Search

COVID-19 has had a significant impact on the mental health and wellbeing of the Australian population. This paper provides detailed data on the mental health of those aged 18 years and under, as reported by an adult in their household. For children aged 2 to 4 years, parents and carers do not report a dramatic worsening in mental health outcomes. For those aged 5 to 18 years, however, it would appear that parents/carers think that COVID-19 has had a large negative impact on mental health. The mental health of adolescents and young adults aged 15 to 18 is of particular concern, with 71.0 per cent of adolescents and young adults in this age group reported to have had a worsening in mental health outcomes due to COVID-19, significantly higher than any other age group. A comparison of our results with those from a survey undertaken in July 2020 suggests that these negative mental health impacts have gotten worse. Outcomes appear to have worsened particularly for children who live in one of the states that have had long lockdown periods and where the parent/carer has high levels of psychological distress themselves. There is also some evidence of a greater worsening in mental health for those children whose parent/carer is Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander. The other main finding from the analysis is that there were significant barriers in finding mental health support. Around two-in-five carers reported that it was difficult or very difficult (39.9 per cent), with 12.2 per cent reporting that it was very difficult.

This paper provides the first detailed, publicly available analysis of the socioeconomic and attitudinal determinants of COVID-19 vaccination amongst both Australian adults and Australian parents' views about vaccinating their children in the future. The analysis is based on the August 2021 wave of the ANU Centre for Social Research and Methods' COVID-19 Impact Monitoring survey program. We find important demographic and socioeconomic predictors of vaccine uptake. Vaccination rates are lower for those who have relatively low levels of education, those who speak a language other than English, those who live outside of New South Wales, and those who have a relatively low household income. Other groups that continue to have low rates of vaccination are those who have a low fear of infection; those experiencing psychological distress; those who have low confidence in state/territory governments; and those who report being very religious. The survey data also shows that the willingness of Australians to get vaccinated has increased since August 2020 and April 2021. Hesitancy has declined for those who haven't been vaccinated, with 93.9 per cent of Australians either already vaccinated or willing to get vaccinated. In regards to vaccinating children, 42.5 per cent of parents and carers reported they would definitely vaccinate children in their household, 36.3 per cent would probably get their child vaccinated, 11.4 per cent would probably not get their child vaccinated and 9.8 per cent would definitely not get their child vaccinated. The analysis found that there are key groups who would be less likely to get their child vaccinated. This includes mothers/female carers, those who are Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander, those who speak a language other than English, those with low education, and those who live in disadvantaged areas. These findings have important implications for the COVID-19 vaccine rollout in Australia.

The ANU Centre for Social Research and Methods ANU COVID-19 Impact Monitoring Survey Program asked the same group of respondents about their vaccine intentions in August 2020 and January 2021. The paper provides data on the vaccine willingness in Australia as of January 2021 and how this changed since August 2020 both at the national level and for particular individuals. The paper provides estimates of how vaccine willingness has changed for different population sub-groups and the individual level characteristics which are associated with changes in vaccine willingness. We find an overall decrease in vaccine willingness, with the biggest decline being those who would definitely get a vaccine as of August 2020 but said they would only probably get a vaccine as of January 2021. We also look at the factors associated with vaccine willingness, as well as the factors associated with change through time.

This paper reports data collected in April 2021 on Australian's vaccine willingness and concerns, with a total sample size of 3,286 adult Australians, comparing results from responses from the same individuals in January 2021 and August 2020. The paper shows that although vaccine willingness has remained stable since January 2021, there are still key population groups within Australia who remain hesitant about getting a vaccine. Groups that have higher rates of vaccine hesitancy include women, those who spoke a language other than English; those who live in relatively disadvantaged areas; and those who live outside a capital city. We show for the first time in Australia that experiences of discrimination are associated with higher rates of vaccine hesitancy. We also show that only 3.7 per cent of Australian adults thought the process for individuals getting the vaccine was going very well. Furthermore, only one-infive were not at all concerned about potential side effects from the COVID-19 vaccination.

In this paper, we utilise a longitudinal sample with responses from prior to the COVID-19 pandemic to measure the factors associated with participation in longitudinal surveys during the COVID-19 period. The benefit of this sample for the analysis is that factors collected in preCOVID waves can be used to measure survey participation. This is in comparison to crosssectional or longitudinal surveys that only commenced once the pandemic had commenced. We find a number of demographic groups that are identified as being more likely to not respond to COVID-19 surveys, despite having completed pre-COVID surveys, as well as a number of other economic and personality factors. Reassuringly though, there were many more factors that did not have an association. The study also highlights that two simple questions (with a low time cost) on subjective survey experience early in the pandemic were highly useful for predicting future survey participation. These findings can help to support survey practitioners and data collection companies to develop more robust sampling strategies during the COVID-19 period.

