IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/reecon/v78y2024i2s1090944324000164.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Home alone: Evaluating the implications of government mandates and disease prevalence on time usage during the pandemic

Author

Listed:
  • Cardon, James H.
  • Eide, Eric R.
  • Showalter, Mark H.

Abstract

During the COVID-19 pandemic governments and individuals alike faced incentives to limit the spread of the disease. Our objective is to assess the extent to which government mandates and private actions influenced time allocated to specific activities and the social interactions of individuals. Information on how individuals spent their time before and during the early stages of the pandemic come from the American Time Use Survey (ATUS), which identifies time use for a 24-hour period and includes each individual's activities, locations and companions. We combine the time diary data with data on state-level restrictions from the Kaiser Family Foundation and state-level COVID-19 infection and death rates from Johns Hopkins University. Our findings suggest that private actions in response to reported death rates are comparable to the effects of state-level public mandates on the outcome variables of time alone and time at home. In evaluating effects based on sex and age, we find that young males experienced the largest disruption in time use, significantly changing both their location and their companions. We also find important age profile differences between males and females.

Suggested Citation

  • Cardon, James H. & Eide, Eric R. & Showalter, Mark H., 2024. "Home alone: Evaluating the implications of government mandates and disease prevalence on time usage during the pandemic," Research in Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(2).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:reecon:v:78:y:2024:i:2:s1090944324000164
    DOI: 10.1016/j.rie.2024.100952
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1090944324000164
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.rie.2024.100952?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Philipson, Tomas, 2000. "Economic epidemiology and infectious diseases," Handbook of Health Economics, in: A. J. Culyer & J. P. Newhouse (ed.), Handbook of Health Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 33, pages 1761-1799, Elsevier.
    2. Dhaval Dave & Andrew I. Friedson & Kyutaro Matsuzawa & Joseph J. Sabia, 2021. "When Do Shelter‐In‐Place Orders Fight Covid‐19 Best? Policy Heterogeneity Across States And Adoption Time," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(1), pages 29-52, January.
    3. Geoffard, Pierre-Yves & Philipson, Tomas, 1996. "Rational Epidemics and Their Public Control," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 37(3), pages 603-624, August.
    4. Goolsbee, Austan & Syverson, Chad, 2021. "Fear, lockdown, and diversion: Comparing drivers of pandemic economic decline 2020," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    5. Dave, Dhaval & Friedson, Andrew & Matsuzawa, Kyutaro & Sabia, Joseph J. & Safford, Samuel, 2022. "JUE Insight: Were urban cowboys enough to control COVID-19? Local shelter-in-place orders and coronavirus case growth," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Sumedha Gupta & Kosali I. Simon & Coady Wing, 2020. "Mandated and Voluntary Social Distancing During The COVID-19 Epidemic: A Review," NBER Working Papers 28139, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Gans, Joshua Samuel, 2020. "The Economic Consequences of R=1: Towards a Workable Behavioural Epidemiological Model of Pandemics," SocArXiv yxdc5, Center for Open Science.
    3. Glenn L. Furton, 2023. "The pox of politics: Troesken’s tradeoff reexamined," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 195(1), pages 169-191, April.
    4. Chakraborty, Shankha & Papageorgiou, Chris & Sebastián, Fidel Pérez, 2016. "Health Cycles And Health Transitions," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 20(1), pages 189-213, January.
    5. Hoy, Michael & Polborn, Mattias K., 2015. "The value of technology improvements in games with externalities: A fresh look at offsetting behavior," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 12-20.
    6. Battiston, Pietro & Gamba, Simona, 2021. "COVID-19: R0 is lower where outbreak is larger," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 125(2), pages 141-147.
    7. Bisin, Alberto & Moro, Andrea, 2022. "Spatial‐SIR with network structure and behavior: Lockdown rules and the Lucas critique," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 198(C), pages 370-388.
    8. Djemaï, Elodie, 2008. "Is the risk taking of HIV-infection influenced by income uncertainty? : Empirical Evidence from Sub-Saharan Africa," MPRA Paper 11731, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Mark Gersovitz & Jeffrey S. Hammer, 2004. "The Economical Control of Infectious Diseases," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 114(492), pages 1-27, January.
    10. Auld, M. Christopher & Toxvaerd, Flavio, 2021. "The Great Covid-19 Vaccine Rollout: Behavioural And Policy Responses," National Institute Economic Review, National Institute of Economic and Social Research, vol. 257, pages 14-35, August.
    11. Jaesang Sung & Will Davis & Qihua Qiu, 2024. "The effects of COVID‐19 lockdown on the body weight and lifestyle behaviors of U.S. adults," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 90(4), pages 900-948, April.
    12. David E. Bloom & Michael Kuhn & Klaus Prettner, 2022. "Modern Infectious Diseases: Macroeconomic Impacts and Policy Responses," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 60(1), pages 85-131, March.
    13. Joakim A. Weill & Matthieu Stigler & Olivier Deschenes & Michael R. Springborn, 2021. "Researchers' Degrees-of-Flexibility and the Credibility of Difference-in-Differences Estimates: Evidence From the Pandemic Policy Evaluations," NBER Working Papers 29550, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Bisin, Alberto & Moro, Andrea, 2022. "JUE insight: Learning epidemiology by doing: The empirical implications of a Spatial-SIR model with behavioral responses," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    15. Hunt Allcott & Levi Boxell & Jacob C. Conway & Billy A. Ferguson & Matthew Gentzkow & Benjamin Goldman, 2020. "What Explains Temporal and Geographic Variation in the Early US Coronavirus Pandemic?," NBER Working Papers 27965, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Herby, Jonas & Jonung, Lars & Hanke, Steve, 2022. "A Literature Review and Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Lockdowns on Covid-19 Mortality - II," MPRA Paper 113732, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Goenka, Aditya & Liu, Lin & Nguyen, Manh-Hung, 2014. "Infectious diseases and economic growth," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 34-53.
    18. Burcu Ozgun & Tom Broekel, 2024. "Saved by the news? COVID-19 in German news and its relationship with regional mobility behaviour," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 58(2), pages 365-380, February.
    19. Christopher J. Cronin & William N. Evans, 2020. "Private Precaution and Public Restrictions: What Drives Social Distancing and Industry Foot Traffic in the COVID-19 Era?," NBER Working Papers 27531, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    20. Andrew I. Friedson & Drew McNichols & Joseph J. Sabia & Dhaval Dave, 2021. "Shelter‐In‐Place Orders And Public Health: Evidence From California During The Covid‐19 Pandemic," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(1), pages 258-283, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:reecon:v:78:y:2024:i:2:s1090944324000164. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622941 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.