CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 144Social Capital and NetworksSocial impacts of COVID-19Health disparities and outcomes

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Coming together or coming apart? Changes in social cohesion during the Covid-19 pandemic in England

Open access
Borkowska, Magda, Laurence, James·2021·European Societies
DOI 10.1080/14616696.2020.1833067
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

This paper explores the potential impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on people’s perceptions of cohesion in their local communities; particularly for vulnerable groups/communities, such as ethnic minorities or those living in highly deprived neighbourhoods. To this end, we examine both trends over time in overall levels of cohesion as well as patterns of positive and negative changes experienced by individuals using nationally representative data from Understanding Society Study. We test whether rates of positive-/negative-change in cohesion over the pandemic-period differed across socio-demographic groups and neighbourhood characteristics. These trends are then compared to patterns of positive-/negative-change over time experienced in earlier periods to test whether the pandemic was uniquely harmful. We show that the overall levels of social cohesion are lower in June 2020 compared to all of the examined pre-pandemic periods. The decline of perceived-cohesion is particularly high in the most deprived communities, among certain ethnic minority groups and among the lower-skilled. Our findings suggest that the pandemic put higher strain on social-resources among vulnerable groups and communities, who also experienced more negative changes in other areas of life.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/14616696.2020.1833067

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Image 1
CC-BY-NC-ND · From the PDF
Image 2
CC-BY-NC-ND · From the PDF
Image 3
CC-BY-NC-ND · From the PDF
Figure 1 Percentage of people reporting positive opinions about social cohesion in their neighbourhood (sum of ' strongly agree ' and ' agree ' answers to positive statements and sum of ' strongly disagree ' and ' disagree ' answers to negative statements) for each of the fi ve social cohesion dimensions at Wave 3, Wave 6, Wave 9 (two statements only), and Covid-19 Wave. Weighted results with 95% CI. (Data: Understanding Society, University of Essex, Institute for Social and Economic Research 2020)
Figure 1 Percentage of people reporting positive opinions about social cohesion in their neighbourhood (sum of ' strongly agree ' and ' agree ' answers to positive statements and sum of ' strongly disagree ' and ' disagree ' answers to negative statements) for each of the fi ve social cohesion dimensions at Wave 3, Wave 6, Wave 9 (two statements only), and Covid-19 Wave. Weighted results with 95% CI. (Data: Understanding Society, University of Essex, Institute for Social and Economic Research 2020)CC-BY-NC-ND · From the PDF
Figure 2 Average social cohesion score at Wave 3, Wave 6 and Covid-19 Wave by IMD decile, sex, ethnicity, age group, education and economic activity. Weighted results with 95% CI. (Data: Understanding Society, University of Essex, Institute for Social and Economic Research 2020)
Figure 2 Average social cohesion score at Wave 3, Wave 6 and Covid-19 Wave by IMD decile, sex, ethnicity, age group, education and economic activity. Weighted results with 95% CI. (Data: Understanding Society, University of Essex, Institute for Social and Economic Research 2020)CC-BY-NC-ND · From the PDF
Figure 3 Percentage of people experiencing positive and negative changes in the overall social cohesion score in two time periods: between Wave 3 and Wave 6 (2011/12 -2014/15); and between Wave 6 and Covid-19 Wave (2014/15-June 2020). Weighted results with 95% CI. (Data: Understanding Society, University of Essex, Institute for Social and Economic Research 2020).
Figure 3 Percentage of people experiencing positive and negative changes in the overall social cohesion score in two time periods: between Wave 3 and Wave 6 (2011/12 -2014/15); and between Wave 6 and Covid-19 Wave (2014/15-June 2020). Weighted results with 95% CI. (Data: Understanding Society, University of Essex, Institute for Social and Economic Research 2020).CC-BY-NC-ND · From the PDF
Figure 4 Adjusted predicted probabilities from multilevel multinomial logistic regression models predicting the likelihood of experiencing positive change, negative change and no change in perceived cohesion between Wave 3 and Wave 6 and between Wave 6 and Covid-19 Wave for all covariates. Weighted results with 95% CI. (Data: Understanding Society, University of Essex, Institute for Social and Economic Research 2020)
Figure 4 Adjusted predicted probabilities from multilevel multinomial logistic regression models predicting the likelihood of experiencing positive change, negative change and no change in perceived cohesion between Wave 3 and Wave 6 and between Wave 6 and Covid-19 Wave for all covariates. Weighted results with 95% CI. (Data: Understanding Society, University of Essex, Institute for Social and Economic Research 2020)CC-BY-NC-ND · From the PDF
Figure 5 Percentage of Ethnic Minority and White British respondents stating that racial insults and attacks are very/ fairly common in their local area at Wave 3, Wave 6 and Covid-19 Wave. Weighted results with 95% CI. (Data: Understanding Society, University of Essex, Institute for Social and Economic Research 2020)
Figure 5 Percentage of Ethnic Minority and White British respondents stating that racial insults and attacks are very/ fairly common in their local area at Wave 3, Wave 6 and Covid-19 Wave. Weighted results with 95% CI. (Data: Understanding Society, University of Essex, Institute for Social and Economic Research 2020)CC-BY-NC-ND · From the PDF

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 24 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Jung J. Y., 2019, International Journal of Communication, 13, 21
  2. Kim H., 2020, Journal of Public Health, 1

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Borkowska, M., & Laurence, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Essex (GB)
  • University of Manchester (GB)
Corresponding author
Borkowska, Magda
ORCID
Venue
European Societies
Publisher
MIT Press
Published
2020-10-22
Volume
23
Issue
sup1
Pages
S618-S636
ISSN
  • 1461-6696 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8307
DOI
10.1080/14616696.2020.1833067
OpenAlex
W3093794251
Cited by
144
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 10 · 2025: 26 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 1
FWCI
28.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • European Societies (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Open Access at Essex (University of Essex) (acceptedVersion)
Funders
Economic and Social Research Council (ES/N00812X/1,ES/S013121/1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social Capital and Networks
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social impacts of COVID-19
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
Keywords
social cohesion, COVID-19 pandemic, community cohesion, ethnic minorities, neighborhood disadvantage, vulnerable populations, social resources, sociodemographic disparities, Understanding Society, England

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review