The novel coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has been a major global event. Countless restrictions and recommendations have revealed novel insights into the everyday lives of people, which are far from uniform across cultures. In this explorative study, the mood perception of people from “individualistic” (Finland) and “collectivistic” (Japan and South Korea) cultures were studied via self-administered questionnaires at the time of major social restrictions (spring–summer of 2020) when the sociocultural effect of the pandemic was at its strongest. A simple measure of “recent mood perception” forms the core of the analysis, against which various factors were analyzed. Such coarse measures fit well with cross-cultural research, for more specific experiences typically do not translate very well between cultures. Somewhat surprisingly, almost no “constant” measures (e.g., occupation, household structure) proved to be significantly correlated with recent mood, whereas the degree of “changes” in personal situation (time spent home, number of people met, and so on, before and after the outbreak) proved to be significant factors, highlighting contextuality and mindset. Further, difference between “individualistic” and “collectivistic” cultures was also observed. These results highlight the vital importance of not only observing consistent phenomena but also recognizing changes and understanding the unique perspectives and experiences individuals have of them. Depending on the context, an objectively same thing can evoke vastly different perceptions.

1. [1] H. Karaki, “Population density and regional differences determine the probability of COVID-19 infection,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.17, No.1, pp. 61-64, 2020. https://doi.org/10.20965/jdr.2022.p0061
2. [2] S. Shinoda, “Epidemiology of the novel coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and several remarkable pandemics,” J. Disaster Res., Vol.16, No.1, pp. 97-109, 2021. https://doi.org/10.20965/jdr.2021.p0097
3. [3] G. Bonaccorsi et al., “Economic and social consequences of human mobility restrictions under COVID-19,” Proc. of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol.117, No.27, pp. 15530-15535, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2007658117
4. [4] M. Nicola et al., “The socio-economic implications of the coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19): A review,” Int. J. of Surgery, Vol.78, pp. 185-193, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2020.04.018
5. [5] D. J. Dean et al., “Cross-cultural comparison of psychosocial distress in the USA, South Korea, France, and Hong Kong during the initial phase of COVID-19,” Psychiatry Research, Vol.295, Article No.113593, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113593
6. [6] C. L. Marmarosh, D. R. Forsyth, B. Strauss, and G. M. Burlingame, “The psychology of the COVID-19 pandemic: A group-level perspective,” Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, Vol.24, No.3, pp. 122-138, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1037/gdn0000142
7. [7] B. Rothmüller, “The grip of pandemic mononormativity in Austria and Germany,” Culture, Health & Sexuality, Vol.23, No.11, pp. 1573-1590, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691058.2021.1943534
8. [8] A. Neely, “Live music is BACK, and holy #$*@ people are pumped,” 2021. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBrjFD3nHbA [Accessed September 27, 2023]
9. [9] Y.-F. Tuan, “Space and Place: The Perspective of Experience,” University of Minnesota Press, 1977.
10. [10] L. Ross and R. E. Nisbett, “The Person and the Situation; Perspectives of Social Psychology,” 2nd Edition, Printer & Martin, 2011.
11. [11] E. P. Willems, “Behavioral ecology,” D. Stokols (Ed.), “Perspectives on Environment and Behavior: Theory, Research, and Applications,” pp. 39-68, Plenum Press, 1977. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-2277-1_2
12. [12] I. Stewart and J. Cohen, “The Collapse of Chaos: Discovering Simplicity in a Complex World,” Penguin Books, 1994.
13. [13] H. F. Chua, J. E. Boland, and R. E. Nisbett, “Cultural variation in eye movements during scene perception,” Proc. of the National Academy of Sciences, Vol.102, No.35, pp. 12629-12633, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0506162102
14. [14] J. A. Lucy, “Linguistic relativity,” Annual Review of Anthropology, Vol.26, pp. 291-312, 1997. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.26.1.291
15. [15] R. E. Nisbett, K. Peng, I. Choi, and A. Norenzayan, “Culture and systems of thought: Holistic versus analytic cognition,” Psychological Review, Vol.108, No.2, pp. 291-310, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.108.2.291
16. [16] R. M. Sapolsky, “Behave; The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst,” Penguin Press, 2017.
17. [17] M. J. Gelfand et al., “Difference between tight and loose cultures: A 33-nation study,” Science, Vol.332, No.6033, pp. 1100-1104, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1197754
18. [18] D. Spiegelhalter, “The Art of Statistics: Learning from Data,” Pelican, 2019.
19. [19] K. Flinkman, “Evolution of urban culture and urbanization in Finland and Japan,” Master’s Thesis, Aalto University, 2018.
20. [20] B. Anderson, “Imagined Communities; Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism,” Revised Edition, Verso, 2006.
21. [21] J. Hasell et al., “A cross-country database of COVID-19 testing,” Scientific Data, Vol.7, No.1, Article No.345, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41597-020-00688-8
22. [22] E. T. Hall, “The Hidden Dimension,” Anchor, 1990 (first published 1966 by Random House).
23. [23] K. Patel et al., “Psychological distress before and during the COVID-19 pandemic among adults in the United Kingdom based on coordinated analyses of 11 longitudinal studies,” JAMA Network Open, Vol.5, No.4, Article No.e227629, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.7629
24. [24] WorldPop, “Global high resolution population denominators project,” 2018. https://doi.org/10.5258/SOTON/WP00645
25. [25] A. L. Nichols and J. K. Maner, “The good-subject effect: Investigating participant demand characteristics,” The J. of General Psychology, Vol.135, No.2, pp. 151-166, 2008. https://doi.org/10.3200/GENP.135.2.151-166
26. [26] A. H. Patterson, “Methodological developments in environment-behavioral research,” D. Stokols (Ed.), “Perspectives on Environment and Behavior: Theory, Research, and Applications,” pp. 325-344, Plenum Press, 1977. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-2277-1_16
27. [27] A. van Deursen and J. van Dijk, “Internet skills and the digital divide,” New Media & Society, Vol.13, No.6, pp. 893-911, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810386774
28. [28] D. Rowntree, “Statistics Without Tears: An Introduction for Non-Mathematicians,” Penguin Books, 2018.
29. [29] C. Foye, “The relationship between size of living space and subjective well-being,” J. of Happiness Studies, Vol.18, No.2, pp. 427-461, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-016-9732-2
30. [30] H. Easthope, “A place called home,” Housing, Theory and Society, Vol.21, No.3, pp. 128-138, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1080/14036090410021360
31. [31] D. Graeber, “Bullshit Jobs: A Theory,” Simon & Schuster, 2018.
32. [32] R. Dunbar, “Friends: Understanding the Power of Our Most Important Relationships,” Little, Brown, 2021.
33. [33] J. Torkki, “Plutarkhos: Mielen Tyyneydestä,” Otava, 2020 (in Finnish).
34. [34] H. M. Lefcourt, “Chapter 9 – Locus of control,” J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, and L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), “Measures of Personality and Social Psychological Attitudes: Measures of Social Psychological Attitudes,” pp. 413-499, Academic Press, 1991. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-590241-0.50013-7
35. [35] T. C. Bates, “The glass is half full and half empty: A population-representative twin study testing if optimism and pessimism are distinct systems,” The J. of Positive Psychology, Vol.10, No.6, pp. 533-542, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2015.1015155