Psychological Well-Being during the COVID-19 Lockdown: Labour Market and Gender Implications.

Israel Escudero-Castillo, Fco Javier Mato-Díaz, Ana Rodríguez-Alvarez
Author Information
  1. Israel Escudero-Castillo: Department of Applied Economics, University of Oviedo, Oviedo, Spain.
  2. Fco Javier Mato-Díaz: Department of Applied Economics, University of Oviedo, Oviedo, Spain.
  3. Ana Rodríguez-Alvarez: Department of Economics, University of Oviedo, Oviedo, Spain.

Abstract

In the Spring of 2020, a great number of countries introduced different restrictive measures in order to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic. This article examines the labour market transitions of individuals brought about by some of those measures, and the effect of such transitions on psychological well-being. The fact that it has been possible to distinguish between unemployment transitions before the pandemic began and those resulting from the lockdowns is worth highlighting. Evidence is provided showing that unemployment due to the lockdown had a greater negative impact on psychological well-being than furloughs and teleworking. Gender differences confirm that women experienced greater adverse effects as compared to men. Specifically, women working at home exhibited greater negative effects when compared with those on furlough, probably due to a combination of work disruption and increased family obligations. Finally, on the contrary to men, women living in areas with more rigorous restrictions show a reduced probability of worse PWB when compared to those residing in areas without restrictions. This finding suggests that women are willing to sacrifice freedom of movement as long as restrictions protect their at-risk relatives.

Keywords

References

  1. J Psychosom Res. 2020 Sep;136:110186 [PMID: 32682159]
  2. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2003 Nov 13;1:66 [PMID: 14614778]
  3. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 1991 May;26(3):132-8 [PMID: 1887291]
  4. Sociol Health Illn. 2013 Jun;35(5):649-65 [PMID: 23009677]
  5. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Mar 12;18(6): [PMID: 33809017]
  6. Psychol Med. 1997 Jan;27(1):191-7 [PMID: 9122299]
  7. Appl Res Qual Life. 2021;16(5):1925-1942 [PMID: 32837605]
  8. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Mar 19;17(6): [PMID: 32204411]
  9. PLoS One. 2021 Mar 30;16(3):e0249352 [PMID: 33784339]
  10. Brain Behav Immun. 2020 Jul;87:167-169 [PMID: 32413557]
  11. PLoS One. 2021 Jan 6;16(1):e0244419 [PMID: 33406085]
  12. Appl Res Qual Life. 2021;16(1):1-11 [PMID: 33425064]
  13. Eur J Health Econ. 2022 Jun;23(4):729-753 [PMID: 34761337]
  14. Compr Psychiatry. 2013 May;54(4):406-13 [PMID: 23206494]
  15. Can Public Policy. 2021 Sep 1;47(3):439-459 [PMID: 36039353]
  16. Health Econ. 2011 Apr;20(4):484-504 [PMID: 21394818]
  17. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Jan 22;18(3): [PMID: 33499416]
  18. Psychol Med. 2000 Jul;30(4):823-9 [PMID: 11037090]
  19. Appl Res Qual Life. 2022;17(3):1227-1245 [PMID: 34226843]
  20. Int J Psychol. 2021 Aug;56(4):532-550 [PMID: 33615477]
  21. Health Care Manage Rev. 2022 Jul-Sep 01;47(3):227-235 [PMID: 34319276]
  22. Appl Res Qual Life. 2022;17(2):949-970 [PMID: 33968280]
  23. BMC Public Health. 2020 Nov 30;20(1):1825 [PMID: 33256652]
  24. Br Med J. 1970 May 23;1(5707):439-43 [PMID: 5420206]
  25. Appl Res Qual Life. 2023;18(1):341-364 [PMID: 35909808]
  26. Appl Res Qual Life. 2022;17(2):541-557 [PMID: 33552309]
  27. Psychiatry Res. 2020 May;287:112934 [PMID: 32229390]
  28. Rev Econ Househ. 2021;19(1):41-60 [PMID: 33456424]
  29. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Aug 27;18(17): [PMID: 34501622]
  30. Appl Res Qual Life. 2022;17(3):1389-1405 [PMID: 34367359]
  31. Brain Behav Immun. 2020 Jul;87:172-176 [PMID: 32405150]
  32. Lancet. 2020 Mar 14;395(10227):912-920 [PMID: 32112714]
  33. Psicothema. 2008 Nov;20(4):839-43 [PMID: 18940092]
  34. Psychol Med. 1979 Feb;9(1):139-45 [PMID: 424481]
  35. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 1997 Aug;32(6):327-31 [PMID: 9299926]
  36. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2004 Nov 11;2:63 [PMID: 15538951]
  37. Health Econ. 2017 Dec;26(12):1844-1861 [PMID: 28497638]
  38. J Glob Health. 2020 Dec;10(2):020505 [PMID: 33110588]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0womenCOVID-19transitionsgreatercomparedrestrictionsmeasurespandemicpsychologicalwell-beingunemploymentduenegativeGendereffectsmenareasLabourSpring2020greatnumbercountriesintroduceddifferentrestrictiveordercopearticleexamineslabourmarketindividualsbroughteffectfactpossibledistinguishbeganresultinglockdownsworthhighlightingEvidenceprovidedshowinglockdownimpactfurloughsteleworkingdifferencesconfirmexperiencedadverseSpecificallyworkinghomeexhibitedfurloughprobablycombinationworkdisruptionincreasedfamilyobligationsFinallycontrarylivingrigorousshowreducedprobabilityworsePWBresidingwithoutfindingsuggestswillingsacrificefreedommovementlongprotectat-riskrelativesPsychologicalWell-BeingLockdown:MarketImplicationssituationMentalhealthWell-being

Similar Articles

Cited By (2)