Each of the studies collected information about participants work life and mental and social wellbeing, including psychological distress, low life satisfaction, loneliness, low social contact, and poor self-rated health, across different stages of the pandemic:
At each timepoint, we tested the association russia rcs data between work location – either at home or employer’s premises – and each of the mental and social wellbeing outcomes. A full range of confounding factors were considered, including work sector, key worker status, and propensity to work from home pre-pandemic.
We pooled results from each study using a “meta-analysis” to give an overall picture for the entire working population. were likely to be affected to a varying extent, we also tested for any group differences by re-analysing data according to age (16-29; 30-45, 50+), gender (male, female), and education level (university degree, lower education).
What were the findings?
The main finding was that work location was not generally associated with mental or social wellbeing. Although at T3 (during the later lockdown), those working from home showed slightly higher risk for psychological distress compared to those working at employer’s premises. Our re-analyses showed that this effect was stronger in those with a lower level of education, who also reported increased loneliness at T3. This suggests that people with a lower level of education suffered more from home-based working in the later lockdown period.