Content uploaded by Isabelle Roskam
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Isabelle Roskam on Jul 26, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
This version of the article may not completely replicate the final authoritative version
published International Perspectives in Psychology (2022), 11(3), 141–152
https://doi.org/10.1027/2157-3891/a000050. It is not the version of record and is therefore not
suitable for citation. Please do not copy or cite without the permission of the author(s).
Title: Parental burnout across the globe during the COVID-19 pandemic
Authors
Hedwig van Bakel1, Coco Bastiaansen1, Ruby Hall1, Inga Schwabe1, Emmie Verspeek1, James J.
Gross37, Julie Ackerlund Brandt35, Joyce Aguiar29, Ege Akgun33, Gizem Arikan31, Kaisa
Aunola14, Zdenka Bajgarová12, Wim Beyers3, Zuzana Bílková12, Emilie Boujut15, Anna Brytek-
Matera27, Bin-Bin Chen9, Géraldine Dorard15, Munseol Eom39, Maria Josefina Escobar6,
Kaichiro Furutani22, Maria Filomena Gaspar28, Annette Griffith35, Mai Helmy13, Mai Trang
Huynh36, Emérence Kaneza4, Roberto Andres Lasso Báez11, Astrid Lebert15, Sarah Le
Vigouroux17, Yanhee Lee30, Hong Dao Mai36, Denisse Manrique-Millones25, Rosa Bertha
Millones Rivalles26, Marina Miscioscia21, Seyyedeh Fatemeh Mousavi19, Munseol Eom30, Alexis
Ndayizigiye4, Josue Ngnombouowo Tenkue5, Daniela Oyarce Cadiz7, Claudia Pineda-Marin11,
Maria Psychountaki18, Yang Qu10, Fernando Salinas-Quiroz38, María Pía Santelices8, Celine
Scola16, Charlotte Schrooyen3, Paolo Silva Cabrera34, Allessandra Simonelli21, Aelita
Skarbalienė23, Egidijus Skarbalius23, Bart Soenens3, Mathilda Sorkkila14, Cara Swit24, Dorota
Szczygieł27, George Theotokatos18, Ayse Meltem Ustundag-Budak32, Lesley Verhofstadt3, Dana
Vertsberger37, Jacqueline Wendland15, Moïra Mikolajczak2 and Isabelle Roskam2
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
Corresponding author:
Hedwig J.A. van Bakel
Tilburg University, Tilburg School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Department of TRANZO.
PO Box 90153, 5000 LE Tilburg, The Netherlands
Email: H.J.A.vanBakel@tilburguniversity.edu; Phone: +31134663138
Affiliations
1Tilburg University, The Netherlands; 2Catholic University Louvain, Belgium; 3Ghent University,
Belgium; 4Education and Psychotherapy Clinic, Burundi; 5University of Yaoundé, Cameroon; 6
Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez, Chile; 7Universidad Santo Tomas, Chile; 8 Pontificia Universidad
Católica de Chile; 9Fudan University, China; 10Northwestern University, USA; 11Konrad Lorenz
University, Colombia; 12University of South Bohemia Czech; 13Menoufia University, Egypt /
Sultan Qaboos University, Oman; 14University of Jyväskylä, Finland; 15University of Paris,
France; 16Aix-marseille University, France; 17University of Nimes, France; 18University of Athens,
Greece; 19Alzahra University, Iran; 21University of Padova, Italy; 22Hokkai-Gakuen University,
Japan; 23Klaipeda University, Lithuania; 24University of Canterbury, New Zealand; 25University
of Lima, Peru; 26Cesar Vallejo University, Peru; 27SWSP University of Social Sciences and
Humanities Warsaw, Poland; 28University of Coimbra, Portugal; 29University of Porto, Portugal;
30Sungkyunkwan University, South Korea; 31Ozyegin University, Turkey; 32Bahcesehir
University, Turkey; 33Ankara University, Turkey; 34Universidad de la Republica, Uruguay; 35The
Chicago School of Professional Psychology, USA; 36University of Education, Ho Chi Minh City,
Vietnam, 37Stanford University, USA, 38Tufts University, USA; 39 International Child Rights
Center, South Korea
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
Acknowledgments and funding
This research was supported by NWO Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research Grants Corona:
Fast-track granted to the first author. The authors would like to thank Peter van der Velden for his support
with a part of the data analysis.
Conflict of Interest Statement
No Conflict of Interest
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic has affected all societies worldwide. The heightened levels of stress that
accompanied the crisis were also expected to affect parenting in many families. Since it is known that
high levels of stress in the parenting domain can lead to a condition that has severe consequences for
health and wellbeing, parental burnout, we examined whether the prevalence of parental burnout in 26
countries (9923 parents; 75% mothers; mean age 40) increased during COVID-19 compared to few years
before the pandemic. In most (but not all) countries, analyses showed a significant increase in the
prevalence of parental burnout during the pandemic. The results further revealed that next to
governmental measures (e.g., number of days locked down, home-schooling) and factors at the individual
and family level (e.g., gender, number of children), parents in less (versus more) indulgent countries
suffered more from parental burnout. The findings suggest that stricter norms regarding their parenting
roles and duties in general and during the pandemic in particular might have increased their levels of
parental burnout.
