Researching children and disasters: What's different in pandemic times?

The repercussions of the global COVID-19 pandemic are far-reaching and extend to the ways in which scholars conduct disaster research. Research on children and disasters is no exception. Focusing on methodologies, this paper explores the methodological constraints and innovations of studying children during the current crisis, and the implications for post-pandemic research on children and disasters. We begin by reviewing research methodologies to study children and disasters, drawing upon scholarly and grey literature as well as on our own research project on the pandemic experiences of children, adolescents, and older adults. We then discuss how these research approaches, tools, and spaces have changed during the pandemic. Methodological adaptation and innovation are necessary because traditional data collection methods are largely not feasible during the current pandemic;for example, many researchers cannot travel to the disaster site, hold in-person focus groups, interview children and their families face-to-face, or conduct extensive participant observation in places people would usually frequent. We pay particular attention to research ethics issues, including the challenges of navigating the research design process when children are involved. We contend that the massive adoption of online methods during the COVID-19 pandemic is laying the foundation for a seventh wave of research on children and disasters characterized by the integration of in-person and virtual worlds, and of in-person and virtual research methods. Rather than initiating this transition to a hybrid or blended model, the pandemic is accelerating the transition, and compelling more of the research community to engage than might have otherwise. The "bricolage" of methods originating in both in-person and virtual fields, adapted in various ways for both in-person and virtual fields, is better attuned to the spaces where children live their lives, and the ways in which they live their lives. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

COVID-19 stigmatization after the development of effective vaccines: Vaccination behavior, attitudes, and news sources.

OBJECTIVE: To compare COVID-19 stigmatization at two pandemic time points (1) August 2020-during lockdowns and prior to vaccine rollout, and (2) May 2021-during vaccine rollout, when approximately half of U.S. adults were vaccinated. METHODS: Comparison of COVID19-related stigmatization and associated factors in two national internet surveys conducted in August 2020 (N = 517) and May 2021 (N = 812). Factors associated with endorsing stigmatization were identified using regression analysis. The main outcomes included endorsement of stigmatization and behavioral restrictions towards persons with COVID-19 and towards persons of Chinese descent. A previously developed "stigmatizing attitudes and behavioral restrictions" scale was adapted to measure the intersection of negative attitudes toward COVID-19 disease and negative attitudes toward persons of Chinese descent. RESULTS: COVID-19 related stigmatization declined significantly from August 2020 to May 2021. Many factors were associated with stigmatizing in both surveys: full time employment, Black race, Hispanic ethnicity, worry about contracting COVID-19, probable depression, and Fox News and social media as sources of information (all positively associated), and self-assessed knowledge about COVID-19, contact with Chinese individuals, and publicly funded news as sources (all negatively associated). Positive attitudes toward vaccination were associated with stigmatization. CONCLUSIONS: COVID-19 related stigmatization reduced substantially over these two points in the pandemic, with many continuities in the factors associated with stigmatizing. Despite the reduction in stigmatizing, however, some stigmatizing attitudes for both COVID-19 and Chinese individuals remained.

Rural/urban differences in mental health and social well-being among older US adults in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVES: This study seeks to identify differences in mental health and social well-being during the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic among older adults by rural/urban location. METHODS: We use data from the COVID-19 Coping Study, a nation-wide online study of U.S. adults aged 55 and older (n = 6,873) fielded during April-May, 2020. We investigated rural/urban differences in mental health (depressive symptoms and anxiety symptoms) and social well-being (loneliness and social isolation); concern about COVID-19; and types of social participation (e.g. phone/video calls, visits). We also used multivariable logistic regression models to assess the relationship of rurality with mental health, adjusting for socio-demographic correlates, COVID-19 history, and COVID-19 concern. RESULTS: We found similar prevalence of mental health and social well-being outcomes for rural and urban respondents. Rural respondents reported lower concern about COVID-19 and more frequent use of social media than urban respondents. CONCLUSION: Mental health and social well-being did not differ by rural/urban location in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, rural residents reported less concern about COVID-19 and more use of social media, potentially leading to greater risk of illness from the pandemic in later months.

Anti-Vaccine Attitudes among Adults in the U.S. during the COVID-19 Pandemic after Vaccine Rollout.

