Home-Schooling During COVID-19 Lockdown: Effects of Coping Style, Home Space
Home-schooling during COVID-19 lockdown: Effects of coping style, home space,
and everyday creativity on stress and home-schooling outcomes.
Ana Aznar
Paul Sowden
Sarah Bayless
Kirsty Ross
Amy Warhurst
Dimitra Pachi
University of Winchester
The authors would like to acknowledge Sandra Mansfield and Nuanpat Tuchinda for their work on this project, as well as thanking the parents who took part.
The research was led by Ana Aznar. All authors contributed to the conceptualisation of the research, methodology and resources and project administration. Data analyses were conducted by Paul Sowden. The manuscript was drafted by Ana Aznar, Paul Sowden and Sarah Bayless. All authors substantially contributed to review and editing of the manuscript. Revisions to the manuscript following peer review were made by Ana Aznar and Paul Sowden.
Please address correspondence to Ana Aznar, Department of Psychology, University of Winchester, Winchester, SO22 4NR. Email: [email protected] Phone: +44 (0) 1962827135. The present study examined parents’ experiences of home-schooling their children during the first COVID-19 lockdown in the UK. A total of 322 parents completed an online survey between the 1st May and the 24th July 2020. Relationships were explored between predictor variables (coping mechanisms, household income, adequacy of space, access to ‘green’ space) and outcome variables (parenting self-efficacy, discipline, home-schooling relationships) mediated by stress and moderated by creativity and parenting dimensions.
Moderated mediation analyses showed that inadequate space at home and negative coping mechanisms resulted in elevated stress and worse outcomes in terms of parents approaches to discipline and their experience of home-schooling their children. Negative outcomes were more pronounced for parents who used high levels of behavioural control. In turn, negative outcomes were reduced when parents had higher levels of self-perceived everyday creativity and outcomes were improved by positive coping strategies. Our findings suggest that interventions focused on developing creative self-efficacy and positive coping strategies may be effective routes to help parents deal with the stress of supporting their children with periods of schooling at home during the COVID-19 pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic has affected the lives of families around the world, causing stress, economic difficulties, and negative short and long-term effects on individuals’ well-being (Restubog et al., 2020; Sher, 2020). Between March and June 2020, the UK government imposed a national lockdown, closing schools and affecting the life of families with school-aged children, with a further lockdown in the UK from January to
March 2021. Similar lockdowns have been enforced and continue to be enforced worldwide, forcing parents into full-time care and home-schooling their children while being socially isolated and physically restricted. Many parents also adjusted to new work-from-home arrangements. Consequently, the stress levels of many parents increased (Hiraoka & Tomoda,
2020), which may have had a negative impact on the parent-child relationship as well as on parents’ and children’s well-being (Lee et al., 2021). Although research examining the effects of the pandemic on families is still emerging, findings suggest that the rates of domestic violence (Taub, 2020) and child maltreatment (UNICEF, 2020) increased. It is vital that we understand the effect that lockdown had on families to inform government responses to further waves of the COVID-19 pandemic and future pandemics.
The present study examined parents’ experiences of home-schooling their children in the UK during the March to June 2020 COVID-19 lockdown with the aim of understanding common effects of stress on parenting and home-schooling outcomes in the pandemic context and extending work to date by identifying some of the factors that may buffer negative outcomes. The findings will inform interventions and support for families during the COVID-
19 pandemic.
Parenting and Child Development
The way parents raise and behave towards their children influences children’s development. Parenting behaviours have mostly been examined in terms of three dimensions: warmth, psychological control, and behavioural control (Morris et al.,
2007). Parental warmth refers to the level of love and support towards the children (Altschul et al., 2016). Psychological control refers to the level of guilt induction, blame, and intrusiveness exercised by parents (Soenens & Vansteenkiste, 2010). Behavioural control refers to the level of structure and control aimed at the child (Manzeske & Stright, 2009).
These dimensions of parenting exist in a continuum with parents scoring high or low in each one of them. In general, children whose parents are warm and use low levels of punitive and coercive control tend to experience better developmental outcomes. In contrast, children whose parents are colder and controlling, tend to show worse psychosocial adjustment (Jaffe et al., 2010). Different circumstances and factors such as culture, socioeconomic status (SES) or stress affect parenting (Pinderhughes et al., 2001).
Parental Stress
Parental stress is an important factor influencing parenting behaviours towards their children and the overall quality of the parent-child relationship. Parental stress develops when parents perceive that they do not have the resources to meet the demands of being a parent
(Deater-Deckard, 1998), negatively affecting their own and their children’s well- being, their children’s developmental outcomes, and the parent-child relationship (Cappa et al., 2011). Elevated parental stress negatively influences the quality of parenting, parents’ sensitivity towards their child, parents’ cooperation and investment in the child (McMahon &
Meins, 2012), and it is linked with poor parental mental health (Leigh & Milgrom, 2008).
Parental stress can also negatively influence children’s development. It is positively correlated with children’s developmental and behavioural maladjustment (Fallucco et al.,
2016), and linked with worse parent-child relations (Beckerman et al., 2017).
In general, stressed parents tend to be more authoritarian and use harsher discipline, which may be negative for children’s development (Liu & Meifang, 2015). There are many factors that tend to increase parents’ level of stress, such as family conflict (Strohschein,
2005), or job loss (Lawson et al., 2020). Parents’ stress during widespread crises (e.g., wars) has been found to increase, in turn having a negative influence on their children’s own stress levels (Eltanamly et al., 2019). In addition, when schools have been closed due to health emergencies or natural disasters, violence against children, reported child abuse, and children’s overall level of vulnerability increased (Cluver et al., 2020; Rothe et al., 2015).
Parenting and Home-schooling during the COVID-19 Lockdown
Even though research examining parenting during the COVID-19 pandemic is still emerging, a similar pattern is appearing to previous mass crises. Parents have reported experiencing elevated stress levels during the COVID-19 pandemic (Brown et al.,
2020; Chung et al., 2020), suggesting that they may have behaved in a more authoritarian manner and used harsher discipline techniques. Indeed, child protection services across many countries affected by the pandemic have reported an increase in levels of child abuse
(Agrawal, 2020). Parents in Singapore experienced high stress levels during the COVID-19 lockdown negatively affecting the relationship with their children and increasing their use of harsh parenting (e.g., spanking; Chung et al., 2020). Parents in Spain reported feeling more stressed during the lockdown, with low SES families experiencing more distress whereas higher SES families reported higher levels of resilience (Romero et al., 2020). Recent research suggests that high levels of stress may have greater negative impact on families who were vulnerable to start with (Riegler et al., 2020; Fontanesi et al., 2020).
