Home working and social and mental wellbeing at different stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK: Evidence from 7 longitudinal population surveys.

BACKGROUND: Home working has increased since the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic's onset with concerns that it may have adverse health implications. We assessed the association between home working and social and mental wellbeing among the employed population aged 16 to 66 through harmonised analyses of 7 UK longitudinal studies. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We estimated associations between home working and measures of psychological distress, low life satisfaction, poor self-rated health, low social contact, and loneliness across 3 different stages of the pandemic (T1 = April to June 2020 -first lockdown, T2 = July to October 2020 -eased restrictions, T3 = November 2020 to March 2021 -second lockdown) using modified Poisson regression and meta-analyses to pool results across studies. We successively adjusted the model for sociodemographic characteristics (e.g., age, sex), job characteristics (e.g., sector of activity, pre-pandemic home working propensities), and pre-pandemic health. Among respectively 10,367, 11,585, and 12,179 participants at T1, T2, and T3, we found higher rates of home working at T1 and T3 compared with T2, reflecting lockdown periods. Home working was not associated with psychological distress at T1 (RR = 0.92, 95% CI = 0.79 to 1.08) or T2 (RR = 0.99, 95% CI = 0.88 to 1.11), but a detrimental association was found with psychological distress at T3 (RR = 1.17, 95% CI = 1.05 to 1.30). Study limitations include the fact that pre-pandemic home working propensities were derived from external sources, no information was collected on home working dosage and possible reverse association between change in wellbeing and home working likelihood. CONCLUSIONS: No clear evidence of an association between home working and mental wellbeing was found, apart from greater risk of psychological distress during the second lockdown, but differences across subgroups (e.g., by sex or level of education) may exist. Longer term shifts to home working might not have adverse impacts on population wellbeing in the absence of pandemic restrictions but further monitoring of health inequalities is required.

Characterising patterns of COVID-19 and long COVID symptoms: evidence from nine UK longitudinal studies.

Multiple studies across global populations have established the primary symptoms characterising Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) and long COVID. However, as symptoms may also occur in the absence of COVID-19, a lack of appropriate controls has often meant that specificity of symptoms to acute COVID-19 or long COVID, and the extent and length of time for which they are elevated after COVID-19, could not be examined. We analysed individual symptom prevalences and characterised patterns of COVID-19 and long COVID symptoms across nine UK longitudinal studies, totalling over 42,000 participants. Conducting latent class analyses separately in three groups ('no COVID-19', 'COVID-19 in last 12 weeks', 'COVID-19 > 12 weeks ago'), the data did not support the presence of more than two distinct symptom patterns, representing high and low symptom burden, in each group. Comparing the high symptom burden classes between the 'COVID-19 in last 12 weeks' and 'no COVID-19' groups we identified symptoms characteristic of acute COVID-19, including loss of taste and smell, fatigue, cough, shortness of breath and muscle pains or aches. Comparing the high symptom burden classes between the 'COVID-19 > 12 weeks ago' and 'no COVID-19' groups we identified symptoms characteristic of long COVID, including fatigue, shortness of breath, muscle pain or aches, difficulty concentrating and chest tightness. The identified symptom patterns among individuals with COVID-19 > 12 weeks ago were strongly associated with self-reported length of time unable to function as normal due to COVID-19 symptoms, suggesting that the symptom pattern identified corresponds to long COVID. Building the evidence base regarding typical long COVID symptoms will improve diagnosis of this condition and the ability to elicit underlying biological mechanisms, leading to better patient access to treatment and services.

The UK Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme and smoking, alcohol consumption and vaping during the COVID-19 pandemic: evidence from eight longitudinal population surveys.

