Search

People across the world have responded to the pandemic by mobilizing and organizing to support their communities, setting up mutual aid groups to provide practical, financial, and social support. Mutual aid means short‐term 'crisis response' for some, while for other groups, it is a chance to radically restructure society, and what it means to be a member of that society. Drawing on social representations theory and previous work on citizenship in social and political psychology, we examined the ways in which mutual aid was understood and performed by members of UK Covid‐19 mutual aid groups. We conducted 29 interviews with members of these groups in May/June 2020. A reflexive thematic analysis showed that mutual aid groups were characterized as complex, efficient, and non‐hierarchical units, operating on the principles of solidarity, kindness, and trust. Two tensions were evident in the data, specifically between (1) collaboration with existing organizations and structures (e.g., local government and the police), and resistance to it and (2) maximizing group inclusivity and sustaining political critique. Findings are discussed in relation to existing theoretical and empirical work on citizenship and mutual aid groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mutual aid groups developed and mobilized in communities across the UK and globally at the outset of the pandemic in order to support vulnerable community members with practical assistance and emotional support, with some understanding their work in political terms. This study adopted a "social cure" lens to investigate the effects of group identification and group perceptions on anxiety and coping self‐efficacy among members of UK Covid‐19 mutual aid groups. Survey data were collected from self‐identified members of these groups (N = 844) during the initial period of "lockdown" restrictions in April – May 2020. Correlational analyses showed that identification with the mutual aid group was linked to more positive group perceptions and better self‐reported psychological outcomes. Perceived group politicization showed the reverse pattern. Mixed support for the "social cure" model was evident; the effect of group identification on coping self‐efficacy (but not anxiety) was serially mediated by perceived support and collective efficacy. Perceived group politicization was a significant moderator, seeming to amplify the indirect effect of group identification on coping self‐efficacy via perceived support. Results are discussed in light of previous empirical work on the social cure and Covid‐19 mutual aid groups. Please refer to the Supplementary Material section to find this article's Community and Social Impact Statement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]