Psychological Well-Being during the COVID-19 Lockdown: Labour Market and Gender Implications

In the Spring of 2020, a great number of countries introduced different restrictive measures in order to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic. This article examines the labour market transitions of individuals brought about by some of those measures, and the effect of such transitions on psychological well-being. The fact that it has been possible to distinguish between unemployment transitions before the pandemic began and those resulting from the lockdowns is worth highlighting. Evidence is provided showing that unemployment due to the lockdown had a greater negative impact on psychological well-being than furloughs and teleworking. Gender differences confirm that women experienced greater adverse effects as compared to men. Specifically, women working at home exhibited greater negative effects when compared with those on furlough, probably due to a combination of work disruption and increased family obligations. Finally, on the contrary to men, women living in areas with more rigorous restrictions show a reduced probability of worse PWB when compared to those residing in areas without restrictions. This finding suggests that women are willing to sacrifice freedom of movement as long as restrictions protect their at-risk relatives.

Automated summary

In the Spring of 2020, many countries implemented different measures to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic. This article examines how these measures affected individuals' labor market transitions and their psychological well-being. The study found that unemployment caused by lockdowns had a more negative impact on mental health compared to furloughs and teleworking. Gender differences showed that women were more adversely affected, especially those working from home, possibly due to work disruption and increased family responsibilities. Interestingly, women living in areas with stricter restrictions had a lower probability of worse psychological well-being compared to those in unrestricted areas, indicating their willingness to sacrifice freedom of movement to protect at-risk relatives.