Keywords: Prevalence, COVID-19, Parental burnout, Culture, Indulgence
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
Impact statement
The results of this unique international study by the International Investigation of Parental Burnout (IIPB)
-- which includes Western and non-Western countries across the globe -- point to the importance of
considering parental burnout as a syndrome helping to meet specific Sustainable Development Goals. Of
all the potentially modifiable influences affecting individuals’ healthy live and wellbeing across the life
course (i.e., SDG 3), positive parenting in the early years has the potential to become a common pathway
-by fostering social and emotional skills- to promote a range of heathy outcomes in both children and
adults. Acknowledging that parenting can be extremely demanding and exhausting for parents who are
confronted with specific individual, family and country level characteristics, may give rise to develop
programs how to encourage parents to minimize exhaustion in their parenting role and how to adopt
nonviolent ways of disciplining children (SDG 16.2). The various individual and cultural factors as well
as COVID-19 factors that have been found related to prevalence rates of parental burnout give indications
with factors need to be addressed to promote health and wellbeing of parents and children (SDG3) and to
diminish or prevent violence against children (SDG16.2).
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
Parental Burnout Across the Globe During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Worldwide, approximately three-quarters of a million people each day experience the
rewards as well as the challenges of becoming new parents (Bornstein, 2019). These new parents
have the important task to raise their children and to contribute to their development and well-
being. The important role of parenting for children’s wellbeing is nowadays globally accepted
and recognised by the United Nations, in alignment with the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Development that the member states of the United Nations adopted in 2015. Of the 17
Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) that have been set, several specifically address the family
and recognize the family as the center of social life and wellbeing (SDG 3), and therefore, make
parenting and the parenting task an integral part of the sustainable goals (United Nations, 2015).
Although parenting is experienced by many parents as satisfying, it also has been
recognized as stressful at times (Abidin, 1990; Deater-Deckard, 2014). When parents lack the
resources needed to handle the stressful moments related to parenting, they may develop
‘parental burnout,’ a condition comprised of four main dimensions: emotional exhaustion,
contrast with the previous parental self, loss of pleasure in the parental role, and emotional
distancing from one’s child(ren) (Mikolajczak & Roskam, 2018; Mikolajczak, et al., 2019). As
shown by Mikolajczak et al. (2020), parental burnout has been recognized as a unique syndrome,
empirically distinct from job burnout, depression or common parental stress that may occur when
risks (demands) are not compensated by enough resources within the family.
When parents experience extremely high levels of exhaustion and emotional distancing in
their parenting task they can become neglectful or violent towards their children (Hansotte, et al.,
2020). Mikolajczak, Brianda et al. (2018) showed a substantial association between experienced
parental burnout and neglectful and violent behavior towards the child(ren). Given that the
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
association between parental burnout and violence did not decrease the significance level when
controlling for demographic factors and was not assumed at all typical of families with low socio-
economic status, the syndrome of parental burnout represented a threat to children’s well-being
even in the most educated families. Therefore, the specific target (SDG 16.2) in the 2030 Agenda
for Sustainable Development to end all forms of violence against children gives impetus towards
a focus on the syndrome of parental burnout in all countries across the globe.
Prevalence rates of parental burnout
A recent initiative known as the International Investigation of Parental Burnout (IIPB)
consortium assessed the prevalence of parental burnout in over 40 countries (Western and non-
western) globally before the pandemic (Roskam et al., 2021). Results of data collected in 2018-
2019 showed a worrying number of parents experiencing parental burnout worldwide.
Importantly, the prevalence rates of parental burnout varied across countries (Roskam et al.,
2021), and it appeared that country-specific cultural factors were found to be associated with
parental burnout. For example, differences between countries in prevalence rates of parental
burnout were found related to the countries’ specific cultural value of ‘individualism.’ Parents in
more individualistic countries (e.g., Belgium, Poland, United States) reported higher average
levels of parental burnout compared to parents living in more collectivistic countries (e.g., Chile,
China, Portugal) (Roskam et al., 2021). Although more studies are needed to understand the
mechanisms that link individualism to parental burnout, the increasing demands created by
parenting norms and the intensification of parental investment in the more individualistic Euro-
American countries might explain this link (Nelson, 2010; Roskam et al., 2021). Moreover,
various factors at both the individual and family level were found related to parents’ feelings of
burnout by their parenting tasks (for a synthesis see Mikolajczak, Raes et al., 2018). But what
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
about the role of parental burnout in relation to the COVID-19 pandemic that took over the world
in 2020?
Parental burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic
The outbreak of COVID-19 in 2020 –and the attempts to control it had an enormous
impact on people’s family lives and on parenting tasks (Weaver & Swank, 2021). The COVID-
19 pandemic increased the number of stressors (e.g., additional chores, home schooling,
struggling to occupy children while working from home) and limited the access to usual
resources (e.g., no reliance on babysitters, no day care, no grandparents to watch over the
children, no leisure activities to breathe out from parenting). Since an imbalance between risks
and resources underlies parental burnout (Mikolajczak & Roskam, 2018), the COVID-19
pandemic -with its increased potential for risks and stressors- might lead to a rise in parental
burnout.