BACKGROUND: Employment disruptions can impact smoking and alcohol consumption. During the COVID-19 pandemic, many countries implemented furlough schemes to prevent job loss. We examine how furlough was associated with smoking, vaping and alcohol consumption in the UK. METHODS: Data from 27,841 participants in eight UK adult longitudinal surveys were analysed. Participants self-reported employment status and current smoking, current vaping and alcohol consumption (>4 days/week or 5+ drinks per typical occasion) both before and during the early stages of the pandemic (April-July 2020). Risk ratios were estimated within each study using modified Poisson regression, adjusting for a range of potential confounders, including pre-pandemic behaviour. Findings were synthesised using random effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: Compared to stable employment and after adjustment for pre-pandemic characteristics, furlough was not associated with smoking (ARR = 1.05; 95% CI: 0.95-1.16; I2: 10%), vaping (ARR = 0.89; 95% CI: 0.74-1.08; I2: 0%) or drinking (ARR = 1.03; 95% CI: 0.94-1.13; I2: 48%). There were similar findings for no longer being employed, and stable unemployment, though this varied by sex: stable unemployment was associated with smoking for women (ARR = 1.35; 95% CI: 1.00-1.82; I2: 47%) but not men (0.84; 95% CI: 0.67-1.05; I2: 0%). No longer being employed was associated with vaping among women (ARR = 2.74; 95% CI: 1.59-4.72; I2: 0%) but not men (ARR = 1.25; 95% CI: 0.83-1.87; I2: 0%). CONCLUSIONS: We found no clear evidence of furlough or unemployment having adverse impacts on smoking, vaping or drinking behaviours during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK. Differences in risk compared to those who remained employed were largely explained by pre-pandemic characteristics.

Cross-cultural differences in self-reported and behavioural emotional self-awareness between Japan and the UK.

OBJECTIVE: How we express and describe emotion is shaped by sociocultural norms. These sociocultural norms may also affect emotional self-awareness, i.e., how we identify and make sense of our own emotions. Previous studies have found lower emotional self-awareness in East Asian compared to Western samples using self-report measures. However, studies using behavioural methods did not provide clear evidence of reduced emotional self-awareness in East Asian groups. This may be due to different measurement tools capturing different facets of emotional self-awareness. RESULTS: To investigate this issue further, we compared the emotional self-awareness of Japanese (n = 29) and United Kingdom (UK) (n = 43) adults using the self-report Toronto Alexithymia Scale (TAS-20), alongside two behavioural measures - the Emotional Consistency Task (EC-Task) and the Photo Emotion Differentiation Task (PED-Task). Japanese adults showed higher TAS-20 scores than UK participants, indicating greater self-reported difficulties with emotional self-awareness. Japanese participants also had lower EC-Task scores than UK adults, indicating a lower ability to differentiate between levels of emotional intensity. PED-Task performance did not show clear group differences. These findings suggest that cross-cultural differences in emotional self-awareness vary with the task used, because different tasks assess distinct aspects of this ability. Future research should attempt to capture these different aspects of emotional self-awareness.

Living alone and mental health: parallel analyses in UK longitudinal population surveys and electronic health records prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: People who live alone experience greater levels of mental illness; however, it is unclear whether the COVID-19 pandemic had a disproportionately negative impact on this demographic. OBJECTIVE: To describe the mental health gap between those who live alone and with others in the UK prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Self-reported psychological distress and life satisfaction in 10 prospective longitudinal population surveys (LPSs) assessed in the nearest pre-pandemic sweep and three periods during the pandemic. Recorded diagnosis of common and severe mental illnesses between March 2018 and January 2022 in electronic healthcare records (EHRs) within the OpenSAFELY-TPP. FINDINGS: In 37 544 LPS participants, pooled models showed greater psychological distress (standardised mean difference (SMD): 0.09 (95% CI: 0.04; 0.14); relative risk: 1.25 (95% CI: 1.12; 1.39)) and lower life satisfaction (SMD: -0.22 (95% CI: -0.30; -0.15)) for those living alone pre-pandemic. This gap did not change during the pandemic. In the EHR analysis of c.16 million records, mental health conditions were more common in those who lived alone (eg, depression 26 (95% CI: 18 to 33) and severe mental illness 58 (95% CI: 54 to 62) more cases more per 100 000). For common mental health disorders, the gap in recorded cases in EHRs narrowed during the pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: People living alone have poorer mental health and lower life satisfaction. During the pandemic, this gap in self-reported distress remained; however, there was a narrowing of the gap in service use. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Greater mental health need and potentially greater barriers to mental healthcare access for those who live alone need to be considered in healthcare planning.

