COVID-19 threat and negative attitudes toward outgroup and ingroup others: A multilevel analysis with coarsened exact matching

Using two waves of nationally representative data, the present study shows the extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated anti-outgroup and anti-ingroup attitudes among South Korean adults. To that end, in a quasi-experimental setting, it exploits the survey interview timing as a source of exogenous variation to investigate the causal influence of the COVID-19 pandemic. Data imbalance is initially corrected using the coarsened exact matching procedure. Then, a series of multilevel models, with data on 10,454 subjects nested in 34 wave–region units, are estimated with additional covariate adjustment to improve estimate precision. Results show that, first, those who are more relatively deprived became less inclined to support the granting of citizenship status to foreigners since the coronavirus outbreak. Second, the same trend was found among individuals who are more dissatisfied with the country's overall economic condition. Third, in the wake of the global health crisis, Korean natives became less willing to pay additional taxes to support conational others who are economically underprivileged.

Political Trust, Mental Health, and the Coronavirus Pandemic: A Cross-National Study.

OBJECTIVES: We investigate whether older adults who place greater trust in their political leadership fare better in terms of mental wellbeing during the COVID-19 pandemic. We also test if and how the trust-wellbeing relationship varies across individual- and country-level moderators. METHODS: Based on cross-national data consisting of over 13,000 older adults in 66 countries, we estimate a series of multilevel models. RESULTS: Within countries, political trust is significantly negatively associated with depressive symptoms. And this association is stronger for those who are subjectively less healthy. Between countries, the trust-depression link at the individual level is stronger in more "fragile" states. These findings are robust to a host of confounders including the experienced level of anxiety stemming from COVID-19. DISCUSSION: During the novel coronavirus pandemic, political trust provides a significant mental health buffer for older adults. This protective role varies partly as a function of individual and contextual vulnerability.

Examining the Complex (Curvilinear and Contingent) Associations between Social Distancing Compliance and Subjective Health during a Global Health Crisis.

OBJECTIVES: This study investigated a potential curvilinear link between social distancing behavior and subjective health in later life. It also evaluated whether food insecurity and community social capital moderated the focal relationship. METHODS: Data were drawn from three waves of the COVID Impact Survey (N = 19,234). Mixed-effects models were fitted. RESULTS: Social distancing has a non-monotonic (U-shaped) relationship with subjective health, i.e., individuals with low and high levels of social distancing show relatively better health. Moreover, the negative linear relationship between social distancing and health is weaker among people suffering from food insecurity as well as those living in communities with lower stocks of social capital. DISCUSSION: This study sheds new light on the health implications of social distancing during the pandemic. Our findings dovetail with the steeling hypothesis, i.e., that social distancing is less harmful for U.S. older adults exposed to prior stressful or vulnerable conditions.

Psychological Distress and Political Distrust during a Global Health Crisis: Evidence from a Cross-National Survey

In addition to causing unprecedented mortality and wreaking havoc on national economies, the coronavirus disease pandemic has significantly undermined public mental health. How has the pandemic-induced psychological and mental distress contributed to declining political trust cross-nationally? Using a large-scale global survey comprising respondents from Africa, Americas, Asia, Middle East, and Europe, the present study addresses this question. Results from multilevel analysis show that across dozens of low- as well as high-income countries, pandemic distress experienced by individuals is negatively linked with political trust (public confidence in the government?s capacity and transparency). Moreover, this relationship is conditional on alternative ?performance measures? or contextual moderators: Human Development Index, Corruption Perceptions Index, and Fragile States Index. Specifically, the magnitude of the association between pandemic distress and political distrust increases in countries that are less economically developed, perceived to be more corrupt, and politically more fragile or vulnerable.

Individual and community social capital, mobility restrictions, and psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic: a multilevel analysis of a representative US survey.

This paper explores the role of social capital in mitigating the mental health harms of social/mobility restrictions instigated in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. We test whether: (a) social capital continued to predict lower mental distress during the pandemic; and (b) whether social capital buffered (moderated) the harm of social/mobility restrictions on psychological distress. In addition, we test the level at which social capital mitigation effects operated, i.e., at the individual- and/or contextual-level. To do so, we apply multilevel models to three waves of the COVID-19 Household Impact Survey consisting of probability samples of U.S. adults (with the average interview completion rate of 93%). In a novel approach, we explore two modes of capturing contextual social capital: aggregated individual-level survey responses and independently measured social capital indices (SCIs). Findings show that at the individual level social capital was associated with lower psychological distress. It also buffered the harm of restrictions: increasing restrictions had a weaker effect on distress among individuals interacting with neighbors more frequently. Importantly, mitigating processes of contextual social capital appeared conditional on how it was measured. Using aggregated survey responses, contextual social capital had no direct effect on distress but exerted an additional buffering role: individuals in counties with higher average neighbor-interaction experienced a weaker impact of restrictions. Using the independent SCI measures, we found county social capital reduced distress. However, its negative effect on distress becomes increasingly weaker the more restrictions an individual reported: where individuals reported lower restrictions, higher county SCI reduced distress; however, where individuals reported higher restrictions, higher county SCI had no effect on distress. More restrictive environments thus cut individuals off from the benefits of higher county social capital as measured using the SCI.

