Blog Layout


The mental toll from 2020 – and what this means for 2021

The physical ravages and unfortunate deaths caused by COVID-19 are well documented, but this pandemic has also taken a toll in many other ways. 


There are the obvious financial impacts – from business closures; inevitable redundancies; through to billions of dollars of government funded wage subsidies – as we all try to navigate our way through some serious economic turbulence.  Then there’s the ongoing uncertainty of living in the shadow of COVID-19…  Should we book that event?  Should we plan a holiday?  When will we see loved ones overseas again?  And with Auckland bouncing in and out of lockdown (and back in again) just recently, uncertainty has ratcheted up another notch. 


One of the lingering impacts from 2020 therefore, has been on the mental health of New Zealanders.

 


It was a tough year for many of us


The Ministry Health estimates that 660,000 New Zealanders suffer some form of depression – up 32% compared with 2012.  With the stigma around mental health slowly receding and more focus on the subject, we need to understand the wider mental health context resulting from COVID-19, even where the physical (i.e. health) impact may have been limited.  And it could be argued that the long-term impact to our minds is arguably an even bigger public health challenge.


As an indicator, a Dynata survey taken at the end of 2020 certainly alludes to a mental health impact, with four in ten (43%) saying they were more stressed than the previous year.  An identical number (43%) also said they were more anxious than in 2019 before COVID-19 appeared.   In amongst the plethora of negative news related to health and the economy – from NZ and overseas – this certainly doesn’t seem surprising.  But when does temporary mental state become an ingrained trait for those who have suffered the worst effects from COVID-19? 


One of our 2020 Vision participants noted “I don’t watch the news anymore – its so depressing. All you hear about is how many people are dying of this virus.  You wonder when it will all end”. 


The unique experience of lockdowns and the various travel restrictions were certainly felt, adding to our mental health load.  The Dynata survey highlighted that three in ten (29%) were more lonely in 2020 compared to the previous year, while four in ten (40%) considered their personal relationships stronger than the year prior.  So, while our household bubbles helped bond many spouses and families over board games and long walks, others were disconnected from their loved ones – particularly the elderly. 

 

With a vaccine having now arrived in New Zealand, hope is certainly on the horizon, but we still have a long way to go before COVID-19 is fully under control.  Large-scale vaccination of the general population is unlikely to be completed before the end of this year, nor is our international border expected to be freely open before 2022.  What if this ‘COVID-19 environment’ lingers for longer, or the economic recovery (especially in the hardest hit sectors) isn’t as quick as desired?  The Christchurch earthquake experience has shown that the effects of psychological distress often don’t manifest until much later after the actual event.  The mental scars of COVID-19 may well endure for some time.


Of course, not all people’s mental health has been adversely affected to the same degree, but all of us will be feeling the effects in some way.

 


How do brands need to respond in 2021? 


That’s a big question off the back of a year in which many organisations were called out for how they responded – or didn’t respond – to support the ‘team of 5 million’. But the Dynata survey provides some clues on what these organisations need to be thinking of in 2021. 


For starters, those expressing greater levels of stress or anxiety in 2020 indicated they were looking for brands that demonstrate they care and who are transparent – essentially showing a sense of fairness in how they interact with their customers.  It seems like customer experience design teams have the perfect opportunity to make a case to really enhance the customer journey – eliminating any pain-points that just add to stress levels, while showing a humane side even if delivered via channels that aren’t classically ‘human’. 


At a time when communications budgets are coming under increasing scrutiny, it also feels the right time to invest wisely in building even deeper emotive connections with consumers.  Stories of human bonding and relationships have always been rich emotional material, but this has been heightened through this pandemic as our household bubbles have brought us closer together in many cases.


Trustpower has managed to tap into this with their most recent campaign 'Lost & Found', in which two people re-connect later in life. This story of human connection has performed well above industry norms in a number of advertising diagnostics, and achieved the highest recall of any Trustpower campaign over the past seven years. By reflecting what’s important to us as a society at the moment, Trustpower have succeeded in creating an emotional connection with their audience.


 

*Survey data was collected by Dynata in December 2020 and interviewed a nationally representative sample of 1000 New Zealanders.


Note, this article was first published as part of the 2020 Vision Project - a research project conducted by Cole Armstrong at NeuroSpot (cole@neurospot.co.nz) and Mark Finnegan at Clarity Insight (mark@clarityinsight.co.nz), looking into the impact that the COVID-19 pandemic was having on our community.