An important task that parents undertook during lockdown was to home-school their children. Previous research addressing stress levels of parents who home-school their children under normal circumstances found relatively low levels of stress when compared to national averages (Windish & Wachob, 2017). However, these findings cannot simply be extrapolated to parents who home-schooled their children during the COVID-19 lockdown because these parents did not do so by choice and were simultaneously coping with COVID-
19 related stressors. Even though parents may be used to helping their children with homework, this is not the same as being responsible for home-schooling a child, as parents were during lockdown. It seems plausible to suggest that the level of parental stress during lockdown increased, negatively influencing their own wellbeing, their ability to home-school their children, and the parent-child relationship.
To the best of our knowledge, there is only one study that has examined parents’ experiences of home-schooling their children during the COVID-19 lockdown. Schmidt et al., (in press) conducted a 21-day diary study in Germany. Their findings suggest that school closures had an overall negative impact on parent-child relations. The level of negative affect between parents and children, and children’s own negative affect, increased on the days that the children completed schoolwork. Also, negative parent-child interactions increased on the days that parents were more involved in home-schooling their children. Parent-child relations were worse in the case of children who rarely completed their schoolwork or in the case of children who worked on school tasks every day. The best parent-child relations were for those children who worked independently.
Parents’ Coping Mechanisms
Due to the COVID-19 lockdown, parents have faced stressors in addition to general parenting related stress. Individuals differ in their approach to dealing with challenges. The continual and deliberate effort to manage stress is referred to as coping (Carver et al., 1989).
Studies from previous health disasters indicate their negative impacts on wellbeing and mental health and the importance of effective coping strategies to facilitate positive, adaptive outcomes (Sprang & Silman, 2013). Positive coping is associated with more adaptive outcomes (e.g., lower stress levels; Vanderhasselt et al., 2014). These strategies include positive refocusing, positive reappraisal, putting into perspective, refocus on planning, and acceptance. Other cognitive emotional strategies are less adaptive such as rumination, self- blame, catastrophizing, and blaming others (Garnefski & Kraaij, 2007).
Studies of individuals dealing with challenges associated with the COVID-19 pandemic have reported on the associations between different coping strategies and wellbeing, and highlighted the benefit of positive, adaptive coping for more resilient outcomes (Agha, 2020; Robles-Bello et al., 2020). For example, parents in the US who lost their jobs during the pandemic, were better able to deal with their stress when they used positive coping mechanisms (Lawson et al., 2020). In general, children whose parents, at a time of crisis, accept the situation, monitor them, and who focus on solving problems, tend to do better than children whose parents are harsh and overprotective (Cobham et al., 2016).
To date, there has been little focus on the stress related to home-schooling during lockdown. We expect that, in line with previous research, certain adaptive coping styles will predict lower levels of parenting stress, and higher levels of wellbeing.
Indoor and Outdoor Space
Inadequate, low quality, living space is associated with poorer mental health (Xie et al., 2021) and this relationship may be more pronounced at times of transition (Foye, 2017), such as the COVID-19 lockdown. Conversely, access to high quality outdoor spaces, especially ‘green’ spaces, has been associated with stress reduction (Ulrich et al., 1991), and increased well-being (White et al., 2019). However, not all individuals find green spaces appealing with some reporting them to be unpleasant (Bixler & Floyd, 1997) and, in general, individuals vary in the extent to which they feel connected to nature (Mayer & Frantz, 2004).
As a result of COVID-19, individuals were potentially faced with a double negative impact from the space-related restrictions imposed by lockdowns. First, any perceived or actual deficiencies of individuals’ indoor home spaces were likely to become particularly salient. Second, individuals’ opportunities to benefit from the restorative and stress reducing benefits of access to green space may have been reduced due to travel restrictions. Thus, in the present work we sought to include perceived adequacy of indoor space, access to green space and connectedness to nature as potential predictors of participants’ stress.
Parental Creativity
Creativity is the production of original and effective solutions or ideas (Runco &
Jaeger, 2012). Creativity can be observed in any domain and at all levels from personal creative insights through to world changing creative ideas (Kaufman & Beghetto, 2009).
Creative self-beliefs include people’s self-estimates of their own creativity and can predict creative achievements, particularly when the creative domain is matched (Snyder et al.,
2020). Various researchers have developed domain specific measures of creative self-beliefs that capture creative self-perceptions in contexts including the everyday, scholarly, performance, science, and arts (Kaufman, 2012). For instance, everyday creativity might reflect someone’s ability to find something fun to do with no money. This kind of everyday creativity is likely to help individuals deal with daily problems and may be important for adapting to the kinds of changes that home-schooling during a pandemic required. Further, creative self-beliefs predict engagement in creative activity (Beghetto, 2006), which has been shown to promote personal growth (Forgeard & Elstein, 2014) and increase wellbeing
(Conner et al., 2018). Creativity may provide a coping mechanism to manage stress and anxiety (Kaimal et al., 2016). Indeed, creative individuals tend to manage stress more effectively than less creative people because they face stressors as challenges and not as obstacles, allowing them to adapt better to life circumstances (Turiano et al., 2012). Thus, these findings suggest that everyday creativity can help with solving problems, promote well- being, and act as a protective agent against stress. We hypothesize that creative parents will report feeling less stressed and better able to home-school their children. The Current Study
In summary, the COVID-19 pandemic forced parents of school-aged children to home-school their children while being socially isolated, physically restricted, and while many had to adapt to new working-from-home conditions. This situation was likely to increase parents’ stress, in turn influencing their children’s well-being. However, the extent to which parental stress increased is likely to be influenced by a range of factors including resources and coping style and buffered by everyday creativity, whilst the impact of stress on various home-schooling outcomes is likely to be dependent on parenting.
Therefore, the present study aims to understand parents’ experiences of home- schooling their children during COVID-19 lockdown between March and June 2020 in the
UK. This knowledge will not only inform policy makers, educators, and clinicians to best support families during and in the aftermath of the pandemic and in similar future crises, but it will also aid our understanding of parenting under adverse conditions. Specifically, we hypothesise that parents’ resources (coping mechanisms, adequacy of space, and income) will predict their ability to home-school their children, their enjoyment of doing so, their discipline, and the quality of parent-child relations. We further hypothesise that these relations will be mediated by parents’ stress level and moderated by parenting dimensions
(warmth, behavioural control, and psychological control) and parents’ creativity.
Method
Participants
Participants were parents who home-schooled at least one school-aged child during the 2020 COVID-19 lockdown in the UK. Only parents who were involved in home- schooling their children during the lockdown and whose children were not home-schooled before the lockdown could participate. Parents who had more than one child, completed the questionnaire about their youngest school-aged child (Mage = 8.18, SD = 2.55). A total of 322 parents participated. After removing missing data, the final number of participants were 183
(161 females; 10 males; 12 undeclared) with a mean age of 41.51 (SD = 5.87).