Even though vaccination is the most effective measure against COVID-19 infections, vaccine rollout efforts have been hampered by growing anti-vaccine attitudes. Based on current knowledge, we identified three domains (beliefs, discrimination, and news) as our correlates of primary interest to examine the association with anti-vaccine attitudes. This is one of the first studies to examine key correlates of anti-vaccine attitudes during the critical early stages of vaccine implementation in the United States. An online survey was administered in May 2021 to a non-representative, nationally based sample of adults (N = 789). Using multivariable logistic regression analysis, we found that individuals who expressed worry about COVID-19 (OR = 0.34, 95% CI 0.21, 0.55) and had greater knowledge of COVID-19 (OR = 0.50, 95% CI 0.25, 0.99) were less likely to hold anti-vaccine attitudes. Conversely, individuals who held stigmatizing views of COVID-19 (OR = 2.47, 95% CI 1.53, 3.99), had experienced racial discrimination (OR = 2.14, 95% CI 1.25, 3.67) and discrimination related to COVID-19 (OR = 2.84, 95% CI 1.54, 5.24), and who had been watching Fox News (OR = 3.95, 95% CI 2.61, 5.97) were more likely to hold anti-vaccine attitudes. These findings suggest COVID-19 beliefs, experiences of discrimination, and news sources should be considered when designing targeted approaches to address the anti-vaccine movement.

Associations Between COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy and Socio-Spatial Factors in NYC Transit Workers 50 Years and Older.

This analysis investigates how age, race/ethnicity, and geographic location contributed to vaccine hesitancy in a sample of 645 New York City (NYC) Transport Workers Union (TWU), Local 100 members surveyed in August 2020. Union members ages 50+ were 46% less likely to be vaccine hesitant than their younger counterparts (OR 0.64; 95% CI 0.42, 0.97). Non-Whites (OR 3.95; 95% 2.44, 6.39) and those who did not report their race (OR 3.10; 95% CI 1.87, 5.12) were significantly more likely to be vaccine hesitant than Whites. Those who were not concerned about contracting COVID-19 in the community had 1.83 greater odds (95% CI 1.12, 2.98) of being vaccine hesitant than those who were concerned. Older respondents tended to reside in Queens while vaccine hesitant and non-White respondents were clustered in Brooklyn. General trends observed in COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy persist in a population of high risk, non-healthcare essential workers.

Aging in Place Since the COVID-19 Pandemic Onset: A Qualitative Study of Neighborhood Engagement

The COVID-19 pandemic may fundamentally change neighborhood environments and ways of aging in place. This research aimed to investigate perceptions of and engagement in neighborhoods since the pandemic onset among online survey respondents of the COVID-19 Coping Study. We analyzed a random stratified sample of 500 open-ended responses collected July-September 2020 with quotas for age, gender, race/ethnicity, and education to match the US population aged 55+. Qualitative thematic analysis identified both increased and decreased local activity and varying levels of social interaction, support, and civic engagement. Community characteristics including age structure, socioeconomic diversity, density, housing patterns, weather, and social infrastructure were related to neighborhood perceptions. These interacted with personal characteristics such as duration of residence, living arrangements, family closeness, health status, and preferred lifestyle. Results highlight coping strategies among aging adults and their neighbors, sources of individual and community vulnerability, and opportunities to strengthen social infrastructure and resiliency within neighborhoods.

Loneliness and Social Connectedness Among Rural Older Adults Since the COVID-19 Pandemic Onset

Rural areas have a higher proportion of older adults aging in place. Rural areas also face structural barriers to supporting social connectedness among older adults, including transportation barriers, greater geographic distances, and access to technological connectivity. This research aims to discuss rural-specific risks of loneliness and social isolation among older adults, as well as rural/urban differences in loneliness and social isolation among older adults using the national COVID-19 Coping Study. Cross-sectional bivariate analyses highlight rural/urban differences in social activities during the pandemic. For example, rural older adults were more likely to use social media daily, compared with urban older adults (67% vs. 61%, p<0.05), but were less likely to have phone or video calls with others daily (21% vs. 26%, p<0.001). We will also share results of differences within rural older adults in loneliness, isolation, and social activities by socio-demographic characteristics in order to design targeted interventions to improve connectedness.

