Inviting an author to review:
Find an author and click ‘Invite to review selected article’ near their name.
Search for authorsSearch for similar articles
11
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Learning from lockdown - Assessing the positive and negative experiences, and coping strategies of researchers during the COVID-19 pandemic

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          With the disruption of nonessential research due to the COVID-19 pandemic, researchers faced unexpected changes in their work and personal life. We assessed what challenges researchers encountered during lockdown and whether gender, career level, discipline, and job-permanency influenced their experiences (negative and positive), thereby collecting empirical material which could provide valuable information for future mentoring/supporting practices. Data were collected between July-August 2020 via an online-survey, and answers from 210 respondents (78% female, 21% male, 1% non-disclosed gender) working in Animal Behaviour and Welfare (ABW, 57%), other biological sciences (37%) or social sciences (6%) were analysed. Respondents were post-graduate students (35%), research associates (35%), and professors (22%) or classified as ‘other’ (8%), and overall fixed-term (55%) and permanent (45%) jobholders. We expected that early career researchers, non-permanent jobholders, and female respondents would report more challenges/less positive experiences during lockdown. Due to the widespread impact of the pandemic, we predicted no effect of academic disciplines. We found great inter-individual difference in the experiences reported by the respondents, with some reporting adaptation to a new routine within a week (31% of the respondents) and/or greater efficiency working from home (19%) while others felt less efficient working from home and/or experienced a greater imbalance towards work (30%) and/or increased personal responsibilities (24%). The most commonly reported challenges were the lack of informal contact with colleagues (63%), a loss of focus due to worry or stress (53%) and/or unsuitable working environments (47%). Postgraduate students, research associates, non-permanent jobholders and ABW researchers reported more work-related challenges ( p = from 0.03 to <0.0001) and were more likely to worry about the future ( p = from 0.0002 to <0.0001) than other career levels, permanent jobholders, and researchers from other disciplines respectively. We found no gender effect ( p = from 0.006 [NS due to Benjamini-Liu correction for multiple comparisons, 24 metrics tested] to 1.000), except that female respondents reported more personal changes affecting their ability to work than male respondents ( p = 0.037). On a positive note, most respondents (83%) perceived positive changes during lockdown and 60% reported one or more coping strategies during lockdown, with exercising/outdoor activities and interacting with family/friends most commonly reported. Based on our findings, we provide recommendations for overcoming the reported Covid-19-related challenges which could further deliver valuable guidance for supporting/mentoring schemes and activities fostering a more resilient research community.

          Related collections

          Most cited references54

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Loneliness and social isolation as risk factors for mortality: a meta-analytic review.

          Actual and perceived social isolation are both associated with increased risk for early mortality. In this meta-analytic review, our objective is to establish the overall and relative magnitude of social isolation and loneliness and to examine possible moderators. We conducted a literature search of studies (January 1980 to February 2014) using MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Social Work Abstracts, and Google Scholar. The included studies provided quantitative data on mortality as affected by loneliness, social isolation, or living alone. Across studies in which several possible confounds were statistically controlled for, the weighted average effect sizes were as follows: social isolation odds ratio (OR) = 1.29, loneliness OR = 1.26, and living alone OR = 1.32, corresponding to an average of 29%, 26%, and 32% increased likelihood of mortality, respectively. We found no differences between measures of objective and subjective social isolation. Results remain consistent across gender, length of follow-up, and world region, but initial health status has an influence on the findings. Results also differ across participant age, with social deficits being more predictive of death in samples with an average age younger than 65 years. Overall, the influence of both objective and subjective social isolation on risk for mortality is comparable with well-established risk factors for mortality.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Social jetlag: misalignment of biological and social time.

            Humans show large differences in the preferred timing of their sleep and activity. This so-called "chronotype" is largely regulated by the circadian clock. Both genetic variations in clock genes and environmental influences contribute to the distribution of chronotypes in a given population, ranging from extreme early types to extreme late types with the majority falling between these extremes. Social (e.g., school and work) schedules interfere considerably with individual sleep preferences in the majority of the population. Late chronotypes show the largest differences in sleep timing between work and free days leading to a considerable sleep debt on work days, for which they compensate on free days. The discrepancy between work and free days, between social and biological time, can be described as 'social jetlag.' Here, we explore how sleep quality and psychological wellbeing are associated with individual chronotype and/or social jetlag. A total of 501 volunteers filled out the Munich ChronoType Questionnaire (MCTQ) as well as additional questionnaires on: (i) sleep quality (SF-A), (ii) current psychological wellbeing (Basler Befindlichkeitsbogen), (iii) retrospective psychological wellbeing over the past week (POMS), and (iv) consumption of stimulants (e.g., caffeine, nicotine, and alcohol). Associations of chronotype, wellbeing, and stimulant consumption are strongest in teenagers and young adults up to age 25 yrs. The most striking correlation exists between chronotype and smoking, which is significantly higher in late chronotypes of all ages (except for those in retirement). We show these correlations are most probably a consequence of social jetlag, i.e., the discrepancies between social and biological timing rather than a simple association to different chronotypes. Our results strongly suggest that work (and school) schedules should be adapted to chronotype whenever possible.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Unemployment impairs mental health: Meta-analyses

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Appl Anim Behav Sci
                Appl Anim Behav Sci
                Applied Animal Behaviour Science
                Elsevier B.V.
                0168-1591
                0168-1591
                18 February 2021
                March 2021
                18 February 2021
                : 236
                : 105269
                Affiliations
                [a ]University of Plymouth, School of Biological and Marine Science, Drake Circus, Plymouth, PL4 8AA, UK
                [b ]University of Bristol, Bristol Veterinary School, Langford House, Langford, BS40 5DU, UK
                Author notes
                [* ]Corresponding authors.
                [1]

                These authors contributed equally to this work.

                Article
                S0168-1591(21)00056-3 105269
                10.1016/j.applanim.2021.105269
                9755055
                36540095
                c736677d-4af9-4b10-9c3c-a32794948759
                © 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                : 17 November 2020
                : 9 February 2021
                : 12 February 2021
                Categories
                Article

                Animal science & Zoology
                covid-19,work management,challenge,positive experience,coping strategies,mentoring

                Comments

                Comment on this article