Mental and social wellbeing and the UK coronavirus job retention scheme: Evidence from nine longitudinal studies.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to major economic disruptions. In March 2020, the UK implemented the Coronavirus Job Retention Scheme - known as furlough - to minimize the impact of job losses. We investigate associations between change in employment status and mental and social wellbeing during the early stages of the pandemic. METHODS: Data were from 25,670 respondents, aged 17-66, across nine UK longitudinal studies. Furlough and other employment changes were defined using employment status pre-pandemic and during the first lockdown (April-June 2020). Mental and social wellbeing outcomes included psychological distress, life satisfaction, self-rated health, social contact, and loneliness. Study-specific modified Poisson regression estimates, adjusting for socio-demographic characteristics and pre-pandemic mental and social wellbeing, were pooled using meta-analysis. Associations were also stratified by sex, age, education, and household composition. RESULTS: Compared to those who remained working, furloughed workers were at greater risk of psychological distress (adjusted risk ratio, ARR = 1.12; 95%CI: 0.97, 1.29), low life satisfaction (ARR = 1.14; 95%CI: 1.07, 1.22), loneliness (ARR = 1.12; 95%CI: 1.01, 1.23), and poor self-rated health (ARR = 1.26; 95%CI: 1.05, 1.50). Nevertheless, compared to furloughed workers, those who became unemployed had greater risk of psychological distress (ARR = 1.30; 95%CI: 1.12, 1.52), low life satisfaction (ARR = 1.16; 95%CI: 0.98, 1.38), and loneliness (ARR = 1.67; 95%CI: 1.08, 2.59). Effects were not uniform across all sub-groups. CONCLUSIONS: During the early stages of the pandemic, those furloughed had increased risk of poor mental and social wellbeing, but furloughed workers fared better than those who became unemployed, suggesting that furlough may have partly mitigated poorer outcomes.

Psychological distress, depression, anxiety, and life satisfaction following COVID-19 infection: evidence from 11 UK longitudinal population studies.

BACKGROUND: Evidence on associations between COVID-19 illness and mental health is mixed. We aimed to examine whether COVID-19 is associated with deterioration in mental health while considering pre-pandemic mental health, time since infection, subgroup differences, and confirmation of infection via self-reported test and serology data. METHODS: We obtained data from 11 UK longitudinal studies with repeated measures of mental health (psychological distress, depression, anxiety, and life satisfaction; mental health scales were standardised within each study across time) and COVID-19 status between April, 2020, and April, 2021. We included participants with information available on at least one mental health outcome measure and self-reported COVID-19 status (suspected or test-confirmed) during the pandemic, and a subset with serology-confirmed COVID-19. Furthermore, only participants who had available data on a minimum set of covariates, including age, sex, and pre-pandemic mental health were included. We investigated associations between having ever had COVID-19 and mental health outcomes using generalised estimating equations. We examined whether associations varied by age, sex, ethnicity, education, and pre-pandemic mental health, whether the strength of the association varied according to time since infection, and whether associations differed between self-reported versus confirmed (by test or serology) infection. FINDINGS: Between 21 Dec, 2021, and July 11, 2022, we analysed data from 54 442 participants (ranging from a minimum age of 16 years in one study to a maximum category of 90 years and older in another; including 33 200 [61·0%] women and 21 242 [39·0%] men) from 11 longitudinal UK studies. Of 40 819 participants with available ethnicity data, 36 802 (90·2%) were White. Pooled estimates of standardised differences in outcomes suggested associations between COVID-19 and subsequent psychological distress (0·10 [95% CI 0·06 to 0·13], I2=42·8%), depression (0·08 [0·05 to 0·10], I2=20·8%), anxiety (0·08 [0·05 to 0·10], I2=0·0%), and lower life satisfaction (-0·06 [-0·08 to -0·04], I2=29·2%). We found no evidence of interactions between COVID-19 and sex, education, ethnicity, or pre-pandemic mental health. Associations did not vary substantially between time since infection of less than 4 weeks, 4-12 weeks, and more than 12 weeks, and were present in all age groups, with some evidence of stronger effects in those aged 50 years and older. Participants who self-reported COVID-19 but had negative serology had worse mental health outcomes for all measures than those without COVID-19 based on serology and self-report. Participants who had positive serology but did not self-report COVID-19 did not show association with mental health outcomes. INTERPRETATION: Self-reporting COVID-19 was longitudinally associated with deterioration in mental health and life satisfaction. Our findings emphasise the need for greater post-infection mental health service provision, given the substantial prevalence of COVID-19 in the UK and worldwide. FUNDING: UK Medical Research Council and UK National Institute for Health and Care Research.