A total of 22% of participants reported living with one child and 53.8% with two children. The rest of the parents lived with three or more children. A total of 83.2% participants reported cohabiting with the child’s other parent. The sample was highly educated with a mean household income of £81,540.74 (SD = 63,331.37). Participants reported spending an average of 11.13 hours (SD = 7.28) per week helping their children with their schoolwork during lockdown. A total of 66% of participants were working from home at the time of the lockdown and they reported typically working for 25.81 hours (SD = 14.23) per week however during lockdown they reported working 17.04 hours per week (SD =
15.18). Overall, parents considered as adequate the resources they had available to support their children (M = 3.20, SD = .75), as well as their home space (M = 3.04, SD = .91).
Materials
Participants completed an online questionnaire via Qualtrics, containing some measures designed to explore experiences in the context of COVID-19 specifically, some that were adapted to the COVID-19 context, and some that were more generic.
Demographics and Household Information.
Demographic and Household Information (15 items). Parents reported on their age, sex, education level, relationship and financial status, and number of hours of paid work per week (before and during the lockdown). They reported on the number of people living in in the household, ages of children under the age of 18, and number of hours that they helped their child with their schoolwork during lockdown. Finally, participants reported on the adequacy of their resources to home-school their children (e.g., computer), on the adequacy of their indoor and outdoor space, and on how connected they feel with nature.
Parents’ Experience of Home-schooling and Parenting during the Lockdown. Parents’ Confidence and Enjoyment while Home-schooling and Parenting their
Children (12 items). Parents reported on their level of confidence and enjoyment while supporting their children’s home-schooling, physical, and emotional wellbeing during lockdown (1 = not enjoying/not confident at all to 7 = enjoying everything about it/completely confident). Parents also rated whether they thought that other parents were doing more for their children than themselves, whether their child’s school was demanding too much, whether they felt on top of the school demands (1 = strongly agree to 7 = strongly disagree), and whether they understood their child’s schoolwork better than before the lockdown (from 1 = a lot less to 7 = a lot more).
Parent-child Relationship During the COVID-19 Lockdown. Parents were asked to rate their relationship with their child during lockdown, and their child’s behaviour during lockdown (1 = much worse to 7 = much better).
Children’s Discipline During the COVID-19 Lockdown. Parents were asked to report on the frequency and strictness of their discipline towards their children (1 = a lot more/stricter to 5 = a lot less/less strict).
Parenting Dimensions Questionnaire (Revised CRPR, Block & Block, 1984) (20 questions). The CRPR assesses participants’ reports of parental warmth (10 items, e.g., “I respect my child’s opinions and encourage him/her to express them”, α = .77), behavioural control (6 items, e.g., “My child should learn that we have rules in our family”, α = .67), and psychological control (4 items, “My child should be aware of how much I sacrifice for him/her”, α = .76). Responses are given on a 5-point scale from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5
(strongly agree). Item scores were added for each subscale with a higher score indicating a higher level of that parenting dimension.
Stress, Coping, and Creativity Stress Questions (4 items). Parents were asked to rate their level of stress (1 = not at all stressed to 5 = very stressed), their level of parental satisfaction (1 = not at all satisfied to
7 = very satisfied), the frequency that they felt upset as a parent (1 = almost always to 7 = never), and their level of happiness with how their children were developing (1 = very happy to 5 = not at all happy) at that specific point in time.
Cognitive Emotion Regulation Questionnaire (CERQ-short version; Garnefski et al.,
2001). The CERQ measures coping as eight cognitive emotion regulation strategies, namely:
Self-blame (α = .63), other blame (α = .87), rumination (α = .54), catastrophizing (α = .64), putting into perspective (α = .71), positive refocusing (α = .71), positive reappraisal (α = .75), acceptance (α = .75), and refocus on planning (α = .49). Each subscale includes 2 items asking participants to indicate their coping strategies. Items are rated from 1 (almost never) to
5 (almost always). Higher scores indicate a more frequent use of each strategy.
Kaufman Domains of Creativity Scale (K-DOCS; Kaufman, 2012). Only the subscale
‘Self/Everyday Creativity’ (11 items; α = .77) asking participants to rate how creative they consider themselves to be compared with people similar to them (e.g., "Finding something fun to do when I have no money”) was used. Items are rated from 1(much less creative) to 5
(much more creative). Higher scores indicate a higher level of self-perceived creativity.
Creative Self-efficacy (Beghetto, 2006, 2009). This questionnaire (6 items) was adapted to ask parents about their creativity when supporting their child with schoolwork
(e.g., “I am good at coming up with new ideas”; α = .84) on a scale from 1 (not true) to 5
(very true). Higher scores indicated higher levels of creative self-efficacy when helping their children with schoolwork.
Procedure
Participating parents were recruited via social media. Only parents who met the eligibility criteria were invited to participate. The survey was available from 1st May - 24th July 2020. Questionnaires were counterbalanced and completion took approximately 25 minutes. The present study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of
Winchester. Participants provided written informed consent. Participation was anonymous.
Parents received no rewards for their participation.
Results Dimension Reduction Analyses
In order to assess the underlying structure of the new measures included in the questionnaire, which explore aspects of parents’ experiences of home-schooling during
COVID-19 lockdown, a series of principle component analyses were run.
Predictors: Sources of stress
A principle components analysis was conducted on the stress items (see Table 1 for a list of items included in the analysis) with direct oblimin rotation. The KMO value was 0.62 indicating sufficient sampling adequacy (Kaiser & Rice, 1974) and the KMO values for individual items ranged from 0.59 – 0.80, which are all above the acceptable minimum of 0.5
(Kaiser & Rice, 1974). Based on Kaiser’s criterion two factors were extracted with eigenvalues that exceeded 1 explaining 63% of the variance. Table 1 shows the factor loadings after rotation. The items loading on factor 1 suggests that it represents stress resulting from social comparison, parental experience and other factors. The items loading on factor 2 suggest that it represents concern about school demands.
Insert Table 1 about here
In order to see whether the items loading on each factor > 0.4 could be combined to form separate scales, reliability analyses were conducted. Reliability for ‘general stress’ was low (α = .48). However, removing the item “I feel there is always someone doing more for their child than I am”, which reflects a form of social comparison stress, improved reliability to α = .67. Reliability for the two items comprising ‘school demands stress’ was α = .62. On the basis of these analyses, social comparison stress was treated as a single item predictor and the remaining two items loading on the ‘general stress’ component were combined as a scale score. Similarly, the two ‘school demands stress’ items were combined to form a scale score.
Outcomes: Parental self-efficacy, discipline and home-schooling experience
A principle components analysis was conducted on the 11 items (see Table 2 for a list of items included in the analysis) with direct oblimin rotation. The KMO value was 0.78 indicating sufficient sampling adequacy (Kaiser & Rice, 1974) and the KMO values for individual items ranged from 0.51 – 0.89, which are above the acceptable minimum of 0.5
(Kaiser & Rice, 1974). Based on Kaiser’s criterion three factors were extracted with eigenvalues that exceeded 1 explaining 63% of the variance. Table 2 shows the factor loadings after rotation. The items loading on factor 1 suggest that it represents the extent to which parents feel effective and satisfied with their parenting and this was labelled ‘parenting self-efficacy’. The items loading on factor 2 suggest that it represents parents’ approach to discipline during lockdown. The items loading on factor 3 suggest that it represents parent- child relationships in the context of home-schooling during lockdown.