Since state-imposed lockdown measures could place parents at higher risk for parental
burnout symptoms (Griffith, 2020) and given that COVID-19 affected families in countries
across all five continents, with lockdown measures differing between countries, we examined
whether Hofstede’s (2001) cultural values, as indicators of cross-cultural differences, were
related to parental burnout levels during the pandemic. Hofstede (2001) identified six statistically
different dimensions of culture: 1) individualism versus collectivism (i.e., the extent to which
individuals are integrated within groups, the strength of ties with other individuals) 2) power
distance (i.e., the extent to which power is expected and accepted to be distributed unequally by
less powerful members of organizations, institutions, or society); 3) uncertainty avoidance (i.e.,
to which extent members feel comfortable or uncomfortable in ambiguous, new, different from
usual or surprising situations); 4) masculinity versus femininity (i.e., the distribution of values
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
between gender); 5) long-term versus short-term orientation (i.e., the sense of conservatism or
traditionalism in an organization, institution, or society) and 6) indulgence versus restraint (i.e.,
the extent to which a society allows the fulfilment of basic human desires that are associated with
joy in life and happiness). Each country can be positioned on these six dimensions relative to
other countries.
By conducting a new data collection wave in the countries participating in the IIPB
consortium in 2020 and comparing the 2020 results to findings of data collected in 2018-2019,
we sought to investigate whether the prevalence rates and mean levels of parental burnout
increased during the lockdown.
The main research questions of this study were:
1. Have prevalence rates and/or mean levels of parental burnout increased in 2020
(Wave 2), measured during the COVID-19 pandemic, compared to 2018-2019 (Wave 1)?
2. Which sociodemographic and family characteristics are associated with higher
levels of parental burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic?
3. Which individual and state imposed governmental lockdown measures during the
COVID-19 pandemic have had an effect on the levels of parental burnout?
4. What country-specific cultural values have had an effect on levels of parental
burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic?
Given the unique situation of the COVID-19 pandemic across the globe, we were able to
assess what country-specific cultural values were related to the relation between lockdown
measures taken by the government and the level of parental burnout in a country.
5. To what extent have country-specific cultural values mitigated the strength of the
impact of governmental measures on parental burnout?
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
Methods
Procedure and participants
For the data collection, members of the IIPB who participated in the first wave of data
collection (see Roskam et al., 2021) were contacted again in April 2020. Not all members were
able to collect data during the COVID-19 pandemic, usually due to practical reasons. Finally,
members of 26 countries agreed and were able to join the second wave of data collection. Six of
the countries were not present in the first wave of the data (i.e., Czech Republic, Egypt, Greece,
Israel, Lithuania, and New Zealand). Members of the IIPB collected data by varying recruitment
procedures (e.g., social media networks, newspaper advertisement, word of mouth, and door-to-
door) and the survey was completed either by paper-and-pencil or online. Parents were eligible
to be included in the study if they had at least one child, regardless of their age, still living at
home. To avoid bias, the study was introduced as a study designed to better understand parental
satisfaction and exhaustion around the world. No incentives were offered to participate. See
supplemental material (Appendix A) for the data collection procedure in each country.
Respondents who did not complete the Parental Burnout Assessment (PBA) (Roskam, Brianda &
Mikolajczak, 2018) were not included in the present research. The final sample included 9,923
parents (74.7 % mothers and 25.3% fathers) from the following countries: Belgium (14.6%);
Burundi (1.7%); Cameroun (2.2%); Finland (10.7%); France (7.2%); Italy (3.2%); Japan (2.0%);
Peru (3.0%); Poland (3.3%); Portugal (5.3%); the Netherlands (4.1%); Turkey (2.5%); United
States (2.7%); Vietnam (1.8%); Czech Republic (3.5%); Egypt (1.5%); Israel (2.5%); New
Zealand (0.8%); China (5.8%); Chili (6.8%); Colombia (2.2%); Lithuania (1.7%); Iran (2.1%);
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
South Korea (2.4%); Greece (3.5%); and Uruguay (2.8%). Ethical approval was obtained by the
Ethic Review Board of Tilburg University (EC2018.013R) and/or an institutes’ ethics board.
Measures
Parental burnout
Parental burnout was assessed with the PBA (Roskam et al., 2018), a 23-item
questionnaire assessing the four core symptoms of parental burnout: Emotional exhaustion (9
items) (e.g., ‘I feel completely run down by my role as a parent’); contrast with previous parental
self (6 items) (e.g., ‘I tell myself I’m no longer the parent I used to be’); loss of pleasure in one’s
parental role (5 items) (e.g., ‘I do not enjoy being with my children’); and emotional distancing
from one’s children (3 items) (e.g., ‘I am no longer able to show my children that I love them’).
