• Aucun résultat trouvé

The health, well-being and life satisfaction of young people in Luxembourg before the COVID-19 pandemic and during deconfinement

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Partager "The health, well-being and life satisfaction of young people in Luxembourg before the COVID-19 pandemic and during deconfinement"

Copied!
14
0
0

Texte intégral

(1)

University of Luxembourg

The health, well-being and life satisfaction of young people in Luxembourg before the COVID-19

pandemic and during deconfinement

Caroline Residori, Lea Schomaker & Robin Samuel

HBSC Autumn Meeting 2020 – 10.11.2020

(2)

Introduction

Subjective well-being encompassing both

Cognitive well-being as well as affective well-being and being linked to subjective health

 Early studies show an above-average decline in well-being for young people compared with the middle aged and elderly as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and the measures taken to contain the pandemic (see for example: Schröder 2020).

 Deconfinement is a specific context and likely to have other effects than lockdown, confinement or quarantine

 Exploration of the effects of deconfinement (including possible

lingering effects of confinement) by comparing cognitive well-being, affective well-being and subjective health of 16-29 year-olds in 2019 and 2020

Schröder, 2020; Diener, 1994; Summer, 1996

(3)

Method: Data and Analysis

 Data collected for the Youth Survey Luxemburg

May-July 2019: n= 2802, 16-29-year-old residents

July 2020: n= 3768, 12-29-year-old residents, preliminary data until 30th July

Representative random sample

 Measures of interest:

Subjective Health (Self-rated health)

Affective Well-being (WHO-5 Well-being Index)

Cognitive Well-being (Life satisfaction – Cantril ladder)

 Analysis:

First cross-sectoral exploration of difference between 2019 and 2020

Weighted bivariate descriptive analysis

Residori et al, 2020; Sozio et al, 2019

(4)

 Self-rated Health

 Statistically non-significant increase of very good health from 36 % (CI-95: 34.1-37.9) to 38,5% (CI-95: 36,7-40,4)

Source YSL 2019 and 2020, n(2019) = 2618 / n(2020) = 2924, n(12-15) = 837, data weighted

Results: Subjective Health (Self-rated Health)

2.38 2.46

13.76 13.42

45.34 48.14

38.52 35.98

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

2020 2019

(Very) Bad Average Good Very Good

5.12 32.48 62.33

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

2020 (12-15 years olds)

Average /Bad Good Very Good

(5)

 Self-rated Health

 Statistically non-significant increase of mean for 16-20-year-olds and

 Statistically non-significant decrease of mean for other age groups

Source YSL 2019 and 2020, n(2019) =2618 / n(2020) 2924, data weighted

Results: Subjective Health (Self-rated Health)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

16-20 years 21-25 years 26-29 years

(Very) Bad Average Good Very Good

(6)

Results: Affective Well-being (WHO-5 Well-being Index)

 Affective Well-being (WHO-5 Well-being Index)

Stable from 2019 to 2020 for 16-29-year-olds

Source YSL 2019 and 2020, n(2019) = 2572 / n(2020) = 2898, n(12-15) = 834, data weighted 24.65

23.54

37.96 39.29

37.38 37.18

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

2020 2019

Low Well-being (<=36) Middle Well-being (40-60) High Well-being (>=64)

17.04 29.29 53.67

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

2020 (12-15 years olds)

Low Well-being (<=36) Middle Well-being (40-60) High Well-being (>=64)

(7)

Results: Affective Well-being (WHO-5 Well-being Index)

 Affective Well-being (WHO-5 Well-being Index)

Statistically non-significant increase of high well-being for youth with high SES by 18% from 45,9% (CI-95 39,4-52,51) to 54,3% (CI-95 48,5-60,1)

Source YSL 2019 and 2020, n(2019) = 2448 / n(2020) = 2789, data weighted 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

2019 2020 2019 2020 2019 2020

Very High Perceived Wealth High / Average Perceived Wealth (Very) Low Perceived Wealth

Low Well-being (<=36) Middle Well-being (40-60) High Well-being (>=64)

(8)

Results: Cognitive Wellbeing (Life satisfaction)

 Cognitive Wellbeing (Life satisfaction – Cantril ladder)

Increase in low LS by 46% from 21,4% (CI-95 19,9-23,2) to 31,4% (CI-95 29,7-33,1)

and increase in high LS by 38% from 10,8% (CI-95 9,6-12,0) to 15,0% (CI-95 13,7-16,3)

Source YSL 2019 and 2020, n(2019) = 2544 / n(2020) = 2927, n (12-15) = 814, data weighted 31.38

21.47

53.66 67.75

14.96 10.78

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

2020 2019

Low Life Satisfaction (<6) Middle Life Satisfaction (6-8) High Life Satisfaction (9-10)

