\documentclass[10pt]{article}

\usepackage{fullpage}
\usepackage{setspace}
\usepackage{parskip}
\usepackage{titlesec}
\usepackage[section]{placeins}
\usepackage{xcolor}
\usepackage{breakcites}
\usepackage{lineno}
\usepackage{hyphenat}





\PassOptionsToPackage{hyphens}{url}
\usepackage[colorlinks = true,
            linkcolor = blue,
            urlcolor  = blue,
            citecolor = blue,
            anchorcolor = blue]{hyperref}
\usepackage{etoolbox}
\makeatletter
\patchcmd\@combinedblfloats{\box\@outputbox}{\unvbox\@outputbox}{}{%
  \errmessage{\noexpand\@combinedblfloats could not be patched}%
}%
\makeatother


\usepackage{natbib}




\renewenvironment{abstract}
  {{\bfseries\noindent{\abstractname}\par\nobreak}\footnotesize}
  {\bigskip}

\titlespacing{\section}{0pt}{*3}{*1}
\titlespacing{\subsection}{0pt}{*2}{*0.5}
\titlespacing{\subsubsection}{0pt}{*1.5}{0pt}


\usepackage{authblk}


\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage[space]{grffile}
\usepackage{latexsym}
\usepackage{textcomp}
\usepackage{longtable}
\usepackage{tabulary}
\usepackage{booktabs,array,multirow}
\usepackage{amsfonts,amsmath,amssymb}
\providecommand\citet{\cite}
\providecommand\citep{\cite}
\providecommand\citealt{\cite}
% You can conditionalize code for latexml or normal latex using this.
\newif\iflatexml\latexmlfalse
\providecommand{\tightlist}{\setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}\setlength{\parskip}{0pt}}%

\AtBeginDocument{\DeclareGraphicsExtensions{.pdf,.PDF,.eps,.EPS,.png,.PNG,.tif,.TIF,.jpg,.JPG,.jpeg,.JPEG}}

\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage[ngerman,english]{babel}



\usepackage{float}








\begin{document}

\title{The life outcomes of children during COVID-19:~ Exploring the protective
roles of the joint and nuclear families in India~~~~~~~~~~~~}



\author[1]{Gyanesh Kumar Tiwari}%
\author[2]{Raghavendra Prasad Tiwari}%
\author[3]{Rakesh Pandey}%
\author[4]{Bablu Ray}%
\author[5]{Abhigyan Dwivedi}%
\author[6]{Devaki Nandan Sharma}%
\author[7]{Pankaj Singh}%
\author[8]{Ajay Kumar Tiwari}%
\affil[1]{Department of Psychology, School of Humanities \& Social Sciences, Doctor Harisingh Gour Vishwavidyalaya, Sagar, 470003, Madhya Pradesh, India, Email: gyaneshpsychology@gmail.com}%
\affil[2]{Vice-Chancellor, Doctor Harisingh Gour Vishwavidyalaya, Sagar, 470003, Madhya Pradesh, India, Email: mzurpt@gmail.com}%
\affil[3]{Department of Psychology, Faculty of Social Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, 221005, Uttar Pradesh, India, Email: rpandeybhu@gmail.com}%
\affil[4]{Department of Linguistics, School of Languages, Doctor Harisingh Gour Vishwavidyalaya, Sagar, 470003, Madhya Pradesh, India, Email: babluray@gmail.com}%
\affil[5]{Department of Linguistics, School of Languages, Doctor Harisingh Gour Vishwavidyalaya, Sagar, 470003, Madhya Pradesh, India, Email: abhigyan5983@gmail.com}%
\affil[6]{Department of Psychology, School of Humanities \& Social Sciences, Doctor Harisingh Gour Vishwavidyalaya, Sagar, 470003, Madhya Pradesh, India Email: devesh1110@gmail.com  }%
\affil[7]{Department of History, School of Humanities \& Social Sciences, Doctor Harisingh Gour Vishwavidyalaya, Sagar, 470003, Madhya Pradesh, India, Email: drpankajsingh77@gmail.com}%
\affil[8]{Naisubah Institute of Mental Health and Behavioral Sciences, Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India, Email: ajay.naisubah@gmail.com}%


\vspace{-1em}



  
  \date{June 14, 2024}


\begingroup
\let\center\flushleft
\let\endcenter\endflushleft
\maketitle
\endgroup





\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{abstract}
Using a qualitative approach, we explored the protective roles of joint
and nuclear families in shaping the life outcomes of children during
COVID-19. Sixteen full-time mothers of children aged 9-12 years (8 each
from joint and nuclear families) were interviewed~and thematic analysis
revealed five major themes viz., negative impacts, differences in
positive engagement, emotional protective roles, promotion of positive
health habits and activity management. Findings suggest that joint
families carry more resources to positively engage their children in
creativity, studies, exercise and entertainment as compared to nuclear
families. Contrary to nuclear families, joint families gave emphasis to
resolve emotional grievances, promote positive emotional engagement and
support emotionally. The joint and nuclear families also differed in
attending food habits, health grievances and physical exercise of
children. The joint families played more positive roles in managing play
behaviours, sleep habits, television watching and other activities of
children compared to nuclear families.

