CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 47Work-Family Balance ChallengesFamily Dynamics and RelationshipsGender, Labor, and Family Dynamics

Family Life in Lockdown

Open access
Biroli, Pietro, Bosworth, Steven, Della Giusta, Marina, Di Girolamo, Amalia, Jaworska, Sylvia, Vollen, Jeremy·2021·Frontiers in Psychology
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.687570PMC PMC8371690
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The lockdown imposed following the COVID-19 pandemic of spring 2020 dramatically changed the daily lives and routines of millions of people worldwide. We analyze how such changes contributed to patterns of activity within the household using a novel survey of Italian, British, and American families in lockdown. A high percentage report disruptions in the patterns of family life, manifesting in new work patterns, chore allocations, and household tensions. Though men have taken an increased share of childcare and grocery shopping duties, reallocations are not nearly as stark as disruptions to work patterns might suggest, and families having to reallocate duties report greater tensions. Our results highlight tightened constraints budging up against stable and gendered patterns of intra-household cooperation norms. While the long-run consequences of the COVID-19 lockdown on family life cannot be assessed at this stage, we point toward the likely opportunities and challenges.

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.2021.687570

Cites

4 of 4 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?

  • Test scores do not consider children's psychosocial development, societal costs due to productivity decline, or heightened pressure among parents.

    “Test scores do not consider children’s psychosocial development (63, 64), either societal costs due to productivity decline or heightened pressure among parents (65, 66).”

    From Learning loss due to school closures during the COVID-19 pandemic (2021) · cites this paper as [66]

    The Results section (Family Cooperation and Tensions; page unavailable) reports increased household tension associated with changes in childcare and other household tasks during lockdown, supporting the point about pressure on parents. The paper does not establish societal costs from declining productivity or state that test scores omit these effects. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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: 36