If and when a safe and effective vaccine that prevents the spread of COVID-19 becomes available, consideration will need to be given to a distribution method not only maximises its effectiveness, but also has support from the general population. The aim of this paper is to summarise the results from a survey experiment on a probability-based, representative sample of the Australian population during mid-August 2020 that tested explicitly the relative weight that Australians put on different characteristics of individuals in terms of who should receive a vaccine ahead of others. Demographic characteristics of priority vaccine recipients only had a small effect, with age more important than sex, and ethnicity having no effect. A person’s employment status did have a large effect though, with essential health workers far and away the highest priority as identified by Australians, and paramedics being the specific occupation who Australians feel should receive the vaccine first. In addition, Australians preferred those with a health condition over those without, those in a high COVID-19 area over those in areas with low infections, and those with caring responsibility over those without (in that order). For the most part, preferences were relatively stable across the Australian population, though people tended to preference those who had different characteristics to themselves to receive the vaccine first. The data from this experiment is available through the Australian Data Archive for further interrogation.

In order to monitor the impacts of COVID-19, the ANU Centre for Social Research and Methods has established a COVID-19 impact monitoring survey program. The first wave of data collection occurred in April 2020, during the peak of the first wave of infections in Australia. This was followed by a survey in May 2020 as restrictions began to ease across the country, and infection rates started to decline in most States and Territories. The third wave of data collection occurred in August 2020, a time when infection rates in Victoria (and Melbourne in particular) were at their highest yet observed, Sydney continued to have a small number of new infections each day, and the rest of the country was, for the most part, experiencing zero confirmed cases. If the first two waves of data collection were at a time of ‘we are all in this together’, our third wave of data collection occurred when jurisdictions were experiencing significant divergence in terms of severity of lockdown, other policy interventions, and infection/mortality rates. The aim of this paper is to update the national-level trends in wellbeing outcomes using the most recently available data, as well as provide an initial analysis of divergence of outcomes within Australia. Data collected using Life in AustraliaTM is still the only longitudinal survey of a large, representative sample of Australians with information from the same individuals prior to and during the Coronavirus pandemic. We show that anxiety and worry due to COVID-19 have increased since their low in May 2020, and measures of subjective wellbeing and psychological distress have worsened. Hours worked have increased across Australia since May 2020, but those in employment are more worried about losing their job than they were in May 2020. We find a relative worsening in outcomes for Victoria compared to the rest of Australia between May 2020 and August for six key outcomes in particular: psychological distress; loneliness; life satisfaction; sati

Given the large social impacts that COVID-19 is currently having on individuals throughout the world, a large amount of social and behavioural research is underway to measure and track those effects. Indeed, there has already been an explosion of new research and data collection. Any kind of social research, whether through quantitative or qualitative methods, has the potential to cause distress and impact on participant wellbeing. While previous literature has illustrated the extent to which research participation can impact distress and wellbeing in a number of contexts, no study that we are aware of has yet examined this in the COVID-19 context. This study attempts to partially fill this gap by undertaking analysis of the impacts of participation in a COVID-19 survey on distress and wellbeing. By using self-reported measures, and through the use of a survey experiment, we find little self-reported distress, and weak evidence of improvements in wellbeing through survey participation. Certain population groups, such as those with mental health concerns and those living in financial insecurity did report greater levels of distress, and worsened wellbeing through completion of the survey. These findings provide the research community (including human research ethics committees) with a deeper understanding of the potential wellbeing impacts of COVID-19-related research participation.

There is little high quality nationally representative data on the level of housing stress being experienced during the COVID-19 period or on the extent to which Australians have been able to reduce their mortgage and rent payment in light of government policies enabling this. The data reported in this paper shows that between April and May 2020 the proportion of Australians reporting that they had not been able to pay their mortgage or rent on time increased from 6.9 per cent in April to 15.1 per cent in May. The level of housing stress is substantially higher for renters than amongst mortgage holders, though this can be explained mainly by differences in socioeconomic outcomes between renters and mortgage holders. Young adults are experiencing very high rates of housing stress with 44.0 per cent of renters aged 18-24 years not being able to pay their rent on time. Importantly, this high rate of housing stress remains even after controlling for levels and changes in income. For renters, the level of housing stress is much higher for the lower income group than for the higher income group with the rate of not being able to pay rent on time being four times as higher for the lowest income quintile compared to the highest income quintile. A large majority of those who have attempted to re-negotiate or freeze mortgage or rental payments have been successful. 16.1 per cent of mortgage holders have managed to reduce their mortgage payment and 8.0 per cent have had their payments frozen for a period of time. Lower, but still a substantial proportion, of renters have negotiated a lower rent (10.5 per cent) or rental freeze (2.0 per cent).

