Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34599096›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2021

The impact of social isolation and changes in work patterns on ongoing thought during the first COVID-19 lockdown in the United Kingdom.

Brontë Mckeown, Giulia L Poerio, Will H Strawson, Léa M Martinon, Leigh M Riby, Elizabeth Jefferies, Cade McCall, Jonathan Smallwood

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Brontë MckeownDepartment of Psychology, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, United Kingdom; bronte.mckeown@york.ac.uk.ORCID 0000-0002-4204-2001
Giulia L PoerioDepartment of Psychology, University of Essex, Colchester, CO4 3SQ, United Kingdom.
Will H StrawsonNeuroscience, Brighton and Sussex Medical School, University of Sussex, Brighton, BN1 9PX, United Kingdom.
Léa M MartinonLaboratoire de Psychologie Cognitive et Sociale, CNRS UMR 6024, Université Clermont Auvergne, 63000 Clermont-Ferrand, France.ORCID 0000-0001-9467-701X
Leigh M RibyDepartment of Psychology, Northumbria University, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 8ST, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9124-2595
Elizabeth JefferiesDepartment of Psychology, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, United Kingdom.
Cade McCallDepartment of Psychology, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, United Kingdom.
Jonathan SmallwoodPsychology Department, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, K7L 3N6, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-7298-2459

Funding

European Research Council
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic led to lockdowns in countries across the world, changing the lives of billions of people. The United Kingdom's first national lockdown, for example, restricted people's ability to socialize and work. The current study examined how changes to socializing and working during this lockdown impacted ongoing thought patterns in daily life. We compared the prevalence of thought patterns between two independent real-world, experience-sampling cohorts, collected before and during lockdown. In both samples, young (18 to 35 y) and older (55+ y) participants completed experience-sampling measures five times daily for 7 d. Dimension reduction was applied to these data to identify common "patterns of thought." Linear mixed modeling compared the prevalence of each thought pattern 1) before and during lockdown, 2) in different age groups, and 3) across different social and activity contexts. During lockdown, when people were alone, social thinking was reduced, but on the rare occasions when social interactions were possible, we observed a greater increase in social thinking than prelockdown. Furthermore, lockdown was associated with a reduction in future-directed problem solving, but this thought pattern was reinstated when individuals engaged in work. Therefore, our study suggests that the lockdown led to significant changes in ongoing thought patterns in daily life and that these changes were associated with changes to our daily routine that occurred during lockdown.

Indexed as

SARS-CoV-2Social IsolationThinkingAdolescentAdultAffectAgedAged, 80 and overCOVID-19FemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProblem SolvingSocial CognitionUnited KingdomCOVID-19experience samplingisolationlockdownthoughts

Identifiers

PMID34599096
PMCPMC8501798

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.