Accumulation of economic hardship and health during the COVID-19 pandemic: Social causation or selection?

This study examines whether economic hardship during the COVID-19 pandemic is deleteriously associated with psychological distress and self-rated health. A social causation perspective suggests that exposure to economic hardship will harm well-being, but a social selection perspective suggests that the appearance of health effects of hardship during the pandemic are attributable to the increased risk of exposure to hardship associated with poor well-being at the start of the pandemic. We also propose a third perspective, economic selection, which suggests that economic hardship prior to the pandemic negatively affects health and increases risk of exposure to hardship during the pandemic; consequently, an association between health and economic hardship during the pandemic may be spurious, and entirely due to pre-existing levels of hardship. To test these competing perspectives, we use a longitudinal study based in Canada that began in late March of 2020 and followed respondents monthly in April, May, and June. Baseline psychological distress and self-rated health, as well as economic hardship prior to the pandemic, independently predict the accumulation of monthly periods of hardship from April to June. The accumulation of periods of hardship from April to June is deleteriously associated with psychological distress and self-rated health in June. Controls for prior economic hardship and baseline health weaken the association between accumulation of periods of hardship and psychological distress, while also eliminating the association between accumulation of hardship and self-rated health. These findings favor a social causation perspective for psychological distress and a social selection perspective for self-rated health, with less evidence found in support of economic selection. This study took place during the first months of the COVID-19 pandemic, though, and associations with self-rated health may have become more evident as hardship further wore on individual well-being over a longer period of time.

Labor market influences on Women's fertility decisions: Longitudinal evidence from Canada.

While fertility theories suggest that insecure labor market experiences encourage women to postpone having children, few have examined whether job insecurity perceptions influence fertility in the North American context-an omission we address in the current study. Findings from event history analyses of a panel dataset of Canadian workers (Canadian Work, Stress and Health Study) reveal that perceived job insecurity is salient for women's first birth decisions but not subsequent births. Further subgroup analyses show that the association between perceived job insecurity and likelihood of a first birth is limited to college-educated women and those in low unemployment labor market regions. Among women with less than a college degree and those in high-unemployment regions, the likelihood of a first birth does not vary by respondents' perceptions of insecurity. Results suggest a more nuanced relationship between insecure work and women's childbearing decisions than predicted by traditional pro-cyclical accounts of the economy-fertility association.

Insecure People in Insecure Places: The Influence of Regional Unemployment on Workers' Reactions to the Threat of Job Loss.

Social comparison theory predicts that unemployment should be less distressing when the experience is widely shared, but does this prediction extend beyond the unemployed to those who are at risk of job loss? Research demonstrates a link between aggregate unemployment and employed individuals' perceptions of job insecurity; however, less is known about whether the stress associated with these perceptions is shaped by others' unemployment experiences. We analyze a nationally representative sample of Canadian workers (Canadian Work, Stress, and Health study; N = 3,900) linked to census data and test whether regional unemployment influences the mental health consequences of job insecurity. Multilevel analyses provide more support for the social norm of insecurity hypothesis over the amplified threat hypothesis: the health penalties of job insecurity are weaker for individuals in high-unemployment regions. This contingency is partially explained by the ability of insecure workers in poor labor market contexts to retain psychological resources important for protecting mental health.

Boundary-spanning work demands and their consequences for guilt and psychological distress.

Using data from a national survey of working Americans (Work, Stress, and Health Survey; N = 1,042), the authors examine the associations between boundary-spanning work demands and self-reported feelings of guilt and distress. The authors document gender differences in the emotional and mental health consequences of boundary-spanning work demands, as indexed by the frequency of receiving work-related contact outside of normal work hours. Specifically, the authors observe that frequent work contact is associated with more feelings of guilt and distress among women only. Analyses also demonstrate that guilt accounts for the positive association between the frequency of work contact and distress among women. Statistical adjustments for levels of guilt reduce the positive association between frequent work contact and distress among women to nonsignificance. The findings underscore the importance of focusing on gender and emotions in work-family interface processes, as well as their implications for psychological health.