skip to main content


Title: Covid-19-Stress Associated With Worse Sleep Quality, Particularly With Increasing Age
Abstract Objectives

Based on socioemotional selectivity theory, one might predict that older adults’ well-being would be less negatively affected by coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19)-stress, as with other stressors, than younger people. However, whether sleep quality, which is negatively affected by aging, is similarly protected from the negative consequences of Covid-19-stress with age is unknown. Here, we examined the association between Covid-19-stress, above and beyond general-stress, and sleep quality and how it varies by age.

Method

From December 2020 to April 2021, 386 adults reported their Covid-19-stress, sleep quality, and resilience in an online study.

Results

While older age was related to lower Covid-19-stress, Covid-19-stress was associated with worse sleep quality with greater age.

Discussion

These results suggest that at least some aspects of one’s well-being may be more susceptible to the negative consequences of stress with increasing age. Our results might be better understood via the strength and vulnerability integration model, which posits that older adults have increased susceptibility to prolonged and unavoidable stress.

 
more » « less
NSF-PAR ID:
10391303
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ; ;
Publisher / Repository:
Oxford University Press
Date Published:
Journal Name:
The Journals of Gerontology: Series B
ISSN:
1079-5014
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. The COVID-19 pandemic has dramatically altered family life in the United States. Over the long duration of the pandemic, parents had to adapt to shifting work conditions, virtual schooling, the closure of daycare facilities, and the stress of not only managing households without domestic and care supports but also worrying that family members may contract the novel coronavirus. Reports early in the pandemic suggest that these burdens have fallen disproportionately on mothers, creating concerns about the long-term implications of the pandemic for gender inequality and mothers’ well-being. Nevertheless, less is known about how parents’ engagement in domestic labor and paid work has changed throughout the pandemic, what factors may be driving these changes, and what the long-term consequences of the pandemic may be for the gendered division of labor and gender inequality more generally.

    The Study on U.S. Parents’ Divisions of Labor During COVID-19 (SPDLC) collects longitudinal survey data from partnered U.S. parents that can be used to assess changes in parents’ divisions of domestic labor, divisions of paid labor, and well-being throughout and after the COVID-19 pandemic. The goal of SPDLC is to understand both the short- and long-term impacts of the pandemic for the gendered division of labor, work-family issues, and broader patterns of gender inequality.

    Survey data for this study is collected using Prolifc (www.prolific.co), an opt-in online platform designed to facilitate scientific research. The sample is comprised U.S. adults who were residing with a romantic partner and at least one biological child (at the time of entry into the study). In each survey, parents answer questions about both themselves and their partners. Wave 1 of SPDLC was conducted in April 2020, and parents who participated in Wave 1 were asked about their division of labor both prior to (i.e., early March 2020) and one month after the pandemic began. Wave 2 of SPDLC was collected in November 2020. Parents who participated in Wave 1 were invited to participate again in Wave 2, and a new cohort of parents was also recruited to participate in the Wave 2 survey. Wave 3 of SPDLC was collected in October 2021. Parents who participated in either of the first two waves were invited to participate again in Wave 3, and another new cohort of parents was also recruited to participate in the Wave 3 survey. This research design (follow-up survey of panelists and new cross-section of parents at each wave) will continue through 2024, culminating in six waves of data spanning the period from March 2020 through October 2024. An estimated total of approximately 6,500 parents will be surveyed at least once throughout the duration of the study.

    SPDLC data will be released to the public two years after data is collected; Waves 1 and 2 are currently publicly available. Wave 3 will be publicly available in October 2023, with subsequent waves becoming available yearly. Data will be available to download in both SPSS (.sav) and Stata (.dta) formats, and the following data files will be available: (1) a data file for each individual wave, which contains responses from all participants in that wave of data collection, (2) a longitudinal panel data file, which contains longitudinal follow-up data from all available waves, and (3) a repeated cross-section data file, which contains the repeated cross-section data (from new respondents at each wave) from all available waves. Codebooks for each survey wave and a detailed user guide describing the data are also available. Response Rates: Of the 1,157 parents who participated in Wave 1, 828 (72%) also participated in the Wave 2 study. Presence of Common Scales: The following established scales are included in the survey:
    • Self-Efficacy, adapted from Pearlin's mastery scale (Pearlin et al., 1981) and the Rosenberg self-esteem scale (Rosenberg, 2015) and taken from the American Changing Lives Survey
    • Communication with Partner, taken from the Marriage and Relationship Survey (Lichter & Carmalt, 2009)
    • Gender Attitudes, taken from the National Survey of Families and Households (Sweet & Bumpass, 1996)
    • Depressive Symptoms (CES-D-10)
    • Stress, measured using Cohen's Perceived Stress Scale (Cohen, Kamarck, & Mermelstein, 1983)
    Full details about these scales and all other items included in the survey can be found in the user guide and codebook
    The second wave of the SPDLC was fielded in November 2020 in two stages. In the first stage, all parents who participated in W1 of the SPDLC and who continued to reside in the United States were re-contacted and asked to participate in a follow-up survey. The W2 survey was posted on Prolific, and messages were sent via Prolific’s messaging system to all previous participants. Multiple follow-up messages were sent in an attempt to increase response rates to the follow-up survey. Of the 1,157 respondents who completed the W1 survey, 873 at least started the W2 survey. Data quality checks were employed in line with best practices for online surveys (e.g., removing respondents who did not complete most of the survey or who did not pass the attention filters). After data quality checks, 5.2% of respondents were removed from the sample, resulting in a final sample size of 828 parents (a response rate of 72%).

