Youth and social cohesion in times of the COVID pandemic: Most negatively affected? Most resilient?

Introduction: The current article reports findings from three large representative survey studies in the German federal state of Baden-Württemberg. The studies are part of the Social Cohesion Radar research initiative of Bertelsmann Stiftung. Methods: The article explores the role of social cohesion in the relationship between COVID-based objective and subjective strain, on the one hand, and future optimism for the youth, citizens of active age, and the elderly. In particular, it focuses on the question whether the degree of social cohesion perceived by respondents moderates the relationship between strain and optimism in the different age groups. Results and discussion: Findings show that the impact of perceived social cohesion in people's life context has only modest effects on the relationship between strain and future optimism. Yet, the results show that having been affected by COVID in one way or the other leads to a small but persistent bounce-back effect. People affected by COVID tend to look more optimistic into the future than those who were not.

Reality bites: An analysis of corona deniers in Germany over time.

The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in unprecedented government interventions in many people's lives. Opposition to these measures was not only based on policy disagreements but for some founded in an outright denial of basic facts surrounding the pandemic, challenging social cohesion. Conspiracy beliefs have been prolific within various protest groups and require attention, as such attitudes have been shown to be associated with lower rule compliance. Several studies have shown that the characteristics linked to holding COVID-19 conspiracy beliefs are complex and manifold; however, those insights usually rest on cross-sectional studies only. We have less knowledge on whether these cross-sectional correlates also reveal which parts of the population have been newly convinced by conspiracy theories or have dropped their support for them as the pandemic evolved. Using a unique panel data set from Germany, this paper explores a wide range of characteristics and compares the insights gained from cross-sectional associations on the one hand and links to the ways in which people change their views on the other hand. The findings show that cross-sectional analyses miss out on nuanced differences between different groups of temporary and more consistent conspiracy supporters. Specifically, this paper identifies major differences in the profiles of people who have been denying COVID-19 consistently compared to those who changed their minds on the question and those who assessed the reality correctly throughout. In doing so, socio-political and perception-based dimensions are differentiated and distinctions between respondents from East and West Germany explored.

Effects of home confinement on mental health and lifestyle behaviours during the COVID-19 outbreak: insights from the ECLB-COVID19 multicentre study.

Although recognised as effective measures to curb the spread of the COVID-19 outbreak, social distancing and self-isolation have been suggested to generate a burden throughout the population. To provide scientific data to help identify risk factors for the psychosocial strain during the COVID-19 outbreak, an international cross-disciplinary online survey was circulated in April 2020. This report outlines the mental, emotional and behavioural consequences of COVID-19 home confinement. The ECLB-COVID19 electronic survey was designed by a steering group of multidisciplinary scientists, following a structured review of the literature. The survey was uploaded and shared on the Google online survey platform and was promoted by thirty-five research organizations from Europe, North Africa, Western Asia and the Americas. Questions were presented in a differential format with questions related to responses "before" and "during" the confinement period. 1047 replies (54% women) from Western Asia (36%), North Africa (40%), Europe (21%) and other continents (3%) were analysed. The COVID-19 home confinement evoked a negative effect on mental wellbeing and emotional status (P < 0.001; 0.43 ≤ d ≤ 0.65) with a greater proportion of individuals experiencing psychosocial and emotional disorders (+10% to +16.5%). These psychosocial tolls were associated with unhealthy lifestyle behaviours with a greater proportion of individuals experiencing (i) physical (+15.2%) and social (+71.2%) inactivity, (ii) poor sleep quality (+12.8%), (iii) unhealthy diet behaviours (+10%), and (iv) unemployment (6%). Conversely, participants demonstrated a greater use (+15%) of technology during the confinement period. These findings elucidate the risk of psychosocial strain during the COVID-19 home confinement period and provide a clear remit for the urgent implementation of technology-based intervention to foster an Active and Healthy Confinement Lifestyle AHCL).

COVID-19 Home Confinement Negatively Impacts Social Participation and Life Satisfaction: A Worldwide Multicenter Study.

Public health recommendations and governmental measures during the new coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic have enforced numerous restrictions on daily living including social distancing, isolation, and home confinement. While these measures are imperative to mitigate spreading of COVID-19, the impact of these restrictions on psychosocial health is undefined. Therefore, an international online survey was launched in April 2020 to elucidate the behavioral and lifestyle consequences of COVID-19 restrictions. This report presents the preliminary results from more than one thousand responders on social participation and life satisfaction. METHODS: Thirty-five research organizations from Europe, North-Africa, Western Asia, and the Americas promoted the survey through their networks to the general society, in 7 languages (English, German, French, Arabic, Spanish, Portuguese, and Slovenian). Questions were presented in a differential format with questions related to responses "before" and "during" confinement conditions. RESULTS: 1047 participations (54% women) from Asia (36%), Africa (40%), Europe (21%), and others (3%) were included in the analysis. Findings revealed psychosocial strain during the enforced COVID-19 home confinement. Large decreases (p < 0.001) in the amount of social activity through family (-58%), friends/neighbors (-44.9%), or entertainment (-46.7%) were triggered by the enforced confinement. These negative effects on social participation were also associated with lower life satisfaction (-30.5%) during the confinement period. Conversely, the social contact score through digital technologies significantly increased (p < 0.001) during the confinement period with more individuals (+24.8%) being socially connected through digital technology. CONCLUSION: These preliminary findings elucidate the risk of psychosocial strain during the early COVID-19 home confinement period in 2020. Therefore, in order to mitigate the negative psychosocial effects of home confinement, implementation of national strategies focused on promoting social inclusion through a technology-based solution is strongly suggested.

Happier together. Social cohesion and subjective well-being in Europe.

Despite mushrooming research on "social" determinants of subjective well-being (SWB), little is known as to whether social cohesion as a collective property is among the key societal conditions for human happiness. This article fills this gap in investigating the importance of living in a cohesive society for citizens' SWB. For 27 European Union countries, it combines the newly developed Bertelsmann Foundation's Cohesion Index with individual well-being data on life evaluation and psychological functioning as surveyed in the recent European Quality of Life Survey. The main results from multi-level analyses are as follows. First, Europeans are indeed happier and psychologically healthier in more cohesive societies. Second, all three core domains of cohesion increase individuals' SWB. Third, citizens in the more affluent part of Europe feel the positivity of social cohesion more consistently than those in the less affluent part. Finally, within countries, cohesion is good for the SWB of resource-rich and resource-poor groups alike. Our findings also shed new light on the ongoing debate on economic progress and quality of life: what makes citizenries of affluent societies happier is, in the first place, their capacity to create togetherness and solidarity among their members-in other words, cohesion.

Happiness inequality: Adding meaning to numbers - A reply to Veenhoven and Kalmijn.

In SSR 40 (3), we proposed two new measures for happiness inequality, which have spurred a debate. With this rebuttal we disprove the arguments of our critics and demonstrate that our recommended measure, the percent-maximum standard deviation, is a valuable tool for cross-national comparative research.