Income inequality, emotional anxiety, and self-rated health in times of the coronavirus pandemic: Evidence from a cross-national survey.

Using a unique cross-national dataset, we explore the interplay between household income, coronavirus-induced anxiety, national context, and self-rated health (SRH) across dozens of countries among more than 13,500 older adults. Based on multilevel models, we find that the emotional anxiety due to COVID-19 negatively predicts SRH, net of country random effects. And holding constant coronavirus-related stress and background controls at both individual and contextual (country) levels, higher income is positively associated with better subjective health. We also report cross-level interactions. The income-health gradient is stronger in countries with higher numbers of coronavirus-related deaths and, to lesser extent, infected cases. That is, health benefits of higher income are more pronounced in countries hit harder by the pandemic. Our study shows that globally income inequality exacerbates the unequal health consequences of COVID-19 for older segments of the population especially vulnerable to the disease.

Social distancing attitudes, national context, and health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic: Findings from a global survey.

This study analyzes global health consequences of the new coronavirus disease by focusing on the roles of normative beliefs on social distancing and country-level factors, i.e., mobility estimate and globalization index. We fitted mixed effects models to examine the associations between two outcome measures, depression and self-rated health, and their multilevel determinants using a subset of Global Behaviors and Perceptions in the COVID-19 Pandemic, an online survey consisting of more than 100,000 participants from 67 nations. Results show that both personal beliefs and general beliefs significantly predict depression and poor health. There is also a contextual effect of globalization on depression. In addition, the relationship between general beliefs and depression is stronger in countries with lower rates of mobility. With respect to poor health, the effect of general beliefs similarly varies inversely with the level of globalization. Our study indicates that one's own beliefs and the perception of others' regarding social distancing, along with contextual factors (measures of mobility and globalization), critically shape mental and physical health. Subjective and objective factors should be considered, in other words, in properly understanding the differential impact of COVID-19 across the world.

Social Isolation and Psychological Distress During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Cross-National Analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic resulted in social isolation globally, creating heightened levels of stress and anxiety. This study investigates the link between social isolation and mental well-being in later life, and how it varies across countries. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We draw on a subset of older adults from Global Behaviors and Perceptions in the COVID-19 Pandemic, a unique global online survey of 13,660 participants from 62 countries. We use mixed-effects models to analyze the data. RESULTS: Social isolation (distancing) significantly predicts poor mental health operationalized as coronavirus-induced distress (p < .01). At the aggregate level, average distress varies positively across countries with higher numbers of coronavirus-related deaths (p < .10) and more fragile state capacity (p < .05), while varying negatively across those with more stringent anticoronavirus policies (p < .05). Finally, we report several cross-level interactions between social isolation and the total number of deaths (p = .025), policy stringency (p = .065), state fragility (p = .061), and globalization index (p = .071). DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS: Our study shows that a proper understanding of the impact of COVID-19 on the mental well-being of older adults should consider the moderating role of national context.

COVID-19 restrictions and mental distress among American adults: evidence from Corona Impact Survey (W1 and W2).

BACKGROUND: The present study examines the impact of coronavirus-related restrictions on mental health among American adults, and how this relationship varies as a function of time and two measures of vulnerability (preexisting physical symptoms and job insecurity). METHODS: We draw on data from two waves of Corona Impact Survey, which were fielded in late April and early of May 2020. Multilevel models were used to analyze the hierarchically nested data. RESULTS: Experiencing coronavirus disease-2019 restrictions significantly raise mental distress. This association is stronger for individuals with preexisting health conditions and those who worry about job prospects. These findings hold with the inclusion of region-wave covariates (number of deaths, wave dummy and aggregate measure of restrictions). Finally, there is a cross-level interaction: the restriction-distress connection is more pronounced in the second wave of data. CONCLUSIONS: Our research indicates that people who are more physically and/or financially vulnerable suffer more from the imposed restrictions, i.e. 'social isolation'. The mental health impact of coronavirus pandemic is not constant but conditional on the level of vulnerability.