Psychological Distress Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic Among Adults in the United Kingdom Based on Coordinated Analyses of 11 Longitudinal Studies.

Importance: How population mental health has evolved across the COVID-19 pandemic under varied lockdown measures is poorly understood, and the consequences for health inequalities are unclear. Objective: To investigate changes in mental health and sociodemographic inequalities from before and across the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic in 11 longitudinal studies. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study included adult participants from 11 UK longitudinal population-based studies with prepandemic measures of psychological distress. Analyses were coordinated across these studies, and estimates were pooled. Data were collected from 2006 to 2021. Exposures: Trends in the prevalence of poor mental health were assessed in the prepandemic period (time period 0 [TP 0]) and at 3 pandemic TPs: 1, initial lockdown (March to June 2020); 2, easing of restrictions (July to October 2020); and 3, a subsequent lockdown (November 2020 to March 2021). Analyses were stratified by sex, race and ethnicity, education, age, and UK country. Main Outcomes and Measures: Multilevel regression was used to examine changes in psychological distress from the prepandemic period across the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychological distress was assessed using the 12-item General Health Questionnaire, the Kessler 6, the 9-item Malaise Inventory, the Short Mood and Feelings Questionnaire, the 8-item or 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and the Centre for Epidemiological Studies-Depression across different studies. Results: In total, 49 993 adult participants (12 323 [24.6%] aged 55-64 years; 32 741 [61.2%] women; 4960 [8.7%] racial and ethnic minority) were analyzed. Across the 11 studies, mental health deteriorated from prepandemic scores across all 3 pandemic periods, but there was considerable heterogeneity across the study-specific estimated effect sizes (pooled estimate for TP 1: standardized mean difference [SMD], 0.15; 95% CI, 0.06-0.25; TP 2: SMD, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.09-0.27; TP 3: SMD, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.10-0.32). Changes in psychological distress across the pandemic were higher in women (TP 3: SMD, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.11, 0.35) than men (TP 3: SMD, 0.16; 95% CI, 0.06-0.26) and lower in individuals with below-degree level education at TP 3 (SMD, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.06-0.30) compared with those who held degrees (SMD, 0.26; 95% CI, 0.14-0.38). Increased psychological distress was most prominent among adults aged 25 to 34 years (SMD, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.14-0.84) and 35 to 44 years (SMD, 0.35; 95% CI, 0.10-0.60) compared with other age groups. No evidence of changes in distress differing by race and ethnicity or UK country were observed. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, the substantial deterioration in mental health seen in the UK during the first lockdown did not reverse when lockdown lifted, and a sustained worsening was observed across the pandemic period. Mental health declines have been unequal across the population, with women, those with higher degrees, and those aged 25 to 44 years more affected than other groups.