All questions were scored using a 7-point Likert scale from 0 to 6 (i.e., never, a few times a year,
once a month or less, a few times a month, once a week, a few times a week, every day). In our
analyses, both the summed score, as well as a prevalence rate of parental burnout will be used as
outcome variables. Firstly, the parental burnout score is computed by summing the item scores
(ranging from 0 to 138): higher scores reflect higher parental burnout level. The internal
consistency of the scale was assessed by use of Cronbach’s alpha and was indicated to be good
to excellent within countries, ranging from .87 to .98 (see supplemental material Appendix B).
To indicate to what extent the construct of parental burnout is measured the same across the
different countries (with measurement invariances), we refer to Roskam et al. (2021). Secondly,
prevalence rates of parental burnout were computed to compare the waves of data collection.
Cut-off scores for parental burnout in the current study were operationalized based on a pre-
registered independent study (Brianda et al., 2020) using a multi-method and multi-informant
analysis strategy and Roskam et al’s. (2021) research. Indicators of parental burnout, such as
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
self-reports of parents, views of external clinical judges, and a biological measure of chronic
stress (the hair cortisol concentration), resulted in a validated cut-off criterion value on PBA
equal to or greater than 86 (95% CI: 79.49 – 93.03) (see https://osf.io/ujfb3 for more details
about the analysis strategy). According to Roskam et al. (2021), parents were judged to have
parental burnout if their score was equal to or higher than 92 (i.e., if they experience all 23
symptoms at least once a week or if they experience at least 16 symptoms daily). This cut-off
score of 92 was considered the most stringent cut-off (i.e., the most conservative prevalence
value to avoid overdiagnosis of burnout and was therefore used in the subsequent analyses in the
current study.
Individual sociodemographic variables – level 1.
In the present study, the following sociodemographic variables were included: Gender (0
= mother, 1 = father); age; educational level (number of successfully completed school years);
paid profession (0 = yes, 1 = no); type of neighbourhood (0 = disadvantaged, 1 = average, 2 =
prosperous); and financial situation 5 categories (0 = very good, 1 = good, 2 = sufficient, 3 =
moderate 4 = poor).
Family variables.
The following factors were included in the analyses as variables at the family level:
number of children; having a child in the age category 0-4 (0 = no, 1 = yes); having a child with
special needs such as a chronic illness or disability (0=no, 1= 1 child, 2 = more than 1 child); and
family type (0 = other, 1 = single parent, 2 = two-parent family).
Individual lockdown variables.
Respondents were asked to answer questions related to their personal situation during the
COVID-19 pandemic such as working from home (0 = yes, 1 = no); home-schooling your
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
children (0 = yes, 1 = no); and number of days locked down; and attention a child requires (0 =
independent including lunch, 1 = independent excluding lunch, 2 = check every hour, 3 =
constantly soliciting me).
Country specific state-imposed lockdown measures – level 2.
The Stringency Index of the Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker
(OxCGRT; Hale et al., 2021) was used as an assessment for the state-imposed lockdown
measures per country. The OxCGRT collected daily scores for each country on policy indicators
(e.g., school- and workplace closure), economic policies (e.g., income support), and health
system policies (e.g., testing regimes) with regards to the COVID-19 pandemic. In the current
study, one score on the Stringency Index was allocated for each country by calculating the
average score on this index during the period of data collection in that specific country (see
https://www.bsg.ox.ac.uk/research/research-projects/coronavirus-government-response-tracker).
A review of this scoring procedure suggested a high degree of accuracy in our data collection. As
of 31 December 2020, 84.79% of all the data points had not changed, and since 1 June 2020,
87.45% of the data points had not required a revision (i.e., post-hoc alterations to the coding
scheme and factual errors). Just 0.41% of the observations were escalated by the reviewers for
adjudication (0.25% since 1 June 2020). The scores generated using an IRT model were highly
correlated to a linear index (r = 0.98), which reinforces the validity of the approach (see Hale et
al. [2021] for information on the actual measures of the index and the methodology of the data
collection and aggregation procedure).
Cultural values.
Cultural values for each country were assessed with the six dimensions identified by
Hofstede (2001, 2011): Individualism (IDV), Power Distance (PDI), Masculinity (MAS),
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
Uncertainty Avoidance (UA), Long Term Orientation (LTO), and Indulgence (IND). For the
levels of each country see https://www.hofstede-insights.com/product/compare-countries. Each
dimension ranges from 0 – 100, with 50 as a mid-level. The rule of thumb is that if a score is
under 50 the culture scores relatively low on that scale and if any score is over 50 the culture
scores high on that scale. Burundi and Cameroun do not have scores on any of the six cultural
values and for Israel no score for Indulgence was available (see supplemental material Appendix
C). Researchers have reported the following Cronbach’s alpha coefficients at the country-level
for each value dimension: .81 (IDV), .84 (PDI), .76 (MAS), .72 (UA), .57 (LTO) and .79 (IND)
(see Beugelsdijk et al., 2015; Hofstede & Minkov, 2013). In terms of construct validity,
significant correlations were reported by Taras et al. (2012) and Guo et al. (2018) between
theoretically relevant external criteria like the Human Development Index (i.e., a statistic
composite index of life expectancy, education and per capita income indicators) and IDV (.56, p
< 0.05), PDI (-.58, p < 0.05), MAS (.21, p < 0.05), and LTO (.60, p < 0.05), and between the
World Giving Index (i.e., a national measure of prosocial behavior) and UA (-.40, p < 0.01) and
IND (.54, p < 0.01). Table 1 shows the descriptive statistics for variables of interest in the current
2020 Wave. We additionally checked the main sociodemographic variables of the two waves.
The results revealed that gender (χ2 = 50.75, p <.0001), paid profession (χ2 = 18.81, p < .0001)
and neighbourhood (χ2 = 7.781, p < .0001) did not significant differ between the two waves.
However, this significant level may be due to the large sample sizes. Odds ratios for these
variables (gender, OR=1.28 [95% CI = 1.21-1.35, p < .001]; paid profession, OR = 1.14 [95% CI
= 1.08-1.21, p < .0001]; neighbourhood, OR = 1.08 [95% CI = 1.02-1.14, p < 0.05]) indicated
very small differences between the 2018-2019 and 2020 waves. Family composition (χ2 = 1.84, p
=.18), age (M1 = 39.20, SD = 8.90 vs. M2 = 39.99, SD = 8.08, t = -1.25, p =.33), educational level
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
(M1 = 14.89, SD = 4.34 vs. M2 = 15.74, SD = 4.57, t = .15, p =.89), and number of children (M1 =
1.98, SD = 1.19 vs. M2 = 1.98, SD = 1.12, t = 0.99, p =.45) were not significantly different
between the two waves.
Insert Table 1 about here
Statistical analyses
To answer the first research question, we compared the mean levels of parental burnout
and prevalence rates of parental burnout of Wave 1 (2018-2019) and Wave 2 (2020, during the
COVID-19 pandemic) by performing a logistic regression analysis and Mann Whitney U tests.
For tests for invariance of measures of burnout we refer to tests as reported in the study of Wave
1 (Roskam et al., 2021).
For the second to fifth research question, a total of five models were fitted in SPSS 26 by
use of hierarchical multilevel regression modelling fitted with Restricted Maximum Likelihood
(REML). Hierarchical models were run to select the model that had the best fit to the data (i.e.,
provided the most parsimonious explanation for the data, but that still shows an adequate fit). For
this purpose, the Akaike’s information criterion (AIC) and the Schwarz’s Bayesian information
criterion (BIC) were used, where lower values indicate better model fit (Stoica & Selen, 2004;
Akaike, 2019). As a result, the best fitted model will be reported in the results section, in
comparison to the null-model. To increase the interpretability of model parameters, predictor
variables were rescaled with categorical variables having a meaningful zero-point. Continuous
variables were centered on the grand mean. Model 0 presents the empty model and functioned as
a reference null model to estimate intra-class correlation. Model 1 introduced the effects of
individual socio-demographical variables; Model 2 introduced family factors; Model 3
introduced the individual lockdown measures; Model 4 introduced the country specific state-
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
imposed lockdown measures and cultural values of the country; and Model 5, included
interaction effects between the country specific state-imposed lockdown measures and cultural
values in each country to test whether country specific cultural values mitigated the strength of
the governmental measures on parental burnout.
Results
Prevalence rates of parental burnout in 2020 compared to 2018-2019
In total, 26 countries participated in 2020 and collected parental burnout data, with six
out of 26 countries not having participated in the first wave of the data collection (i.e., Czech
Republic, Egypt, Greece, Israel, Lithuania, and New Zealand) (See supplemental material
Appendix D for Figures with percentages of parental burnout in each country at wave 1 and
wave 2).
Results of a Mann-Whitney U test showed that the average mean level of parental
burnout did not significantly differ between the two waves (Wave 1 mean rank = 17.0, Wave 2
mean rank = 22.0, U = 133, z = -1.387, p = .172). However, the prevalence rates of parental
burnout were significantly higher in the second wave, compared to the first wave (Wave 1 mean
rank = 15.50, Wave 2 mean rank= 23.50, U = 104.5, z = -.2.219, p = .03).
To check whether the mean levels and prevalence rates of parental burnout were related
to participation or no participation in the COVID-19 wave we compared the countries that
collected data in Wave 1 only with countries that had gathered data in both waves. A Mann-
Whitney U test showed no significant differences in mean levels and prevalence rates of parental
burnout between the countries that participated in wave 1 and not in wave 2, and the countries
that participated in both waves (mean levels of parental burnout U = 213, z = -1.76, p = .860,
prevalence rates U = 119, z = -.025, p = .980).
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
Results of a logistic regression analysis (Table 2) to compare prevalence rates of parental
burnout during the first wave in 2018-2019 and the second COVID-19 wave showed a
significant increase in parental burnout for the total sample (4.2% vs 5.8% respectively). The
odds of having parental burnout during the COVID-19 wave was 1.39 times higher than the odds
of having parental burnout during the pre-COVID wave 1 (p < .001) with varying odds among
countries.