The aim of this paper is to explore the relationship between mental health outcomes and relationship quality during the COVID-19 period. We find that after a significant worsening in mental health outcomes between February 2017 and April 2020, there was strong evidence for improvements between April and May and weaker evidence for a further improvement between May and the end of June/start of July. However, for those Australians under the age of 45, psychological distress is still at a higher level than it was prior to the spread of COVID-19. We find that a number of people have reported negative changes to their subjective circumstances. Only 22.5 per cent of the population are estimated to have not experienced any of the negative changes during the COVID-19 period from our dataset compared to 51.6 per cent who reported no improvements in the same measures. The majority of respondents reported no change in relationship quality, and for those who did report a change, there was a net improvement. We find a very strong relationship between self-reported changes in outcomes and psychological distress, with a particularly strong relationship between changes in stress, loneliness and relationships and mental health outcomes.

The aim of this paper is to analyse changes in alcohol consumption since the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. We show that the frequency of alcohol consumption during COVID-19 is slightly higher for males than it was 2-3 years previously, and substantially higher for females. While Australians are more likely to say that their alcohol consumption has decreased than say that it has increased since the spread of COVID-19, self-reported increases in alcohol consumption were larger than in surveys prior to COVID-19. There was a larger self-reported increase in alcohol consumption for females than males, with having a child caring role being a strong predictor of an increase in alcohol consumption for females. For males, on the other hand, it was a loss of job or a decline in hours worked which appears to be the strongest predictor of a (self-reported) increase in alcohol consumption. For both sexes, but particularly for males, psychological distress in April 2020 was strongly associated with higher self-reported increases in alcohol consumption since the spread of COVID-19.

This paper provides a summary of the initial impacts of COVID-19 on the self-employed based on data from the 33rd ANUpoll which collected information from 3,155 Australians over the period 14-27 April 2020. It is the first longitudinal survey data on the impact of COVID-19 in Australia, with respondents to the April ANUpoll also interviewed in January and February 2020. The data shows that the negative impact of COVID-19 on the probability of being employed is similar for the self-employed and employees. On other measures, however, the self-employed have been more adversely affected by COVID-19 than the rest of the workforce. Compared to employees, the self-employed had a higher reduction in hours worked, a greater reduction in income, an increase in the probability of not thinking current income was sufficient to meet expenditure (compared to a decline for employees) and a higher chance of accessing retirement savings and/or superannuation early. Within the self-employed population, almost half experienced a decrease in profits that was either ‘substantial’, completely eliminated, or had gone out of business. Finally, almost a third of the self-employed did not think their business was viable over the next two months if current trends continued. This uncertainty appears to be leading to significant fear, anxiety, and psychological distress amongst the self-employed.

This paper presents data on the initial impacts of COVID-19 on psychological distress among the Australian population and compares these data to a nationally representative sample in the United States. The Australian survey is based on interviews with 3,155 Australians over the period 14-27 April 2020, with many of these respondents linked at the individual level to survey responses obtained prior to the spread of COVID-19. We find a substantial increase in the levels of psychological distress between February 2017 and April 2020 for the Australian population, increasing from 8.4 per cent reporting a serious mental illness in 2017 to 10.6 per cent during the COVID-19 pandemic. These increases in severe psychological distress are largely concentrated in young Australian adults aged 18 to 34 years. Compared to the survey in the United States of over 10,000 respondents, Australia does not appear to have as high levels of distress on average. However, the levels of psychological distress reported by younger Australian adults are similar to those being reported by Americans of the same age. While a substantial minority of Australians are experiencing higher rates of psychological distress as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, there were some positive findings. In Australia, 61 per cent of people were very hopeful about the future, higher than the rate in the US of 52 per cent. These high levels of hope for the future were also found to be protective against some of the negative mental health impacts during this time.

