• Build up task-oriented resources and competences (e.g. self-learning, ask colleagues for expertise when learning to work with new formats or tools, such as your first podcast)
• Organisational improvements (e.g., optimising task-structures, work-flow processes, supportive technical devices)
• Improve self-management skills (train and practice setting priorities, delegation, time-management techniques)
• Reflect on your work style (what do you want to keep, stop, do more or do more often?)

Train communicative skills to prevent conflicts or prevent them from escalating (e.g., give constructive feedback; delegate efficiently and appreciatively; learn and practice saying no without fear of personal rejection, reputational damage, or of missing out on the next round

Some stressors can’t be reduced by such instrumental strategies, but must be more or less taken the way they are. This is where mental stress competence comes in. Many motives and standards that guide us at work are helpful as such, but become “unhealthy” when exaggerated: the aim to deliver solid research and high quality stories may turn into perfectionism; the wish to be appreciated by others may lead to fear of rejection in case of minor dissent; the urge to master challenges by oneself may lead to refuse support when it is necessary and appropriate, and so on. These mental stress enhancers work a bit like conversations you are having with yourself – inner monologues that may be helpful sometimes, but do real harm at other times.

Building mental stress competence is easier said than done. It requires not only seriously questioning mental stress enhancers, but also maintaining a healthy balance between following your “calling” and being able to “turn off”. It requires in particular accepting your limits. It is very helpful to zoom out once in a while and ask yourself: How are you doing, honestly, in terms of physical health, mental stability and social relationships? Is this project worth the toll it is taking? When starting to review, do not expect too much at once. Be patient with yourself, take small steps, and seek support if appropriate. The following box provides some “first aid” tools for self-reflection, for questioning and dealing with these kinds of thoughts, and getting into a more constructive dialogue with yourself:

Even with solid instrumental as well as mental stress competences, stress reactions might be unavoidable. As has been said, experiencing temporary, moderate stress reactions is not in itself a bad thing, but rather natural and even healthy, as long as active phases are followed by time for relaxation. To protect yourself against the unhealthy long term consequences of chronic stress, it is essential a)to feel socially supported, and b)to fully regenerate on a regular basis. Most of the tools filling the box for regenerative stress competence are common knowledge and may seem trivial at first glance, but the trick is to actually practise them in everyday life – again a mental thing, and a frequent issue in counselling and coaching:

What employers can do on a systemic level

So far, we have addressed three levels at which individuals can build resilience. However, many countries have clear laws and regulations about the employers’ responsibility to ensure the physical and mental well-being of their employees (and sometimes freelancers) by means of corporate health care management systems. These include measures that minimise heavy risks (e.g., providing bullet-proof vests for those who report from conflict zones) and physical harm from the working environment (e.g., ensuring ergonomic desk equipment, regular pauses, etc.), but also those that minimise psychological strains such as time pressure, intransparent or overly high demands, or a climate that fosters conflict, mobbing or discrimination. In many countries, employers are by law obliged to assess and report on eventual job-related dangers to physical and mental health on a regular basis and to invest in countermeasures. 

It is not only a matter of ethics and legal responsibility, but also economically very reasonable to invest in a sustainable, healthy work climate: Such an investment sends the authentic message to employees that they are appreciated and valued, keeping experienced professionals on board and making the company attractive for future high potentials as well as contributing to a good public (employer) image. Economic consequences of chronically high stress at work are complex to estimate and may in some cases only represent the tip of the iceberg. 

Costs of chronic high stress for media houses  may include (cf. 28; 57): 

• Lower quality of work results due to lack of concentration, bad memory, and generally suboptimal performance during research and production. 
• Bad priority-setting and/or decision making, resulting in
• frustration among co-workers (whose work is de-prioritised)
• work accidents and their collateral costs (e.g., when incidentally destroying files or technic equipment), and
• awareness of these issues as further stressors, accelerating chronification of symptoms and long-term illness.
• Social conflict due to stress-related, low frustration tolerance; hostile communication; blaming others, resulting in
  • bad team climate, negative mood contagion within teams
  • less effective cooperation within the team or between interdependent teams
  • less effective, eventually off-putting negotiation style within important networks
  • purposeful underperformance or resignation among other team-members.
• Sick-leave times and times for rehabilitation (e.g., after burnout), or staff turnover
  • (temporarily) losing valuable experience and expertise
  • vacancies implying an increase in workload for the remaining team
  • costs for hiring and training new staff including recruitment and selection process; suboptimal performance in the beginning; time and effort for onboarding.
• Long-term systemic consequences 
  • damage to the reputation of a media house among journalists as well as audiences, increasing difficulty to build long-term business partnerships or reaching subscribers
  • damage to employer image (or even industry image) among the next generation
  • increased difficulty recruiting in times when there is a shortage of specialist and managerial talents.

Investing in mental health care has a high return on investment (57). Only people in a good state can do good work, and constructive journalism (or constructive team culture) will hardly prosper under negative conditions. In fact, reversely, constructive approaches may help buffer the individual consequences of difficult working conditions (see above). On top of that, there are some well-established classic measures that can be combined in customised ways, according to demand as well as time and budget available:

But where to start if you are able to implement or want to lobby those in charge to implement mental health care measures at your workplace? The good news is: It doesn't matter. Just as negative vibes spread and accumulate within social systems, positive impulses can unfold their effects in a non-linear, dynamic upward spiral of open-mindedness, appreciation and mutual inspiration and support (15; cf. 8).

You can take the first step and become a model to others in the way you handle communication, deadlines, vacation and self-care. 

As stated above, we strongly recommend taking a short break and reflecting on how you are doing on a regular basis. This may be every two weeks, once a month, once a quarter or as a ritual after having reached certain milestones, depending on your general condition and the way you work. To this end, we recommend our one-page Self-Check Mental Health for Journalists. This collection of questions on typical stress symptoms will help you track and reflect on your physical and mental well-being, for instance, with regard to changes in eating or sleeping routines, your social life, behaviour at work, and general thoughts and feelings (as taken from 28). The questions don't aim at assessing particular mental issues; they are not a scientific test and do not replace a professional assessment, but a tool for personal self-evaluation (so no cheating, please!). As this is not a test in the narrow sense of the word, there is no benchmark value that says “if you have reached x points or higher, this means…”. However, the symptoms listed do each reflect serious issues, and if you have experienced a considerable number of issues for “several days”, please consider taking a break and recharging soon, and/or reach out to a professional who is trained to help.

In addition to the tools and tips provided in section 3, we’ve collected links to non-commercial  resources for support with stress and mental health by reputed international and national institutions, governments or NGOs, followed by special initiatives designed for the journalism sector (not all of it entirely non-profit), as well as sites providing free mental health care management tools for assessment and support at the workplace. 

You can find more articles on the series "Psychology for Journalists" on this page.

Margarida Alpuim is a Portuguese psychologist and journalist. She completed her master's in Community Psychology at the University of Miami, where she focused on issues of collective well-being. As a journalist, Margarida wants to explore more constructive ways to tell stories that consider both the audience and media professionals. Margarida currently works from Lisbon on innovative projects that unite psychology and journalism.
 

Katja Ehrenberg holds a PhD in psychology and is professor at Fresenius University of Applied Sciences in Cologne. For almost 25 years, she has conducted research, taught and published on topics of social, communication, organisational and health psychology. As a freelance systemic consultant, she advises teams and individuals and enjoys applying social science findings to the various challenges of everyday human (work)life.