WEBVTT

1
00:00:00.001 --> 00:00:19.000
Okay, and so we start with the country acknowledgement. So we acknowledge the sovereignty of the people of Narn, the Kolyn Nesch, Nuruncii, Voila room and pay our respect to them and their ancestors.

2
00:00:19.000 --> 00:00:27.000
And so we have 4 papers. Here and we start with Oliver.

3
00:00:27.000 --> 00:00:33.000
It's already on.

4
00:00:33.000 --> 00:00:44.000
Instrument you made.

5
00:00:44.000 --> 00:00:57.000
Oh. I'll show myself as well.

6
00:00:57.000 --> 00:01:07.000
Okay, how do I hide this?

7
00:01:07.000 --> 00:01:10.000
How did you open it?

8
00:01:10.000 --> 00:01:26.000
Yes. Okay. And then and then and then Okay, now it should be okay. Coming from Estonia University of Tartu.

9
00:01:26.000 --> 00:01:42.000
And, if my, paper together with one of my former students student the paper is about the impact of COVID.

10
00:01:42.000 --> 00:01:47.000
19 pandemic on children subjective well-being.

11
00:01:47.000 --> 00:01:51.000
And

12
00:01:51.000 --> 00:02:06.000
And there is not much knowledge or evidence about how the pandemic impacts reflecting children's over and subjective well-being change multinationally.

13
00:02:06.000 --> 00:02:20.000
To our knowledge, there are, there are only one, multinational study, which described the change based on country means.

14
00:02:20.000 --> 00:02:42.000
But we believe that to understand the impacts of the pandemic. On children's subjective wellbeing and it's changed more thoroughly, it is important to go further from country means analysis and use children's profiles of change approach.

15
00:02:42.000 --> 00:02:58.000
So what is genius profiles of change approach? In this approach we believe that that some children may have had predominant negative or predominantly positive experiences.

16
00:02:58.000 --> 00:03:17.000
Experiences during the pandemic and then their subjective well-being. Lowered or increased respectively or or for some children, they experienced both and then their subjective learning didn't change much.

17
00:03:17.000 --> 00:03:28.000
And, this approach we have already used in, in one another paper which which we have published in frontiers in sociology.

18
00:03:28.000 --> 00:03:33.000
And yeah

19
00:03:33.000 --> 00:03:46.000
And previously as there are some single country studies which have looked at the change of children subject to well-wing during pandemic.

20
00:03:46.000 --> 00:04:09.000
And it and they have found that, well-being decreased or not changed. And this one multinational study I mentioned showed that children's mean over our subjective well-being has decreased in 20 countries across 4 continents.

21
00:04:09.000 --> 00:04:24.000
And there are also some evidence that that the social distancing experience pandemic related anxiety and psychological needs fulfillment.

22
00:04:24.000 --> 00:04:32.000
Can be important factors contributing to the children's subjective well-being and its change during the pandemic.

23
00:04:32.000 --> 00:04:55.000
But this evidence is also based on single country studies. So the aim of this paper is, By taking this profile of change approach, the aim is to explore multinationally the change of children's oversubject well-being during the COVID pandemic including the role of social distancing experience.

24
00:04:55.000 --> 00:05:21.000
Pandemic related anxiety and psychological needs fulfillment in this. And we have 3, 4 research questions. First, how do children's profiles of change vary across countries, profiles of change means that 20, if, decliners and, and no changers.

25
00:05:21.000 --> 00:05:42.000
Then how these these profiles of change vary by the children's gender and socio economic status and how to subject your well-being decliners, no change in containers differ by their social distancing experience, democratic anxiety and psychological needs fulfillment.

26
00:05:42.000 --> 00:05:57.000
And lastly, to these factors I just mentioned, today I help to explain children's belonging to the decliner's profile compared to the node agents profile.

27
00:05:57.000 --> 00:06:06.000
And to also do these research questions used data from from International Children's World's Covid.

28
00:06:06.000 --> 00:06:11.000
19 Supplements Survey. We thought that was collected in 2,021.

29
00:06:11.000 --> 00:06:41.000
There was more than 2,000 20,000 children's data aged 9 to 13 from 16 countries across 4 continents you can see countries here and it should be mentioned that mostly the samples were not represent in samples but they were represented to some smaller area or some smaller area or in some cases they were not representative at all.

30
00:06:51.000 --> 00:07:11.000
So it was the, yeah, it's the COVID pandemic time when the data collection was not so easy and so yeah the computer collection methods or sampling methods may varied a bit across countries.

31
00:07:11.000 --> 00:07:26.000
And sample size is also varied across countries, for example in Germany there was around 600 children's data but in Belgium there was 2,400.

32
00:07:26.000 --> 00:07:42.000
So it has to be. Just to be remembered here. And we used these measures. To make sure this over a subjective well-being we used a retrospective question.

33
00:07:42.000 --> 00:07:55.000
Yeah, thinking about how you life was before the coronavirus, how happy were you with your life as a whole and the same question but in this case now during the coronavirus.

34
00:07:55.000 --> 00:08:09.000
And, yeah, we computed the, change in this way. And, and social distancing experience. Yeah, there was 2 questions used.

35
00:08:09.000 --> 00:08:22.000
First one was related to their experience if they had to stay at home at some period and the other one was that they couldn't attend school for many days.

36
00:08:22.000 --> 00:08:34.000
One of our anxiety was measured with 7 item fear of COVET. 19 psychometric scale school anxiety in this case the question.

37
00:08:34.000 --> 00:08:42.000
During the last month, where it have been about the following things in our life, the changes in my life as a student.

38
00:08:42.000 --> 00:08:45.000
Because of the coronavirus situation. And psychological needs for a moment was measured with 3 items.

39
00:08:45.000 --> 00:09:03.000
First, I feel our own, which is measure relatedness dimension. I'm good at managing my daily responsibilities, which is measuring competence, dimension and satisfaction with the freedom I have which is measuring the autonomy.

40
00:09:03.000 --> 00:09:07.000
So those 3 psychological needs.

41
00:09:07.000 --> 00:09:19.000
And We used, for our analysis, we used, first of allies and money with new tests.

42
00:09:19.000 --> 00:09:39.000
And also, PINRY logistic regression on And this logistic progression analyzes We, look, the climbers compared to no changes, no changes was, was the reference group there.

43
00:09:39.000 --> 00:09:47.000
And we look for what factors help to explain belonging to the decliners compared to the no changes.

44
00:09:47.000 --> 00:09:51.000
Okay, now at the results.

45
00:09:51.000 --> 00:10:18.000
So in this figure You can see that The percentage is of of children. Belonging to the decliners profile it means that for these children, over a subjective well-being declined during the pandemic, those are those.

46
00:10:18.000 --> 00:10:38.000
Green green bars here and you can see that in all countries the Korean bars are the most frequent one so it means that in all countries the subjective well-being decreased most frequently for children.

47
00:10:38.000 --> 00:10:58.000
And in in the case of Turkey, Germany and Bangladesh, most common compared to the other countries, 3 out of 4 children, they are subjective well being, priest.

48
00:10:58.000 --> 00:11:11.000
For example in Estonia, Albania. And some other countries there was about half half of children subjective well being decreased.

49
00:11:11.000 --> 00:11:33.000
And there was the second common profile was no changers. So we can see that down in Albania there was almost the same amount of no-changers as decliners, so there was quite equal proportion there to this country.

50
00:11:33.000 --> 00:11:42.000
And, and, and there was also some, some children in each country whose subjective well being actually increased during the bandemic.

51
00:11:42.000 --> 00:12:10.000
So for example in in Algeria this it was most common. Compared to other countries. Okay now if you look this this one results by gender then we then we found that the liners was more common profile of change among girls compared to poison in Algeria, Chile, stone in Israel and Wales.

52
00:12:10.000 --> 00:12:20.000
In Belgium it was the opposite. And parts of boys. Clinters was more common among boys.

53
00:12:20.000 --> 00:12:34.000
And in other countries, the gender didn't matter. And, socioeconomic status, we can say that it differentiated children's profiles of subjective wellbeing chain most in Germany but also in other countries.

54
00:12:34.000 --> 00:12:47.000
Except Chile, Columbia, Romania and South Korea.

55
00:12:47.000 --> 00:13:07.000
And now to the research question. To. No, 3 actually. So the differences between this profile children belonging to the different profiles of change and their experience, social distancing experience and their related anxiety and psychological needs fulfillment.

56
00:13:07.000 --> 00:13:24.000
Here we can see that, These are the 2 social distancing experience factors here and we can see that at least for half of the

57
00:13:24.000 --> 00:13:33.000
At least half of the countries, this social distancing experience factors didn't matter.

58
00:13:33.000 --> 00:13:47.000
For children that were not important. But in some cases like Bangladesh or Algeria or Belgium or Israel or South Korea.

59
00:13:47.000 --> 00:14:02.000
Yeah, we can say that. That the decliners, children whose subjective well-being declined they experienced more those social distancing.

60
00:14:02.000 --> 00:14:12.000
Things so they had to more stay at home at least they reported as so they had to be more.

61
00:14:12.000 --> 00:14:20.000
So, have But if we look at those 2 other factors, pandemic related anxiety and psychological needs fulfillment, then I can see that these factors play more important role.

62
00:14:20.000 --> 00:14:35.000
Differentiating those different children. You can see that.

63
00:14:35.000 --> 00:15:03.000
For example, this coronavirus anxiety and school anxiety, it was mostly the case that that children who belong to theliners profile they perceive more anxiety compared to the children who belong to the No Chang's profile and

64
00:15:03.000 --> 00:15:33.000
Yes. And psychological information is all 3 needs mattered as well. 3 needs mattered as well but here the interesting result is that in addition to the children whose subjects were well being declined, children whose subjects were being increased actually they Also,

65
00:15:36.000 --> 00:15:48.000
Felt for example more loneliness or less autonomy or less competence than children belonging to the No Chang's profile.

66
00:15:48.000 --> 00:16:07.000
It was an interesting result here. And last research question. When we wanted to explore, how the, how this, do they help to explain?

67
00:16:07.000 --> 00:16:18.000
Children belonging to the decliners profile compared to the no changes profile. So this is been our regression models here.