Insert Table 2 about here
Impact of various individual and country level characteristics on parental burnout
Multilevel analyses were performed to answer the research questions concerning the
association between individual level characteristics, governmental measures and the levels of
parental burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic and to what extent differences in country
cultural values were related to the increase in the levels of parental burnout. The null-model
indicates an intraclass correlation of approximately 9 percent (76.96 / 833.32). Based on the fit
indices Model 4 showed the best fit to the data (see supplemental material Appendix E). This
fourth model included all variables that were added in the first three models (i.e.,
sociodemographic variables, family variables, lockdown variables) and also variables on level
two (i.e., stringency of lockdown and cultural values). The results of this final and best fitted
model (model 4) are described below in more detail (Table 3).
Insert Table 3 about here
Impact of individual and family characteristics on parental burnout
With regard to the sociodemographic variables, significant effects were found for gender,
age, and the financial situation of the parents. First, the results indicated that women (mothers)
showed a higher level of parental burnout compared to men (fathers) (B = 4.49, p < .001). The
results for age indicated that the higher the age of the parents, the lower the level of parental
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
burnout (B = -.15, p = .014). In addition, the results showed that compared to a poor financial
situation, a very good (B = -10.07, p < .001), good (B = -6.98, p < .001), sufficient (B = - 4.90, p
=.012), and moderate (B = - 3.85, p =.046) financial situation decreased the level of parental
burnout. The better the financial situation, the lower the level of parental burnout. The family
type (e.g., two-parent, single parent or other) did not show a significant effect on the level of
parental burnout.
A significant effect was found for having a child with special needs, having a child under
the age of four, and the number of children in the household on levels of parental burnout. This
indicated that having two or more children with special needs or suffering from medical-,
physical-, emotional-, cognitive-, or behavioural problems increased the level of parental burnout
compared to having no child (B = -12.31, p < .001) or one child (B = - 4.83, p = .02) with special
needs. In addition, the number of children (B = 1.82, p < .001) increased the level of parental
burnout. For those parents having children all above the age of 4 levels of parental burnout
significantly decreased (B = -2.41, p = .02).
Impact of individual lockdown measures on parental burnout
For the individual lockdown variables, significant effects were found for days that
families were locked down, whether parents had a task of home-schooling their children, and the
amount of attention the child(ren) required from them during the day. First, the more days
respondents were locked down, the higher the mean level of parental burnout (B = .05, p <. 001).
The need for home-schooling significantly increased the levels of parental burnout (B = 3.21, p <
.001). In addition, compared to parents who had to check on their children every hour, parents
with independent children (B = -16.88, p <.001), and parents that only needed to be present
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
during lunchtime (B = -9.08, p <.001) showed lower levels of parental burnout. The more
attention a child required, the higher the levels of parental burnout.
Country-specific cultural values and the strength of the impact of governmental measures
on parental burnout
With regard to the country level variables, no significant results were found for the
stringency index (i.e., the state-imposed lockdown measures). The analyses only revealed a
significant effect for the level of indulgence. The results of our analysis showed that the higher
the level of indulgence in a country, the lower the level of parental burnout (B = -.26, p = .016).
A final model did not reveal significant results, showing that country specific cultural
values did not mitigate the strength of the governmental measures on parental burnout.
Therefore, we refrain from describing this model in detail.
Discussion
Since the family is regarded as the natural and elementary unit of almost all societies,
there are many reasons to focus on the role of families and parenting in meeting the current
Sustainable Developmental Goals. An increase in families’ wellbeing and a reduction of family
violence is considered to be achieved by supporting parents in positive parenting practices and
by diminishing stressors in families (Richardson et al., 2020). In this context, the main goal of
the present study was to assess whether a stressor like the COVID-19 pandemic -with its related
state-imposed lockdown measures- affected the prevalence of parental burnout (as an indicator of
a lack of positive parenting practices and risk factor for increased family violence) worldwide.
The results of our analyses showed that the global prevalence of parental burnout significantly
increased in many countries during the COVID-19 pandemic. These results confirmed that the
pandemic affected family life seriously and dovetails with independent studies conducted in the
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
United States (Russell et al., 2020), Italy (Spinelli et al., 2020), and Germany (Calvano, et al.,
2021).
Although the odds of experiencing parental burnout were higher in most Western and
non-Western countries in 2020 than before the COVID-19 pandemic in 2018-2019, the size of
the increase varied considerably across countries. Various individual and family factors were
found to be related to increases in rates of parental burnout. Mothers, younger parents, those in
poor financial situations, those with more than one child with problems or special needs, those
with more children living at home, and those having children under the age of four evidenced
higher levels of parental burnout during the pandemic. These factors also were found to be
significantly related to parental burnout in previous pre-COVID studies focusing on parental
burnout (Roskam et al., 2021). Having young children (between the age of 0 and 4), more
children, and children with special needs certainly increases the attention that children require
from parents on a daily basis (Lundberg et al., 1994; Mikolajczak et al. 2018) and increases the
levels of stress associated with parenting. This did not change in 2020. In times of COVID-19
when parents may lose jobs and are confronted with financial uncertain situations it is not
surprising that the amount of stress increases and puts an additional strain on family life and
parenting practices. People’s daily routines changed and apart from working from home and
parenting, parents were fed up with the task of home schooling their children. This required extra
attention and increased level of stress (Griffith, 2020). The results of our analysis are in line with
previous findings and support the assumption that strict lockdown measures (i.e., work remote,
stay at home, closing of schools and daycare facilities) increased parental burnout (Joyce, 2022;
Skjerdingstad et al., 2021).