Insert table 2 about here
To see whether the items loading on each factor > 0.4 could be combined to form separate scales, reliability analyses were conducted. Reliability for ‘parental self-efficacy’ was good (α = .81). Reliability for the two items comprising ‘Discipline’ (the item relating to effect of lockdown on child behaviour also loaded > 0.4 but loaded more strongly on the
‘home-schooling relationships’ factor so was not included here) was α = .62. Reliability for the four items loading on ‘home-schooling relationships’ was α = .73. On the basis of these analyses, it was decided to combine scores on the items respectively loading onto each factor to form scale scores, albeit cautiously for the two items comprising the ‘discipline’ scale.
Reliability analysis of established scales A number of established scales used in the present study were not specifically designed for a COVID-19 context. Therefore, the internal consistencies with the present sample of these scales were checked and are presented in Table 3. Due to the low reliability of CERQ focus on thought/rumination and refocus on planning in the present context, these sub-scales were excluded from further analyses.
Insert Table 3 about here Testing the conceptual model
Figure 1 shows the series of relationships we explored between each of our predictor variables (CERQ self-blame, acceptance, positive refocusing, positive reappraisal, putting into perspective, catastrophizing; household income, adequacy of space and resources, access to natural space) and our outcome variables (parenting self-efficacy; discipline; home- schooling relationships) as mediated by our stress variables (social comparison stress; general stress; school demands stress) and moderated by our creativity (KDOCS; CSE) and parenting style variables (warmth; behavioural control; psychological control).
Because of the large number of predictors, potential mediators and moderators, and
DV’s initial regression analyses were used to test for significant predictors and moderators before conducting the full moderated mediation analyses on these significant relationships.
Insert Figure 1 about here
Effect of resources on outcomes
This analysis comprised of three models, testing the effects of resources on outcomes
(parenting self-efficacy, discipline, and home-school relationships).
Parenting self-efficacy was positively predicted by CERQ positive re-appraisal and perceived adequacy of home space (high score more adequate) and negatively predicted by
CERQ self-blame. Further, the effect of adequacy of space on parenting self-efficacy was moderated by everyday creativity (KDOCS). Simple slopes analysis showed that at low everyday creativity scores (-1 SD) adequacy of space positively predicted parenting self- efficacy (b = .36, 95% CI [.16, .57], t = 3.51, p = .0006) and this relationship was maintained at mean everyday creativity scores (b = .21, 95% CI [.069-.34], t = 2.95, p = .0036) but not at high creativity scores (n.s.). In other words, inadequate space only predicted lower parenting self-efficacy when creativity scores were lower.
Insert Table 4 about here
Discipline was not significantly predicted by resources (R2 = .11, p = .132). Home- school relationships, however, were positively predicted by CERQ positive reappraisal, and negatively predicted by CERQ self-blame and CERQ acceptance.
Insert Table 5 about here
Effect of resources on stress
Three models were tested, addressing the effect of resources on the three stress factors
(social comparison stress, general stress and school demands stress). Social comparison stress was negatively predicted by adequacy of space, and positively predicted by CERQ catastrophising.
Insert Table 6 about here
General stress was negatively predicted by positive refocusing and adequacy of space at home, and positively predicted by CERQ self-blame.
The effect of adequacy of space on general stress was moderated by everyday creativity (KDOCS). Simple slopes analysis showed that at low (b = -.33, 95% CI [-.50, -.16], t = -3.85, p = .0002) and mean (b = -.20, 95% CI [-.32, -.07], t = -3.08, p = .0024) levels of everyday creativity (KDOCS) stress was predicted by adequacy of space, but not at high levels of everyday creativity (n.s.). Inadequate space predicted general stress only when creativity scores were lower.
The effect of positive refocusing on general stress was also moderated by everyday creativity. Simple slopes analysis showed that at low (b = -.38, 95% CI [-.57, -.20], t = -4.12, p = .001) and mean (b = -.24, 95% CI [-.37, -.10], t = -3.54, p = .001) levels of everyday creativity (KDOCS), general stress was predicted by positive refocussing, but not at high levels of everyday creativity (n.s.). Positive refocusing negatively predicted general stress only when creativity was lower.
Insert Table 7 about here
School demands stress was not significantly predicted by any of the variables (R2
= .12, p = .116).
Effect of stress on outcomes
Three models were tested, addressing the effect of stress on the three parenting outcomes (parenting self-efficacy, discipline and home-school relationships).
Parenting self-efficacy was negatively predicted by general stress. This relationship was moderated by behavioural control, such that at higher levels of behavioural control greater general stress predicts lower parenting self-efficacy.
Insert Table 8 about here
Discipline was positively predicted by general stress. This relationship was moderated by behavioural control. Simple slopes analysis showed that general stress predicted discipline at medium (b = .16, 95% CI [.03, .28], t = 2.55, p = .0118) and high levels of behavioural control (b = .33, 95% CI [.17, .49], t = 4.01, p = .0001, but not at low levels of control (n.s.). General stress therefore predicted discipline only at higher levels of behavioural control.
The relationship between discipline and general stress was also moderated by everyday creativity (KDOCS). Simple slopes analysis showed that general stress predicted discipline at mean (b = .19, 95% CI [.048, .33], t = 2.66, p = .0087) and high levels of creativity (+1 SD, b = .30, 95% CI [.11, .49], t = 3.13, p = .0020, but not at low levels of creativity (-1 SD, n.s.). At higher levels of creativity, higher levels of general stress were more likely to predict more frequent and harsh discipline.
Insert Table 9 about here
Home-schooling relationships were negatively predicted by social comparison stress, general stress, and school demands stress. Everyday creativity moderated the relationship between social comparison stress and home-schooling relationships. The relationship was significant at low (b = -.28, 95% CI [-.41, -.15], t = -4.34, p = .001) and mean (b = -.15, 95%
CI [-.24, -.07], t = -3.58, p = .001) but not high levels of everyday creativity (n.s.)
Insert Table 10 about here Hierarchical regression analyses
Prior to conducting a series of moderated mediation and mediation analyses, a series of hierarchical regression analyses checked the separate contribution of the significant stress predictors of parenting outcomes, after controlling for the effect of resources. For parenting self-efficacy, the model explained 32% of the variance at step 1 and the addition of general stress at step 2 explained an additional 6% of variance. The only significant predictors at step
2 were CERQ positive reappraisal (β = .33, p = .001) and general stress (β = -.29, p = .001).
For discipline, the model was not significant.
In the model for home-schooling relationships, 29% of the variance was explained at step 1. The addition of three stress variables explained an additional 17% of the variance. In the final model the two significant predictors were CERQ positive reappraisal (β = .25, p
= .003) and general stress (β = -.23, p = .001). Social comparison stress and school demands stress did not predict parenting outcomes.