  1. Adams-Prassl A. Boneva T. Golin M. Rauh C. (2020). Inequality in the impact of the coronavirus shock: evidence from real time surveys. J. Public Econ. 189: 104245. 10.1016/j.jpubeco.2020.104245 · DOI
  2. Alon T. M. Doepke M. Olstead-Rumsey J. Tertilt M. (2020). The Impact of COVID-19 On Gender Equality. NBER Working Paper No. 26947. Cambridge, MA: NBER.
  3. Alway J. Belgrave L. L. Smith K. J. (1998). Back to normal: gender and disaster. Symb. Interact. 21 175– 195. 10.1525/si.1998.21.2.175 33021500 · DOI
  4. Bansak C. Grossbard S. Wong C. H. P. (2021). Mothers’ Caregiving During COVID: The Impact of Divorce Laws and Homeownership on Women’s Labor Force Status. IZA DP No. 14408. Bonn: University of Bonn. PMC9340130 35969968
  5. Becker G. S. (1965). A theory of the allocation of time. Econ. J. 75 493– 515. 10.2307/2228949 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Bicchieri C. Mercier H. (2014). “ Norms and beliefs: how change occurs,” in The Complexity of Social Norms, eds Xenitidou M. Edmonds B. (Cham: Springer), 37– 54.
  7. Calarco J. M. Meanwell E. Anderson E. Knopf A. (2020). ‘My husband thinks I’m crazy: COVID-19-related conflict in couples with young children. SocArXiv [Preprint]. 10.31235/osf.io/cpkj6 33784477 · DOI
  8. Carlson D. L. Petts R. Pepin J. R. (2020). Changes in parents’ domestic labor during the COVID-19 pandemic. SocArXiv [Preprint]. 10.31235/osf.io/jy8fn 34908600 PMC8662176 · DOI
  9. Cohan C. L. Cole S. W. (2002). Life course transitions and natural disaster: marriage, birth, and divorce following Hurricane Hugo. J. Family Psychol. 16 14– 25. 10.1037//0893-3200.16.1.14 11915406 · DOI · Paper page
  10. Cohan C. L. Cole S. W. Schoen R. (2009). Divorce following the September 11 terrorist attacks. J. Soc. Pers. Relatsh. 26 512– 530. 10.1177/0265407509351043 · DOI
  11. Croda E. Grossbard S. (2021). Women pay the price of COVID-19 more than men. Rev. Econ. Household 19 1– 9. 10.1007/s11150-021-09549-8 33613141 PMC7883943 · DOI
  12. Del Boca D. Oggero N. Profeta P. Rossi M. (2020). Women’s and men’s work, housework and childcare, before and during COVID-19. Rev. Econ. Household 18 1001– 1017. 10.1007/s11150-020-09502-1 32922242 PMC7474798 · DOI
  13. Folbre N. (2018). “ The care penalty and gender inequality,” in Oxford Handbook of Women and Economy, eds Averett S. L. Arys L. M. Hoffman S. D. (New York: Oxford University Press), 1– 28.
  14. Goldin C. (2014). A grand gender convergence: its last chapter. Am. Econ. Rev. 104 1091– 1119. 10.1257/aer.104.4.1091 · DOI
  15. Grossman D. (2019). The unintended effects of place based programs: fertility and health effects of urban empowerment zones. J. Health Econ. 63 114– 127. 10.1016/j.jhealeco.2018.11.005 30544047 · DOI
  16. Grossbard-Schectman S. (1993). On the Economics of Marriage: A Theory of Marriage, Labor, and Divorce. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
  17. Guiso L. Monte F. Sapienza P. Zingales L. (2008). Culture, gender, and math. Science 320 1164– 1165. 10.1126/science.1154094 18511674 · DOI
  18. Howe C. J. Cole S. R. Lau B. Napravnik S. Eron J. J. Jr. (2016). Selection bias due to loss to follow up in cohort studies. Epidemiology 27 91– 97. 10.1097/EDE.0000000000000409 26484424 PMC5008911 · DOI
  19. Hupkau C. Petrongolo B. (2020). Work, care and gender during the COVID-19 crisis. Fiscal Stud. 41 623– 651. 10.1111/1475-5890.12245 33362313 PMC7753653 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Inglehart R. Norris P. (2003). Rising Tide: Gender Equality and Cultural Change Around the World. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  21. Jaworska S. Ryan K. (2018). Gender and the language of pain in chronic and terminal illness: a corpus-based discourse analysis of patients’ narratives. Soc. Sci. Med. 215 107– 114. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.09.002 30219748 · DOI
  22. Kleven H. Landais C. Posch J. Steinhauer A. Zweimüsller J. (2019). Child penalties across countries: evidence and explanations. AEA Pap. Proc. 109 122– 126. 10.1257/pandp.20191078 · DOI
  23. Lakoff R. (1975). Language and woman’s place. Lang. Soc. 2 45– 79. 10.1017/S0047404500000051 · DOI · Paper page
  24. Lundberg S. Pollak R. A. (1993). Separate spheres bargaining and the marriage market. J. Polit. Econ. 101 988– 1010. 10.1086/261912 · DOI
  25. Lundberg S. Pollak R. A. (1996). Bargaining and distribution in marriage. J. Econ. Perspect. 10 139– 158. 10.1257/jep.10.4.139 · DOI
  26. Manser M. Brown M. (1980). Marriage and household decision-making: a bargaining analysis. Int. Econ. Rev. 21 31– 44. 10.2307/2526238 · DOI
  27. McElroy M. B. Horney M. J. (1981). Nash-bargained household decisions: toward a generalization of the theory of demand. Int. Econ. Rev. 22 333– 349. 10.2307/2526280 · DOI
  28. Patnaik A. (2019). Reserving time for daddy: the consequences of fathers’ quotas. J. Labor Econ. 37: 703115. 10.1086/703115 · DOI
  29. Prados M. Zamarro G. (2021). Gender differences in couples’ division of childcare, work and mental health during COVID-19. Rev. Econ. Household 19 11– 40. 10.1007/s11150-020-09534-7 33488316 PMC7811157 · DOI
  30. Ruppanner L. Brandén M. Turunen J. (2018). Does unequal housework lead to divorce? Evidence from Sweden. Sociology 52 75– 94. 10.1177/0038038516674664 · DOI
  31. Seguino S. (2007). Plus ça change? Evidence on global trends in gender norms and stereotypes. Feminist Econ. 13 1– 28. 10.1080/13545700601184880 · DOI
  32. Sevilla A. Smith S. (2020). Baby steps: the gender division of childcare during the COVID-19 pandemic. Oxf. Rev. Econ. Policy 36 S169– S186. 10.1093/oxrep/graa027 PMC7499756 40504206 · DOI
  33. Sunderland J. (2004). Gendered Discourses. London: Palgrave.
  34. Tannen D. (1990). You Just Don’t Understand: Women and Men in Conversation. London: Virago Press.
  35. Thompson P. (2008). Desperate housewives? Communication difficulties and the dynamics of marital (un)happiness. Econ. J. 118 1640– 1669. 10.1111/j.1468-0297.2008.02184.x · DOI
  36. Zhou M. Hertog E. Kolpashnikova K. Kan M.-Y. (2020). Gender inequalities: changes in income, time use and well-being before and during the UK COVID-19 lockdown. SocArXiv [Preprint]. 10.31235/osf.io/u8ytc 33784477 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Biroli, P., Bosworth, S., Della Giusta, M., Di Girolamo, A., Jaworska, S., & Vollen, J.
Affiliations
  • University of Zurich (CH)
  • University of Reading (GB)
Corresponding author
Biroli, Pietro
ORCID
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Publisher
Frontiers Media SA
Published
2021-08-04
Volume
12
Pages
687570-687570
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3389/fpsyg.2021.687570
PMC
PMC8371690
OpenAlex
W3036919831
Cited by
47
References
4
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 23 · 2020: 3
FWCI
14.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • CentAUR (University of Reading) (submittedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Econstor (Econstor) (submittedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Work-Family Balance Challenges
  • Social Sciences › Demography › Family Dynamics and Relationships
  • Social Sciences › Gender Studies › Gender, Labor, and Family Dynamics
Keywords
COVID-19 lockdown, family life, family routines, gender division of labor, child care, grocery shopping, work patterns, gender norms

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