68
00:16:18.000 --> 00:16:35.000
So we run these models for each country separately. I mean this table we can see that that for example this school anxiety row.

69
00:16:35.000 --> 00:17:03.000
You can see these plus signs most often live basically in every country except some some and this means that a school in almost in all countries, school and society help to explain children's belonging to the decliner's profile compared to the no changers.

70
00:17:03.000 --> 00:17:17.000
So, and it means that, for, they felt more school anxiety than no changers.

71
00:17:17.000 --> 00:17:35.000
So if we look at these social distancing experience factors then there's all very few plus or minus signs here so it means that in regression models these didn't matter.

72
00:17:35.000 --> 00:18:05.000
If we also took this if all these different other factors into account And, if we look at this psychological needs fulfillment, then we can say that in every country some psychological needs fulfillment factor matters so it means that for theliners the They had lower psych psychological needs fulfillment level than for no

73
00:18:09.000 --> 00:18:11.000
changers

74
00:18:11.000 --> 00:18:24.000
Okay, and to conclude, we can say that our study confirmed Sawal and colleagues previous results that in all countries.

75
00:18:24.000 --> 00:18:43.000
Most commonly children's oversubjective will be decreased. But as Dr. Newfinings or Profiles of Change approach allowed us to detect the cross-country is a proportion of children whose objective will be did not change or even increase during the pandemic.

76
00:18:43.000 --> 00:18:55.000
As a new research evidence we found that How are you pandemic related schooling standing most consistently almost in all countries helped to explain children's belonging to decliners profile.

77
00:18:55.000 --> 00:19:03.000
And lack of psychological needs fulfillment were important in explaining genius belonging to the planners profiling majority of countries.

78
00:19:03.000 --> 00:19:13.000
And only in Belgium. Israel and South Korea, strictly social distancing experience, helped to explain children belonging to theliners profile.

79
00:19:13.000 --> 00:19:30.000
Yeah, okay. I will end with this.

80
00:19:30.000 --> 00:19:40.000
So we have some time for questions. These ways.

81
00:19:40.000 --> 00:19:52.000
Questions or comments? That works hard to do. Thanks. Yeah, please.

82
00:19:52.000 --> 00:20:04.000
Thank you for the presentation. I must have connect from Central University to the. One question. May I may miss, your explanation.

83
00:20:04.000 --> 00:20:34.000
What is a profile of change approach? Thank you. So in this Yeah, as I, so, there is one, one multinational study exploring this issue and it used this country means approach so we there they compared different country means and how would they how this means changed but but if we divide children to

84
00:20:38.000 --> 00:21:08.000
those different profiles. So for example, children whose have a So the 3 profiles, decliners and no changers and containers, so the decliners are the children who who's a subjective well being decreased during the pandemic and we assume that these children mostly experienced negative experiences or things during the pandemic.

85
00:21:12.000 --> 00:21:37.000
So that's why there. Subjective well being declined and so and for example in the case of No Changers we assume that they experienced both positive and negative things in their life and so in total there's subject to we didn't change much during the pandemic and in the case of Kaneers.

86
00:21:37.000 --> 00:21:54.000
Their subjective well being increased. Based on the measure we used and we assume that they mostly experienced positive things in during the pandemic in their life.

87
00:21:54.000 --> 00:22:04.000
So you mean, you, you, analyze this, through multinomial unknown, a logistic regulation model, right?

88
00:22:04.000 --> 00:22:09.000
We

89
00:22:09.000 --> 00:22:39.000
We basically we had those 2 questions as our dependent variable or we asked how was their life satisfaction before the coronavirus and 2 integer coronavirus and so there was 2 questions to items then we yeah took the change with yeah computed the change based on those 2 questions And that's how we got, got those 3

90
00:22:47.000 --> 00:22:55.000
groups of children. Yeah. Okay. So, you, measure the change in the subjective wellbeing or some things.

91
00:22:55.000 --> 00:23:06.000
So, that that you call change of profile approach. Yes, yes, And did you have violations?

92
00:23:06.000 --> 00:23:14.000
Because We could have cartridge with very small variations and contrast with very big changes. Have you checked that?

93
00:23:14.000 --> 00:23:29.000
So, so if, if in inside the one country there

94
00:23:29.000 --> 00:23:46.000
There was a children who was subject to well being decreased extremely are you mean this are extremely you could have one country that you have always close to the note changes and the other one where you have extreme variation.

95
00:23:46.000 --> 00:24:03.000
Oh, that's not a problem, I think. Would be interestingly to know. In this case I have this graph I showed a figure where it was this graph I showed or figure where it was proportions of this graph I showed or figure where it was proportions of steel profiles inside the country.

96
00:24:03.000 --> 00:24:12.000
Proportions are not. Could be a lot of difference of distance or small distances. Let's change.

97
00:24:12.000 --> 00:24:27.000
If you have a big changer and a small change and so it was also related to my question if you wouldn't make sense to me to distinguish the big changes and small changes.

98
00:24:27.000 --> 00:24:33.000
So we have a big group to distinguish the big changes and small changes. So we have a big group of changes and small changes. So we have a big group of changes.

99
00:24:33.000 --> 00:24:39.000
That might be quite different if you have a big group of changes that might be quite different if you have really a high variation will arise within these groups.

100
00:24:39.000 --> 00:24:50.000
To distinguish those who are really effects it more seriously affected them. Yeah, I should check this.

101
00:24:50.000 --> 00:25:09.000
But, er, er, I can't, er, er, Because I do the country specific analyzes and then I can't slice those groups very small sizes as well because then I can't do this analysis because n is too small then.

102
00:25:09.000 --> 00:25:17.000
But, yes. I should check it to be good. Yeah, there's no changes.

103
00:25:17.000 --> 00:25:23.000
Maybe we can slice those no changes group.

104
00:25:23.000 --> 00:25:30.000
Okay, other questions? I,

105
00:25:30.000 --> 00:25:45.000
Thank you, Albert. This was a really interesting presentation. And Oh, I actually conducted the SIM SARB in Bangladesh and I noticed that actually in when he presented the change profile for this country's Buddhism.

106
00:25:45.000 --> 00:26:02.000
Court law which I'm not surprised But I also noticed there are some countries like Alvenia, Estonia, which in the upper right hand side where the percentage of children who reported no change quite high.

107
00:26:02.000 --> 00:26:12.000
Like Alvinia, 44% reported no change and in Estonian case 33% reported.

108
00:26:12.000 --> 00:26:24.000
No tune. I'm a bit curious just to know whether you have any explanation. For why this children, high high passenger children reported.

109
00:26:24.000 --> 00:26:45.000
Not to change when you compare them with Some of the countries maybe like some of them Albania is the country where the no changes were almost as frequent as decliners profiles.

110
00:26:45.000 --> 00:26:59.000
And Albania is a curious country in this children's World Survey. Because they are most, their children are most happy, happy ones actually compared to the other countries.

111
00:26:59.000 --> 00:27:06.000
And that's a puzzling result. I haven't figured it out and I think many people haven't figured out why it is so.

112
00:27:06.000 --> 00:27:19.000
But KS in Estonia, there's also the 33% and then in South Korea, 33%, no changers.

113
00:27:19.000 --> 00:27:37.000
I suppose maybe in these countries. There was, there were maybe they, experienced, Like,

114
00:27:37.000 --> 00:27:50.000
Some positive things but also some negative things and so they balanced it out these effects but I don't know how to compare it to the other countries right now.

115
00:27:50.000 --> 00:28:00.000
I'm not Yeah, for example, in the case of Bangladesh, I would I would ask your help to explain why.

116
00:28:00.000 --> 00:28:09.000
Why, why there the clients professors are so frequent. Compared to the other countries.

117
00:28:09.000 --> 00:28:23.000
Well, in the case of all of this, I promise that very long period of time to those completely shot down.

118
00:28:23.000 --> 00:28:37.000
So, we, assumed that this might be a reason for Our children do. 1, one.

119
00:28:37.000 --> 00:29:02.000
To get my view on this and I also have no one. But then you have to be in size students for Probably it would be good to have some qualitative data status here to go in or in depth but We have to go on so Thanks.

120
00:29:02.000 --> 00:29:08.000
So next present is Kosovo

121
00:29:08.000 --> 00:29:19.000
Make sure what I need to use the mind because when people go there during your So do you think, well you should speak here just a little bit, okay that's great.

122
00:29:19.000 --> 00:29:31.000
Sir, where shall I go to open it?

123
00:29:31.000 --> 00:29:34.000
Okay, good afternoon. Good afternoon to colleagues who are here and also those who have joined remotely.

124
00:29:34.000 --> 00:30:03.000
Thank you all for joining. Presenting at a conference in Friday afternoon is usually challenging. After a long week being in the conference, perhaps We all feel hard to go to maybe a pub or coffee shop for relaxing to enhance our own well-being.

125
00:30:03.000 --> 00:30:14.000
But thank you for staying with us. So in this presentation, I would like to talk to you about the children's experiences during Covid-nineteen pandemic in the context of Bangladesh.

126
00:30:14.000 --> 00:30:30.000
So I have structured my presentation under 8 broader themes. First I would like to talk about the context for conducting this piece of research in Bangladesh.

127
00:30:30.000 --> 00:30:41.000
And then we'll explain the aims for this presentation. Then I will present a regression model which I tested.

128
00:30:41.000 --> 00:30:47.000
To assess the impact of some of the factors. On children's who are well being during the pandemic.

129
00:30:47.000 --> 00:31:03.000
Then I'll explain the methods used. Explain the measurement of the variables. Which are used in the Analysis, present the results and briefly summarize the findings before I conclude the presentation.

130
00:31:03.000 --> 00:31:12.000
So just to set out the research problem. Buting children's well being is vital to have a good childhood.

131
00:31:12.000 --> 00:31:25.000
And also is the basis for future well-being of well-being as an adult. And the aspiration to seek you well being of children is explicit in in different grand challenges such as United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.

132
00:31:25.000 --> 00:31:35.000
And if we look at the sustainable development goals, then we will find at least 169 targets.

133
00:31:35.000 --> 00:31:49.000
Which are actually attached to children and young people directly or indirectly. However, more recently countries are actually facing enormous challenges to meet those targets.