Mediation and moderated mediation analyses
Following the pattern of significant predictors identified in the preceding linear regression and moderation analyses, three potential mediation and moderated mediation relationships were identified for mediation analyses. These are shown in figures 2, 3 and 4. The first analysis showed that the relationship between CERQ self-blame and home- schooling relationships was fully mediated by general stress (Figure 2). Higher levels of self- blame predicted increased stress which in turn predicted poorer home-schooling relations.
Insert Figure 2 about here
The second analysis explored whether general stress mediated the relationship between CERQ self-blame and parenting self-efficacy with the relationship between general stress and parenting self-efficacy moderated by behavioural control. The index of moderated mediation was n.s. However, a simple mediation analysis suggested that the effect of CERQ self-blame on parenting self-efficacy was fully mediated by general stress, albeit CERQ self- blame only marginally predicted general stress in this analysis. Higher levels of self-blame predicted increased general stress, which in turn predicted lower parenting self-efficacy.
Insert Figure 3 about here
The third analysis explored whether general stress mediated the relationship between adequacy of space and parenting self-efficacy with the relationship between general stress and parenting self-efficacy moderated by behavioural control and the relationships between adequacy of space and general stress and parenting self-efficacy moderated by everyday creativity. The index of moderated mediation was again n.s. However, a simple mediation analysis suggested that the effect of adequacy of space on parenting self-efficacy was mediated by general stress. Ratings of greater adequacy of space predicted reduced stress, which in turn predicted higher parenting self-efficacy.
Insert Table 4 about here
Discussion
The present study examined parents’ experiences of home-schooling their children during the 2020 COVID-19 lockdown in the UK. Whilst previous work has focused on the increase in stress experienced by many parents during the pandemic and in relation to the need to home-school, our work focused on factors that make stress better or worse and the consequences for a variety of aspects of home-schooling outcomes. In doing so, we are able to start identifying targets for intervention to reduce stress and improve home-schooling outcomes during the current crisis. Overall, our findings indicate that inadequate living space and negative coping mechanisms resulted in increased stress and worse outcomes in terms of parents approaches to discipline and their experience of home-schooling their children.
Negative outcomes were more pronounced for parents who used higher levels of behavioural control. Conversely, negative outcomes were reduced when parents had higher levels of self- perceived everyday creativity and outcomes were improved by positive coping strategies.
These findings and their implications are discussed below.
We first tested the effect of parents’ resources (adequacy of space and resources, access to green space, income, and coping mechanisms) on parenting self-efficacy, discipline and home-schooling relationships. Contrary to expectations, green space access did not significantly predict stress. However, parents reported higher levels of parenting self-efficacy when they felt that available indoor space was adequate. Parents who considered space inadequate, reported lower levels of parenting self-efficacy except for parents who were highly creative in their everyday life. Perhaps creative parents found imaginative ways of using the space they had, which helped them to cope with the pressures of home-schooling.
Indeed, creativity is the ability to regularly solve problems (Gardner, 1982). Research shows that individuals with higher ability to think flexibly are better able to deal with crises (Metzl,
2009). Flexible thinking is linked with higher creativity and refers to the ability to come up with different strategies. Creative resilience is the ability to come up with solutions to problems (Endler & Parker, 1994). Thus, creativity can be a predictor of resilience (Metzl &
Morrell, 2008) helping parents to manage living in an inadequate space. Parents also reported higher levels of parenting self-efficacy and better home- schooling relationships when they used effective coping mechanisms. Specifically, positive reappraisal (thoughts giving the situation a positive meaning) predicted higher parenting self- efficacy, and home-schooling relationships. Positive home-schooling relationships were also predicted by the use of acceptance. In contrast, parenting self-efficacy and home-schooling relationships were worse for parents who used self-blame. These findings underscore the importance of using effective coping mechanisms when facing difficult situations. This is more important for parents because children’s adjustment during stressful events depends to a great extent on their parents’ emotional state (Shorer & Leibovich, 2020). If parents are not able to cope effectively, they may be less able to help their children dealing with their stress
(Cohen & Shulman, 2019). We did not examine children’s coping mechanisms and thus, it is not possible to know if children were negatively affected by their parents’ use of ineffective coping mechanisms.
Next, we tested the effects of parents’ resources on their stress levels (social comparison stress, general stress, and school demands stress). Findings suggest that the more inadequate parents considered their home space to be and the more they showed a coping response of catastrophizing, the more social comparison stress they experienced.
Catastrophizing refers to engaging in thoughts emphasizing the terror that you are experiencing (Garnerfski & Kraaij, 2006). Although not directly tested in our model, perhaps when parents were unsatisfied with their lockdown living arrangements, they engaged in catastrophizing more frequently because it was not possible to change those living arrangements. It would have been informative to examine whether these parents engaged in higher levels of catastrophizing the longer lockdown lasted. Due to the cross-sectional nature of our study, it is not possible to test this hypothesis. Findings also suggest that parents experienced less general stress (overall and parenting stress combined) when they engaged in more frequent positive refocusing (thinking about positive experiences and not about the actual event). In turn, parents experienced higher general stress when they engaged in self-blame more frequently. However, for those parents who were creative the negative link between inadequate space and high stress was reduced. These findings suggest that creative parents were better able to cope with stress during the COVID-19 lockdown than parents that are not as creative.
Third, the effect of stress on parenting self-efficacy, discipline, and home-schooling relationships was examined. When examining parenting self-efficacy, parents with high levels of general stress reported lower levels of self-efficacy but only when they exerted high levels of behavioural control towards their children. That is, as behavioural control increased, greater general stress predicted increasingly low parenting self-efficacy. Excessive or developmentally inappropriate levels of behavioural control are linked with emotion dysregulation (Moilanen, 2007). It is important to note that because the parent-child relation is bidirectional, the greater need for parents to implement high levels of control could be parent-driven, child-driven, or a combination of both (Andreadakis et al., 2020). In addition, the finding suggesting that parents who experienced elevated general stress also reported lower parenting self-efficacy, is consistent with research showing that stress makes parents more impulsive and psychologically unavailable (Cohen et al., 1983).
Regarding discipline, parents with high levels of general stress and who exerted a high level of behavioural control reported disciplining their children more harshly and frequently than parents who were not as stressed. Indeed, elevated parental stress is linked with the use of harsh and frequent discipline (Beckerman et al., 2017), in turn linked with higher levels of internalizing and externalizing problems in children (Gershoff, 2002).
Parents who reported using harsher discipline also reported using higher levels of behavioural control over their children. Surprisingly, the relationship between discipline and stress was also moderated by everyday creativity. Parents who were more creative and who were highly stressed were more likely to use frequent and harsher discipline. A worrying prospect is that this may be an example of the more malevolent side of creativity (Jonason et al., 2017).
In turn, the analysis of home-schooling relationships revealed that they were negatively predicted by social comparison stress, school demands stress and general stress.