Aging in Place During a Pandemic: Neighborhood Engagement and Environments Since the COVID-19 Pandemic Onset.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic may fundamentally change neighborhood environments and ways of aging in place. This research aimed to investigate perceptions of and engagement in neighborhoods since the pandemic onset among aging Americans. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Data were from the COVID-19 Coping Study, a longitudinal cohort study of health and well-being of U.S. adults aged 55 years or older during the COVID-19 pandemic. In the present analysis, we conducted a qualitative thematic analysis of responses to an open-ended survey question about how respondents felt that COVID-19 has affected their neighborhood and relationships with neighbors. The survey data were collected June-September 2020 and analyzed for a random-stratified subsample of 1,000 study participants. Sampling quotas for age, gender, race/ethnicity, and education aimed to match the U.S. population aged 55 years or older (average age: 67.7 years). RESULTS: We identified 4 overarching themes: altered neighborly social interactions, support levels, and community environments; and no observed changes. Geographic factors that affected neighborhood engagement included age structure, sociopolitical diversity, urbanicity/rurality, and walkability; while individual factors included age, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, political orientation, health status, duration of residence, lifestyle, and personality. DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: The results highlight resilience among aging adults and their neighbors, sources of individual and community vulnerability, and opportunities to strengthen social infrastructure to support aging in place since the pandemic onset.

Behavioral Correlates of COVID-19 Worry: Stigma, Knowledge, and News Source.

Non-adherence to COVID-19 guidelines may be attributable to low levels of worry. This study assessed whether endorsing COVID-19-stigmatizing restrictions, COVID-19 knowledge, and preferred news source were associated with being 'very worried' versus 'not at all' or 'somewhat' worried about contracting COVID-19. Survey data were collected in July-August 2020 from N = 547 New York State (NYS) and N = 504 national Amazon MTurk workers. Respondents who endorsed COVID-19 stigmatizing restrictions (NYS OR 1.96; 95% CI 1.31, 2.92; national OR 1.80; 95% CI 1.06, 3.08) and consumed commercial news (NYS OR 1.89; 95% CI 1.21, 2.96; national OR 1.93; 95% CI 1.24, 3.00) were more likely to be very worried. National respondents who consumed The New York Times (OR 1.52; 95% CI 1.00, 2.29) were more likely to be very worried, while those with little knowledge (OR 0.24; 95% CI 0.13, 0.43) were less likely to be very worried. NYS (OR 2.66; 95% CI 1.77, 4.00) and national (OR 3.17; 95% CI 1.95, 5.16) respondents with probable depression were also more likely to be very worried. These characteristics can help identify those requiring intervention to maximize perceived threat to COVID-19 and encourage uptake of protective behaviors while protecting psychological wellbeing.

Anticipated mental health consequences of COVID-19 in a nationally-representative sample: Context, coverage, and economic consequences.

The COVID-19 pandemic will have long-term consequences due to social and economic disruption. This study aimed to understand the contextual, media, and economic factors associated with anticipated mental health consequences from the COVID-19 pandemic among Americans. A nationally representative survey of 1001 respondents was conducted in April 2020. Chi-square tests and logistic regressions examined anticipated emotional or psychological effects on respondents or members of their households should social distancing measures continue. Specific analyses focused on: 1) COVID-19 experience - knowing someone or being infected; living in a state with a high death rate; or state social distancing policies; 2) media exposure - source of coronavirus information and time spent on coronavirus news; and 3) economics - current economic effects; and anticipated long-term financial effects. 41% of respondents anticipated mental health consequences. Living in a state with a greater COVID-19 death rate (OR 1.73; 95% CI 1.10, 2.72) and anticipating long-term financial difficulties (OR 2.98; 95% CI 1.93, 4.60) were both associated with greater likelihood of anticipated mental health consequences. Those whose primary news source was television, as opposed to print or online, were almost 50% less likely to anticipate mental health challenges (OR 0.52 CI 0.33, 0.81), while those who reported spending two or more hours daily on COVID-19 news were 90% more likely (OR 1.90; 95% CI 1.27, 2.85). Aspects of community health, media consumption, and economic impacts influence anticipated poor mental health from the COVID-19 pandemic, suggesting each domain is relevant to interventions to address the consequences.