Keywords: children; COVID-19; joint family; life outcomes; nuclear
family; thematic analysis.%
\end{abstract}%



\sloppy


Cite as:

\par\null



\section*{Introduction}

{\label{222682}}

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused significant influences on the lives of
people of all age groups around the globe. Its seriousness can be
understood in terms of the worldwide infected (17, 106, 007) and death
(668, 910) cases of COVID-19 by July 31, 2020 (World Health
Organization, 2020). Due to the unprecedented and unparallel
restrictions, fear and uncertainty, COVID-19 has created an
indescribable situation of anguish and pain in the whole of humanity. It
has created severe mass distress, anxiety, uncertainty, panic and
challenges to the life outcomes of children and adults (Jiao et al.,
2020; Tiwari, Singh, et al., 2020). United Nations Organization (2020)
has observed that children are one of the biggest sufferers of this
pandemic and its negative influences may be significantly shaped by the
economic and social conditions of families and their health conditions.
Children are facing acute availability to the needed resources, social
support and services which may lead them to bear the pain of
psychological distress, violence, abuse, neglect and exploitation which,
in turn, may badly affect their development and well-being (Avenue et
al., 2020; Lee, 2020). These negative consequences for children may go
beyond imagination since the current pandemic is more traumatic,
pervasive and uncertain (Galea et al., 2020; Tiwari, Pandey, et al.,
2020; Tiwari, Rai, et al., 2020).

The family acts as an important and universal agency which provides care
for children. Various forms of families with different structures and
functions are found. One typology is a joint family and the nuclear
family. According to Merriam-Webster Dictionary (2020a), a joint family
is a consanguineal unit that includes two or more generations of kindred
related through either paternal or maternal line who maintain a common
residence and are subject to common social, economic and religious
regulations. A nuclear family is defined as a group that consists only
of parents and children (Merriam-Webster Dictionary, 2020b). The joint
family system is the major vehicle of collective values which are guided
by shared identity, deep attachments, unique socialization,
emotionality,~ meaning, relationships, concern for others,
interdependence and relatively permanent relationships (Cai et al.,
2013; Gaines et al., 1997; Hoshino-Browne et al., 2005; Scabini \&
Manzi, 2010). Parallel to this, a nuclear family is based on
individualistic values and lays emphasis on individual identity,
independence, self-esteem and personal achievements (Cai et al., 2013;
Gupta \& Sukamto, 2020; Markus \& Kitayama, 1991).

Dissimilar life outcomes have been linked with the two-family systems.
For example, a joint family is more supportive for children to achieve
psychological well-being than a nuclear family (Gul et al., 2017). The
differences in the outcomes of children of the two family systems have
been assumed to be the results of dissimilarities in parent relations
and social relations (Bernardi et al., 2013; Mackay, 2005), kin rivalry
(Kreppner, 2013) and parental resources, the mental health of parents,
parent-child relations, quality of relationships between parents and
parental discrepancy (Fomby \& Cherlin, 2007; Y. Sun \& Li, 2002). A
study has shown that the children of joint families show better
performance on the various components of psychological well-being such
as autonomy, environmental mastery, personal growth, positive relations,
purpose in life and self-acceptance as compared to their nuclear family
counterparts (Gul et al., 2017). Children from joint families show lower
behavioural problems (Kauts \& Kaur, 2016) and higher emotional maturity
(Kondiba \& Hari, 2018).

There is an explicit gap in the literature as previous studies on
children have been limited to less severe natural or man-made
adversities on the life outcomes of children (Klein et al., 2009; Lee,
2020; United Nations Organization, 2020). It has been argued that the
psychological impacts of COVID-19 for the general population has been
well-documented and there is a lack of studies involving parents,
families and children (Brooks et al., 2020; Jiao et al., 2020). The
distress of the current pandemic has severely influenced the life
outcome of children similar to adults (Wang et al., 2020). The study of
children is also important for other reasons. Families differ in
providing care and support to their children. For example, a joint
family may provide more live, long-term and varied positive stimulations
emanating from the dynamics of relationships among children, siblings,
parents, grandparents and other relatives. On the other hand, a nuclear
family may become naturally restrictive and less live and short-term
stimulating due to the limited size and variety of relationships.

