Values during lockdown better than afterwards
The first results of this study, which have now been published, clearly show that general mental distress was significantly increased during the first months of the pandemic. “People who had a strong sense of meaning in their lives, however, reported less severe mental distress overall. The ability of self-control – which is an important resource in terms of compliance with restrictions – was also beneficial to mental well-being. Both meaningfulness and self-control acted as a kind of buffer: they weakened the connection between COVID-19 stress and mental distress,” Schnell explains. The scientists were also interested in the development over several months: “The problems were apparently less severe during the strict lockdown than afterwards. The ease of restrictions did not lead to an improvement of the psychological situation – in fact the opposite was true. Schnell and Krampe can only assume what the reason for this is: “Of course, one source of concern is economic losses. In addition, our data indicate a possible connection with the ambiguity of the situation: During the strict initial restrictions, the situation was clear to everyone. There were explicit guidelines and everyone was in the same boat, so to speak. This atmosphere has probably had a positive effect for many people”. In the weeks following the lockdown, Schnell und Krampe registered both increasing crises of meaning and more severe psychological distress as well as a diminished sense of meaning in life and a deficiency in self-control. “We assume that self-control declined shortly after the lockdown – and seems to have continued declining, as we can observe in society – because the restrictions’ purpose is less clear: In Austria and Germany, the measures have worked so well that the situation has not (yet) escalated, which leads one to question their meaning – the so-called prevention paradox. In addition, in recent months, communication by the authorities has become less explicit and comprehensible. But if the meaningfulness of the measures is not apparent, it is difficult for many people to maintain self-control in the long term,” Tatjana Schnell points out.
Here Schnell and Krampe appeal once again to those responsible in politics: “If you want to achieve acceptance throughout society, you should act in a participatory manner. This implies that policy-making takes different perspectives into account, i.e. not only medicine and economics but also social sciences and the humanities. Moreover, democratic participation also means the active involvement of minorities and key interest groups. When this is successful, then self-control has less to do with obedience or resistance, but is a possible result of an informed personal decision”.