    In the second stage, a new sample of parents was recruited. New parents had to meet the same sampling criteria as in W1 (be at least 18 years old, reside in the United States, reside with a romantic partner, and be a parent living with at least one biological child). Also similar to the W1 procedures, we oversampled men, Black individuals, individuals who did not complete college, and individuals who identified as politically conservative to increase sample diversity. A total of 1,207 parents participated in the W2 survey. Data quality checks led to the removal of 5.7% of the respondents, resulting in a final sample size of new respondents at Wave 2 of 1,138 parents.

    In both stages, participants were informed that the survey would take approximately 20 minutes to complete. All panelists were provided monetary compensation in line with Prolific’s compensation guidelines, which require that all participants earn above minimum wage for their time participating in studies.
    To be included in SPDLC, respondents had to meet the following sampling criteria at the time they enter the study: (a) be at least 18 years old, (b) reside in the United States, (c) reside with a romantic partner (i.e., be married or cohabiting), and (d) be a parent living with at least one biological child. Follow-up respondents must be at least 18 years old and reside in the United States, but may experience changes in relationship and resident parent statuses. Smallest Geographic Unit: U.S. State

    This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. In accordance with this license, all users of these data must give appropriate credit to the authors in any papers, presentations, books, or other works that use the data. A suggested citation to provide attribution for these data is included below:            

    Carlson, Daniel L. and Richard J. Petts. 2022. Study on U.S. Parents’ Divisions of Labor During COVID-19 User Guide: Waves 1-2.  

    To help provide estimates that are more representative of U.S. partnered parents, the SPDLC includes sampling weights. Weights can be included in statistical analyses to make estimates from the SPDLC sample representative of U.S. parents who reside with a romantic partner (married or cohabiting) and a child aged 18 or younger based on age, race/ethnicity, and gender. National estimates for the age, racial/ethnic, and gender profile of U.S. partnered parents were obtained using data from the 2020 Current Population Survey (CPS). Weights were calculated using an iterative raking method, such that the full sample in each data file matches the nationally representative CPS data in regard to the gender, age, and racial/ethnic distributions within the data. This variable is labeled CPSweightW2 in the Wave 2 dataset, and CPSweightLW2 in the longitudinal dataset (which includes Waves 1 and 2). There is not a weight variable included in the W1-W2 repeated cross-section data file.
     
    more » « less
  2. Abstract Background

    The COVID-19 pandemic presented challenges that disproportionately impacted women. Household roles typically performed by women (such as resource acquisition and caretaking) became more difficult due to financial strain, fear of infection, and limited childcare options among other concerns. This research draws from an on-going study of hot flashes and brown adipose tissue to examine the health-related effects of the COVID-19 pandemic among 162 women aged 45–55 living in western Massachusetts.

    Methods

    We compared women who participated in the study pre- and early pandemic with women who participated mid-pandemic and later-pandemic (when vaccines became widely available). We collected self-reported symptom frequencies (e.g., aches/stiffness in joints, irritability), and assessments of stress, depression, and physical activity through questionnaires as well as measures of adiposity (BMI and percent body fat). Additionally, we asked open-ended questions about how the pandemic influenced women’s health and experience of menopause. Comparisons across pre-/early, mid-, and later pandemic categories were carried out using ANOVA and Chi-square analyses as appropriate. The Levene test for homogeneity of variances was examined prior to each ANOVA. Open-ended questions were analyzed for yes/no responses and general themes.

    Results

    Contrary to our hypothesis that women would suffer negative health-related consequences during the COVID-19 pandemic, we found no significant differences in women’s health-related measures or physical activity across the pandemic. However, our analysis of open-ended responses revealed a bi-modal distribution of answers that sheds light on our unexpected findings. While some women reported higher levels of stress and anxiety and lower levels of physical activity, other women reported benefitting from the remote life that the pandemic imposed and described having more time to spend on physical activity or in quality time with their families.