The unprecedented challenges created by the current pandemic may have
exerted its impacts on the functioning of different family systems and
individuals including children in a novel, severe and less-known manner.
It compelled the authors to choose a qualitative research design for
capturing the roles of joint and nuclear families in providing
protections to their children from the ill-consequences of COVID-19.
Qualitative methods have been recommended to be useful in situations
where there is no guiding framework, theory, measures and the phenomenon
is novel (Creswell, 2014). Due to the nationwide restrictions of
lockdown and quarantine in India to prevent further spreading of
COVID-19, the basic and detailed information regarding the behaviours
and experiences of children were not possible to measure. Thus, parents,
especially full-time mothers remain the chief source of data regarding
their children. A full-time mother was the incessant primary caregiver
from birth to the present (Ahirwar et al., 2019). In some previous
studies, collecting data from the parents, especially full-time mothers
of younger children have been reported to be useful (Ahirwar et al.,
2019; Tiwari, Singh, et al., 2020). The current study chose children
between 9 years to 12 years. This age group was chosen since the
children of this age group remain dependent on their parents and other
family members for their satisfaction of needs and care to some extent.
Besides, these children are able to speak out their demands, show
understandable emotional and behavioural responses. This makes their
behaviour comprehensive, stable and patterned. Besides, these children
also understand the necessity and compulsion of the adherence to the
restrictions of the lockdown. It has been suggested that the children of
this age group develop some sense of life goals, able to share their
positive and negative experiences with their caregivers and reflect some
understanding of life realities and broader human collectives (Tiwari,
Singh, et al., 2020). In this backdrop, the present study aims to
explore the protective roles of joint and nuclear families in shaping
the life outcomes of children with age ranging between 9 years to 12
years during the restrictions of COVID-19 through a qualitative research
design. The telephonic mode of data collection was adopted since
face-to-face interaction was restricted due to restrictions of lockdown.

\section*{Methods}

\subsection*{Research Design}

The current study employed a qualitative research design. The data were
collected through a telephonic semi-structured interview protocol to
come up with a deeper understanding of the full-time mothers'
descriptions and experiences of the happenings and restrictions of the
pandemic, and the role of two-family systems regarding their children.
The study used a constructivist approach which refers to a dialogical
exchange between the interviewers and interviewees to the experiences
and meanings held by them (Levitt et al., 2017, 2018).~

\subsection*{Participants}

Initially, 27 full-time mothers from 15 joint and 12 nuclear families
were contacted on their phones through a snowball technique and asked to
take part in the study. Out of these, only 16 mothers with the age range
between 33 years to 45 years gave their telephonic consent. Eight
mothers were from joint families (Mean Age = 41.63, SD = 2.62) and the
rest 8 were from nuclear families (Mean Age = 37.50, SD = 3.07). The age
range of their children was 9 years to 12 years (Mean Age = 10.66, SD =
1.17). The sample was selected from the Indian cities such as Sagar, New
Delhi, Varanasi and Lucknow (See Table 1).\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.98\columnwidth]{figures/Table-Authorea-17-08-2020/Table-Authorea-17-08-2020}

\end{center}
\end{figure}

\subsection*{Recruitment of the
Participant}\label{recruitment-of-the-participant}

There were eight researchers in the team who had a good knowledge of the
qualitative research and the socio-cultural realities of the Indian
society. The differences in age, experiences and academic background
were minimized through a regular discussion among the researchers. Due
to restrictions of a nationwide lockdown, the interviews were conducted
through telephonic calls. The study was conducted during June and July,
2020. The participants were not reimbursed any compensation for their
participation. The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the
University {[}BLINDED FOR REVIEW{]}. The participants belonged to the
middle-class families mostly adhering to the Hindu religion.

Three inclusion criteria were adopted to choose the participants: a
participant should be a full-time mother, living in either a joint
family or nuclear family, and has at least one child with the age range
between 9 years to 12 years. The study began only after their telephonic
consent. The participants were briefed about the basic goals of the
study. A purposive sampling method was used as it is appropriate when
the goal is to inquire about the experiences more relevant to the
phenomenon of interest (Creswell, 2014). We chose only full-time mothers
since they represent an information-rich group and were able to describe
and reflect upon the behaviours and experiences of their children
(Patton, 2015). Guest et al. (2006) have suggested that a sample size of
12 is sufficient for qualitative study using purposive sampling.
Accordingly, 16 full-time mothers were chosen through purposive
sampling.

\subsection*{Data Collection}\label{data-collection}

A semi-structured interview protocol was used to collect the data
through telephonic calls. The structure of the protocol was developed as
per the study goals which were identified in the beginning. The
interview started with some preliminary queries about the causes and
impacts of COVID-19 on human life. The mean length of the interviews was
70.14 min (\emph{Range} = 60-81 min). The questions were framed on the
impacts of COVID-19 on life, the methods of engagement, management of
emotional issues, promotion of health habits and management of the
activities of the children by the joint and nuclear families during the
pandemic. The contents of the interviews were audio-taped and their
verbatim transcriptions were prepared.

\subsection*{Data-Analysis}\label{data-analysis}

The thematic analysis method was used to analyze data which entails
organization and preparation, obtaining a general sense, coding,
generating categories or themes and interpreting the data (Braun \&
Clarke, 2006). Codes were assigned to each participant to ascertain
confidentiality. The reliability of the coding was maintained by
multiple checking and rechecking of the data and codes. The multiple
reading and re-reading of the transcriptions helped to increase the
familiarity of the interview contents, inherent meaning and useful
insights (Barbour, 2001). A priori criteria were adopted for generating
codes: the impacts of COVID-19 on life, the methods of engaging,
resolving emotional issues, promoting health habits and managing the
activities of the children. According to the suggestions of Guest et al.
(2012), these generated codes were organized, merged and re-categorized
to identifying relevant codes. Saturation was recorded after completing
12 interviews when no new themes and codes generated from further
interviews consistent with the research questions (Saunders et al.,
2018). Two more interviews were conducted each from joint and nuclear
families to verify the saturation. An appropriate understanding of the
preliminary interview protocol was developed by initial discussions
among the authors. ~

A careful assessment and reviewing of the codes helped to incorporate
the relevant modifications. The revisions of the coding framework helped
to generate appropriate codes and keep out irrelevant codes. An
iterative approach was employed until the complete analysis to enhance
the quality of coding. A gap of two weeks was made between the initial
and final scrutiny, and review of the transcriptions and codes to
minimize the distortions caused by over-involvement in the data as per
the suggestions of the earlier researchers (Braun \& Clarke, 2016; Guest
et al., 2012). It helped to generate the final codes with a set of
appropriate themes. Recurrent discussions, regular evaluation of the
data, focus on the insights and meanings, consistent analysis,
preparation of a codebook and attending the evidence helped to maintain
the methodological integrity.~~~~~

\section*{Results}\label{results}

Five themes were generated: negative impacts of COVID-19, differences in
positive engagement, emotional protective roles, promotion of positive
health habits and activity management.

\subsection*{Theme 1: Negative impacts of
COVID-19}\label{theme-1-negative-impacts-of-covid-19}

The uncertainties, suddenness and restrictions of lockdown had negative
impacts on the lives of the children of both the families. The major
negative impacts of the pandemic for the children of the joint families
were disturbed life schedule, loss of happiness, extreme anxiety,
altered work-life and burden due to uncertainties of COVID-19.~~~

The experiences of boredom and disturbed lifestyle were reported by the
majority of the mothers of joint and nuclear families alike.

The pandemic has made our life very boring. It has also completely
disturbed our routine of life. (J\_M\_2)

It has affected our life in many ways. It has changed our routine and
schedule of all work and made our life boring. It has also changed our
food habits as my husband and children are foodie. I have to keep on
cooking different items. (N\_M\_3)

Decreased happiness and other positive life outcomes were also commonly
reported.

Our happiness has decreased.~ (J\_F\_3)

Our self-confidence and quality of life have decreased significantly. It
has confined us in a house, shaken our confidence of control and virtual
house arrest. (N\_M\_6)

Extreme fear and anxiety were frequently described by them.

We have to take extra care of our children and in-laws. It has also
given unwanted fear and anxiety. (J\_F\_3)

It has also developed a sense of alertness in social interactions.
(J\_M\_3)

We frequently experience fear extreme of negative consequences, fear of
infection and terror experiences. More badly, there is a strong fear of
re-infection. (N\_M\_6)

Burden, financial loss and disturbed work-life were also reported by
most of the mothers.

It has significantly affected our business. (J\_M\_2)

We had a business. We were selling breakfast like items. It sufficed to
satisfy the need for bread and butter of more than 10 members and 2
employees. Now, we have become jobless. We are now burdened with debt.
(J\_M\_7)

The care of family members has become a burden now. We have to engage
our child without our wish. It causes the loss of work and makes us
frustrated. (N\_M\_6)

Loss of study of children was another negative consequence of the
pandemic.

Students are facing great loss in their studies. They are not paying
that much attention like in class. (J\_F\_2)

It has disturbed the study of children. (J\_F\_3)

\subsection*{Theme 2: Differences in positive
engagement}\label{theme-2-differences-in-positive-engagement}

Engagements in online classes, games, watching television (TV) and
playing with mobile, household works, playing with the elders and
siblings, listening stories from grandparents, studies in the
supervision of grandparents and creative activities such as drawing,
painting or sketching were the methods of engagement of children in the
joint families.~

Most of them reported that their children have to regularly attend
online classes.

They are busy taking their online classes and doing homework or
assignments. Children are almost busy in playing online games on phone
or watching TV but we restrict watching excessive TV or using mobiles as
theses may harm their eyes. (J\_M\_2)

Instead of letting them watch unnecessary TV and mobiles, we engage them
in helping us in household works. (J\_F\_2)

Playing with family members and involvement in some positive behaviours
were another method of engagement in joint families.

They are very happy about playing with siblings or cousins and
grandparents. (J\_M\_2)

When they are free they also play Ludo or crack jokes with their
grandparents. Sometimes, they listen to stories from them and they get
help in the study. (J\_F\_2)

Children of the joint families were also engaged in some household
tasks.

They do small household tasks such as dusting, watering plants and
helping in the kitchen especially when the maid is on leave. They also
help us in serving foods to their grandparents. (J\_F\_2)

Sometimes they help their father and uncles in outdoor activities.
(J\_M\_3)

They also help their grandmother in giving food, water and medicines.
(J\_F\_3)

Joint families also engaged their children in some creative tasks and
activities.

We also engage our children in learning drawing, painting or sketches
through which they can learn something new. (J\_F\_3)

They are also learning new skills including growing vegetables and
learning to cook meals. (J\_M\_3)

They also spend time with their grandparents by gossiping. (J\_M\_5)

Nuclear families differed significantly in their methods of engagements
of their children during the pandemic. Most of them reported that the
online class was one compulsory engagement. It was almost similar to the
children of joint families. One departure was reported in more reliance
on the children of these families on TV, mobiles and indoor games.
Besides, sleeping and lesser engagement in creative activities of
drawing and paintings were also reported by the mothers of nuclear
families.

After their classes, they get busy watching TV or playing games in the
mobile phone. (N\_M\_1)

Along with watching TV, they also play games on mobiles or indoor games
with their siblings and us. (N\_F\_1)

After lunch, they sleep for at least one hour regularly and play with us
or alone in the evening. (N\_M\_6)

Sometimes, we engage them in drawing and colouring pictures and
paintings. (N\_M\_4)

\subsection*{Theme 3: Differences in emotional protective
roles}\label{theme-3-differences-in-emotional-protective-roles}

Enhanced care, close supervision by the elders, support and positive
engagement in play, health and other activities were the methods through
which the emotional support was extended to the children in the joint
families.

We tell them to wash their hands regularly and frequently with soaps or
hand wash. They have understood now that they have to be very careful
during this time. (J\_M\_2)

We manage the emotional issues of our children by telling not to be
afraid in this situation. We motivate them to take care of personal
hygiene such as using a mask, washing hands or sanitizing them several
times. (J\_F\_2)

They also get emotional support from grandparents or elders and because
of this support they don't get panic. (J\_M\_2)

Due to the emotional support of our joint family, we feel protected.
(J\_F\_2)

My children are always engaged with their grandparents and other family
members so there hardly arise any emotional issues. (J\_M\_5)

We motivate them to focus on their studies and to learn new things.
(J\_M\_3)

The nuclear families significantly differed in managing the emotional
problems of their children. They promoted more engagement of their
children through indoor games, TV and mobile and irregular activities
and thus, could provide limited emotional support to their children.

We motivate them for frequent hand wash and sanitize their hands and not
to touch anything unnecessarily. (N\_F\_5)

We play indoor games with them such as ludo, chess and carom to engage
them. (N\_F\_6)

We engage him in activities such as TV, games and mobile games.
(N\_M\_6)

Sometimes, the parents from the nuclear families reported it difficult
to manage the feelings of their children.

He is younger and it is very difficult for us to manage and engage him.
He reports negative feelings of boredom. He is younger so makes the
situation worse. Sometimes, he does irregular activities. (N\_M\_6)

They show rigidity and boredom. We make them fear that if they go
outside they will become ill. (N\_F\_7)

\subsection*{Theme 4: Differences in the promotion of positive health
habits}\label{theme-4-differences-in-the-promotion-of-positive-health-habits}

Healthy diets, exercise, games and sports, protective habits and use of
some Ayurvedic medicines were the means through which health of the
children in joint families was promoted.

I try to take care of the health of our all members including children
and older persons of our house. We include fresh vegetables in our
meals. Fruits such as apple, orange and banana are among our daily
needs. Children are served sometimes fruit chat and juices. Taking milk
before going to sleep is compulsory for especially children and elders
of our family. (J\_M\_2)

We also try to keep them physically active in engaging them with doing
physical exercise and play games. We also ask them to do yoga exercises.
(J\_F\_4)

We also use medicine for boosting immunity. We also take steam
occasionally. (J\_F\_2)

We have adopted Ayurvedic formulations nowadays. We use ginger and
garlic while cooking foods for better immunity. (J\_M\_5)

Apart from some similarities such as healthy diets, exercise etc. in the
promotion of positive health of their children, the nuclear families
imposed more restrictions on outdoor games with friends and permitted
their children only to practice Yoga, play indoor games and observe
restrictions during the pandemic.

I make him practice yoga in the morning. He practices Anulom-Vilom (a
yogic exercise). We have to play with him. We involve him in games
regularly. (N\_M\_6)

We do not allow our children to play outside and to avoid playing with
their friends and neighbourhood children. It is safe and secure. N\_M\_4

\subsection*{Theme 5: Differences in activity
management}\label{theme-5-differences-in-activity-management}

Restrictions on the excessive TV watching, mobile play and more emphasis
on the involvement in household tasks, team play, storytelling and
creative activities were the means through which the activities of
children in joint families were managed.~~

We tell them to watch TV or play with mobiles too much. (J\_M\_2)

We have restricted and limited the time for watching TV. (J\_F\_3)

We also engage them in doing little household things so that they can be
physically active and learn managing household items. (J\_F\_4)

Children also play Ludo in free time or sometimes they gossip with their
siblings, cousins and grandmother. (J\_M\_3)

In the evening, our children assemble in front of their grandparents and
listen to stories. (J\_F\_3)

We also engage them in paintings, make craft art and practice dance.
(J\_F\_2)

We also manage their activities by involving them in teaching the
traditional family cultures and rituals. (J\_F\_4)

They also spend time with their grandparents in the morning or evening
walks. (J\_M\_5)

The mothers of nuclear families relied more on some restrictive methods
to manage the activities of their children. For instance, allowing TV
watching or playing with mobiles, in-door creative activities, playing
indoor games and household activities were chief methods.