That is, the more stress across all three categories, the worse the home-schooling relationships were. However, whilst high social comparison stress predicted worse home- schooling relationships this was not the case for parents with high levels of creativity.
Finally, we identified three potential mediation and moderated mediation relationships. The first model examined relations between self-blame and home-schooling relationships mediated by general stress. Parents who used higher levels of self-blame experienced increased stress, in turn leading to worse home-schooling relationships. The second model examined the relations between self-blame, and parenting self-efficacy mediated by general stress, and moderated by behavioural control. Findings suggests that parents who used self-blame frequently experienced higher levels of stress which in turn predicted lower parenting self-efficacy. Thus, self-blame increased stress, causing poorer home-schooling relationships and lower parenting self-efficacy. Self-blame is an ineffective coping mechanism found to predict negative emotions (Martin & Dahlen, 2005) and linked with stress (Garnerfski & Kraaij, 2006). Our findings suggest that self-blame was a particularly maladaptive coping mechanism for parents during the COVID-19 lockdown. The final model examined the relation between the adequacy of space and parenting self-efficacy mediated by general stress and moderated by everyday creativity and behavioural control.
Parents who considered as adequate their living space were able to manage their stress more effectively, in turn feeling better able to home-school and take care of their children. Limitations and Future Research
This study has several limitations. First, the sample is relatively small and mostly comprised of well-educated parents with high mean household income. Future studies should examine the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in at risk families as they are likely to be worst affected by it. Second, most parents in the sample were mothers. Given that there are differences in parenting behaviours between mothers and fathers (Lamb & Lewis, 2013), future studies should examine how the pandemic affected fathers’ parenting behaviours.
However, the fact that mostly mothers participated in the study is consistent with research suggesting that mothers are still children’s main caregivers. Third, the present study did not examine children’s experience of their family life and home-schooling during the COVID-19 lockdown. Adversity, such as stressful life events, increases children’s externalizing and internalizing problems (Kohen et al., 2008), therefore research must examine how the lockdown influenced children’s development. Fourth, some of the measures used in the present study were not specifically designed to capture parents’ experiences during the
COVID-19 lockdown and as such, they may not fully capture parents’ experiences during this time. An important final limitation to consider is that this is a cross-sectional study, and so we do not have any data on participating parents' experiences before or after the pandemic. Our findings only allow us to capture a snapshot of parents’ experiences at the particular point of measurement during the 2020 lockdown. Longitudinal research is needed to achieve a better understanding of the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic for families across time.
Conclusion
Taken together these findings highlight parents’ experience of lockdown home- schooling and the factors contributing to parenting self-efficacy, parenting behaviours and relationships with their children in the context of home-schooling. Overall, parents who used effective coping mechanisms, who were creative, and who considered their living space as adequate were better able to manage the stress created by the home-schooling demands. The
COVID-19 pandemic may have long lasting consequences for families, and our findings may help with the design of interventions aimed at improving parents’ coping mechanisms and creative self-efficacy, in turn decreasing their stress, and potentially improving home- schooling related outcomes.
Implications and Applications
The present study aids our understanding of parenting and family dynamics under adverse conditions, and it will inform the work of clinical psychologists, health behavioural professionals, educators, and other relevant social agents.
Parents reported feeling stressed during the 2020 COVID-19 lockdown, suggesting that they may need more support when facing the long-term consequences of the pandemic.
Parents should be advised to take care of their own well-being. Not only will this help them to better deal with everyday problems, but it will have a positive impact on their children’s own well-being. Special support should be dedicated to at risk families who are more likely to fare worse under adverse conditions. Findings highlight the importance of fostering parents’ use of effective coping mechanisms, such as creativity. Interventions targeted at fostering creativity in families may promote effective problem solving in challenging circumstances and help build wellbeing (Conner et al., 2018). By parents adopting more effective coping mechanisms, they will be more likely to promote their children’s own use of such coping mechanisms, as well as improving the quality of the family relations, and reducing the chances of engaging in harsh parenting. Finally, findings also revealed the implications that living in inadequate home spaces has for families. This is an important element that mental health professionals should consider when working with families. References Agha, S. (2020). Mental well-being and association of the four factors coping structure model: A
perspective of people living in lockdown during COVID-19. Ethics, Medicine and Public
Health, 100605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jemep.2020.100605
Agrawal, N. (2020). The coronavirus could cause a child abuse epidemic. New York Times, 7.
All-Party Parliamentary Group on Arts, H., & Wellbeing. (2017). Creative health: The arts for
health and wellbeing: All-Party Parliamentary Group on Arts, Health and Wellbeing.
Altschul, I., Lee, S. J., & Gershoff, E. T. (2016). Hugs, not hits: Warmth and spanking as
predictors of child social competence. Journal of Marriage and Family, 78, 695-714.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12306
Andreadakis, E., Laurin, J. C., Joussemet, M., & Mageau, G. A. (2020). Toddler Temperament,
Parent Stress, and Autonomy Support. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 29, 3029-3043.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-020-01793-3
Barber, B. K., Stolz, H. E., Olsen, J. A., Collins, W. A., & Burchinal, M. (2005). Parental support,
psychological control, and behavioral control: Assessing relevance across time, culture, and
method. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 135-147.
Beckerman, M., van Berkel, S. R., Mesman, J., & Alink, L. R. (2017). The role of negative
parental attributions in the associations between daily stressors, maltreatment history, and
harsh and abusive discipline. Child Abuse & Neglect, 64, 109-116.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2016.12.015
Beghetto, R. A. (2006). Creative self-efficacy: Correlates in middle and secondary students.
Creativity Research Journal, 18, 447-457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2016.12.015
Beghetto, R. A. (2009). In search of the unexpected: Finding creativity in the micromoments of
the classroom. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3, 2.
https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0014831 Bixler, R.D., & Floyd, M.F. (1997). Nature is scary, disgusting, and uncomfortable. Environment
and Behaviour, 29, 443-467. https://doi.org/10.1177/001391659702900401
Bloomfield, D. (2018). What makes nature-based interventions for mental health successful?
BJPsych. International, 14, 82-85. doi:10.1192/S2056474000002063
Brown, S. M., Doom, J. R., Lechuga-Peña, S., Watamura, S. E., & Koppels, T. (2020). Stress and
parenting during the global COVID-19 pandemic. Child Abuse & Neglect.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104699
Cappa, K. A., Begle, A. M., Conger, J. C., Dumas, J. E., & Conger, A. J. (2011). Bidirectional
relationships between parenting stress and child coping competence: Findings from the
PACE study. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 20, 334-342.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-010-9397-0
Carver, C. S., Scheier, M. F., & Weintraub, J. K. (1989). Assessing coping strategies: a
theoretically based approach. Journal of personality and social psychology, 56, 267.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.56.2.267
Chung, G.S.K., Lanier, P., & Wong, P.Y.J. (2020). Mediating effects of parental stress on harsh
parenting and parent-child relationship during coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic in
Singapore. Journal of Family Violence. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-020-00200-1
Cline, J. I., Belsky, J., Li, Z., Melhuish, E., Lysenko, L., McFarquhar, T., Stevens, S., & Jaffee, S.