By Cole Armstrong 15 Mar, 2024
How do we create persuasive touchpoints that make a difference? By considering how simple ways of reframing our messages, using insights from psychology and behavioural science, can create greater motivation to act.
By Cole Armstrong 19 Jul, 2023
If I asked you to think back about an event, maybe a holiday or your last plane trip, your last dinner out, or a shopping experience, what would you remember? If I asked you to describe the experience, chances are you’d feel pretty confident about your memory, or at least some of the key elements. It turns out though, that confidence you’re feeling - it doesn’t relate to the accuracy of your memory. Faulty memories You’re not losing your mind, it’s just that your mind is playing tricks... sort of. We’ve spent quite a bit of time using eye tracking technology through our client projects. It enables us to see a participant’s behaviour – what they actually see and engage with - and the journeys people take through a physical environment, like a mall or retail setting. One project saw participants navigating a store with eye tracking glasses, getting items off a shopping list. As soon as they’d completed their journey, we asked which way they’d walked. Participants confidently recounted their route, and yet despite having literally just finished their journey, consistently missed out details. In another project we asked focus group participants about an image we’d shown them 20 minutes earlier. This elicited quite a spirited conversation about skin colour and how the illustrator’s choice of using a dark skin colour for all of the characters pointed to the racism of the illustrator and client. The thing was though, the characters weren’t dark skinned. Not one of them. And yet all of the participants convinced themselves this was the case. We’re certainly not the first to have encountered this phenomenon. There’s quite an active scene looking into issues with eyewitness testimony, and under which conditions our memory maybe unduly swayed or prone to errors. As you can imagine, the consequences of this could be huge. How can we stop getting it wrong? We’re not saying that our memories are always wrong – clearly that’s not the case! But there’s a rhyme and reason behind how our memory operates – both for good and bad. Our brains are BUSY. It’s like a hamster wheel going full on 24/7. Even when sleeping our brain is taking stock of the day, filing away moments into short and long-term memory. In order to look after us, our brains have to prioritise its resources, and it essentially takes shortcuts wherever possible, driving the same way to work each day, ordering the same coffee and so on. Imagine the fatigue we would face if we had to make every decision and action consciously, rather than letting our brains run the show. Which moments matter? So when our brain – a lazy but efficient workaholic – is sorting through events and the happenings of our day, it throws out the mundane, peripheral information it deems unimportant. It instead focuses on creating a highlight reel, and takes the moment of the events and experiences that were the most emotionally intensive, and the final moment. The concept is known as The Peak-End rule, and comes from Daniel Kahneman and his colleague Donald Redelmeier. Their 1996 study, which I am very pleased to not have been a participant in, involved 154 colonoscopy patients rating their level of discomfort at 60-second intervals throughout the procedure, as well as being asked to retrospectively describe how uncomfortable the procedure was. The level of discomfort during the procedure had no correlation to the discomfort they reported retrospectively. As an aside, they followed-up this study with yet more colonoscopy patients, who were split into two groups. One group had the standard procedure and experience of the camera being somewhat painfully removed, and the other had an amended experience that lasted three minutes longer, but which the camera removal was more uncomfortable than painful. The second group – with a longer procedure but less discomfort in the final moments – rated the procedure as less painful than the first group and were more likely to return for subsequent procedures. What was relevant was the peak level of discomfort experienced, as well as the level of discomfort in the final, end moments of the procedure. So what does this tell us? Firstly, that our memory is more fallible than we’d like to realise, more often made up of a series of stitched together moments and thoughts that can be revised and reinterpreted after the fact. Here’s an example - one of the best flights I’ve had was on Air New Zealand to Sydney – the first time we’d flown with my then-infant daughter (you can imagine our nerves!). At the end of the flight we apologised to the man next to us who’d (somehow) been working the whole 3.5 hours. We were suitably self-conscious at the amount of screaming he’d been subjected to but were greatly surprised at how nice he was – telling us that she’d been great, and how his (now teenage) children had subjected him through worse. Then some of the other passengers near us congratulated us on surviving a flight with an infant and how good a flyer she’d been – alongside the cabin staff who were making faces at our daughter to get her to laugh. It's honestly one of the best flights I remember – but clearly it wasn’t that pleasant at the time! The Peak-End rule in action – our actual and remembered experiences diverting wildly. How to apply these learnings to your work Don’t rely on people providing an accurate testimony of their experience. It’s more important to look at what a customer does vs what they say they do. When reviewing a process, journey or customer experience, focus on the moments that matter – the peak emotional moment and the final moment. This provides direction, stopping you from spreading your resources too thin and helping concentrate efforts on the moments most likely to have an impact. Be creative when designing experiences. Because our remembered experience is more important than our actual experience, you have a unique opportunity where you can creatively leave customers with an experience perhaps better than what they had… If you know there’s a frustration or issue during a process, while working on a fix for that, make sure your final moment knocks their socks off.
08 Nov, 2022
JCDecaux is one of the largest Out-of-Home businesses worldwide; in New Zealand it specialises in high quality Large Format and Airport touchpoints. JCDecaux is committed to delivering research-led validation to its partners regarding Out-of-Home effectiveness and looks for partners who can deliver neuro or behavioural methodologies that can deliver on this objective.
Show More
Share by: