Public acceptance of Covid-19 lockdown scenarios

By mid-March 2020, most countries had implemented nationwide lockdown policies aimed at decelerating the spread of SARS-CoV-2. At that time, nobody knew how long these policies would have to remain in force and whether they would have to be extended, intensified or made more flexible. The present study aimed to illuminate how the general public in Germany reacted to the prospect of increasing the length, the intensity and/or the flexibility of distancing rules implied by different lockdown scenarios. Endorsement of and compliance with five specific lockdown scenarios were assessed in a large (N = 14,433) German sample. Results showed that lockdown length affected respondents' reactions much more strongly than intensity or flexibility. Additional analyses (i.e., mixture distribution modelling) showed that half of the respondents rejected any further extensions or intensifications, while 20% would endorse long-term strategies if necessary. We argue that policy-makers and political communicators should take the public's endorsement of and compliance with such scenarios into account, as should simulations predicting the effects of different lockdown scenarios.     

COVID-19, precarity and loneliness

In this paper I discuss Jungian psychological work of the trauma and loss experienced in reaction to COVID-19 with a man who represents a clinical composite. The issues of precarity, a concept used by the philosopher Judith Butler, are combined with the notions of lack and absence of French psychoanalyst André Green. The psychological and societal situation of precarity aroused the man’s childhood issues that were long repressed. The loneliness, isolation and death from COVID-19 mirrored his personal and the collective responses to the disaster from this global pandemic. He felt on the edge of collapse as what he knew of his world crashed and he found himself unable to cope. The subsequent Jungian work taking place through the virtual computer screen was taxing and restorative simultaneously for both analyst and analysand.     

The COVID-19–Social Identity–Digital Media Nexus in India: Polarization and Blame

Drawing on social identity theory and research on digital media and polarization, this study uses a quasi-experimental design with a random sample (n = 3304) to provide causal evidence on perceptions of who is to blame for the initial spread of COVID-19 in India. According blame to three different social and political entities—Tablighi Jamaat (a Muslim group), the Modi government, and migrant workers (a heterogeneous group)—are the dependent variables in three OLS regression models testing the effect of the no-blame treatment, controlling for Facebook use, social identity (religion), vote in the 2019 national election, and other demographics. Results show respondents in the treatment group were more likely to allay blame, affective polarization (dislike for outgroup members) was social identity based, not partisan based, and Facebook/Instagram use was not significant. Congress and United Progressive Alliance voters in 2019 were less likely to blame the Modi government for the initial spread. Unlike extant research in western contexts, affective and political polarization appear to be distinct concepts in India where social identity complexity is important. This study of the first wave informs perceptions of blame in future waves, which are discussed in conclusion along with questions for future research.     

Processing trauma in psychoanalysis in ‘real’ time and in dreams: the convergence of past,present and future during COVID-19

In the current collective unrest, we and our analysands are living in real time and need vantage points from which to make meaning, as subjective experience of time is collapsing. For many analysands, the past is being relived in the present, with no imaginable future. During the time of COVID-19, dreams are providing a valuable mechanism in working with atemporal emotional trauma, previously uncontextualized. Dream metaphor can provide a transitional space to move around in within the analytic framework. This paper explores a variety of dreams from individual analysands demonstrating different ways of conceptualizing personal and collective experience, bridging between the past, present, and future. Parallels between feeling states related to the current condition and unprocessed implicit memories from the past will be examined, as a vehicle for processing past trauma. Dreams expressing current states of dread for an unimaginable future, as well compensatory dreams showing a hopeful vision of the future will be considered.     

Intersections of personal vs. collective trauma during the COVID-19 pandemic: the hijacking of the human imagination

This paper explores how the deadly shadow of COVID-19 passing over the Earth constitutes a collective trauma that frequently opens up or ‘triggers’ un-remembered personal trauma, and it provides clinical examples of these intersections. The paper further explores how the human imagination, which we normally utilize to make meaning out of traumatic experience, can be hijacked by fear – leading to avoidance of suffering and to illusory formulations and alternative realities such as conspiracy theories. Alternatively, the imagination can be employed in more realistic and creative ways – leading through conscious suffering to healing and wholeness. Which path the imagination takes is shown to depend on the capacity of individuals to feel the full reality of the human condition in general and the exquisite vulnerability of our existence as fragile human beings at this moment in history. Ernest Becker’s analysis of our ‘denial of death’ and his urgency to embrace our common human vulnerability is explored in relation to Jung’s early tendency to deny the body. The author proposes that the more creative uses of the imagination, connected to a more humble and realistic apprehension of our common destiny, may be seen in the ‘Black Lives Matter’ movement that swept the world in the aftermath of the COVID-19 outbreak.     

Reflections on the role of the analytic setting in the light of COVID-19

There have been many reflections, both individual and collective within our Institutes, on the effects on our work with patients caused by COVID-19 and the requirement to move suddenly from the setting of our own consulting rooms to working with patients online (see also, the previous issue of this Journal). This paper focuses on what we have learned from these experiences that can add to our knowledge about the role of the setting in analytic work. Drawing on Bleger’s (1967) seminal paper highlighting the usual setting as a mute projection carrier for primitive wishes and affects, the paper explores how different patients have reacted to the loss of the analyst as the guardian of the setting and in particular as an embodied presence. Some key questions and challenges for both patients and analysts during the pandemic, when ‘the setting begins to weep’, are explored.     

Lessons Learned Conducting Dialectical Behavior Therapy via Telehealth in the Age of COVID-19

Given the severity and suicide risk of patients typically treated by Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT) and the absence of guidelines regarding delivery of DBT via telehealth, it is crucial that the DBT treatment community gather and rapidly disseminate information about effective strategies for delivering DBT via telehealth. The current study surveyed DBT providers (N = 200) to understand challenges and lessons learned as they transitioned to conducting DBT via telehealth during the COVID-19 pandemic. Open-ended responses to challenges and lessons-learned were coded. Most frequently noted challenges were Therapy-Interfering Behaviors and elements related to the provision of Individual Therapy and Skills Training Group. The majority of providers offered advice for implementing group skills training, avoiding or overcoming therapist burnout, and emphasized continued adherence to treatment principles, even in the context of this new treatment modality. Overall, this qualitative study marks a starting point on identifying best practices delivering DBT via telehealth for which it is anticipated that clinical recommendations in this area will evolve, informed by clinician, researcher, and consumer input.     

Fear and Anxiety in COVID-19: Preexisting Anxiety Disorders

The general population has experienced a significant elevation in fear and anxiety during COVID-19 both as a direct result of the virus but also due to measures taken to prevent it spreading, such as the need to stay inside and increase hand-washing. Lockdown has been used in many/most countries to prevent widespread infection. The advice and imposed actions are necessary to prevent the virus from spreading, but they might exacerbate the problems experienced by people with a preexisting anxiety-related disorder. The treatment of anxiety-related disorders can be provided while in quarantine. Staying at home in self-isolation does not preclude obtaining psychological treatment for anxiety-related disorders. Dealing with cognitive biases, over-estimations of threat, intolerance of uncertainty, inflated responsibility and excessive safety behavior, are useful clinical directions.