We manage his activities by allowing him to watch his favourite TV
serials, cartoons or recipes of cooking. (N\_M\_4)

We also engage them in doing the things of their choice or hobby such as
painting works, art and craftworks. (N\_F\_5)

We also tell them moral stories and cracking jokes. (N\_F\_6)

We motivate to involve them in playing indoor games such as ludo, carom
or chess on phone. (N\_F\_1) (N\_M\_4)

We also manage his activities by playing with him or gossiping or
discussing something related to his study or about his friends.
(N\_M\_1)

Sometimes, we also engage them in doing little household things.
(N\_M\_4)

\section*{Discussion}\label{discussion}

The findings of the study proved the contention that the perceived
consequences of COVID-19 were equally distressful to both the mothers of
the joint and nuclear families for their children. There were
significant differences in the way the two families managed their
perceived threats to life, well-being and overall existence caused by
the pandemic. It appears that joint families provide for a broader
temporal dimension, experiential resources and buffer mechanisms for
moderating the negative consequences of the pandemic as compared to the
nuclear families. The presence of larger members in the joint families
provides for a positive and dependable source of social stimulation,
larger experience base, care, positive stories of life, control
mechanisms and sources of interpretation which eased protection of their
children. A joint family in India is a strength which may bear the
negative consequences of modernity. Conversely, the nuclear families may
have been gripped by over-alertness and lack of human resources to deal
with the flow of negative attributions and emotions arising out of the
uncertainties of the pandemic.

A joint family in India has been suggested to be the chief vehicle of
collective values comprising interdependence, mutuality, a collective
self and community-orientation (Choi \& So, 2019; Tiwari, Kashyap, et
al., 2020). Contrarily, a nuclear family is born out of the influence of
postmodern lifestyle, the proliferation of materialistic and
individualistic values, achievement-orientation, and a search for better
opportunities for education and employment. The two value systems may
cultivate two distinct modes of relationships, care and the life goals
which may have characteristically different impacts on the various life
outcomes of their children. The joint families were reported to carry
more resources to engage positively their children in creativity,
studies, exercise and entertainment as compared to the nuclear families.
Likewise, the joint families appeared to resolve easily the emotional
grievances, promote positive emotional engagement and support
emotionally as compared to the nuclear families. Significant differences
were observed in their attending the food habits, health grievances and
physical exercise of children. The joint families played more positive
roles in managing play behaviours, health habits, use of mass media and
other activities of children than nuclear families. Thus, the diversity
in the patterns of moral, emotional, interpersonal, temporal and other
resources may have made a significant difference in the experiences of
good and bad times faced by children of joint and nuclear families.
Besides, these resources may have led dissimilar experiences of
satisfaction, care, play, belongingness, learning, creativity, positive
involvement, support, discipline, morality and emotion regulation for
children of the two families.

It was noticeable that the current pandemic equally had negative impacts
on the members of the joint and nuclear families (Theme 1). The mothers
of both the families reported almost similar perceived negative
consequences. The uncertain, novel and fatal nature of the pandemic give
birth to a set of epidemic-like psycho-social processes which may spread
at a faster pace in a variety of forms to individuals and collectives
(Strong, 1990). This psycho-social epidemic is characterized by fear,
explanation and moralization, and the epidemic of action which may be
even more severe in the face of poor knowledge (Strong, 1990). This
psycho-social epidemic may carry suspicion, insecurity, irrationality,
misinformation, panic, stigmatization, avoidance, segregation, abuse and
theories of the origin of disease and its effects and metaphysical
explanations among educated as well as illiterate people (Tiwari, Rai,
et al., 2020; Weber \& Goldmeier, 1983).

According to Illness Perceptions Theory (Leventhal et al., 1998), the
stressful situations involve representations, coping responses and
appraisal of coping outcomes. The stress may be perceived more severe if
the identity, cause, timeline, consequences and curability
representations do not match with the current normative guidelines of
the known epidemics (Leventhal et al., 1998). The current pandemic may
have lowered the self-efficacy of the participants which refers to a
person's beliefs in his/her abilities to accomplish a task in a given
situation according to some accepted criteria (Bandura, 1977). It may be
argued that the current pandemic may have lowered the self-efficacy and
culminated in their perceived psychological distress (de Zwart et al.,
2009). The restrictions of the pandemic have reduced social interaction.
Being human, all individuals carry a strong need for interactions to
make sense of their world, to get satisfaction and happiness, and to
live well (J. Sun et al., 2019). Due to the lack of similar past
experiences, the loss of social connection may have caused them to
perceive stress. Similar to the findings of the present study, many
earlier researchers have reported negative psychological consequences to
be linked with the current pandemic. For example, COVID-19 has been
found to cause confusion, stress, anxiety, restrictions, fear of
infection, frustration, boredom, loss and stigma (Brooks et al., 2020;
Racine et al., 2020), disturbance in the emotional attachment (Jiao et
al., 2020) and lowered well-being among children and adults (Avenue et
al., 2020; Ghosh et al., 2020; Lee, 2020).