134
00:31:49.000 --> 00:31:55.000
Because of the Covid-nineteen pandemic affecting billions of children's globally.

135
00:31:55.000 --> 00:32:05.000
So although medical research has advanced very well to prevent deaths and find a cue for virus, research assessing the social and psychological impact.

136
00:32:05.000 --> 00:32:18.000
Of the pandemic is still limited. There are some studies which narrowly examined these are specs but these were actually conducted mostly among adults.

137
00:32:18.000 --> 00:32:30.000
And systematic research among children regarding their experience during the pandemic is still limited. But children are the active agents and they are the key stakeholders.

138
00:32:30.000 --> 00:32:39.000
So they should be in the forefront. Around the debates on the impact of the Covid-nineteen pandemic on their welfare.

139
00:32:39.000 --> 00:32:47.000
So guided by this principle, this research was carried out in Bangladesh in collaboration with Children's Worlds.

140
00:32:47.000 --> 00:32:56.000
And there's Cobb. 19 special server. So these are this in this presentation I'll basically present some of the findings from this.

141
00:32:56.000 --> 00:33:18.000
Please search. So although the actual survey covered collected data from from children over different aspects of their life. In this presentation, I will be talking about a children's self-reported experience of the pandemic by focusing on 3 things, whether their families moved during the pandemic.

142
00:33:18.000 --> 00:33:27.000
The economic aspects of their lives and their families. And the psychosocial aspects of their lives. In particular, the level of support they receive from their friends, family and their ability to manage learning from home.

143
00:33:27.000 --> 00:33:45.000
Sell, percept safety and their worries about changes in student life. Finally, the aim is also to identify socially demographic factors.

144
00:33:45.000 --> 00:33:53.000
Economic and psychological factors of the pandemic which are associated with children's objective

145
00:33:53.000 --> 00:34:10.000
So, on children's well-being. We have found some potential factors which we included in in explaining children's subjecting well being during the pandemic.

146
00:34:10.000 --> 00:34:29.000
So here you can see those factors. First one, gender is a rural urban location whether they moved home parental job loss food poverty, digital inequality, I want to support the receive from Fran's family.

147
00:34:29.000 --> 00:34:39.000
Ability to manage home learning, sell per se safety during the pandemic and there worry about student life.

148
00:34:39.000 --> 00:34:52.000
So these, these factors, the data on these vectors are collected and then these are actually used to explain subjective well-being.

149
00:34:52.000 --> 00:35:04.000
So now I'd like to tell you about the methods. So in this ARM, in Bangladesh around 1,370 children took part.

150
00:35:04.000 --> 00:35:15.000
There is a range from 10 to 12. And we developed a common question here which was actually used in other participating countries.

151
00:35:15.000 --> 00:35:22.000
I think probably there are 22 countries in children's whole survey who took part in COVID special saga.

152
00:35:22.000 --> 00:35:30.000
So the English version of the questionnaire was translated into local Bengali language using a translation method.

153
00:35:30.000 --> 00:35:41.000
And we originally plan to use only face-to-face server, but because of the long period of a shard down in Bangladesh.

154
00:35:41.000 --> 00:35:52.000
We couldn't actually rely fully on face-to-face method to get the necessary sample size. So we also used online as a mood of data collection.

155
00:35:52.000 --> 00:36:02.000
We sort of ethical approval from Manchester Metropolitan University. So this table here in the slide shows actually the regions where the data was collected.

156
00:36:02.000 --> 00:36:09.000
So we couldn't actually collect data covering whole country. So we selected 3, 4 regions.

157
00:36:09.000 --> 00:36:17.000
South, southern part of Bangladesh, northwest of Bangladesh. Northeast to Bangladesh and capital city.

158
00:36:17.000 --> 00:36:31.000
So most of the data are collected by using online more. Only 310 children actually participated. Yeah, in this area by completing online question here.

159
00:36:31.000 --> 00:36:39.000
So this slide actually shows the region where the data were mainly collected.

160
00:36:39.000 --> 00:36:48.000
So I have grouped all those variables into 3 groups. By, by their thematic meanings.

161
00:36:48.000 --> 00:37:02.000
So the first group falls under social demographic characteristics under which we have got 4 variables, It is a self-reported questions asking children to report their age which ranges from 10 to 12.

162
00:37:02.000 --> 00:37:13.000
It also asked their gender or whether their boy or girl a place of resident asking children to say whether they lived in a village or town.

163
00:37:13.000 --> 00:37:23.000
And, and finally, we asked children to say whether their family had to move. From that usual place of living because of the COVID.

164
00:37:23.000 --> 00:37:36.000
19 pandemic and the answer was deported under 2 groups yes and no. So under socio economic factors we we gather data from children on 3 variables parental job loss.

165
00:37:36.000 --> 00:37:46.000
Asking children whether either of their parents lost their jobs due to the pandemic and were not receiving any support and so was the record in 2 groups years now.

166
00:37:46.000 --> 00:37:57.000
For poverty we ask children to report how often they had enough food to eat each day during the pandemic. An answer was recorded always, sometimes never.

167
00:37:57.000 --> 00:38:14.000
And we use some codes which ranges from 0. Always and then means no poverty for poverty to never had chance to eat which was quoted 3 which means a very high level of foodboard.

168
00:38:14.000 --> 00:38:27.000
And to measure digital inequality we ask children whether they had access to internet during the pandemic and so it was recorded into 4 groups ranging from always to neighbor.

169
00:38:27.000 --> 00:38:40.000
And this single item Mazar actually captured their digital inequality. And for friend support, family support.

170
00:38:40.000 --> 00:38:51.000
And menezing home learning. We, provided, for 3 separate statements and ask children to say how much they actually agree.

171
00:38:51.000 --> 00:39:02.000
With those statements. And answers are gathered in 4 response options ranging from do not agree coder 0 to totally agree.

172
00:39:02.000 --> 00:39:12.000
Quoted 4 and for self are sipped safety again we also used a statement asking children to say how much they agree or disagree with this.

173
00:39:12.000 --> 00:39:26.000
And answers are included in 4 groups. And then finally, to capture their worry about student life we used an 11 point single item scale.

174
00:39:26.000 --> 00:39:40.000
Asking how ordered they were actually about the changes in life as a student because of the COVID pandemic. And uncertainty are gathered not at all could it 0 to very much quoted channel.

175
00:39:40.000 --> 00:39:54.000
IR score means greater level of worry. And finally, the dependent variable measuring children's objective worldview was measured by using children's whole subjective world wing scale which consisted of 6 items.

176
00:39:54.000 --> 00:40:01.000
So you see all those 6 items there. So children were asked to say how much they agree. With each of those items.

177
00:40:01.000 --> 00:40:18.000
And principal component analysis was conducted with very very max rotation and we found one factor for those. Items and Crownbec alpha, point 9 0 indicated a very high level of internal consistency among those items.

178
00:40:18.000 --> 00:40:31.000
To measure our objective working scale. So now I'm going to briefly present the results. So first of all, very descriptive results presenting children's experiences during the pandemic here.

179
00:40:31.000 --> 00:40:49.000
You see that data for those 4 social demographic factors. The more interesting one is moving home. So here you can see Only 4% children reported that their families had to move.

180
00:40:49.000 --> 00:41:04.000
From their usual place of residence during COVID pandemic. And then this live present dedicated results about economic aspects of children's lives during endemic or parental job laws.

181
00:41:04.000 --> 00:41:17.000
Almost 20%. Children reported their families to have at least one adult who lost their job during the pandemic.

182
00:41:17.000 --> 00:41:34.000
And in terms of food poverty scale, we see that. At least one quarter children if we marched sometimes and never into one groups then almost one quarter children actually reported to have a certain degree of food poverty.

183
00:41:34.000 --> 00:41:52.000
And finally for digital inequality during pandemic we also see that a considerable amount of children reported. to have a very high level of digital inequality because Almost 40 person reported never having any access.

184
00:41:52.000 --> 00:41:57.000
And only one quarter had

185
00:41:57.000 --> 00:42:08.000
As occasional to internet during the pandemic. And this slide shows very descriptive results about the psychosocial aspects of children's life during the pandemic.

186
00:42:08.000 --> 00:42:24.000
So friends support it is measured in a scale. So if we use 2 as a meat point. Then the main is 1.7 which is less than midpoint so it suggests that the level of support that is quite love, family support.

187
00:42:24.000 --> 00:42:34.000
Quite high if we consider 2 as a midpoint. Manizing learning from school again is just about the midpoint.

188
00:42:34.000 --> 00:42:45.000
And sell perceived safety again just in the border line. And worry about student life and that degree of 4 is quite high if we consider.

189
00:42:45.000 --> 00:42:56.000
For a 4.5 or 5 is a midpoint because here the mini is 7.2. But I must say these are just a crude interpretation of the descriptive results.

190
00:42:56.000 --> 00:43:10.000
So now I'm going to present on the regression results which captured the impact of those social demographic economic and psychosocial factors.

191
00:43:10.000 --> 00:43:22.000
On children's objective well being during the pandemic in Bangalore. So I have presented the table into 2 slides because I have presented the table into into 2 slides because I couldn't fit.

192
00:43:22.000 --> 00:43:30.000
Them into one slice. So this is the first part. So this one presents only results for social demographic and economic factors.

193
00:43:30.000 --> 00:43:40.000
So out of 4 social demographic factors. You see, the area of living, He is a statistically significant factor.

194
00:43:40.000 --> 00:43:52.000
So people who are actually children who live in rural area reported to him a greater level of well-being during the pandemic.

195
00:43:52.000 --> 00:44:08.000
And then Out of 3 economic factors. To where statistically significant food poverty digital inequality both at a negative impact.

196
00:44:08.000 --> 00:44:22.000
On children's subject evolving. In other words, those who had higher level of food poverty and higher digit inequality reported to have lower level of well-being during the pandemic.

197
00:44:22.000 --> 00:44:35.000
So this final part of the regression result presents the influence present the results capturing the influence of psychosocial factors on the children's objective well being.

198
00:44:35.000 --> 00:44:46.000
And interestingly, you can see that of those, all those fives, or actually statistically significant.

