Cited by 21COVID-19 and Mental HealthCognitive Abilities and TestingNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Beginning of the Pandemic: COVID-19-Elicited Anxiety as a Predictor of Working Memory Performance

Open access
Fellman, Daniel, Ritakallio, Liisa, Waris, Otto, Jylkkä, Jussi, Laine, Matti·2020·Frontiers in Psychology

Abstract

Increasing evidence indicates that the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is associated with adverse psychological effects, including heightened levels of anxiety. This study examined whether COVID-19-related anxiety levels during the early stage of the pandemic predicted demanding working memory (WM) updating performance. Altogether, 201 healthy adults (age range, 18-50) mostly from North America and the British Isles were recruited to this study via the crowdsourcing site www.prolific.co. The results showed that higher levels of COVID-19-related anxiety during the first weeks of the pandemic outbreak were associated with poorer WM performance as measured by the n-back paradigm. Critically, the unique role of COVID-19-related anxiety on WM could not be explained by demographic factors, or other psychological factors such as state and trait anxiety or fluid intelligence. Moreover, across three assessment points spanning 5-6 weeks, COVID-19-related anxiety levels tended to decrease over time. This pattern of results may reflect an initial psychological "shock wave" of the pandemic, the cognitive effects of which may linger for some time, albeit the initial anxiety associated with the pandemic would change with habituation and increasing information. Our results contribute to the understanding of cognitive-affective reactions to a major disaster.

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 · 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.576466

Cites

68 of 68 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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?

  • The discrepancy between our findings and previous literature showing poorer cognitive performance and increased attention toward social cues likely reflects the specific components investigated and the measures used.

    “Previous literature showed that the COVID-19 lockdown was associated with poorer cognitive performance (54, 55) and increased attention toward social cues (56). Our findings seem to go against these results; this discrepancy likely reflects the specific components investigated and the measures used, since previous studies primarily focused on working memory (especially using n-back tasks) or gaze”

    From The Evolution of Psychological and Behavioral Consequences of Self-Isolation During Lockdown: A Longitudinal Study Across United Kingdom and Italy (2022) · cites this paper as [55]

    The Results and Discussion report that greater COVID-19-related anxiety early in the pandemic was associated with poorer n-back working-memory performance. The paper does not establish that lockdown itself was associated with poorer cognitive performance generally. The social-cue finding has a separate citation, and the proposed explanation for the discrepancy is the citing authors’ own. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Elevated COVID-19-related anxiety is associated with poorer WM performance on N-back tasks.

    “Elevated levels of COVID-19-related anxiety have also been associated with poorer WM performance as measured by N-back tasks56.”
  • COVID-19-related anxiety is associated with poorer cognitive performance.

    “some studies have shown that COVID-19-related anxiety is associated with poorer cognitive performance (54, 55)”

Self-check

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

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

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Hu W. Su L. Qiao J. Zhu J. Zhou Y. (2020). COVID-19 outbreak increased risk of schizophrenia in aged adults. PsyChinaXiv [Preprint], 10.12074/202003.00003 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fellman, D., Ritakallio, L., Waris, O., Jylkkä, J., & Laine, M.
Affiliations
Åbo Akademi University (FI)
Corresponding author
Fellman, Daniel
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Published
2020-11-26
Volume
11
Pages
576466-576466
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3110160349
Cited by
21
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 2
FWCI
1.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Åbo Akademi University Research Portal (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • KTH Publication Database DiVA (KTH Royal Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Funders
Academy of Finland
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
COVID-19 pandemic, working memory, n-back task, state anxiety, trait anxiety, fluid intelligence, habituation

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