Differences in positive engagement, emotional protective roles,
promotion of positive health habits and activity management of the joint
and nuclear families have been found (Themes 2, 3, 4 \& 5). Along with
some similarities, the two families differed significantly in the way
they engaged their children during the pandemic. The joint families were
reported to engage their children through play with elders and siblings,
storytelling by grandparents and creative activities while the nuclear
families heavily relied on the use of television, mobile and indoor
games. These differences in positive engagement methods of the two
families may be due to the differences in the available resources in the
form of elders, multiple relationships and temporal dimensions. It has
been argued that the joint families provide for more alternatives for
interactions, play and creative activities for children (Bisht \& Sinha,
1981).

The elders have long and rich experiences of life, positive stories,
wisdom, emotional maturity and forgiveness (Ghaemmaghami et al., 2011;
Hayward \& Krause, 2013) and carry more agreeableness and lesser
neuroticism (Steiner et al., 2012). Elders may also carry generativity
which involves finding meaningful work and contributing to the
development of others through activities such as volunteering, mentoring
and raising children (Erikson \& Erikson, 1997). These resources in the
form of elders in the joint families may have supported them to exercise
more positive engagements of their children than the nuclear families.
For the parents of nuclear families, dealing with the restrictions of
the pandemic particularly may be more stressful who have to make a
balance among their personal life, work, raising children and loneliness
(Spinelli et al., 2020). These challenges may have reduced the
psychological resources in the hands of the parents of nuclear families
to engage and protect their children more positively.

