Using time-use diaries to track changing behavior across successive stages of COVID-19 social restrictions.

How did people change their behavior over the different phases of the UK COVID-19 restrictions, and how did these changes affect their risk of being exposed to infection? Time-use diary surveys are unique in providing a complete chronicle of daily behavior: 24-h continuous records of the populations' activities, their social context, and their location. We present results from four such surveys, collected in real time from representative UK samples, both before and at three points over the course of the current pandemic. Comparing across the four waves, we find evidence of substantial changes in the UK population's behavior relating to activities, locations, and social context. We assign different levels of risk to combinations of activities, locations, and copresence to compare risk-related behavior across successive "lockdowns." We find evidence that during the second lockdown (November 2020), there was an increase in high-risk behaviors relative to the first (starting March 2020). This increase is shown to be associated with more paid work time in the workplace. At a time when capacity is still limited both in respect of immunization and track-trace technology, governments must continue to rely on changes in people's daily behaviors to contain the spread of COVID-19 and similar viruses. Time-use diary information of this type, collected in real time across the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, can provide policy makers with information to assess and quantify changes in daily behaviors and the impact they are likely to have on overall behavioral-associated risks.

A new perspective from time use research on the effects of social restrictions on COVID-19 behavioral infection risk.

We present findings from three waves of a population-representative, UK time-use diary survey conducted both pre- and in real time during full 'lockdown', and again following the easing of social restrictions. We used an innovative online diary instrument that has proved both reliable and quick-to-field. Combining diary information on activity, location, and co-presence to estimate infection risks associated with daily behavior, we show clear changes in risk-associated behavior between the pre, full-lockdown and post full-lockdown periods. We document a shift from more to less risky daily behavior patterns (combinations of activity/location/co-presence categories) between the pre-pandemic pattern and full lockdown in May/June 2020, followed by a reversion (although not a complete reversal) of those patterns in August 2020 following the end of the first lockdown. Because, in general, a populations' time use changes relatively slowly, the behavioral changes revealed may be interpreted as a consequence of the UK COVID-19 lockdown social restrictions and their subsequent relaxation.

Improving Stylised Working Time Estimates with Time Diary Data: A Multi Study Assessment for the UK.

Accurate working time estimates represent an important component of the statistical toolbox used for economics forecasting and policy-making. The relatively good availability of such estimates may sometimes induce researchers to take them for granted and see their reliability as largely unproblematic. There is however a growing body of evidence showing that measurement errors may affect their robustness and quality, especially as far as specific but policy relevant subgroups of the population such as part-time or atypical workers are concerned. Against this background, the goal of this paper is to investigate the reliability of paid weekly working-time measurement instruments commonly available in a key UK social survey, the Labour Force Survey. It focuses on the discrepancies between estimates obtained by self-assessed/aggregated instruments-also known as stylised-and those recorded using time diaries which have been found more truthful to the time spent working in ones paid job(s). It is also to explore ways to improve the reliability of stylised estimates in datasets for which no time diary instruments are available, contrasting those where 'usual' and 'actual' hours of work are recorded. It does so by creating calibration weights based on the Work Schedule recorded in the 2000 and 2015 UK Time Use Surveys and using them to up/down scale stylised estimates in the 2000 and 2015 UK Labour Force Survey using statistical matching. Such techniques could enable significant improvements of measurement errors in large scale social surveys at a minimal cost.

Well-Being During Recession in the UK.

This article explores the impact of the recent recession on the well-being of the UK working age population by comparing two measures of well-being. One is a measure of evaluative subjective well-being, a measure which previous research has shown to be stable in the UK throughout the economic crisis. The second is a different but complementary measure of positive psychological health. By comparing the trajectories of these two measures using the same sample and modelling techniques the analysis examines how different measures may lead to different interpretations. Six waves of longitudinal data from Understanding Society and the British Household Panel Survey (BHPS) are used. Latent curve models are used to analyse change over time. The results corroborate previous research showing that people's evaluative subjective well-being remained relatively stable, on average, throughout the economic crisis. In contrast, the positive psychological health measure was found to decline significantly during the recession period. The paper highlights that what we measure matters. Using single measures as summaries of well-being masks the complexity of the term, and given their appeal in the social policy arena, single measures of well-being can be seen as problematic in some scenarios.

Health trajectories in regeneration areas in England: the impact of the New Deal for Communities intervention.

BACKGROUND: A large body of evidence documents the adverse relationship between concentrated deprivation and health. Among the evaluations of regeneration initiatives to tackle these spatial inequalities, few have traced the trajectories of individuals over time and fewer still have employed counterfactual comparison. We investigate the impact of one such initiative in England, the New Deal for Communities (NDC), which ran from 1999 to 2011, on socioeconomic inequalities in health trajectories. METHODS: Latent Growth Curve modelling of within-person changes in self-rated health, mental health and life satisfaction between 2002 and 2008 of an analytical cohort of residents of 39 disadvantaged areas of England in which the NDC was implemented, compared with residents of comparator, non-intervention areas, focusing on: (1) whether differences over time in outcomes can be detected between NDC and comparator areas and (2) whether interventions may have altered socioeconomic differences in outcomes. RESULTS: No evidence was found for an overall improvement in the three outcomes, or for significant differences in changes in health between respondents in NDC versus comparator areas. However, we found a weakly significant gap in life satisfaction and mental health between high and low socioeconomic status individuals in comparator areas which widened over time to a greater extent than in NDC areas. Change over time in the three outcomes was non-linear: individual improvements among NDC residents were largest before 2006. CONCLUSIONS: There is limited evidence that the NDC moderated the impact of socioeconomic factors on mental health and life satisfaction trajectories. Furthermore, any NDC impact was strongest in the first 6 years of the programmes.

Evaluating the health inequalities impact of area-based initiatives across the socioeconomic spectrum: a controlled intervention study of the New Deal for Communities, 2002-2008.

BACKGROUND: Previous evaluations of area-based initiatives have not compared intervention areas with the full range of areas from top to bottom of the social spectrum to evaluate their health inequalities impact. SETTING: Deprived areas subject to the New Deal for Communities (NDC) intervention, local deprivation-matched comparator areas, and areas drawn from across the socioeconomic spectrum (representing high, medium and low deprivation) in England between 2002 and 2008. DATA: Secondary analysis of biannual repeat cross-sectional surveys collected for the NDC National Evaluation Team and the Health Survey for England (HSE). METHODS: Following data harmonisation, baseline and time trends in six health and social determinants of health outcomes were compared. Individual-level data were modelled using regression to adjust for age, sex, ethnic and socioeconomic differences among respondents. RESULTS: Compared with respondents in HSE low deprivation areas, those in NDC intervention areas experienced a significantly steeper improvement in education, a trend towards a steeper improvement in self-rated health, and a significantly less steep reduction in smoking between 2002 and 2008. In HSE high deprivation areas, significantly less steep improvements in five out of six outcomes were seen compared with HSE low deprivation areas. CONCLUSIONS: Although unable to consider prior trends and previous initiatives, our findings provide cautious optimism that well-resourced and constructed area-based initiatives can reduce, or at least prevent the widening of, social inequalities for selected outcomes between the most and least deprived groups of areas.