R. (2015). Take your mind off it: Coping style, serotonin transporter linked polymorphic
region genotype (5-HTTLPR), and children’s internalizing and externalizing problems.
Development and Psychopathology, 27, 1129–1143.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579415000723
Cluver, L., Lachman, J. M., Sherr, L., Wessels, I., Krug, E., Rakotomalala, S., ... & Butchart, A.
(2020). Parenting in a time of COVID-19. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30736-4. Cobham, V. E., McDermott, B., Haslam, D., & Sanders, M. R. (2016). The role of parents,
parenting and the family environment in children’s post-disaster mental health. Current
Psychiatry Reports, 18, 53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11920-016-0691-4
Cohen, E., & Shulman, C. (2019). Mothers and toddlers exposed to political violence: Severity of
exposure, emotional availability, parenting stress, and toddlers’ behavior problems. Journal
of Child & Adolescent Trauma, 12, 131-140. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40653-017-0197-1
Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., & Mermelstein, R. (1983). A global measure of perceived stress. Journal
of Health and Social Behavior, 385-396. https://doi.org/10.2307/2136404
Conner, T. S., DeYoung, C. G., & Silvia, P. J. (2018). Everyday creative activity as a path to
flourishing. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 13, 181-189.
Creativity and Perceived Stress of Female Music Therapists and Hobbyists.: Discovery Service
for University of Winchester. (n.d.-a). Retrieved 13 August 2020, from
http://eds.b.ebscohost.com.winchester.idm.oclc.org/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?
vid=29&sid=14e12d72-4b2a-4bd7-ac28-dbedfd131fc6%40pdc-v-sessmgr06
Deater‐ Deckard, K. (1998). Parenting stress and child adjustment: Some old hypotheses and new
questions. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 5, 314-332.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2850.1998.tb00152.x
Eltanamly, H., Leijten, P., Jak, S., & Overbeek, G. (2019). Parenting in times of war: A meta-
analysis and qualitative synthesis of war exposure, parenting, and child adjustment. Trauma,
Violence, & Abuse. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1524838019833001
Endler, N. S., & Parker, J. D. (1994). Assessment of multidimensional coping: Task, emotion, and
avoidance strategies. Psychological assessment, 6, 50.
Fallucco, E. M., Aldridge, P., Greco, P., & Blackmore, E. R. (2016). 1.45 Parenting stress and
early childhood behavioral and emotional problems. Journal of the American Academy of
Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 10, 114. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.jaac.2016.09.046 Field, A. (2018). Discovering SPSS Using IBM Statistics 5E. London: Sage Publications.
Fontanesi, L., Marchetti, D., Mazza, C., Di Giandomenico, S., Roma, P., & Verrocchio, M. C.
(2020). The effect of the COVID-19 lockdown on parents: A call to adopt urgent
measures. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy. http://dx.doi.org/
10.1037/tra0000672
Forgeard, M. J., & Elstein, J. G. (2014). Advancing the clinical science of creativity. Frontiers in
Psychology, 5, 613. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00613
Foye, C. The Relationship Between Size of Living Space and Subjective Well-Being. J Happiness
Stud 18, 427–461 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-016-9732-2
Gardner, H. (1982). Art. Mind, and Brain: A Cognitive Approach to Creativity-The Journal of
Aesthetic Education, 18, 108-110.
Garnefski, N., & Kraaij, V. (2007). The cognitive emotion regulation questionnaire. European
Journal of Psychological Assessment, 23, 141-149. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-
5759.23.3.141
Garnefski, N., Kraaij, V., & Spinhoven, P. (2001). Negative life events, cognitive emotion
regulation and emotional problems. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 1311-1327.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00113-6
Gershoff, E. T. (2002). Corporal punishment by parents and associated child behaviors and
experiences: a meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 539. DOI:
10.1037//0033-2909.128.4.539
Hiraoka, D., & Tomoda, A. (2020). The relationship between parenting stress and school closures
due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, 497–498.
https://doi.org/10.1111/pcn.13088
Jaffe, M., Gullone, E., & Hughes, E.K. (2010). The roles of temperamental dispositions and perceived parenting behaviours in the use of two emotion regulation strategies in late
childhood. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 31, 47-59. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.appdev.2009.07.008
Jonason, P.K., Abboud, R., Tomé, J., Dummett, M., & Hazer, A. (2017). The Dark Triad traits and
self-reported and other-rated creativity. Personality and Individual Differences, 117, 150-
154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.06.005
Kaimal, G., Ray, K., & Muniz, J. (2016). Reduction of cortisol levels and participants' responses
following art making. Art therapy, 33, 74-80.
https://doi.org/10.1080/07421656.2016.1166832
Kaiser, H. F. & Rice, J. (1974). Little jiffy, mark 4. Educational and Psychological Measurement,
34, 111-117.
Kaplan, S., (1995). The restorative effects of nature: towards an integrative
framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 16; 169-182.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0272-4944(95)90001-2
Kaufman, J. C. (2012). Counting the muses: development of the Kaufman domains of creativity
scale (K-DOCS). Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6, 298.
https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0029751
Kaufman, J. C., & Beghetto, R. A. (2009). Beyond big and little: The four c model of creativity.
Review of General Psychology, 13, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1037%2Fa0013688
Kohen, D. E., Leventhal, T., Dahinten, V. S., & McIntosh, C. N. (2008). Neighbourhood
disadvantage: Pathways of effects for young children. Child Development, 79, 156-169.
Lamb, M. E., & Lewis, C. (2013). Father-child relationships. Handbook of father involvement:
Multidisciplinary perspectives, 2, 119-135. Lawson, M., Piel, M. H., & Simon, M. (2020). Child maltreatment during the COVID-19
pandemic: Consequences of parental job loss on psychological and physical abuse towards
children. Child Abuse & Neglect. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2020.104709
Lee, S. J., Ward, K. P., Chang, O. D., & Downing, K. D. (2021). Parenting activities and the
transition to home-based education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Children and Youth
Services Review. 105585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105585
Leigh, B., & Milgrom, J. (2008). Risk factors for antenatal depression, postnatal depression and
parenting stress. BMC Psychiatry, 8, 24. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-244X-8-24
Leinonen, J. A., Solantaus, T. S., & Punamäki, R. L. (2003). Parental mental health and children's
adjustment: The quality of marital interaction and parenting as mediating factors. Journal of
Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 44, 227-241. https://doi.org/10.1111/1469-7610.t01-1-
00116
Liu, L., & Meifang, F. (2015). Parenting stress and harsh discipline in China: The moderating
roles of marital satisfaction and parent gender. Child Abuse & Neglect, 43, 73–82.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chiabu.2015.01.014
Manzeske, D. P., & Stright, A. D. (2009). Parenting styles and emotion regulation: The role of
behavioral and psychological control during young adulthood. Journal of Adult Development,
16, 223. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10804-009-9068-9
Martin, R. C., & Dahlen, E. R. (2005). Cognitive emotion regulation in the prediction of
depression, anxiety, stress, and anger. Personality and individual differences, 39, 1249-1260.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2005.06.004
Mayer, F. S., & Frantz, C. M. (2004). The connectedness to nature scale: A measure of
individuals’ feeling in community with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24,
503-515. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2004.10.001 McMahon, C. A., & Meins, E. (2012). Mind-mindedness, parenting stress, and emotional
availability in mothers of preschoolers. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 27, 245-252.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2011.08.002
Metzl, E. S. (2009). The role of creative thinking in resilience after hurricane Katrina. Psychology
of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 3, 112. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0013479
Metzl, E. S., & Morrell, M. A. (2008). The role of creativity in models of resilience: Theoretical
exploration and practical applications. Journal of Creativity in Mental Health, 3, 303-318.
