Individual and community social capital, mobility restrictions, and psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic: a multilevel analysis of a representative US survey.
Individual and community social capital, mobility restrictions, and psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic: a multilevel analysis of a representative US survey.
复制标题
Covid-19大流行期间的个人和社区社会资本，流动性限制和心理困扰：对美国代表性调查的多层次分析。
DOI：
10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114361
复制
发表时间：
2021-10
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Kim HH
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Laurence J;Kim HH
本文探讨了社会资本在减轻COVID-19大流行后引发的社会/流动限制对心理健康的危害方面的作用。我们测试了：(a)在大流行期间，社会资本是否继续预测较低的精神痛苦；(b)社会资本是否缓冲（缓和）了社会/流动限制对心理困扰的危害。此外，我们还测试了社会资本缓解效应运行的水平，即在个人和/或情境层面。为此，我们将多层模型应用于由美国成年人概率样本组成的三波COVID-19家庭影响调查（平均访谈完成率为93%）。在一种新颖的方法中，我们探索了两种获取情境社会资本的模式：汇总个人层面的调查反应和独立测量的社会资本指数（SCIs）。结果表明，在个体层面上，社会资本与较低的心理困扰相关。它还缓冲了限制的危害：增加限制对与邻居频繁互动的个人的痛苦影响较弱。重要的是，情境社会资本的缓解过程似乎取决于它的测量方式。综合调查结果显示，情境社会资本对痛苦没有直接影响，但具有额外的缓冲作用：在邻居平均互动程度较高的县，个体受到限制的影响较弱。使用独立的SCI指标，我们发现县域社会资本降低了贫困。然而，个体报告的限制越多，其对痛苦的负面影响越弱：个体报告的限制越低，县SCI越高，其痛苦程度越低；然而，当个体报告较高的限制时，较高的县SCI对痛苦没有影响。因此，更严格的环境限制了个体从使用SCI测量的更高县社会资本中获得的利益。
This paper explores the role of social capital in mitigating the mental health harms of social/mobility restrictions instigated in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic. We test whether: (a) social capital continued to predict lower mental distress during the pandemic; and (b) whether social capital buffered (moderated) the harm of social/mobility restrictions on psychological distress. In addition, we test the level at which social capital mitigation effects operated, i.e., at the individual- and/or contextual-level. To do so, we apply multilevel models to three waves of the COVID-19 Household Impact Survey consisting of probability samples of U.S. adults (with the average interview completion rate of 93%). In a novel approach, we explore two modes of capturing contextual social capital: aggregated individual-level survey responses and independently measured social capital indices (SCIs). Findings show that at the individual level social capital was associated with lower psychological distress. It also buffered the harm of restrictions: increasing restrictions had a weaker effect on distress among individuals interacting with neighbors more frequently. Importantly, mitigating processes of contextual social capital appeared conditional on how it was measured. Using aggregated survey responses, contextual social capital had no direct effect on distress but exerted an additional buffering role: individuals in counties with higher average neighbor-interaction experienced a weaker impact of restrictions. Using the independent SCI measures, we found county social capital reduced distress. However, its negative effect on distress becomes increasingly weaker the more restrictions an individual reported: where individuals reported lower restrictions, higher county SCI reduced distress; however, where individuals reported higher restrictions, higher county SCI had no effect on distress. More restrictive environments thus cut individuals off from the benefits of higher county social capital as measured using the SCI.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
3.2
作者：
Aldrich, Daniel P.;Meyer, Michelle A.
通讯作者：
Meyer, Michelle A.
影响因子：
8.1
作者：
Borkowska, Magda;Laurence, James
通讯作者：
Laurence, James
影响因子：
6.6
作者：
Daly, Michael;Sutin, Angelina R.;Robinson, Eric
通讯作者：
Robinson, Eric
DOI：
10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x
发表时间：
1995-01-01
影响因子：
5.8
作者：
BENJAMINI, Y;HOCHBERG, Y
通讯作者：
HOCHBERG, Y
影响因子：
4.5
作者：
Fahmi, Mohamad;Panjaitan, Nur Afni;Sunjaya, Deni K.
通讯作者：
Sunjaya, Deni K.