Changes in retirement plans in the English older population during the COVID-19 pandemic: The roles of health factors and financial insecurity.

Over the course of 2020 and 2021, the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted lives globally. In the UK, unemployment rate continued to increase during and post-lockdown periods, and job security and financial wellbeing deteriorated. It is important to understand whether individual decisions related to retirement plans have changed systematically as a result of the pandemic, especially among older adults who experienced greater rates of pandemic unemployment. Using the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing, this article examines changes in retirement plans of older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic and estimates the impact of health and financial circumstances on these changes. In June/July 2020, 5% of 2095 participants reported planning earlier retirement, while 9% reported planning later retirement. We found that poor self-rated health and financial insecurity were associated with intentions to postpone retirement. Additional risk of later retirement associated with poor health was detected among those experiencing financial insecurity. In November/December 2020, 7% of 1845 participants reported planning earlier retirement, while 12% reported planning later retirement. We found that poor health was predictive of a lower relative risk of later retirement, while depressive symptomology and financial insecurity predicted a higher relative risk of later retirement. The findings imply a contextual role of health factors in, and a persistent influence of financial insecurity on, retirement planning in the older population.

Changes in Internet use patterns among older adults in England from before to after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic brought about an increased reliance on the Internet for various daily activities. Given the known digital divide, it is important to understand whether older adults changed their Internet use patterns, but current evidence is limited to cross-sectional studies. This study documents changes in frequency and types of Internet use among older adults from before to shortly after the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic (2018/2019 to June/July 2020), and the factors predicting regular use during these early days of the pandemic. Using data on 6,840 adults aged 50 + from the nationally representative English Longitudinal Study of Ageing, we apply longitudinal fixed-effects models to examine within-individual changes in Internet use behaviour. There was no change in the likelihood of daily Internet use between 2018/2019 and June/July 2020, despite the increased digitalisation of services over the pandemic. Daily use in June/July 2020 was negatively related to age, neighbourhood deprivation, and loneliness, and positively related to partnership status, education, employment, income, and organisation membership. Using the Internet for making calls and getting information about Government services increased, which was important given the social restrictions and overall uncertainty. However, Internet use for finding health-related information decreased. As the world moves towards digital alternatives post-pandemic, it is important to continually ensure older adults are not at risk of exclusion.

COVID-19 lockdowns and changes in loneliness among young people in the U.K.

RATIONALE: There has been growing concern that loneliness has increased throughout the COVID-19 lockdowns, and that the burden has fallen heavily on young people. This is important because loneliness is strongly linked to worse health outcomes. OBJECTIVE: We examine whether and how loneliness among young people changed during the pandemic across the different lockdown periods in 2020 and 2021. We also assess differences by gender, socioeconomic status, and economic activity before the COVID-19 outbreak. METHODS: We use nine waves of longitudinal data from the COVID-19 supplement of the UK Household Longitudinal Study (Understanding Society), collected between April 2020 and September 2021. We apply an individual fixed-effects event study design, which compares the loneliness reported by the same individual over lockdown transitions. We focus on loneliness reported by 1870 respondents aged between 16 and 24 years and compare it with pre-pandemic baselines. RESULTS: We find that the loneliness of young people tracked the extent of lockdown restrictions but had returned to baseline levels by September 2021. This loneliness response was more pronounced for females than males but similar for young people across higher and lower socioeconomic backgrounds. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that policy interventions aimed at increasing opportunities for in-person social interactions for young people in 'normal' times, might have some success in tackling loneliness, particularly for young females.

Internet use and psychological wellbeing among older adults in England: a difference-in-differences analysis over the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Longitudinal evidence on how Internet use affects the psychological wellbeing of older adults has been mixed. As policymakers invest in efforts to reduce the digital divide, it is important to have robust evidence on whether encouraging Internet use among older adults is beneficial, or potentially detrimental, to their wellbeing. METHODS: We observe depressive symptoms and loneliness of adults aged 50 + in the nationally representative English Longitudinal Study of Ageing, from before (2018/19) to during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic (June/July and November/December 2020). Our quasi-experimental difference-in-differences strategy compares within-individual wellbeing changes between older adults who desired to use the Internet more but experienced barriers including lack of skills, access, and equipment, with regular Internet users who did not desire to use the Internet more. To reduce selection bias, we match both groups on demographic and socioeconomic characteristics that are predictive of Internet use. We assume that in the absence of COVID-19 - a period of increased reliance on the Internet - the wellbeing trajectories of both groups would have followed a common trend. RESULTS: Compared with matched controls (N = 2983), participants reporting barriers to Internet use (N = 802) experienced a greater increase in the likelihood of depressive symptoms from before to during the pandemic, but not worse loneliness levels. This effect was stronger for women, those aged above 65 years, and those from lower-income households. CONCLUSIONS: Besides enabling access to digital services, efforts to ensure older adults continue to be engaged members of an increasingly digital society could deliver returns in terms of a buffer against psychological distress.

Who is resilient in a time of crisis? The importance of financial and non-financial resources.

Enhancing population resilience to adverse events is now a policy priority. Accordingly, there have been calls for more evidence on the determinants of resilience. We answer this call by identifying financial and non-financial resources associated with psychological resilience during the COVID-19 pandemic. Using longitudinal survey data, psychological resilience is measured by comparing distress reported pre-COVID-19 with distress reported during the outbreak and initial lockdown in April 2020. Methodologically, we compare differences in resilience and resources between people with identical gender, ethnicity, health, parenthood status, education, employment status, and region of residence (all measured pre-2020). We also provide estimates from within-household comparisons. Surprisingly, income, savings, and debt levels did not affect the likelihood of psychologically resilient outcomes. Cognitive ability, religiosity, and neighborhood social capital also had no protective effect. In contrast, we find robust evidence that non-cognitive skills, measured by self-efficacy, strongly protected against psychological distress. Self-efficacy also dampened the increase in distress caused by large earnings shocks. These findings support investments in non-cognitive skills that modify the damage-function from adverse events.