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
With regard to the cultural values discussed by Hofstede (2011), the seemingly protective
factor of collectivism (versus individualism) in experiencing parental burnout (Roskam et al.,
2021) disappeared during the pandemic when many families were in lockdown and social
contacts were restricted. During the pandemic, living in a more indulgent country appeared to be
a protective cultural value for developing parental burnout. The finding that indulgence is the
main contributing cultural value related to parental burnout across countries during the pandemic
seems to contrast with the finding of Roskam et al (2021) which showed no significant effect of
indulgence. This difference is particularly interesting because it shows that when external
circumstances change, the protective (or vulnerability) role of cultural values may change too. A
value that was not found to be particularly protective in “regular” circumstances became
particularly protective in a context of extreme stress on the parents. In response to adversity (e.g.
a pandemic and lockdown), individuals from a culture of indulgence might feel that they still
have control over their participation in life activities, while individuals from a background of
cultural restraint may have a sense of helplessness and be less actively involved in taking control
over their involvement in enjoyable activities. This finding on the protective role of indulgence
opens perspectives for studies at the individual level too and fits well with existing results
showing that parents who take leisure time are actually less vulnerable to parental burnout
(Piraux & Mehauden, 2018). Moreover, perhaps less strict norms regarding parenting roles and
duties during the pandemic, in particular, in indulgent countries can leave room for individuals to
adapt to the extraordinary COVID-19 situation. This may subsequently lead to more freedom for
parents how to balance work and home or how to shape the parental role.
Recently, studies have outlined how to prevent or decrease parental burnout (Brianda et
al (2020). High levels of parental burnout in families at risk can be reduced by supporting
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
parents on how to deal with social pressure and perfectionism by enhancing their emotion
regulation competencies and stress management techniques. Parents who received a brief and
focused intervention not only reported significant decreases in parental burnout symptoms and
negative emotions but also decreases in neglect and violence towards their children.
Because of varying rates per country, different sample sizes across countries, variations
in geographical areas per country, the overrepresentation of mothers in almost all countries, and
potential unmeasured factors that cannot be ruled out, our results must be interpreted with
caution. Nevertheless, the results of this unique study involving 26 Western and non-Western
countries around the globe point to the importance of considering parental burnout as a syndrome
shaped by various individual and cultural factors as well as natural disasters like pandemics.
Acknowledging that parenting can be extremely demanding and exhausting for many parents
across the globe, particularly in times of the COVID-19 pandemic, may give rise to the
development of specific parenting programs. Those programs should focus on minimizing the
exhaustion of parents and should aim to support these individuals to adopt nonviolent ways of
parenting their children (SDG 16.2) in order to promote the health and wellbeing of their
offspring (SDG3).
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
References
Abidin, R. R. (1990). Parenting stress index manual. Charlottesville: Pediatric Psychology
Press.
Akaike, H. (2019). Fitting Autoregressive models for prediction. Annals of institute of statistical
mathematics, Vol. 21, pp. 243- 247.
Beugelsdijk, S., Maseland, R., & Van Hoorn, A. (2015). Are scores on Hofstede’s dimensions of
natural culture stable over time? A cohort analysis. Global Strategy Journal, 5, 223-240
Bornstein, M.H. (Ed.). (2019). Handbook of Parenting: Volume 1: Children and Parenting (3rd
ed.). New York: Routledge.
Brianda M., Roskam, I., Gross, J., Franssen, A., Kapala, F., Gérard, F. & Mikolajczak, M.
(2020). Treating parental burnout: Impact of two treatment modalities on burnout
symptoms, emotions, hair Cortisol, and parental neglect and violence. Psychotherapy and
Psychosomatics, 89, 330-332. doi: 10.1159/000506354
Calvano, C., Engelke, L., Di Bella, J., Kindermann, J., Renneberg, B., and Winter, S. M. (2021).
Families in the COVID-19 pandemic: parental stress, parent mental health and the
occurrence of adverse childhood experiences—results of a representative survey in
Germany. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry 1, 1–13. doi: 10.1007/s00787-021-
01739-0
Deater-Deckard, K. (2014). Parenting stress. Yale: University Press.
Griffith, A. K. (2020). Parental burnout and child maltreatment during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Journal of Family Violence, Published online. doi:10.1007/s10896-020-00172-2.
Guo, Q., Liu, Z., Xile, Li., X., & Qiao, X., (2018). Indulgence and long term orientation influence
prosocial behavior at national level. Frontiers, 9: 1798. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01798
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
Hale, T. Anania, J., Angrist, N., Boby, T., Cameron-Blake, E., Di Folco, M., Ellen, L., Goldszmidt,
R., Hallas, L., Kira, B., Luciano, M., Majumdar, S., Nagesh, R., Petherick, A., Phillips, T.,
Tatlow, H., Webster, S., Wood, A., & Zhang, Y (2021). Variation in Government
Responses to COVID-19” Version 12.0. Blavatnik School of Government Working Paper.