199
00:44:46.000 --> 00:44:51.000
And out of those 5 support from France

200
00:44:51.000 --> 00:45:03.000
Apart from family, for managing learning, feeling safe, all hard positive. Relation so those who felt more supported from friends family more able to learn from home more feels safe.

201
00:45:03.000 --> 00:45:20.000
I had reported a higher level of well-being. But, we've also find that actually the degree of ORA children had, actually acted negatively in determining the level of holding.

202
00:45:20.000 --> 00:45:33.000
But again, this is also statistically significant. So if we allow someone No findings, then we can see that actually out of 4 social demographic factors included in the model.

203
00:45:33.000 --> 00:45:42.000
Area of living appeared to have the only factors which affect our children's well-being during Covid-nineteen pandemic.

204
00:45:42.000 --> 00:45:54.000
And among the 3 social economic factors, examining the analysis. Food poverty and digital inequality had statistically a significant relation.

205
00:45:54.000 --> 00:46:09.000
And all those 5 psychosocial factors were actually statistically significant. So finally, I was also curious to find out actually out of all those statistically significant factors, which one had highest impact.

206
00:46:09.000 --> 00:46:18.000
On children's wellbeing during COVID. Went in a pandemic for which I looked at the standardized regulation coefficient.

207
00:46:18.000 --> 00:46:42.000
And you can see that actually, the regression standardized regression coefficient linked to children's ability to manage learning from home at the highest impact on the level of well-being during pandemic followed by followed by the level of support they received from France in Bitcoin point 1 point.

208
00:46:42.000 --> 00:46:54.000
Oh, point 1 6 family. Food poverty feeling safe living in rural areas, digital inequality. Children worry about changes in student life.

209
00:46:54.000 --> 00:47:08.000
So this is just a kind of order. Of the impact of those factors on children's wellbeing which one basically had IS to each one as the last, but all of them were statistically significant.

210
00:47:08.000 --> 00:47:12.000
Independence level of well-being during vendor. Now I'd like to conclude the finding by acknowledging few limitations.

211
00:47:12.000 --> 00:47:33.000
So in this research we used correlational design. So all those factors I had in divine cannot be established as a kind of cause for for for children to have higher or lower level well-being.

212
00:47:33.000 --> 00:47:43.000
And apart from those 8 statistically significant factors, there might be some other contextual factors which also affect children's well-being.

213
00:47:43.000 --> 00:47:52.000
Like they have their ethnic background, social class, disabilities and so on. We couldn't get that data on those factors.

214
00:47:52.000 --> 00:48:03.000
In this artback. And I'm emphasizing on this because if we look at the predictive power of the regulation model that only 14% variation were explained by those factors.

215
00:48:03.000 --> 00:48:16.000
So it suggests that probably. There is a room for improving the expiry power of the model.

216
00:48:16.000 --> 00:48:29.000
And finally, this study conceptualizes well-being using hedonic perspective. But we know that you Diamonding approach suggests a range of psychological factors such as personality.

217
00:48:29.000 --> 00:48:40.000
Autonomy which are also linked to well-being. So future studies can consider those aspects. In assessing their influence on children's solving.

218
00:48:40.000 --> 00:48:53.000
Finally, I would like to say that the findings I presented here is actually used to write a paper and and this paper is not published.

219
00:48:53.000 --> 00:49:00.000
In Charlie Inndictive Research. So it is a free access article. So if you want to know a bit more than please feel free to.

220
00:49:00.000 --> 00:49:11.000
Download it from Charlie indicator's research channel And I'd like to conclude saying thank you again for listening.

221
00:49:11.000 --> 00:49:17.000
Have some Yes.

222
00:49:17.000 --> 00:49:21.000
Hi, thank you for Rupert.

223
00:49:21.000 --> 00:49:29.000
No.

224
00:49:29.000 --> 00:49:58.000
Excuse me. Hi, thank you for your presentation. I was wondering because one in one of the first slides to show that in a free Iranians you use like in person interviews and in the fourth one there was online question or online interview from zoom or whatever online interview from zoom or whatever tool you use and I was wondering if you analysed

225
00:49:58.000 --> 00:50:28.000
whether there was an impact of using this tool you use and I was wondering if you analysed whether there was an impact of using this tool like this online because for example for digital inequality I was wondering if you analysed whether there was an impact of using this tool like this online because for example for digital inequality I assumed that there was an impact of using this tool like this online because for example for digital inequality I assumed that if someone did the interview through

226
00:50:36.000 --> 00:50:44.000
Zoom or like this online because for example for digital inequality I assumed that if someone did the interview through Zoom or like whatever tool they used they had to have at least some kind Thank you.

227
00:50:44.000 --> 00:50:56.000
That's a really good question. So unfortunately in this analysis I could I didn't just the mood effect but it is a good point for me to consider in the next level.

228
00:50:56.000 --> 00:51:10.000
But I want to mention one thing about those children who participated using online platform. In many cases, especially in the context of Bangladesh, children are actually not given mobile.

229
00:51:10.000 --> 00:51:24.000
Fall with internet access in most cases. So although they participated online. And they actually use their parents device, to to answer our complete questionnaire.

230
00:51:24.000 --> 00:51:30.000
But I take your point, it would be interesting to find out whether this mode effect has anything to do.

231
00:51:30.000 --> 00:51:39.000
With and the meaning of the results. Thank you for mentioning this.

232
00:51:39.000 --> 00:51:58.000
Thank you. Very interesting work. Have a question that usually Children subject to well being or life satisfaction it it's usually not normal distribution but it's Yeah.

233
00:51:58.000 --> 00:52:11.000
More higher than the midpoint. So why did you decide to use this, linear regression model?

234
00:52:11.000 --> 00:52:27.000
Thank you. Yes, it is again a very good technical question. Normally you'd you'd need a kind of a normal distribution.

235
00:52:27.000 --> 00:52:43.000
For a robust regulation results. But you know, we tested. And that robustness, whether that assumptions were actually violated by by the data because of slight skewed skewedness.

236
00:52:43.000 --> 00:52:55.000
And we didn't find any major kind of change. In the way the distribution actually was.

237
00:52:55.000 --> 00:53:07.000
Of our. We also run the analysis using logistic regression and the findings were actually not different from ordinary list square integration.

238
00:53:07.000 --> 00:53:14.000
So we thought maybe it will be better just to stick to ordinary list for integration because the results are not that different.

239
00:53:14.000 --> 00:53:22.000
Thank you. Did you answer your question? Many thanks. Last question, if not.

240
00:53:22.000 --> 00:53:30.000
It's the chimney. No question how we came up to you. Yeah. No other questions?

241
00:53:30.000 --> 00:53:53.000
Thank you again.

242
00:53:53.000 --> 00:53:58.000
Okay, it is here. I was worried they're not. It's not gonna come up.

243
00:53:58.000 --> 00:54:00.000
All right, so this paper I'm presenting from some work that I did of analysis of Hilda Data, I'm presenting from some work that I did of analysis of Hilda Data, which is a household in common Labor Data, which is a household in common Labor Dynamics in Australia project that's been running since 2,001.

244
00:54:00.000 --> 00:54:19.000
It has oodles of money. It's a huge project. They've got About 20,000 people involved at the moment and that's just the stuff.

245
00:54:19.000 --> 00:54:27.000
No I'm only kidding. They got 20,000 respondents or thereabouts and they have a large stuff.

246
00:54:27.000 --> 00:54:34.000
So it's not a project that I'm personally working on, but I do secondary analysis of the data.

247
00:54:34.000 --> 00:54:44.000
So just as at the context I'm I'm sort of interested in young people age 15 to 17 year old.

248
00:54:44.000 --> 00:54:51.000
Because during the pandemic they had little control over their living conditions. They were living with their parents, they were going to school.

249
00:54:51.000 --> 00:55:15.000
So they couldn't really adjust that well personally to health, social and economic threats of the pandemic. And they had to just go along with whatever the family was doing and and you can imagine if you can think back to when you were 15 to 17, being in close contact with your parents 24 7, it's not necessarily a good

250
00:55:15.000 --> 00:55:26.000
thing. It's a period when young people are trying to develop their own social networks, therefore peer relationships become increasingly important.

251
00:55:26.000 --> 00:55:31.000
And experiences during the adolescent years shake their values and behaviors throughout life. So we all remember the music that we listened to in that age, right, 15 to 17.

252
00:55:31.000 --> 00:55:44.000
That stays with you for life. Other things, little habits that you picked up during those years stay with you for life.

253
00:55:44.000 --> 00:55:55.000
It's a very important part of our life trajectory. So I'm saying that the kovat 19 pandemic further complicated an already complex process.

254
00:55:55.000 --> 00:56:04.000
That is a transition to adulthood. So just quickly in Australia, our pandemic restrictions were particularly harsh here in Victoria.

255
00:56:04.000 --> 00:56:16.000
We had a national lockdown for 6 weeks. In, 2,020, then we had state lockdowns, regional lockdowns throughout 2,020 and 2,021.

256
00:56:16.000 --> 00:56:32.000
For long periods of time schools were closed so students were physically isolated from their friends. Social media, fortunately they're digital natives so they had some contact with their friends through social media. But it's not quite the same as hanging out, right?

257
00:56:32.000 --> 00:56:37.000
You're in your room and you're on social media. It's not quite the same, but it's better than nothing.

258
00:56:37.000 --> 00:56:48.000
And the other thing that's important is that school closures varied according to location. So in Victoria the schools will close for much longer than they were in Tasmania for example.

259
00:56:48.000 --> 00:56:57.000
They had a just the national lockdown in Tasmania. So this is just a table that shows you how many weeks.

260
00:56:57.000 --> 00:57:13.000
The schools were closed for so about where are we? Victoria just to show you, 42% of the Victorian samples said that their school had been closed between 13 and 28 weeks compared to everyone else.

261
00:57:13.000 --> 00:57:35.000
Okay, so that's just setting this scene for Victoria. So, the main variable that I'm interested in is a subjective well-being and it's a combination of your physical and your social wellbeing and this is influenced by your personal factors, the community and society factors of the groups of people that

262
00:57:35.000 --> 00:57:49.000
you're living with and interacting with. In this case, in Hilda it's measured using the global life satisfaction indicator asking respondents how satisfied they are with their life overall.