Long COVID burden and risk factors in 10 UK longitudinal studies and electronic health records.

The frequency of, and risk factors for, long COVID are unclear among community-based individuals with a history of COVID-19. To elucidate the burden and possible causes of long COVID in the community, we coordinated analyses of survey data from 6907 individuals with self-reported COVID-19 from 10 UK longitudinal study (LS) samples and 1.1 million individuals with COVID-19 diagnostic codes in electronic healthcare records (EHR) collected by spring 2021. Proportions of presumed COVID-19 cases in LS reporting any symptoms for 12+ weeks ranged from 7.8% and 17% (with 1.2 to 4.8% reporting debilitating symptoms). Increasing age, female sex, white ethnicity, poor pre-pandemic general and mental health, overweight/obesity, and asthma were associated with prolonged symptoms in both LS and EHR data, but findings for other factors, such as cardio-metabolic parameters, were inconclusive.

Autistic traits predict underestimation of emotional abilities.

People vary in their self-awareness of their own emotions, and this may predict psychological well-being. Evidence suggests that emotional self-awareness is diminished in autism, but these findings may be biased by self-report or confounded by verbal intelligence. To address this issue, we developed the emotional consistency (EC) task, measuring emotional self-awareness through consistency in emotional decision-making. In the EC-Task, we showed participants pairs of emotional images, asking them to judge which evoked the more intense emotional experience. The logical consistency of decision making, based on transitive relationships between stimuli, reflects precision of judgment of experience of emotional intensity, which in turn reflects emotional self-awareness. Emotional consistency significantly correlated with lower self-reported alexithymia but not autistic traits. Instead, autistic traits predicted greater discrepancy between EC-Task performance and self-reported difficulties identifying feelings. Participants with higher autistic traits were more likely to underestimate their emotional self-awareness, possibly because of greater metacognitive difficulties and negative self-beliefs. Our study suggests emotional self-awareness is not diminished in autism and provides a novel method to investigate this issue. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Emotional self-awareness in autism: A meta-analysis of group differences and developmental effects.

LAY ABSTRACT: Autistic people are thought to have difficulties with identifying and understanding their own emotions. This is referred to as emotional self-awareness. It is important to study emotional self-awareness as people who are more able to understand their own emotions, whether they are autistic or not, are more able to respond to them appropriately, as well as to identify them in other people. It has not yet been confirmed whether autistic people have difficulties with emotional self-awareness, or if any reported difficulties are actually due to the way in which emotional self-awareness is measured in autistic people. If these difficulties do exist, it is also not known when these difficulties emerge. In this research, we reviewed 47 existing studies that measured emotional self-awareness in autistic and non-autistic adults and children. We also compared studies that measured emotional self-awareness in different ways. We found that autistic adults did seem to have poorer emotional self-awareness compared to their neurotypical peers. However, this was not the case with autistic children of age 12 years and below. Instead, differences in emotional self-awareness only seemed to emerge during adolescence. Moreover, these difficulties seemed to increase with age. These results suggest that difficulties with emotional self-awareness may not be inherent in autism. Instead, they may emerge alongside the greater social and mental health difficulties that are experienced by many autistic people during adolescence. We therefore suggest that it is important to find out more about, and subsequently support, the emotional self-awareness difficulties that autistic adolescents may encounter.

Cross-Cultural Differences and Psychometric Properties of the Japanese Actions and Feelings Questionnaire (J-AFQ).