https://doi.org/10.1080/15401380802385228
Moilanen, K. L. (2007). The adolescent self-regulatory inventory: The development and validation
of a questionnaire of short-term and long-term self-regulation. Journal of Youth and
Adolescence, 36, 835-848. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-006-9107-9
Morris, G. D., Wood, P. B., & Dunaway, R. G. (2007). Testing the cultural invariance of parenting
and self-control as predictors of American Indian delinquency. W. Criminology Rev., 8, 32.
Pinderhughes, E. E., Nix, R., Foster, E. M., Jones, D., & The Conduct Problems Prevention
Research Group (2007). Parenting in Context: Impact of Neighborhood Poverty, Residential
Stability, Public Services, Social Networks, and Danger on Parental Behaviors. Journal of
marriage and the family, 63, 941–953. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.00941.x
Restubog, S. L. D., Ocampo, A. C. G., & Wang, L. (2020). Taking control amidst the chaos:
Emotion regulation during the COVID-19 pandemic.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2020.103440
Riegler, J.L., Raj, S. P., Moscato, E. L., Narad, M. E., Kincaid, A., & Wade, S. L. (2020). Pilot
trial of a telepsychotherapy parenting skills intervention for veteran families: Implications for
managing parenting stress during COVID-19. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration, 30, 290.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/int0000220 Robles-Bello, M. A., Sánchez-Teruel, D., & Naranjo, N. V. (2020). Variables protecting mental
health in the Spanish population affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. Current Psychology,
1-12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-01132-1
Rodriguez-Jenkins, J., & Marcenko, M. O. (2014). Parenting stress among child welfare involved
families: Differences by child placement. Children and Youth Services Review, 46, 19-27.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2014.07.024
Romero, E., Lopez-Romero, L., Dominguez-Alvarez, B., Villar, P., Gomez-Fraguela, J.A. (2020).
Testing the effects of COVID-19 confinement in Spanish children: The role of parents’
distress, emotional problems and specific parenting. International Journal of Environmental
Research and Public Health, 17, 6975. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17196975
Rothe D, Gallinetti J, Lagaay M, Campbell L. Ebola: beyond the health emergency. Monrovia:
Plan International; 2015.
Runco, M.A. & Jaeger, G.J. The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24,
92-96. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2012.650092
Runco, M. A., Millar, G., Acar, S., & Cramond, B. (2010). Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking as
predictors of personal and public achievement: A fifty-year follow-up. Creativity Research
Journal, 22, 361–368. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2010.523393
Schmidt, A., Kramer, A.C., Brose, A., Schiemedek, F., & Neubauer, A.B. (preprint). Home-
schooling and affective well-being of parents and children during the COVID-19 pandemic:
A daily dairy study. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/sntxz
Sher, L. (2020). The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on suicide rates. An International Journal
of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1093/qjmed/hcaa202
Shorer, M., & Leibovich, L. (2020). Young children’s emotional stress reactions during the
COVID-19 outbreak and their associations with parental emotion regulation and parental playfulness. Early Child Development and Care, 1-11.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2020.1806830
Simonton, D. (2014). The mad-genius paradox: Can creative people be more mentally healthy but
highly creative people more mentally ill? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9, 470-480.
https://journals.sagepub.com/journal-info/pps
Soenens, B., & Vansteenkiste, M. (2010). A theoretical upgrade of the concept of parental
psychological control: Proposing new insights on the basis of self-determination theory.
Developmental Review, 30, 74-99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2009.11.001
Sprang, G., & Silman, M. (2013). Posttraumatic stress disorder in parents and youth after health-
related disasters. Disaster medicine and Public Health Preparedness, 7, 105-110. DOI:
10.1017/dmp.2013.22
Snyder, H. T., Sowden, P. T., Silvia, P. J., & Kaufman, J. C. (2020). The creative self: Do people
distinguish creative self-perceptions, efficacy, and personal identity?. Psychology of
Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/aca0000317
Strohschein, L. (2005). Parental divorce and child mental health trajectories. Journal of Marriage
and Family, 67, 1286-1300. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2005.00217.x
Taub, A. (2020). A new Covid-19 crisis: Domestic abuse rises worldwide. The New York Times, 6.
Turiano, N. A., Spiro III, A., & Mroczek, D. K. (2012). Openness to experience and mortality in
men: Analysis of trait and facets. Journal of Aging and Health, 24, 654-672.
https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0898264311431303
Ulrich, R. S., Simons, R. F., Losito, B. D., Fiorito, E., Miles, M. A., & Zelson, M. (1991). Stress
recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments. Journal of Environmental
Psychology, 11, 201-230. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(05)80184-7
Vanderhasselt, M. A., Koster, E. H., Onraedt, T., Bruyneel, L., Goubert, L., & De Raedt, R.
(2014). Adaptive cognitive emotion regulation moderates the relationship between dysfunctional attitudes and depressive symptoms during a stressful life period: A prospective
study. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 45, 291-296.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbtep.2014.01.003
White, M.P., Alcock, I., Grellier, J. et al. (2019). Spending at least 120 minutes a week in nature is
associated with good health and wellbeing. Sci Rep 9, 7730-7741.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-44097-3
Windish, L. S., & Wachob, D. A. (2017). Homeschooling parent stress levels and its association
with the mental and physical health of their children. International Journal of Health,
Wellness & Society, 7, 11–21. https://doi.org/10.18848/2156-8960/CGP/v07i03/11-21
Xie, S. (2019) Quality matters: housing and the mental health of rural migrants in urban China,
Housing Studies, 34, 1422-1444, DOI: 10.1080/02673037.2019.1577956
Xie L, Zhou S, Zhang L. (2021). Associations between Objective and Subjective Housing Status
with Individual Mental Health in Guangzhou, China. International Journal of Environmental
Research and Public Health, 930. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18030930