263
00:57:49.000 --> 00:58:05.000
The reason why we have 15 to 17 year olds in the Hilda sample is that households were initially selected and within the household people are interviewed if they agree and then as the young people in the household turned 15 they are included in the sample as respondents.

264
00:58:05.000 --> 00:58:19.000
So we always, every here we have 15 to 17 year olds coming into the sample. It's usually around 500 a year.

265
00:58:19.000 --> 00:58:26.000
So I'm drawing on social production function theory for this because I'm interested in this concept that your well-being is dependent on your ability to attain these 5 goals.

266
00:58:26.000 --> 00:58:43.000
Stimulation, comfort, status, behavioural confirmation and affection. And I'm interested in this because I think the pandemic restricted our ability to satisfy these goals.

267
00:58:43.000 --> 00:59:00.000
Sometimes just for a short period of time, 6 weeks, but sometimes 4 months on end. Another thing that you need to consider even without a pandemic, your ability to satisfy these goals and therefore have high levels of subjective well-being is constrained by your access to resources.

268
00:59:00.000 --> 00:59:10.000
So if your family has low income then you're less likely to be able to achieve the goal of comfort.

269
00:59:10.000 --> 00:59:24.000
Okay, cause you're not gonna have a good standard of living. OK, so the research question that I looked at was how did the, pandemic impact on levels of subjective wellbeing of secondary school students.

270
00:59:24.000 --> 00:59:28.000
So the data's the Hilda data. I chose 5 cohorts. I'm kind of interested in cohorts at the moment.

271
00:59:28.000 --> 00:59:48.000
So I looked at the 15 to 17 year olds in 2,001 the second cohort was same age in 2,005 2,000 12,015 and 2,020 I'm hoping to find that this group is different.

272
00:59:48.000 --> 01:00:01.000
Hoping. So I've got family income because I have household data as well as personal data so I can look at household income, family income for for the entire household.

273
01:00:01.000 --> 01:00:08.000
I divided that into 5 groups from lowest to highest incomes. I've got the young person's health.

274
01:00:08.000 --> 01:00:14.000
I've got the type of family they're living in. Single parent, family, 2 parent family.

275
01:00:14.000 --> 01:00:20.000
The age, 1516 or 17. Sex is only male and female at this stage in Hilda.

276
01:00:20.000 --> 01:00:30.000
I'm not sure in the future. The location in this case I didn't look at state, in part of it I looked at state but initially I just looked at whether they were in a regional area or a city area.

277
01:00:30.000 --> 01:00:43.000
Their migrant status, whether they are a first second generation migrant or both they and their parents were born in Australia, so non-migrant.

278
01:00:43.000 --> 01:01:02.000
And in the second part I'm looking at where I do look at the state difference, I look at percent chance to catch Covid-nineteen, which they were asked in 2,020 and the ability to stay in contact with their friends and family who live outside of the household again only in 2,020.

279
01:01:02.000 --> 01:01:21.000
So these are the means for subjective well-being for each of the cohorts you can see there, not much difference happening, got to be happier over time and standard deviations tell me that there's not a lot happening in the 5 cohorts.

280
01:01:21.000 --> 01:01:25.000
So then I did the regressions individually for each of the cohorts just to get a sense of what's going on.

281
01:01:25.000 --> 01:01:42.000
Just and also to check that these variables that we expect to have an effect do have an effect. So the literature tells us that having living in a lone parent family is associated with having lower levels of subjective well-being.

282
01:01:42.000 --> 01:01:53.000
They are lower levels but not always significant. It the doubt the excellent literature also tells us that age as young people get a little older.

283
01:01:53.000 --> 01:02:02.000
Okay, it's only 3 years, 1516, 17, but we can see there that there is some negative effect for being 17 rather than 15.

284
01:02:02.000 --> 01:02:10.000
This might because because when you're 17 you're thinking that I have to leave school and work out what I'm gonna do with the rest of my life.

285
01:02:10.000 --> 01:02:26.000
Maybe I don't know. Been a long time since I was 17. State also we thought there might be an effect for state so I had looked there to see what state they were in but interestingly young people in Western Australia are Northern Territory, yes.

286
01:02:26.000 --> 01:02:40.000
Theification questions. Special informed one and at least the age 15 to 17 in 2,017 in 2,001 or 15 to 7 in their 5 separate cohorts.

287
01:02:40.000 --> 01:02:46.000
They're not the same people. So that's 15 to 17 year olds in 2,005.

288
01:02:46.000 --> 01:02:53.000
Cohort 3 with that age in 2,010. So I've done these regressions individually for each cohort.

289
01:02:53.000 --> 01:02:59.000
So apparently living over here in Western Australia, maybe it's something to do with the remoteness.

290
01:02:59.000 --> 01:03:08.000
But apart from that Income's not really an issue. Doesn't affect this age group that much I suspect.

291
01:03:08.000 --> 01:03:14.000
Okay so then I thought that's all very well, got a bit an idea a bit of an idea of the pattern.

292
01:03:14.000 --> 01:03:20.000
Let's put the cohorts together and see if we can see a difference according to cohort.

293
01:03:20.000 --> 01:03:29.000
No. So if we have a look here in Model One, we can see that, so I can't see that that way I have to look at it this way.

294
01:03:29.000 --> 01:03:37.000
We can see that state has an effect if you live in Western Australia and Northern Territory. Age has an effect when we put them all in together.

295
01:03:37.000 --> 01:03:49.000
Being female has a negative effect. One parent family has a negative effect. Being in good health has a positive effect.

296
01:03:49.000 --> 01:03:56.000
So these are what we expect. Danny Model 2, I've also added in parents income, doesn't have an effect.

297
01:03:56.000 --> 01:04:04.000
When I add in the cohort the cohort doesn't have an effect which tells me that These variables are.

298
01:04:04.000 --> 01:04:13.000
Consistent regardless of the cohort that you're in because we're getting the same effects. I didn't do an interaction effect because I had nothing down here.

299
01:04:13.000 --> 01:04:24.000
That suggested to me that the interaction would would be worth running. Then I just looked at the 2,020 cohort.

300
01:04:24.000 --> 01:04:31.000
So these are the young people interviewed in 2,020 because they were asked these extra questions about COVID.

301
01:04:31.000 --> 01:04:43.000
And I was expecting that young people in Victoria This group here might be less happy than people in the rest of Australia but it turns out it's not significant.

302
01:04:43.000 --> 01:04:51.000
Okay, so what is significant is the expected, so I'm just having trouble with this quarter to keep serving on.

303
01:04:51.000 --> 01:05:03.000
What is significant are the same ones, female, one parent family, good health, age. But this is the chance of getting COVID is significant.

304
01:05:03.000 --> 01:05:17.000
So if you were less likely to get COVID, sorry if you if you thought that you had a low chance of getting COVID or a high chance of getting COVID compared to no chance you were less happy.

305
01:05:17.000 --> 01:05:27.000
So that sort of makes sense because you're worried about getting kovat so that depresses your subjective wellbeing and if you got to spend more time with your friends and family that weren't living in your home, then you were happier.

306
01:05:27.000 --> 01:05:41.000
So you had high levels of subjective well-being and so this is something that yeah intuitively I would also expect.

307
01:05:41.000 --> 01:05:57.000
So what does that mean? That means that despite having to abruptly adapt to the changing social and economic conditions, the 2,020 cohort of young people will no less satisfy than their counterparts in the other cohorts.

308
01:05:57.000 --> 01:06:05.000
Being locked out of school in 2,020 was probably not too much of an issue given that they could use social media to keep in contact with their friends.

309
01:06:05.000 --> 01:06:14.000
The case numbers of having COVID were very low in Australia. In the first year we only lost 910 people to COVID.

310
01:06:14.000 --> 01:06:26.000
But that's because we were shut down for such a long period of time. Interestingly, too, the number of people who died from pneumonia dropped dramatically in 2,020 for the same reason we were locked down.

311
01:06:26.000 --> 01:06:35.000
So because case numbers were so low, the COVID didn't have the impact on their health that they might have been expecting.

312
01:06:35.000 --> 01:06:47.000
Family incomes weren't terribly impacted in 2,020 because if you're middle class you worked from home so you actually saved money because you weren't commuting to work.

313
01:06:47.000 --> 01:06:58.000
If you were in a job where you were in hospitality or retail, yes you lost your job but then the government brought in jobkeeper so you were expected by the government to be paid by your employer.

314
01:06:58.000 --> 01:07:04.000
The amount was capped but for people in low paid jobs they actually could get more money on Jobkeeper than they could get from actually working.

315
01:07:04.000 --> 01:07:21.000
So this kind of buffered families from the rapid shutdown. The other thing is that these data work collected in the middle of the year.

316
01:07:21.000 --> 01:07:31.000
So this was just at the end of the first lockdown. So we hadn't had the multiple lockdowns that we had in 2,021.

317
01:07:31.000 --> 01:07:41.000
Okay so and in the second lockdown for Victoria was in July. So this is really only reflecting what happened in the first lockdown which was a national lockdown.

318
01:07:41.000 --> 01:08:00.000
So I just need to explain why I think there hasn't been much of an effect yet. So I'm Coming now to link back to social production function theory so young people who were suffering from poor health reported having lower levels of subjective well-being.

319
01:08:00.000 --> 01:08:12.000
This is the comfort goal that you cannot achieve if you have poor health. Those who rated their chance of contracting Covid-nineteen as being high reported lower levels of subjective well-being.

320
01:08:12.000 --> 01:08:24.000
Again, that's a comfort. Goal. The need for affection goal was if You were able to spend more time with your friends and family during the lockdown.

321
01:08:24.000 --> 01:08:38.000
You reported height levels for me. Of SWB so you're able to achieve that affection goal and those living in lone parent families had lower levels of subjectively well being.

322
01:08:38.000 --> 01:08:42.000
And I'd like to acknowledge that the paper uses data from Hilda. And that's the little thing I have to tell you.

323
01:08:42.000 --> 01:08:51.000
And there's my references. Thank you.

324
01:08:51.000 --> 01:08:57.000
Thank you, Jenny, even if there is Not many results, so my indifference is very interesting.