Available: www.bsg.ox.ac.uk/covidtracker
Hansotte, L., Nguyen, N., Roskam, I., Stinglhamber, F., & Mikolajczak, M. (2020). Are all
burned out parents neglectful and violent? A latent profile analysis. Journal of Child and
Family Studies, 30, 158–168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-020-01850-x
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and
organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Hofstede, G. (2011) Hofstede Insight. Compare Countries. Retrieved from Error! Hyperlink
reference not valid.
Hofstede, G. & Minkov, M. (2013). Values Survey Module 2013 Manual. Available online
at: https://geerthofstede.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Manual-VSM-2013.pdf
Joyce, A. (2022). Controlling the uncrollable: stress, nurnout and parenting during a pandemic.
The Family Journal, 1, 1-7.
Lundberg, U., Mardberg, B. & Frankenhaeuser, M. (1994). The total workload of male and female
white collar workers as related to age, occupational level, and number of children.
Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 35, 315–327.
Mikolajczak, M., Brianda, M. E., Avalosse, H., & Roskam, I. (2018). Consequences of parental
burnout: a preliminary investigation of escape and suicidal ideations, sleep disorders,
addictions, marital conflicts, child abuse and neglect. Child Abuse and Neglect, 80, 134–
145. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2018.03.025
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
Mikolajczak, M., Gross, J.J., & Roskam, I. (2019). Parental burnout: What is it, and why does it
matter? Clinical Psychological Science, 7, 1319-1329.
doi:10.1177/2167702619858430.
Mikolajczak, M., Gross, J.J., Stinglhamber, F., Lindhal-Norberg, A. & Roskam, I. (2020). Is
parental burnout different from job burnout and depressive symptomatology? Clinical
Psychological Science, 8, 673-689.
Mikolajczak, M., Raes, M., Avalosse, H. & Roskam, I. (2018) Exhausted parents:
Sociodemographic, child-related, parent-related, parenting and family-functioning
correlates of parental burnout. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 27, 602 – 614. doi:
10.1007/s10826-017-0892-4
Mikolajczak, M. & Roskam, I. (2018). A theoretical and clinical framework for parental burnout:
The balance between risks and resources (BR2). Frontiers in Psychology, 9, (pages). doi:
10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00886
Nelson, M.K. (2010). Parenting out of control: Anxious parents in uncertain times. New York:
New York University Press.
Oxford COVID-19 Government Response Tracker, Blavatnik School of Government. Retrieved
from https://www.bsg.ox.ac.uk/research/research-projects/coronavirus-
government-response-tracker.
Piraux, V. & Mehauden, F. (2018) Quand les Circonstances de Vie Malmènent le Quotidien et
Conduisent au Burnout Parental. In I. Roskam & M. Mikolajczak: Le burnout parental :
comprendre, diagnostiquer et prendre en charge. Bruxelles: De Boeck Supérieur.
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
Richardson, D., Dugarova, E., Higgins, D., Hirao, K., Karamperidou, D., Mokomane, Z., &
Robila, M. (2020). Families, family policy and the sustainable development goals.
UNICEF Office of Research – Innocenti, Florence.
Roskam, I., Brianda, M.-E., & Mikolajczak, M. (2018). A Step Forward in the Conceptualization
and Measurement of Parental Burnout: The Parental Burnout Assessment
(PBA). Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1-12. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00758
Roskam, I., IIPB Consortium, & Mikolajczak, M. (2021). Parental Burnout Around the Globe: a
42-Country Study. Affective Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42761-020-00028-4.
Russell, B.S., Hutchison, M., Tambling, R., Tomkunas, A.J., & Horton, A.L. (2020). Initial
challenges of caregiving during COVID-19: caregiver burden, mental health, and the
parent–child relationship. Child Psychiatry & Human Development, 51, 671–682. doi:
10.1007/s10578-020-01037-x
Skjerdingstad, N., Johnson, M. S., Johnson, S. U., Hoffart, A., & Ebrahimi, O. V. (2021). Parental
burnout during the COVID-19 pandemic. Family Process, 00, 1– 15.
https://doi.org/10.1111/famp.12740
Spinelli, M., Lionetti, F., Pastore, M., & Fasolo, M. (2020). Parents’ stress and children’s
psychological problems in families facing the COVID-19 outbreak in Italy. Frontiers in
Psychology 11:1713.
Stoica, P. & Selen, Y. (2004). Model-order selection: a review of information criterion rules. IEEE
Signal Processing Magazine (July): 36–47.
Taras, V., Steel, P. & Kirkman, B. (2012). Improving national cultural indices using a longitudinal
meta-analysis of Hofstede’s dimensions. Journal of World Business, 47(3), 329-341.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2011.05.001.
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
United Nations (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development.
(A/RES70/L1).
Weaver, J. L., & Swank, J. M. (2020). Parents’ lived experiences with the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Family Journal, 29(0), 136-142. doi:10.1177/1066480720969194.
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
Running head: PARENTAL BURNOUT ACROSS THE GLOBE DURING THE COVID-19
PANDEMIC
A preview of this full-text is provided by American Psychological Association.
Content available from International Perspectives in Psychology Research Practice Consultation
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.