14.44 54.10 31.46

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

2020 (12-15 years olds)

Low Life Satisfaction (<6) Middle Life Satisfaction (6-8) High Life Satisfaction (9-10)

(9)

Results: Cognitive Wellbeing (Life satisfaction)

 Cognitive Wellbeing (Life satisfaction – Cantril ladder)

Reduction of the gap between male and female (trend between 2014 and 2018, Heinz et al, 2019) High life satisfaction increased by 86% in male from 9,1% (CI 7,5-10,8) to 16,3% (CI 14,3-18,5)

Low life satisfaction increased by 69,6% in female from 19,4% (CI 17,4-21,6) to 32,9% (CI 30,6-35,2)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Male Female

Low Life Satisfaction (<6) Middle Life Satisfaction (6-8) High Life Satisfaction (9-10)

Source YSL 2019 and 2020, n(2019) = 2544 / n(2020) = 2927, data weighted

(10)

Results: Cognitive Wellbeing (Life satisfaction)

Source YSL 2019 and 2020, n(2019) = 2544 / n(2020) = 2927, data weighted

 Cognitive Wellbeing (Life satisfaction – Cantril ladder)

Changes between 2019 and 2020 are more pronounced in the higher age categories 16-20-years-olds (Low LS up by 28,0%, middle LS down by 16,6% and high LS up by 34,3%) 26-29-years-olds (Low LS up by 61,9%, middle LS down by 22,7% and high LS up by 39,8%)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

16-20 Jahre 21-25 Jahre 26-29 Jahre

Low Life Satisfaction (<6) Middle Life Satisfaction (6-8)

(11)

Results: Cognitive Wellbeing (Life satisfaction)

 Cognitive Wellbeing (Life satisfaction – Cantril ladder)

Changes between 2019 and 2020 more pronounced for youth with lower SES Middle life satisfaction down by 9,5% for high SES, by 19,6% for average SES and by 50,9% for low SES

Source YSL 2019 and 2020, n(2019) = 2418 / n(2020) = 2814, data weighted 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Very High Perceived Wealth High / Average Perceived Wealth (Very) Low Perceived Wealth

Low Life Satisfaction (<6) Middle Life Satisfaction (6-8) High Life Satisfaction (9-10)

(12)

Discussion and Conclusion

Discussion

 Between 2019 and 2020 indications of a polarising effect on cognitive well-being of the COVID-19 pandemic and the measures taken to

contain the pandemic – after a period of stability between 2006 and 2018

 Affective well-being and subjective health (still) more stable Conclusion

 Mid- and long-term evolution to be observed: Will cognitive well-being return to prepandemic levels or will it have repercussions on affective well-being and subjective health?

Heinz et al, 2019

(13)

Literature

Literature

Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being.Psychological Bulletin, 95(3), 542–575.

Heinz, Andreas; van Duin, Claire; Kern, Matthias Robert; Catunda, Carolina; Willems, Helmut (2020). Trends from 2006 - 2018 in Health Behaviour, Health Outcomes and Social Context of Adolescents in Luxembourg. Esch-sur-Alzette.

Residori, C., Sozio, M. E., Schomaker, L., Samuel, R. (2020): YAC – Young People and COVID-19. Preliminary Results of a Representative Survey of Adolescents and Young Adults in Luxembourg. University of Luxembourg: Esch-sur-Alzette

Sozio, M., Procopio, A., & Samuel, R. (2020). Youth Survey Luxembourg – Technical Report 2019. Esch-sur-Alzette: University of Luxembourg.

Sumner, W. (1996).Welfare, happiness, and ethics. Oxford: Claredon Press.Thorndike, E. L. (1920). A constant error in psychological

ratings.Journal of Applied Psychology, 4(1),25–29.

(14)

Thank you

Références

Documents relatifs

The rate of older adults with clinically relevant impaired mental health was similar to pre- pandemic levels in Luxembourg, suggesting thatnegative mental health

His research blends political history and theory, law as well as media and technology studies to look at the political history of the Internet and computing, power practices

For this reason, Google Forms was used to create a questionnaire, based on the existing format used at the university, but supplemented with questions on distance

◼ Inform health workers involved in the COVID-19 response and those who provide essential services to children, women and older people about the signs, symptoms and risk factors

The agricultural trade balance of Latin America and the Caribbean (15 countries, with available data to July 2020) increased by a value of 9.72 billion dollars, or 13 percent,

At the beginning of lockdown (wave 1), participants (N = 470) completed self-assessment questionnaires to document their initial level of well-being and state of nine

Social determinants of health and well-being among young people : Health Behaviour in School-Aged Children (HBSC) study : international report from the 2009/2010 survey / edited

Precisely, these health workers and medical scientists of Chinese origin are cooperating tightly with French public services − the public hospitals (AP-HP),