‘De-trending’ the data
We are all aware of the raft of studies on the effects of COVID-19 on young people’s psychological well-being (and ill-being) that have flooded out since 2020. A key problem with the bulk of these studies is that they could not control for time trends, known as ‘the normative ageing processes in adolescence’. The PROMENTA team cracked this problem, by using longitudinal data (i.e., repeated observations) on the same people before and during the pandemic to distinguish COVID-19-related changes from time trends that would happen regardless of the pandemic, such as an increase in social media use through adolescence. Psychologist von Soest notes that this innovation came from interdisciplinary conversations with Kozák, a sociologist, who saw an opportunity to apply ‘societal growth curve’ methods which are less common in developmental psychology.
What counts as well-being?
Another exciting aspect of their work was the comprehensive definition of wellbeing: rather than focusing on traditional psychological outcomes (e.g., psychiatric diagnoses), they looked at a range of symptoms, behaviours and traits measured quantitatively including depression symptoms, alcohol use, exercise habits and beyond. This allowed them to draw a fuller picture of young people’s lives and how they have been affected by the pandemic.
The pandemic exacerbated social inequalities in wellbeing
Perhaps contrary to popular opinion, general effects of the pandemic on wellbeing appeared to be small, with many null effects (e.g., loneliness) and others even in the positive direction. The authors say they are therefore ‘not too concerned about the average adolescent’.
But importantly, closer inspection revealed social inequality in the effects of the pandemic, which remain concealed unless differences by gender, age, and socioeconomic status are interrogated. Von Soest and his team found that pandemic effects were worse for girls than for boys, for younger than older adolescents, and for young people from families with lower socioeconomic status. In some cases the effects of the pandemic were in totally opposite directions for young people in different socio-demographic categories. For instance, one year into the pandemic, those with high parental education were exercising more than they were before, but those with low parental education were exercising less.
Important implications
The key take-home from this study is that young people who were already suffering the most in terms of wellbeing were disproportionately worse off one year into the pandemic. This held even after accounting for worsening time trends. It is therefore more urgent and important than ever to find ways to reduce structural inequalities. PROMENTA is working on it.