Suchergebnisse

The global COVID-19 pandemic poses challenges to the economy, politics and public health systems of developed and developing countries alike. However, the latter are less well placed to cope with adverse effects. In particular, important advances towards sustainable development might be reversed. Tackling the pandemic and its effects therefore requires global cooperation as well as solidarity in the form of development assistance. Yet, support for development assistance among donor publics might be dampened by individual health-related and economic worries as well as decreasing trust in government during the pandemic. Against this backdrop, we investigate the possible effect of pandemic-induced worries on public support for development assistance as well as the moderating role of moral considerations and trust in government. Drawing on literature on aid attitudes, and using survey data for Germany provided by the COVID-19 Snapshot Monitoring (COSMO) project from April 2020 (N = 1,006), our analyses show that neither health-related nor economic worries are associated with less support for providing development assistance during the first wave of the pandemic. However, we observe a marginal interaction between health-related worries and trust in government in predicting support for development assistance. For those with high levels of trust in government the effect of worry regarding the loss of friends or relatives on support for development assistance is positive, whereas it is close to zero for those with low levels of trust. We conclude that at the peak of the first wave of the pandemic there was little need for concern by policy-makers endorsing development assistance as neither form of worry correlated negatively with public support for development assistance and trust was high. However, when worries recur and trust in government simultaneously decreases, public support for global solidarity may wane. ; Peer Reviewed

The global COVID-19 pandemic poses challenges to the economy, politics and public health systems of developed and developing countries alike. However, the latter are less well placed to cope with adverse effects. In particular, important advances towards sustainable development might be reversed. Tackling the pandemic and its effects therefore requires global cooperation as well as solidarity in the form of development assistance. Yet, support for development assistance among donor publics might be dampened by individual health-related and economic worries as well as decreasing trust in government during the pandemic. Against this backdrop, we investigate the possible effect of pandemic-induced worries on public support for development assistance as well as the moderating role of moral considerations and trust in government. Drawing on literature on aid attitudes, and using survey data for Germany provided by the COVID-19 Snapshot Monitoring (COSMO) project from April 2020 (N = 1,006), our analyses show that neither health-related nor economic worries are associated with less support for providing development assistance during the first wave of the pandemic. However, we observe a marginal interaction between health-related worries and trust in government in predicting support for development assistance. For those with high levels of trust in government the effect of worry regarding the loss of friends or relatives on support for development assistance is positive, whereas it is close to zero for those with low levels of trust. We conclude that at the peak of the first wave of the pandemic there was little need for concern by policy-makers endorsing development assistance as neither form of worry correlated negatively with public support for development assistance and trust was high. However, when worries recur and trust in government simultaneously decreases, public support for global solidarity may wane. ; Peer Reviewed

Hintergrund: In der Coronaviruspandemie nehmen 2 Institutionen eine zentrale Rolle in der evidenzbasierten Einordnung des Geschehens für Politik und Bevölkerung ein. Das Robert Koch-Institut (RKI) koordiniert die Pandemiebekämpfung, erstellt fundierte Empfehlungen für medizinisches Fachpersonal, die Medien sowie die Bevölkerung und berät die Politik. Die Bundeszentrale für gesundheitliche Aufklärung (BZgA) informiert die Bevölkerung und Institutionen. Ziel der Arbeit: Mit dem COVID-19 Snapshot Monitoring (COSMO) wird beobachtet, ob und wie sich das Vertrauen in Institutionen über die Pandemie verändert. Es wird untersucht, welche Bevölkerungsgruppen Vertrauen zeigen und wie dies mit Einstellungen, Risikowahrnehmung und Verhaltensweisen zusammenhängt. Material und Methoden: In Querschnittstudien werden seit März 2020 die Risikowahrnehmung, das Verhalten und die Akzeptanz von Maßnahmen sowie das Vertrauen in Institutionen mit etwa N = 1000 Befragten pro Erhebung untersucht. Ergebnisse: Das Vertrauen in RKI und BZgA war generell hoch, sank aber über den Verlauf der Pandemie. Höheres Vertrauen ging für beide Institutionen mit höherem Alter der Befragten, höherer Bildung, höherer Risikowahrnehmung und höherer Akzeptanz von Maßnahmen einher. Verhaltensweisen wie Abstandhalten und Händewaschen wurden häufiger gezeigt. Männer und chronisch Erkrankte zeigten geringeres Vertrauen. Diskussion: Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass Vertrauen weiter gefördert werden sollte. Dies könnte u. a. erreicht werden, indem in der Entwicklung und Begründung von Strategien und Maßnahmen auch die Sichtweise der Bevölkerung (z. B. durch COSMO) berücksichtigt wird. Kommunikationsstrategien und Handlungsempfehlungen sollten darauf abzielen, Personen mit hoher Risikowahrnehmung zu unterstützen und zu entlasten. ; Background: In the coronavirus pandemic, two institutions play a central role in the evidence-based classification of events for politics and the population. The Robert Koch Institute (RKI) coordinates the fight against the pandemic, ...

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted the lives of children and adolescents worldwide. The German COPSY study is among the first population-based longitudinal studies to examine the mental health impact of the pandemic. The objective of the study was to assess changes in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and mental health in children and adolescents and to identify the associated risk and resource factors during the pandemic.
Methods: A nationwide longitudinal survey was conducted with two waves during the pandemic (May/June 2020 and December 2020/January 2021). In total, n = 1923 children and adolescents aged 7 to 17 years and their parents participated (retention rate from wave 1 to wave 2: 85%). The self-report and parent-proxy surveys assessed HRQoL (KIDSCREEN-10), mental health problems (SDQ with the subscales emotional problems, conduct problems, hyperactivity, and peer problems), anxiety (SCARED), depressive symptoms (CES-DC, PHQ-2) and psychosomatic complaints (HBSC-SCL). Mixed model panel regression analyses were conducted to examine longitudinal changes in mental health and to identify risk and resource factors.
Results: The HRQoL of children and adolescents decreased during the pandemic, and emotional problems, peer-related mental health problems, anxiety, depressive and psychosomatic symptoms increased over time, however the change in global mental health problems from wave 1 to wave 2 was not significant, and some changes were negligible. Socially disadvantaged children and children of mentally burdened parents were at particular risk of impaired mental health, while female gender and older age were associated with fewer mental health problems. A positive family climate and social support supported the mental health of children and adolescents during the pandemic.
Discussion: Health promotion, prevention and intervention strategies could support children and adolescents in coping with the pandemic and protect and maintain their mental health.