This paper provides a summary of the impact of COVID-19 on labour market outcomes, income, financial stress, social cohesiveness, political attitudes, subjective wellbeing, and psychological distress. It is based on data from the 33rd ANUpoll which collected information from 3,155 Australians over the period 14-27 April 2020. It is the first longitudinal survey data on the impact of COVID-19 in Australia, with respondents to the April ANUpoll also interviewed in January and February 2020. The findings suggest large declines in employment and income, significant increases in social isolation and psychological distress, changes in household structure, and significant uncertainty about the future. At the same time, we observe greater confidence in government and the public service, large improvements in social trust, and substantial observance of physical distancing measures.

In order to monitor the impacts of COVID-19, the ANU Centre for Social Research and Methods has established a COVID-19 impact monitoring survey program. Data collected using Life in AustraliaTM is still the only longitudinal survey of a large, representative sample of Australians with information from the same individuals prior to and during the Coronavirus pandemic. The data summarised in this paper comes from the second wave of the COVID-19 monitoring surveys collected in May 2020. It gives an indication that economic circumstances may have stabilised, and that subjective wellbeing outcomes for Australians are improving. Australians are far less anxious and worried about COVID-19, less likely to think they are going to be infected, are less lonely, and have higher levels of life satisfaction. There has been neither an improvement nor a worsening in labour market outcomes, but Australians are far more positive about their labour market prospects in the future. There has been a continued decline in the per cent of Australians who think they could not get by on their current income, and small increases in income, particularly for those who were at the bottom of the income distribution prior to the spread of COVID-19.

COVID-19 has resulted in disruptions to schooling for the vast majority of Australian school children. Universities and other post-secondary education providers have also seen widespread shifts to remote learning, and considerable impacts on school funding. While there have undoubtedly been negative impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on education institutions, students and their families, the crisis has at the same time created an opportunity to reflect on the role of education in a society like Australia's. In this paper we provide a summary of survey data on the experiences of students and their families during the pandemic, as well as attitudes of the entire Australian population to the role of schools and universities. We found 47.8 per cent, or almost one-in-two Australians were very satisfied with their child's educational institution, while 40.2 per cent were somewhat satisfied. Only a small percentage of the population were not satisfied with their child's education, with a slightly higher per cent of adult learners not being satisfied with their own education. Despite this high level of satisfaction, the paper also shows that a large number parents or adult learners were concerned about their own learning or their children's learning.

Given the substantial improvement in the Australian economy and easing of restrictions, it is an opportune time to take stock and reflect on the economic and wellbeing costs of the pandemic over the past nine months. Between the 9th and 23rd of November, the Social Research Centre on behalf of the ANU Centre for Social Research and Methods undertook the fifth wave of the ANU's COVID-19 Impact Monitoring Survey Program on a representative sample of over 3,000 adult Australians. This paper provides a summary of the main findings from the November 2020 survey. There has been a dramatic decline in the proportion of Australians who think it is very likely or somewhat likely that they would be infected by COVID19 in the next 6 months, as well as a reduction in those who say they were anxious and worries about the spread of COVID-19. We also provide further evidence that the impact of the COVIDrecession has not been evenly spread across the Australian population. We show that the total loss of wellbeing over the period was concentrated in Victoria, young Australians, those outside of the most advantaged areas in Australia, and those who lived in capital cities. The total loss of income, on the other hand, was greater for single parent and non-couple households, those whose main source of income was not wages and salaries, young and older Australians, those in the middle part of the education distribution, and those outside of the most advantaged areas in Australia.

In this paper, we focus on data trust and data privacy, and how attitudes may be changing during the COVID-19 period. We also look at the implications of these changes for the take-up and effectiveness of the COVIDSafe App, a mobile phone-based application that was designed to assist in the identification of people who may have unknowingly come into contact with someone who has been infected by COVID-19. On balance, it would appear that Australians are more trusting of organisations with regards to data privacy and less concerned about their own personal information and data than they were prior to the spread of COVID-19. The major determinant of this change in trust with regards to data was changes in general confidence in government institutions. Despite this improvement in trust with regards to data privacy, trust levels are still low. Trust in data privacy is strongly predictive of the probability of downloading the app. We also find that the age group with the greatest reported level of downloading was 55 to 74 year olds and those in the most advantaged areas are the most likely to have downloaded. Politically, there were no differences between Labor and Coalition voters though we do find a lower probability for those who would not have voted for one of the two major parties. Finally, we also showed a number of other behavioural and attitudinal determinants of COVIDSafe usage. Those who were generally confident in the government, thought it was likely they would be infected, were less populist, more altruistic, and more patient were all more likely to have used the app.