    Conclusions

    In this cross-sectional comparison of women during the pre-/early, mid-, and later-pandemic, we found no significant differences across means in multiple health-related variables. However, open-ended questions revealed that while some women suffered health-related effects during the pandemic, others experienced conditions that improved their health and well-being. The differential results of this study highlight a need for more nuanced and intersectional research on risk, vulnerabilities, and coping among mid-life women.

     
    more » « less
  3. Introduction Stress in relation to the Coronavirus disease 19 pandemic (i.e., COVID-19, COVID stress) may be linked with poor sleep quality. The association between stress that is specific to the COVID-19 pandemic and sleep quality has been understudied, particularly in racially diverse people across the adult lifespan. Here, we investigated self-reported sleep quality in relation to COVID stress and factors that may protect against experiencing poor sleep quality from high COVID stress, including social support and religiosity. Method We recruited non-Hispanic Black ( n = 73) and non-Hispanic White ( n = 178) participants across the adult lifespan (18–76 years) using an online, cross-sectional design during the COVID-19 pandemic (March 2021–June 2021). We asked participants to report information regarding demographics (age, race/ethnicity, years of education), sleep (sleep quality, sleep habits), and positive (social support, religious activities) and negative (events of discrimination, depression, general stress, COVID stress) psychosocial factors. Results Across age and racial groups, better sleep habits were associated with better sleep quality, and higher COVID stress was linked to poorer sleep quality. Black participants reported higher quality sleep than White participants ( p = 0.006). They also endorsed greater private and internal religiosity ( p’s < 0.001). Across racial groups, moderation analyses revealed a protective effect of religiosity against poor sleep ( p’s < 0.006). Specifically, individuals with high religious activity and high COVID stress did not experience poor sleep quality, but individuals with low religious activity and high COVID stress demonstrated poor sleep quality. These results remained significant when controlling for general stress. Discussion Protective factors, such as religiosity, may mitigate the negative associations between high COVID stress and poor sleep quality. 
    more » « less
  4. Abstract Background

    This article addresses the urgent need for more evidence-based research using primary data to document how the COVID-19 pandemic affected the health and social wellbeing of disabled individuals. Our study sought to determine if adults with disabilities, and with specific types of disability, were more likely to suffer adverse health and social impacts related to COVID-19 than nondisabled adults in metropolitan Texas, during the first 18 months of the pandemic.

    Methods

    We collected primary data from randomly selected residents in eight Texas metropolitan areas through a bilingual telephone survey in July 2021. Statistical analysis comprised multivariable generalized estimating equations that control for relevant sociodemographic and COVID-related risk factors, and spatial clustering.

    Results

    Disabled survey respondents had been more adversely affected by COVID-19 than nondisabled respondents, in terms of mental and physical health, health care access, living conditions and social life. Significant disparities were also found for almost all COVID-19 impacts when the disabled category was disaggregated by disability type. Respondents experiencing cognitive and independent living difficulties were negatively impacted in all five areas of life examined.

    Conclusions

    Findings emphasize the need to consider a wide range of impacts associated with the COVID-19 pandemic that negatively affect the health and social wellbeing of disabled persons, as well as develop disability-inclusive policies that provide adequate protections.

     
    more » « less
  5. Abstract Background and Objectives

    Climate change threatens well-being and has increased the prevalence of weather-related disasters. We investigated age differences in emotional well-being among adults who had experienced hurricane-related, unavoidable stressors. Socioemotional selectivity theory (SST) posits that age-related motivational shifts buffer older adults against psychological distress, whereas the strength and vulnerability integration model (SAVI) posits that unavoidable stressors are more detrimental to older adults’ well-being compared to younger adults.

    Research Design and Methods

    We used existing self-report data from a life-span sample of adults (N = 618, M age = 58.44 years, standard deviation = 16.03, 18–96 years) who resided in the U.S. Gulf Coast region. The sample was recruited in 2016 to examine the sequelae of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill and contacted again after the 2017 and 2018 hurricane seasons. In 2016, participants reported their depression, anxiety, and trauma history. After the 2017–2018 hurricane seasons, participants reported their depression, post-traumatic stress, exposure to hurricane-related adversities, injuries and casualties, self-efficacy, and perceived health.

    Results

    In line with SST, older age was associated with reporting significantly fewer depression and post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms, even after controlling for exposure to hurricane-related adversities, injuries and casualties, health, self-efficacy, pre-hurricane depression, anxiety, and trauma. The association between older age and fewer depression symptoms was stronger among those who experienced hurricane-related adversities compared to those who had not, in contrast to predictions based on SAVI.

    Discussion and Implications

    We discuss the implications of age-related strengths in emotional well-being for policy and practice in the context of the ongoing climate crisis.

     
    more » « less