325
01:08:57.000 --> 01:09:02.000
That there is

326
01:09:02.000 --> 01:09:21.000
Hi, thank you for your presentation and actually my question was when the data was collected but you answer it already but I am wondering if you don't have it in your data because the data is only from you don't have it in your data because the data is only from 2,020 but Like, do you expect that this.

327
01:09:21.000 --> 01:09:44.000
Log downs and like the following clog downs either in 2,020 or 2221 will have an lasting effect on like next cohorts because like from my perspective obviously you can kind of maintain contacts through social media but when you are a teenager it is not time when you are trying to maintain contacts but

328
01:09:44.000 --> 01:09:56.000
you are making new friends and it's very difficult to make new friends through social media. Usually you do that in school, you go, you hang out with friends and like for adults.

329
01:09:56.000 --> 01:10:01.000
It's fine if you don't see one another for weeks or something like that because their relationship is rather established but for kids they kind of need this reinforcement.

330
01:10:01.000 --> 01:10:29.000
Like day to day. Thank you. I am planning. Am planning to look at this again using the cohort who were 15 to 17 from 2018 and because they're actually surveyed every year so we would have this objective well being measure for every year so we could look at 2 years before the onset of the pandemic 2 years during the

331
01:10:29.000 --> 01:10:39.000
pandemic and then yes I would hope to be able to pick something up and you're absolutely right this is the worst time in the world in their whole life to be locked down.

332
01:10:39.000 --> 01:10:46.000
I mean, 2 cohort or 2 year 12 cohorts of graduates didn't have a formal in Victoria.

333
01:10:46.000 --> 01:10:54.000
That is something you cannot give them back. Yeah, they didn't have that right of passage. Finishing school, having the big celebration and then going off to schoolies.

334
01:10:54.000 --> 01:11:06.000
That they couldn't do that so yeah it would have an effect. Just a follow up. Yeah, I just have to agree because from my own experience.

335
01:11:06.000 --> 01:11:15.000
I remember like, 2,020, I mean the first lockdowns were OK. We know why we are doing it by but in 2,021 when we were repeating it it was just disasters being stuck at home.

336
01:11:15.000 --> 01:11:35.000
And we had the vaccination in 2,021 but we had to wait until 90% of people got vaccinated and 2,021 but we had to wait until 90% of people got vaccinated and there was a a cohort of people who decided they weren't going to get vaccinated and that held us all into lockdown for

337
01:11:35.000 --> 01:11:38.000
much longer.

338
01:11:38.000 --> 01:11:54.000
A See that. OK, thank you for your presentation. It's so interesting because I was I'm also having daughter who is him age during the lockdown.

339
01:11:54.000 --> 01:11:58.000
So I just wondering, can you more elaborate on family type? Is there any specific observation related to family time?

340
01:11:58.000 --> 01:12:23.000
Like children with siblings and just only child in home, Yeah, I didn't look at that, but yes I could, but you will get a situation where they might get along okay when they don't see each other all the time but when you keep them in a space together, it could be Bedlam.

341
01:12:23.000 --> 01:12:40.000
Personally, 3 daughters, There's no way I could have kept them saying what me saying during the extended lockdowns in Victoria because You know, you need an outlet and people were allowed to leave their house for 1 HA day.

342
01:12:40.000 --> 01:12:45.000
It for exercise. They're allowed to leave the house to go shopping. People went to the supermarket every single day to buy 2 things because they could get out of the house.

343
01:12:45.000 --> 01:12:55.000
OK, I went to the supermarket and bought bread and milk. Go home. My daughter, you go to the supermarket and buy the vegetables.

344
01:12:55.000 --> 01:13:02.000
Daughter too. You go to the supermarket and buy something else. It's the only way you could get out of the house.

345
01:13:02.000 --> 01:13:08.000
People were really inventive about how can I get out of the house and justify getting out of the house.

346
01:13:08.000 --> 01:13:14.000
So, and you, and you could only go to something that was 5 within 5 kilometers of your home.

347
01:13:14.000 --> 01:13:35.000
So you couldn't go to the discount supermarket because that would mean that you would be more than 5 kilometres so yes so there was all these rules that people had to be inventive to get around but you're right that could make a difference but I think the more siblings you have the lowest subjective or We cranky with

348
01:13:35.000 --> 01:13:42.000
them.

349
01:13:42.000 --> 01:14:06.000
I also had a question about the family type. Have you had your chance or can you, look at, if, if those children living in lone parent families, they somehow suffered more in terms of their subjective world being loss than children living in traditional families.

350
01:14:06.000 --> 01:14:21.000
And, and then how do you link this? Result that the children with low parent families have lower subjective well-being to the social production theory.

351
01:14:21.000 --> 01:14:34.000
So the reason II mean that it's consistent and the literature tells me that it that children in lone parent families will have lower levels of subjective well-being and there could be a whole range of reasons for that.

352
01:14:34.000 --> 01:14:43.000
But the social production function theory says that it's because they have less opportunities to fulfill their need for affection.

353
01:14:43.000 --> 01:14:59.000
So if you have one parent, Don't want to get into divorce statistics pretty high in Australia. But if you have one parent and I'm not distinguishing between 2 parents being both biological parents I'm distinguishing between one parent being both biological parents.

354
01:14:59.000 --> 01:15:12.000
I'm distinguishing between one parent in the household and 2 parents in the household. So it could be a step parent, one parent plus a step parent, but having one parent in the household means there's only half as many adults there to give you affection.

355
01:15:12.000 --> 01:15:30.000
OK, so that is probably why it's not satisfying their need for affection. As the result showed it didn't make a difference during the pandemic you were still you know, because children in lone parent families were less happy in the cohorts.

356
01:15:30.000 --> 01:15:39.000
That I looked at before the pandemic. Yeah.

357
01:15:39.000 --> 01:15:43.000
Hi, I'm Tatiana Krabchuk, UAE University. Very nice presentation.

358
01:15:43.000 --> 01:15:50.000
I'm also working on longitudinal data and use. So for me it was fascinating but I have like 3 questions.

359
01:15:50.000 --> 01:15:58.000
The first one is how would you explain the differences between boys and girls? Why girls are less happy in Australia.

360
01:15:58.000 --> 01:16:10.000
What's going on with the teenagers? Second question. So if I understood it correctly, all of the adjusted art square are very, very low.

361
01:16:10.000 --> 01:16:17.000
So that means we can't explain basically, I mean these factors are not explaining the well-being.

362
01:16:17.000 --> 01:16:38.000
So what are possible factors that would be missed out and you cannot check within the data maybe like number of friends or like usually as a social capital and engagement and different clubs, activities, even like online gaming makes a lot of life for teenagers.

363
01:16:38.000 --> 01:16:43.000
So is it possible to control for that?

364
01:16:43.000 --> 01:16:54.000
Got the first question first why girls less happy than boys in Australia probably because they're under a lot more pressure.

365
01:16:54.000 --> 01:17:07.000
Typically it's very common to front for this finding in Australia that the girls do. Report being stressed, they're more likely to report it than boys.

366
01:17:07.000 --> 01:17:26.000
For a start so they're more likely to admit that they're not happy. Levels of mental distress in Australia have Just exploded during the pandemic and since the pandemic schools are under a lot of pressure they're bringing in councillors and since the pandemic. Schools are under a lot of pressure. They are bringing in councillors.

367
01:17:26.000 --> 01:17:34.000
They are trying all sorts of pressure. They're bringing in counselors. They're trying all sorts of things to try and support young women in particular to try and support young women in particular to recover from young women in particular to recover from the stress of the pandemic.

368
01:17:34.000 --> 01:17:39.000
They're also more likely to report from the stress of the pandemic. They're also more likely to report being bullied online.

369
01:17:39.000 --> 01:17:53.000
So the stress of the pandemic. They are also more likely to report being bullied online. So cyberbullying is a big thing in schools.

370
01:17:53.000 --> 01:17:59.000
It's not a new thing and it wasn't caused by the pandemic but it has exacerbated it.

371
01:17:59.000 --> 01:18:15.000
Yes, the R squared is load but actually I've done SWB in adult data as well and the R squared is always low because your subjective well-being depends on your personality or how you deal with things in life.

372
01:18:15.000 --> 01:18:24.000
It depends on the community that you live in. It depends on a whole range of factors and we can never get a very high R squared for SWB.

373
01:18:24.000 --> 01:18:34.000
I might be wrong, somebody might have got a high squared on SWB but because it's so personal.

374
01:18:34.000 --> 01:18:44.000
And it's linked to so many personal factors that we get low ones. You've had high arcade?

375
01:18:44.000 --> 01:18:53.000
Negro. So, They could be, I mean I haven't looked at it because it's a survey for people age 15 to 100.

376
01:18:53.000 --> 01:19:01.000
So they're not going to ask people all those ages do they do online gaming or play games online.

377
01:19:01.000 --> 01:19:08.000
They might do. I haven't looked at it.

378
01:19:08.000 --> 01:19:18.000
When you are saying about like subjective well-being I just had this idea maybe it's a suggestion worth considering.

379
01:19:18.000 --> 01:19:27.000
But as I understand for this data, there are kids data but you should you probably also have the data for their parents.

380
01:19:27.000 --> 01:19:57.000
Yes. So maybe it would be. Worth checking without Well-being subjective well-being of parents influence okay yeah because like if your parents are really depressed it affects you because you are children and they stay with you especially during the lockdown.

381
01:20:06.000 --> 01:20:21.000
And then we looked at the child subjective well-being when they were aged 30. Okay, and we find there is a relationship we looked at lots of other factors including parents health and their income and family factors didn't make a difference when the child was 30.

382
01:20:21.000 --> 01:20:32.000
The only thing that made a difference when the child was 30 was their parents level of subjective well-being when the child was 15.

383
01:20:32.000 --> 01:20:46.000
So yeah, there is a strong correlation. Yeah. And. So you showed the the chart with the life satisfaction happiness objective was being by by by years, right?

384
01:20:46.000 --> 01:21:16.000
It was not that big difference. No, so that's what I'm asking so is it like COVID-19 I love down completely has no effect on this group it didn't have an effect but I think that's because the data were collected, but I think that's because the data were collected after the first lockdown and people

385
01:21:16.000 --> 01:21:32.000
went, and how we get looking forward. We look forward. We look forward in continuous time. Go to the last place.

