Exploring the effects of COVID-19 restrictions on wellbeing across different styles of lockdown

Abstract

Globally, everyday life has been restricted – varyingly – to control the COVID-19 pandemic. In January 2021, nationwide “lockdown” was enacted in Scotland with breaches punishable by law. Contrastingly, Japanese restrictions were managed prefecture-by-prefecture, with opportunities for travel and interaction, with citizens requested rather than required to conform. To explore these differential strategies’ impact, we conducted a transnational online survey of health behaviours and wellbeing. In February 2021, 138 Scottish and 139 Japanese participants provided demographic information, pandemic-induced health behaviour-change (i.e., alcohol consumption, diet, perceived sleep quality, physical activity), negative mood scores (NMS), and perceived isolation. Scottish participants’ health behaviours were characterised by change (typically negative), whereas Japanese participants’ behaviours were more-stable. However, Scots were more-likely than Japanese participants to have positively-changed their physical activity levels. Negative changes in perceived sleep quality and activity levels were associated with greater NMS; furthermore, negative changes in alcohol consumption, diet, sleep quality, and activity were associated with greater perceived isolation. Japanese participants reported greater NMS; there was no transnational difference in perceived isolation.

Mental, Physical, and Cognitive Wellbeing during the COVID-19 Pandemic: Data from Scotland and Japan

“…Restrictions in Japan, on the other hand, were mild and allowed for travel and social interaction, with citizens requested rather than required to conform. For more information on the nature of restrictions in the two countries before and during data collection, see Ingram et al (2022).…”

“…For example, the Study 1 data set includes data collected on alternative social activities carried out during the pandemic (e.g., online parties/quizzes, phone calls), and these could be associated with any of the outcome variables collected or other socio-demographic variables. Selected sociodemographic variables are considered in line with health behaviours and negative mood in Ingram et al (2020) and Ingram et al (2022). However, variables such as gender, changes to work status or COVID-19 infection could also be considered in relation to cognitive tasks.…”

“…The timeframe of data collection makes our study unique as we were able to assess effects very early in the time course of the pandemic. To compare the effects of differing styles of COVID-19 restrictions, the second study collected data on broadly the same factors from participants based in Scotland, UK, and in Japan during the lockdown conditions of spring 2021 (Ingram et al, 2022; see section 2 Methods for more information on differences between data collected in the first and second study).…”

“…As differing national approaches to limiting the spread of the virus emerged, we developed Study 2 -taking this opportunity to look cross-culturally at wellbeing in Scotland and Japan (Ingram et al, 2022). Those living in Scotland were subject to two highly restrictive, legally enforced, "lockdowns" (23 rd March to 28 th May 2020, and 5 th January to 2 nd April 2021).…”

Data on COVID-19-related Research Questions Spanning Diverse Disciplinary and National Contexts

“…Further data papers describe datasets that cover the consequences of COVID-19 restrictions for family life and the well-being of parents and children at a more general level (Reim et al, 2022), or that focus on specific behavioural consequences, such as parental behaviour with regard to infant nutrition and infant regulation (Reinelt et al, 2022). The datasets described in other papers address the effects of COVID-19 restrictions on health behaviours and mental well-being (Ingram et al, 2022); widely discussed interindividual factors such as the endorsement of these restrictions, (dis)trust in science, and conspiracy mentality (Schnepf & Groeben, 2022); and psychological correlates of beliefs in conspiracy theories (Hudecek et al, 2022). Edlund and Edlund (2023) further strengthen this area of research by contributing data from replication studies on the effects of empathy and conspiracy beliefs on preventive health behaviours (see discussion above on the dissemination of unqualified knowledge).…”