Aims: We aimed to assess the psychometric properties of a Japanese version of the Actions and Feelings Questionnaire (J-AFQ), an 18-item self-report measure of non-verbal emotional communication, as well as to examine its transcultural properties. Methods: The J-AFQ was administered to 500 Japanese adults (age 20-49, 250 male), alongside the Japanese Broad Autism Phenotype Questionnaire (BAPQ-J) and Empathy Quotient (EQ-J). These were compared to a group of 597 British and Irish participants (age 16-18, 148 male). J-AFQ was assessed in terms of validity by confirmatory factor analysis and convergence with BAPQ-J and EQ-J using Pearson correlation. Internal consistency and differential item functioning (DIF) were assessed and compared between Japanese and UK/Irish participants. Results: Reversed worded items (RWIs) showed poor item-total correlations but excluding these left a 13-item version of the J-AFQ with good internal consistency and content validity. Consistent with the English version, J-AFQ scores correlated with EQ and lower BAPQ scores. However, comparing across cultures, J-AFQ scores were significantly lower in the Japanese sample, and there was evidence of important DIF by country in over half of the J-AFQ items Conclusion: Cultural differences in attitudes to self-report, as well as increased acquiescence to RWI's also seen in previous studies, limit the value of the 18-item instrument in Japanese culture. However, the 13-item J-AFQ is a valid and reliable measure of motor empathy, which, alongside the English version, offers promise for research in motor cognition and non-verbal emotional communication across cultures.

CovidLife: a resource to understand mental health, well-being and behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic in the UK.

CovidLife is a longitudinal observational study designed to investigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on mental health, well-being and behaviour in adults living in the UK. In total, 18,518 participants (mean age = 56.43, SD = 14.35) completed the first CovidLife questionnaire (CovidLife1) between April and June 2020. To date, participants have completed two follow-up assessments. CovidLife2 took place between July and August 2020 (n = 11,319), and CovidLife3 took place in February 2021 (n = 10,386). A range of social and psychological measures were administered at each wave including assessments of anxiety, depression, well-being, loneliness and isolation. Information on sociodemographic, health, and economic circumstances was also collected. Questions also assessed information on COVID-19 infections and symptoms, compliance to COVID-19 restrictions, and opinions on the UK and Scottish Governments' handling of the pandemic. CovidLife includes a subsample of 4,847 participants from the Generation Scotland cohort (N~24,000, collected 2006-2011); a well-characterised cohort of families in Scotland with pre-pandemic data on mental health, physical health, lifestyle, and socioeconomic factors, along with biochemical and genomic data derived from biological samples. These participants also consented to their study data being linked to Scottish health records. CovidLife and Generation Scotland data can be accessed and used by external researchers following approval from the Generation Scotland Access Committee. CovidLife can be used to investigate mental health, well-being and behaviour during COVID-19; how these vary according to sociodemographic, health and economic circumstances; and how these change over time. The Generation Scotland subsample with pre-pandemic data and linkage to health records can be used to investigate the predictors of health and well-being during COVID-19 and the future health consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic.

TeenCovidLife: a resource to understand the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on adolescents in Scotland.

TeenCovidLife is part of Generation Scotland's CovidLife projects, a set of longitudinal observational studies designed to assess the psychosocial and health impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. TeenCovidLife focused on how adolescents in Scotland were coping during the pandemic. As of September 2021, Generation Scotland had conducted three TeenCovidLife surveys. Participants from previous surveys were invited to participate in the next, meaning the age ranges shifted over time. TeenCovidLife Survey 1 consists of data from 5,543 young people age 12 to 17, collected from 22 May to 5 July 2020, during the first school closures period in Scotland. TeenCovidLife Survey 2 consists of data from 2,245 young people aged 12 to 18, collected from 18 August to 14 October 2020, when the initial lockdown measures were beginning to ease, and schools reopened in Scotland. TeenCovidLife Survey 3 consists of data from 597 young people age 12 to 19, collected from 12 May to 27 June 2021, a year after the first survey, after the schools returned following the second lockdown in 2021. A total of 316 participants took part in all three surveys. TeenCovidLife collected data on general health and well-being, as well as topics specific to COVID-19, such as adherence to COVID-19 health guidance, feelings about school closures, and the impact of exam cancellations. Limited work has examined the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on young people. TeenCovidLife provides relevant and timely data to assess the impact of the pandemic on young people in Scotland. The dataset is available under authorised access from Generation Scotland; see the Generation Scotland website for more information.