386
01:21:32.000 --> 01:21:46.000
Pronounced it well. And maybe as I mentioned, We know how Okay, Good afternoon, dear artists.

387
01:21:46.000 --> 01:22:06.000
So thank you for including me in this session for this session organizers. So yeah, the first initial submission was general results, general survey results about how Mongolian perceived their well-being.

388
01:22:06.000 --> 01:22:21.000
So once I know once we noticed the our session name and be a little bit adjusted to our session name and be a little bit adjusted to our presentation into more fitting into our session and therefore the more like results about the young people.

389
01:22:21.000 --> 01:22:35.000
Their successes included Survivor, a little bit adjust our presentation to fit with this session. So I am presenting this presentation on behalf of Adadasatas.

390
01:22:35.000 --> 01:22:44.000
Who are from our institution. I am from the Independent Research Institute of Mongolia, which is private research institute.

391
01:22:44.000 --> 01:22:55.000
Located in Lambata in Mongolia. Yeah, so in this presentation I mainly present the results of Mongolian social well-being Surrey, which is which has been conducted since 2,016.

392
01:22:55.000 --> 01:23:23.000
So and the most likely results have been conducted since 2,016 and the most likely results of 2,016 and the most likely results of 2,018 just before COVID and also the most likely results of 2,018 just before COVID and also the last survey conducted in 2,022 last year.

393
01:23:23.000 --> 01:23:33.000
So before the going to the results I just very straightforwardly explain the our theoretical approach behind our survey.

394
01:23:33.000 --> 01:23:49.000
So in this study we we try to, we try to measure the overall social well-being in Mongolia.

395
01:23:49.000 --> 01:24:00.000
So in a social ways being we understood it's a social ways being we understood it's the of of course the fundamental ways being we understood it's of course the fundamental parties subject to well being of course the fundamental parties subject to well being of personal and plus.

396
01:24:00.000 --> 01:24:20.000
Are trying to understand the social cohesion. These 2 are the key main concept. The under the subjective will being we usually assess like to look at the life evaluation, self-reversation of quality of life and also effect.

397
01:24:20.000 --> 01:24:28.000
That means like a person's feelings and emotional states. And also you do mean that that's like how people see their meaning of their life.

398
01:24:28.000 --> 01:24:40.000
So these 3 components is to define this objective we haveve been of personal individuals and then under this social cohesion we It's like a concept is arised from the sociologist in my email time.

399
01:24:40.000 --> 01:25:05.000
So in this in his idea the society to reach this organic solidarity the most important elements is sense of belonging to the Australian society and also trust between social members within the society and also cooperation.

400
01:25:05.000 --> 01:25:19.000
So in this study we mostly look at the trust and compression. These are the main our the component of our study.

401
01:25:19.000 --> 01:25:38.000
So in our social well-being survey we use the using the guideline that's developed by War of the Value Surrey and of course the main data collection conducted by face-to-face interviews.

402
01:25:38.000 --> 01:25:50.000
And, and the 2 categories, the social collision category, we have questions related to trust and cooperation and also under subjective well-being.

403
01:25:50.000 --> 01:26:06.000
We have a 3 different components of questions. Life, aversion, effect, tomania and in this presentation we mostly used trust, cooperation, life evaluation questions, the results.

404
01:26:06.000 --> 01:26:32.000
So in terms of measurement, we have a country ladder. So it means like people are asked to So he was at the certain questions using 0 to 10 and then if people answer from 0 to 4 they are classified by suffering and if people that answer from 0 to 4 they are classified by suffering and if they answer answer 5 score 5 5

405
01:26:32.000 --> 01:26:42.000
and 6 and struggling and then up from 7 to 8 it's classified thriving like in terms of their quality of life.

406
01:26:42.000 --> 01:26:52.000
So the behind of this study, like we, it's how it's connected to. Social Autumns.

407
01:26:52.000 --> 01:26:58.000
SARSHIZABETH BEEN DIFFIENCE Social outcomes of SUSTIN Society and again the rivers.

408
01:26:58.000 --> 01:27:12.000
These social outcomes also define the indigenous social well-being. And also within this frame, there are policies and institutions, social capitasa, like how to say the framed.

409
01:27:12.000 --> 01:27:40.000
So that's the just main idea of our survey. So in this study like the data collection In 2,018 actually it started 2,016 but the way the latest one before quality is 2,018 so nationwide service we conducted and then after COVID, 2,022 last year also we conducted nationwide service and

410
01:27:40.000 --> 01:27:50.000
it's called of our 21 provinces of Mongolia. And also plus several quality interviews conducted.

411
01:27:50.000 --> 01:28:07.000
And also in order to fit with the youth perspective, we also used our latest separate study which is youth a perception survey commissioned by IRI, International Republican Institutes.

412
01:28:07.000 --> 01:28:15.000
So conducted in 2,021. So that's us. Feed some, results.

413
01:28:15.000 --> 01:28:30.000
Yeah. So in the general trends, so here are 2 years. And the lighter blue is the late year, 2,022, more like after college tuition.

414
01:28:30.000 --> 01:28:49.000
So just a brief overview. And the COVID started early January, 2,020 and we like free from the first case until November, 2,020 and we free from the first case until November, 2,020 and we like free from the first case until November, 2,020.

415
01:28:49.000 --> 01:28:52.000
So quite like we are doing good. The first case until November, 2,020. So quite like we are doing good.

416
01:28:52.000 --> 01:29:09.000
And then, but finally, the first case is detected in 2,020 November and then the government get to 2,020 November and then the government get restriction off size of policies were taken and then the government get restriction off size of the policies were taken and then we are quite often released last May.

417
01:29:09.000 --> 01:29:19.000
So that means one year and a half. There is several restrictions, sometimes total like close closure of activities kind of.

418
01:29:19.000 --> 01:29:23.000
So one year and half it continues.

419
01:29:23.000 --> 01:29:37.000
Yeah, and that was the situation in there. So, so in our observation, compared with the pre-corded situation, the trust.

420
01:29:37.000 --> 01:29:47.000
Has declined in across the society. So in this situation, 0 means no trust. 10 means high trust.

421
01:29:47.000 --> 01:30:04.000
So, the generally a question, about generally in Mongolia the trust is not so high it's usually like counts 5, 5, so but it's now fell down 2, 4, 0, 4.1.

422
01:30:04.000 --> 01:30:14.000
So it's like, it's, the trust has the client. Also, it's also validated by qualitative data.

423
01:30:14.000 --> 01:30:32.000
And also in terms of the cooperation, the corporation is law. So especially the lack of trust in strangers and outside the others who are outside from their families.

424
01:30:32.000 --> 01:30:48.000
And French Circle means there is a low lips level of cooperation between the people. So also, compared to the precovers situation, membership of all type of clubs.

425
01:30:48.000 --> 01:30:54.000
And community organisations except for political party decreased. So if that means you as people usually like socially inactive during the period.

426
01:30:54.000 --> 01:31:18.000
So, population is also low and and there was no change in life selection in in terms in from our our data so usually Mongolians positive about their future.

427
01:31:18.000 --> 01:31:29.000
Nitro's about current present and usually the negative part in the past. So that pattern is exactly the same in post-corvid survey data.

428
01:31:29.000 --> 01:31:48.000
So because we didn't do a survey in during the COVID like 2,020 and 2,021 so no idea of during that term right satisfaction down or no idea but in these 2 years no change in life satisfaction.

429
01:31:48.000 --> 01:31:58.000
So, and also the who, and if you look, down to the Mordetta and who are the most vulnerable to us.

430
01:31:58.000 --> 01:32:16.000
Is also interesting. So in a general scale, people 70% of people are they consider it as suffering according to 10 a scoring script and

431
01:32:16.000 --> 01:32:25.000
33% one third of people are struggling and half of a population they considered as thriving.

432
01:32:25.000 --> 01:32:36.000
So a proportion of people considers suffering and struggle have increased. You see, the rate is the past COVID.

433
01:32:36.000 --> 01:32:52.000
Blue is the play-cow situation and the first 2 categories are increasing and before COVID the people consider themselves as was quite high and then that one is a little bit.

434
01:32:52.000 --> 01:33:04.000
For example, the people who considered being the big stories like dramatically decreased. So like there was a kind of observation there.

435
01:33:04.000 --> 01:33:33.000
And, Also, income, In terms of the population groups, the urban population, paid workers and also the retired people, students and also population group who aged 30 to 39 like active working age groups most like they consider they they gave their lowest score on their quality of life.

436
01:33:33.000 --> 01:33:50.000
So these are more like, considered, vulnerable to the situation was and also the concept about the leave no one behind is usually discussed in ad hoc paces.

437
01:33:50.000 --> 01:34:03.000
That means like usually the enduring the period development interventions. Have been badly covered with several social groups like single-heads or people with disabilities.

438
01:34:03.000 --> 01:34:14.000
LGBTQI, ethnic minorities and also people in prisons. So this kind of some specific groups are quite not such considerate.

439
01:34:14.000 --> 01:34:18.000
So I will explain a little bit the reason of it. And, we did a series of qualitative interviews before COVID.

440
01:34:18.000 --> 01:34:35.000
So it from these studies it showed like there is qualitative interviews before COVID. So from these studies it showed like there is correspondence and also ages.

441
01:34:35.000 --> 01:34:37.000
So from these studies it showed like there is correspondence and also ages and how life ski milestones.

442
01:34:37.000 --> 01:34:46.000
Affect influence their quality of life happiness. So it's just really examples of data and here at the min, conclusion, not like the results.

443
01:34:46.000 --> 01:35:16.000
So for example here the very important factors is the statistic significance of what we painted the green color. So that means for people trust the open and who are citing in whether in important for their for example trust and also life satisfaction and effect and usually when you see the gender education employment is not such a big you know elation so of course employment influence

444
01:35:26.000 --> 01:35:38.000
the life subscription to the section. And the income is little bit and the very important fact is freedom to make choice.

445
01:35:38.000 --> 01:35:52.000
And also social support. These and also genericity, compassion, related questions. Showed very significant. Significance, statistical significance to trust and cooperation.

