ABSTRACT
The COVID-19 pandemic presented a teachable moment to empower citizens to assess and apply information to protect their health by promoting critical health literacy. Most Americans took preventive measures, suggesting some overall increase in critical health literacy around infectious disease. Simultaneously, however, a torrent of misinformation, disinformation and malinformation intentionally buried facts, sewed doubt and confusion, promoted lies and conspiracies, and undermined health authorities and institutions. The authors discuss how this ‘infodemic' rose from previously localized, unconnected anti-vaccination, anti-government, and anti-science groups galvanized by the pandemic. Prominent politicians seeking political gain lent the power of their offices to the movement, layering a ‘polidemic' onto the infodemic and overwhelming inconsistent public health messaging. Even those with strong health literacy skills were challenged. Millions were misled to over-confidently self-manage their risk, revealing the possibility and perils of empowerment in the absence of critical health literacy skills – negative empowerment. The roots of resistance to the government response to COVID-19, and conditions that fostered its influence are examined, followed by recommendations to position health literacy scholars and practitioners to better meet communication challenges and opportunities in future crises. [ FROM AUTHOR] Copyright of Information Services & Use is the property of IOS Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full . (Copyright applies to all s.)
ABSTRACT
Introduction: The study examined age-related differences between young and older adults' emotional and psychological experience as well as cognitive functioning throughout different phases of the COVID-19 pandemic in Italy. Materials and Methods: Participants were interviewed by phone when confined at home during the national lockdown (T1-May 2020; N = 138 young adults; N = 119 older adults) and after the first wave of contagions, when restrictions were discarded (T2-September 2020; N = 52 young adults; N = 59 older adults). A sub-sample also participated in a third assessment (T3-December 2020). Participants completed questionnaires assessing their emotional and psychological functioning (i.e., positive and negative affect, perceived social and emotional loneliness, resilience) along with memory tasks (Backward Digit Span task and words list recall). Results: Although individuals reported less positive and more negative emotions during the lockdown than at T2, results showed that older adults displayed overall fewer negative emotions and greater resilience than young adults. The latter were those who reported feeling more emotionally lonely when compared to their older counterpart during the lockdown than afterward. Older adults' advantage in emotional and psychological functioning was also confirmed 7 months after the national lockdown. Only age-related differences in favor of young adults for the memory tasks were found. The measures of interest were also susceptible to mood and/or concerns of COVID-19 effects. Discussion: These findings further highlight the age-related advantage of older adults managing the emotional and psychological experience even when facing an unexpected, prolonged, and unpredictable, stressful life event such as the COVID-19 pandemic.
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: The present pilot study examined to what extent the COVID-19 lockdown affected the behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) in people with dementia and worsened their family caregivers' distress. The associations between changes in the BPSD of relatives with dementia (RwD) and in their caregivers' distress, and sense of social and emotional loneliness, and resilience were also investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-five caregivers of RwD attending formal healthcare services before the COVID-19 lockdown volunteered for the study, and were interviewed by phone during the lockdown. Caregivers completed the NeuroPsychiatric Inventory (NPI) to assess their care recipients' BPSD and their own distress, and two questionnaires assessing their social and emotional loneliness, and their resilience. RESULTS: No clear changes emerged in either the BPSD of the RwD or the caregivers' distress during lockdown compared with before the pandemic. Caregivers reporting more frequent and severe BPSD in their RwD before the lockdown scored higher on emotional loneliness. Those reporting more frequent and severe BPSD under lockdown, especially men and those taking care of RwD with more advanced dementia, scored higher on both social and emotional loneliness. A significant negative correlation also emerged between caregivers' resilience and changes in their level of distress due to the lockdown, with female caregivers reporting greater resilience. DISCUSSION: Our findings offer preliminary insight on the effects of loneliness and resilience, and on the influence of individual characteristics on the experience and consequences of informal caregiving for RwD in times of restrictions imposed by a pandemic.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: This study examined changes due to COVID-19 lockdown in young and older adults' self-reported sleep quality and dysfunctional sleep-related beliefs. METHODS: Adults involved in studies prior to the pandemic were contacted during the COVID-19 lockdown. Seventeen young adults (age range: 18-35 years) and 21 older adults (age range: 65-90 years) agreed to participate. Participants were interviewed by phone (between 27th April and 4th May, 2020) to complete the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and the Dysfunctional Beliefs About Sleep (DBAS) questionnaire they had been administered before the pandemic. RESULTS: In terms of mean changes, the results showed null effect sizes for changes in self-reported sleep quality for both age groups. In young adults, a medium effect size emerged for changes in sleep latency, which increased during lockdown. No changes in any of the self-reported sleep quality dimensions emerged in older adults. In both age groups, the effect sizes for changes in dysfunctional sleep-related beliefs were negligible. In older adults, however, changes in self-reported sleep quality were largely associated with changes in dysfunctional sleep-related beliefs. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that self-reported sleep quality and dysfunctional sleep-related beliefs were not affected by the COVID-19 lockdown in young or older adults. They also suggest that it might be useful to consider changes in dysfunctional sleep-related beliefs to better capture the impact of stressful events (such as a period of quarantine) on sleep quality, especially where older adults are concerned.