RuralCovidLife: A new resource for the impact of the pandemic on rural Scotland.

RuralCovidLife is part of Generation Scotland's CovidLife project, investigating the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and mitigation measures on people in Scotland. The RuralCovidLife project focuses on Scotland's rural communities, and how they have been impacted by the pandemic. During survey development, Generation Scotland consulted with people living or working in rural communities, and collaborated with a patient and public involvement and engagement (PPIE) group composed of rural community leaders. Through this consultation work, the RuralCovidLife survey was developed to assess the issues most pertinent to people in rural communities, such as mental health, employment, transport, connectivity, and local communities. Between 14th October and 30th November 2020, 3,365 participants from rural areas in Scotland took part in the survey. Participant ages ranged from 16 to 96 (mean = 58.4, standard deviation [SD] = 13.3), and the majority of the participants were female (70.5%). Over half (51.3%) had taken part in the original CovidLife survey. RuralCovidLife includes a subsample (n = 523) of participants from the Generation Scotland cohort. Pre-pandemic data on health and lifestyle, as well as biological samples, are available for these participants. These participants' data can also be linked to past and future healthcare records, allowing analysis of retrospective and prospective health outcomes. Like Generation Scotland, RuralCovidLife is designed as a resource for researchers. RuralCovidLife data, as well as the linked Generation Scotland data, is available for use by external researchers following approval from the Generation Scotland Access Committee. RuralCovidLife can be used to investigate mental health, well-being, and behaviour in participants living in rural areas during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as comparisons with non-rural samples. Moreover, the sub-sample with full Generation Scotland data and linkage can be used to investigate the long-term health consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic in rural communities.

A sensorimotor control framework for understanding emotional communication and regulation.

Our research team was asked to consider the relationship of the neuroscience of sensorimotor control to the language of emotions and feelings. Actions are the principal means for the communication of emotions and feelings in both humans and other animals, and the allostatic mechanisms controlling action also apply to the regulation of emotional states by the self and others. We consider how motor control of hierarchically organised, feedback-based, goal-directed action has evolved in humans, within a context of consciousness, appraisal and cultural learning, to serve emotions and feelings. In our linguistic analysis, we found that many emotion and feelings words could be assigned to stages in the sensorimotor learning process, but the assignment was often arbitrary. The embodied nature of emotional communication means that action words are frequently used, but that the meanings or senses of the word depend on its contextual use, just as the relationship of an action to an emotion is also contextually dependent.

Different Aspects of Emotional Awareness in Relation to Motor Cognition and Autism Traits.

Emotion is inherently embodied, formulated through bodily sensation, as well as expressed and regulated through action. Both expressing one's own emotions and understanding the emotional actions of others are common areas of difficulty in autism. Moreover, reduced emotional awareness is also thought to be problematic in autism, and such difficulties may be mediated by impaired motor cognition. We aimed to examine how intensity of emotional experience and ability to differentiate between one's own emotions relates to motor empathy and autistic traits. We hypothesized that greater motor cognition would be associated with greater emotional intensity and more refined emotion differentiation. Participants from the general population (N = 160) completed the Actions and Feelings Questionnaire (AFQ), a self-report measure assessing motor cognition, alongside the Broad Autism Phenotype Questionnaire and an emotion elicitation task. Motor cognition was significantly associated with more intense emotional experiences but not with ability to differentiate between similar emotions. Autistic traits, particularly social aloofness, predicted less emotion differentiation and lower scores on the animation subscale of the AFQ. We suggest that whereas as intensity of experience may be dependent on sensorimotor representation of emotions, differentiation requires additional cognitive functions such as language understanding. A dissociation between awareness of intensity and differentiation may be critical for understanding emotional difficulties in autism.