446
01:35:52.000 --> 01:36:05.000
So that's the key pattern of how relevant factors to people's trust and cooperation.

447
01:36:05.000 --> 01:36:28.000
So that means reasons for unhappiness, especially for antiquity, losing family member, unstable working status, change of living environment, ancestry work, environment separation, and also economies and other social change and just really relevant towards someone's life, evolution of their life.

448
01:36:28.000 --> 01:36:40.000
So why I am showing this is how these things influence the young people who aged 16 to 25 is now I really discuss.

449
01:36:40.000 --> 01:36:50.000
So, it's still results related with young people. Not education, not age, not income.

450
01:36:50.000 --> 01:37:20.000
The more likely the society, like more like the social aspects is relevant and affect to the people's wish being I mean so he has several results so Usually the during the climate means like, our, government was very authority and like more like decisive you know and also the civil society you know and also the civil society

451
01:37:21.000 --> 01:37:30.000
people's voices are quite limited and also the civil society, the people's voices are quite limited and there was always like very, and also the civil society, people's voices are quite limited and there was always like very strict decisions taken.

452
01:37:30.000 --> 01:37:36.000
So therefore people feel that people's voices are quite limited and there was always very limited and there was always like very strict decisions taken. So therefore people feel we are far away from the involvement in the decision making.

453
01:37:36.000 --> 01:37:37.000
So, are quite limited and there was always like very strict decisions taken. So therefore, like people feel we are far away from the involvement decision making.

454
01:37:37.000 --> 01:37:43.000
So therefore, people feel we are far away from the involvement of people feel we are far away from the involvement in the decision making.

455
01:37:43.000 --> 01:38:09.000
So that kind of getting more likeative kind of a government decision leading style So. Indeed, almost 60% of Soviet young people that this is faith with Mongolia's 60% of the Soviet young people that this suspected Mongolia's democracy, Democracy, given to the Tax Covid Duration government leading

456
01:38:09.000 --> 01:38:39.000
style. So also the urban youth don't see bright futures higher than the rural areas. And also the unemployment corruption power the 2 question is must important issue in facing problems facing our country and also people young people usually positive about their law enforcement media CSO that's the really important to them in social you know society functioning and

457
01:38:40.000 --> 01:39:07.000
but in the other side political parties plermanent judiciary must be negative because of the There are gardening style and also more than 90% of young people, regardless of age, gender, disability, they believe that participation in political decision making is important, but their participation in any political activities in.

458
01:39:07.000 --> 01:39:21.000
So also the satisfaction democracy had led to preference of Arthur Carmichael of government, a several percentage of as young people preferred to have other forum.

459
01:39:21.000 --> 01:39:28.000
So why the reasons of these like results is we are we are explained that it's like lack of dirt.

460
01:39:28.000 --> 01:39:38.000
It was often then a lot of euthanasis among the society. So it's like quite lacking and also during the period time it's also very hard to assemble.

461
01:39:38.000 --> 01:40:00.000
To like people assemble and people's gathering and expressed their voices there. So it's like we There was no such things and lack of also there were a lack of support network especially for us If you talk talk about like and decision making labour.

462
01:40:00.000 --> 01:40:09.000
The wounds like it's the support network is quite as missing. So therefore these kind of things these are some absolute and more discussion therefore in doing the COVID time.

463
01:40:09.000 --> 01:40:38.000
The economy is the urgent priority for the population. So in 2,020 once our others survey like the health bus was very priority topic but in 2,02020 22 last year, the economy is very priority because like we are really dependent on our 2 neighbours, Russia and China.

464
01:40:38.000 --> 01:40:42.000
So therefore, it is like the economic autonomies. Always the issue and even comment time it's becoming more and more like issue.

465
01:40:42.000 --> 01:40:56.000
And also the satisfaction of political leadership and governance and people see they have no such a influence in decision-making.

466
01:40:56.000 --> 01:41:13.000
And lack of participation. So it means like people's voice. Are not heard and they feel like eliminated from the decision making but only in high level and also regional and like sub-district like community levels sometimes.

467
01:41:13.000 --> 01:41:29.000
So also there is a common sense to by far democratic norms. That means like the restrictive laws are introduced and also adopted in the Corbyn time and not such a priority.

468
01:41:29.000 --> 01:41:51.000
And a view process with the public. So that's also played like some you know factor in this outcomes and also this information misinformation about the social media as like other countries there's social uses uses of such media was very high in this period.

469
01:41:51.000 --> 01:42:00.000
So, but in the same time the disinformation misinformation like face you know all this information also is like very increased holding.

470
01:42:00.000 --> 01:42:23.000
So that's still one of the that like observation. So these kind of what I'm trying to say now presentation is so what it that social outcomes like trust, co-operation, is very important, that social outcomes like trust, that social outcomes like trust, cooperation is very important, like trust, cooperation is very

471
01:42:23.000 --> 01:42:29.000
important, is a very important, integral part of this, cooperation is very important, integral part of the social functioning, social solidarity part of social functioning, social solidarity.

472
01:42:29.000 --> 01:42:39.000
For that, they are very important, part of social functioning, social solidarity. For that, they are very important factors.

473
01:42:39.000 --> 01:42:56.000
The governing style, like people's feeling of trust to each other people's willingness to cooperate each other so and and then ultimately their perception and evaluation of quality of life.

474
01:42:56.000 --> 01:43:04.000
So that's the some observation from Mongolia.

475
01:43:04.000 --> 01:43:13.000
So just before giving the What are you? We made a conference in Mongolia? No, on democracy.

476
01:43:13.000 --> 01:43:21.000
This was in 2,01818 years. And I had the impression. For I had to summarise also the discussions.

477
01:43:21.000 --> 01:43:25.000
It is exactly this. It was already at that time. Now it was kind of this situation of not feeling be included.

478
01:43:25.000 --> 01:43:46.000
Yeah. So that would be my question what happened actually. Became diverse. Or this is just a continuation of what has been the processes the past decade.

479
01:43:46.000 --> 01:43:58.000
Yeah. Yes.

480
01:43:58.000 --> 01:44:15.000
In one table I think I saw that that rural people have higher well being than urban people. If you, if different effective well-being and cognitive developing and these different measures.

481
01:44:15.000 --> 01:44:22.000
So, why, why, are we more more higher the well-being than everyone?

482
01:44:22.000 --> 01:44:32.000
Yeah. We are actually Mongolia is actually a member of Asian Social Development Survey Consortium that includes 8 Asian countries.

483
01:44:32.000 --> 01:44:44.000
So in our service shows a similar pattern with our other Asian countries, sometimes in some other Asian countries. Sometimes in some other elements we show different countries. Sometimes in some other elements we show different.

484
01:44:44.000 --> 01:44:50.000
So in some other elements we show different. So especially in Mongolia, we show different. So especially in Mongolia, the well being, the life scoring is.

485
01:44:50.000 --> 01:45:05.000
So especially in Mongolia, the wellbeing, the life scoring is higher in people more into the life scoring is higher in people more into the outside of this city residences more into the outside of the city residences more into the rural areas, more into the outside of the city residences, more into the rural areas, rural areas.

486
01:45:05.000 --> 01:45:08.000
Even though of course there are more into the outside of the city residences, more into the rural areas, more into the rural areas, rural areas.

487
01:45:08.000 --> 01:45:21.000
Even though of course there are like infrastructure material like tangible things like sailors or these things well developed, but not that kind of things influenced like a play of factor in when people's evaluate their life evaluation.

488
01:45:21.000 --> 01:45:42.000
So usually rural area and rural area and Let's bit a took place little bit I have to say factor and so quite less educated and more into a rural area.

489
01:45:42.000 --> 01:46:03.000
More happy like more like they give it higher scoring and more into the city area more to create more high income the income they usually give a lower scoring so that's the pattern and we also share similar results with like East Asian countries like Japan and Korea.

490
01:46:03.000 --> 01:46:16.000
Korean partners, maybe my second head something. And also, there is a seasonal variation. For example, like in Mongolia we have 4 different distinctive different seasons.

491
01:46:16.000 --> 01:46:26.000
And then if we conduct our service just after winter, during the autumn. It's like there is a very different, it shows differences.

492
01:46:26.000 --> 01:46:44.000
But in this study we all integrated community. It starts showing. So, I mean, yeah, life is styled of different lifestyles of role and openness, please.

493
01:46:44.000 --> 01:46:51.000
The factor, I mean.

494
01:46:51.000 --> 01:47:02.000
Thank you for your interesting presentation. I must say it is the first time actually heard young people's quality of life from Mongolia.

495
01:47:02.000 --> 01:47:11.000
I have a very quick question. I think you probably mentioned this. I probably missed it. Could you just explain which sampling strategy was used?

496
01:47:11.000 --> 01:47:19.000
In the survey and gathering the data. Thank you. Same thing, Stata.

497
01:47:19.000 --> 01:47:27.000
It's the main frame is old population because it's a face-to-face interview. We visit it to David, you know, the promises, 21 purposes.

498
01:47:27.000 --> 01:47:43.000
So that means frame is 21 from like 30 population. And then once we reach the promises, we select 3 sums from each province and capital centre of the center.

499
01:47:43.000 --> 01:47:54.000
At administrative unit of province. I mean, each province has around 10 or 10 to 15 swims like districts.

500
01:47:54.000 --> 01:48:04.000
So that means, 21 province and each province with a 3, districts. One is the centers district.

501
01:48:04.000 --> 01:48:15.000
Another one is the farther one, for the one. And then another one is the closer one to this one is the closer one to this center of the promise.

502
01:48:15.000 --> 01:48:29.000
So that means 30, no, 63 districts are selected from the throat country. Yeah. So we're very confident in some extra as they used.

503
01:48:29.000 --> 01:48:37.000
It's not so complicated, but we need to be in, because as you know, it's the country, the land is very huge.

504
01:48:37.000 --> 01:48:51.000
Population is only 3,000,003.5 million very sparsely split out so need to catch but of course we couldn't can't visit every single district.

505
01:48:51.000 --> 01:48:55.000
So, was just like, you know.

506
01:48:55.000 --> 01:48:58.000
Laugh

507
01:48:58.000 --> 01:49:05.000
That's the coincidence. So many things.