\section*{Summary and Implications}\label{summary-and-implications}

~~~~~~~~~~~ The joint and nuclear families showed dissimilar resources
and mechanisms for dealing with the issues of their children during the
restrictions of COVID-19. The joint families evinced a set of robust
positive resources, mechanisms, temporal dimensions, relational
resources, knowledge and relevant support to deal with the task of
engaging their children. Conversely, the nuclear families showed
dissimilar resources and mechanisms which were characterized by slight
restrictions, over-alertness, lack of broader experiences and
socio-emotional repertoire. Moreover, the joint family is said to carry
collective values which reflect more support, cooperation, care,
interdependence, discipline, cultural knowledge and conflict resolution
mechanisms. Conversely, a nuclear family carries individualistic values
which catalyze independence, narrow temporal dimension, individualism,
achievement-orientation, limited support and cooperation and independent
self-construal. The differences in these resources and mechanisms may be
argued to surface in their dissimilar abilities to protect and engage
their children during the current pandemic.~

The findings showed that living in a joint family is beneficial and
protective for both individuals and society. Further explorations are
needed to understand the positive mechanisms of different types of
families. This will help to understand policymakers, practitioners and
researchers to chart out appropriate and effective intervention plans
and policies to cater to the needs of the different types of family
systems prevailing in different societies. The assessment of the impacts
of the current pandemic may be carried out in terms of different family
structures, groups and collectives which will help develop insights to
understand their moderating impacts. This understanding may help to
provide better resources for the positive development of individuals and
groups.

~

\section*{References}\label{references}

Ahirwar, G., Tiwari, G. K., \& Rai, P. K. (2019). Exploring the nature,
attributes and consequences of forgiveness in children: A qualitative
study. \emph{Psychological Thought}, \emph{12}(2), 214--231.
https://doi.org/10.5964/psyct.v12i2.347

Avenue, H. R. W. \textbar{} 350 F., York, 34th Floor \textbar{} New, \&
t 1.212.290.4700, N. 10118-3299 U. \textbar{}. (2020, April 9).
\emph{COVID-19's Devastating Impact on Children}. Human Rights Watch.
https://www.hrw.org/news/2020/04/09/covid-19s-devastating-impact-children

Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of
behavioral change. \emph{Psychological Review}, \emph{84}(2), 191--215.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191

Barbour, R. S. (2001). Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative
research: A case of the tail wagging the dog? \emph{BMJ},
\emph{322}(7294), 1115--1117. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.322.7294.1115

Bernardi, F., H\selectlanguage{ngerman}ärkönen, J., Boertien, D., Rydell, A., Bastaits, K., \&
Mortelmans, D. (2013). \emph{Effects of family forms and dynamics on
children's well-being and life chances: Literature review}. Undefined.
/paper/Effects-of-family-forms-and-dynamics-on-children\%27s-Bernardi-H\%C3\%A4rk\%C3\%B6nen/09aad957d844df88bc9672fff8f2e30ab1b9908c

Bisht, S., \& Sinha, D. (1981). Socialization, family, and psychological
differentiation. In D. Sinha, \emph{Socialization of the Indian Child}
(pp. 41--54). Concept Publishing Co.

Braun, V., \& Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology.
\emph{Qualitative Research in Psychology}, \emph{3}(2), 77--101.
https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Braun, V., \& Clarke, V. (2016). (Mis)conceptualising themes, thematic
analysis, and other problems with Fugard and Potts' (2015) sample-size
tool for thematic analysis. \emph{International Journal of Social
Research Methodology}, \emph{19}(6), 739--743.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2016.1195588

Brooks, S. K., Webster, R. K., Smith, L. E., Woodland, L., Wessely, S.,
Greenberg, N., \& Rubin, G. J. (2020). The psychological impact of
quarantine and how to reduce it: Rapid review of the evidence. \emph{The
Lancet}, \emph{395}(10227), 912--920.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30460-8

Cai, H., Sedikides, C., \& Jiang, L. (2013). Familial Self as a Potent
Source of Affirmation: Evidence From China. \emph{Social Psychological
and Personality Science}, \emph{4}(5), 529--537.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550612469039

Choi, J., \& So, J. (2019). Effects of self-affirmation on message
persuasiveness: A cross-cultural study of the U.S. and South Korea.
\emph{Asian Journal of Communication}, \emph{29}(2), 128--148.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01292986.2018.1555265

Creswell, J. W. (2014). \emph{Research design: Qualitative,
quantitative, and mixed methods approaches} (4th ed). SAGE Publications.

de Zwart, O., Veldhuijzen, I. K., Elam, G., Aro, A. R., Abraham, T.,
Bishop, G. D., Voeten, H. A. C. M., Richardus, J. H., \& Brug, J.
(2009). Perceived Threat, Risk Perception, and Efficacy Beliefs Related
to SARS and Other (Emerging) Infectious Diseases: Results of an
International Survey. \emph{International Journal of Behavioral
Medicine}, \emph{16}(1), 30--40.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12529-008-9008-2

Erikson, E. H., \& Erikson, J. M. (1997). \emph{The life cycle
completed} (Extended version). W.W. Norton.

Fomby, P., \& Cherlin, A. J. (2007). Family Instability and Child
Well-Being. \emph{American Sociological Review}, \emph{72}(2), 181--204.
https://doi.org/10.1177/000312240707200203

Gaines, S. O., Marelich, W. D., Bledsoe, K. L., Steers, W. N.,
Henderson, M. C., Granrose, C. S., Barájas, L., Hicks, D., Lyde, M.,
Takahashi, Y., Yum, N., Ríos, D. I., García, B. F., Farris, K. R., \&
Page, M. S. (1997). Links between race/ethnicity and cultural values as
mediated by racial/ethnic identity and moderated by gender.
\emph{Journal of Personality and Social Psychology}, \emph{72}(6),
1460--1476. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.6.1460

Galea, S., Merchant, R. M., \& Lurie, N. (2020). The Mental Health
Consequences of COVID-19 and Physical Distancing: The Need for
Prevention and Early Intervention. \emph{JAMA Internal Medicine}.
https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.1562

Ghaemmaghami, P., Allemand, M., \& Martin, M. (2011). Forgiveness in
Younger, Middle-Aged and Older Adults: Age and Gender Matters.
\emph{Journal of Adult Development}, \emph{18}(4), 192--203.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10804-011-9127-x

Ghosh, R., Dubey, M. J., Chatterjee, S., \& Dubey, S. (2020). Impact of
COVID -19 on children: Special focus on the psychosocial aspect.
\emph{Minerva Pediatrica}, \emph{72}(3).
https://doi.org/10.23736/S0026-4946.20.05887-9

Guest, G., Bunce, A., \& Johnson, L. (2006). How Many Interviews Are
Enough?: An Experiment with Data Saturation and Variability. \emph{Field
Methods}, \emph{18}(1), 59--82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903

Guest, G., MacQueen, K. M., \& Namey, E. E. (2012). \emph{Applied
thematic analysis}. Sage Publications.

Gul, N., Ghani, N., Alvi, S. M., Kazmi, F., \& Shah, A. A. (2017).
Family system's role in the psychological well-being of the children.
\emph{Khyber Medical University Journal}, \emph{9}(1), 29--32.

Gupta, M., \& Sukamto, K. (2020). Cultural Communicative Styles: The
Case of India and Indonesia. \emph{International Journal of Society,
Culture \& Language}, \emph{0}, 1--16.

Hayward, R. D., \& Krause, N. (2013). Trajectories of change in
dimensions of forgiveness among older adults and their association with
religious commitment. \emph{Mental Health, Religion \& Culture},
\emph{16}(6). https://doi.org/10.1080/13674676.2012.712955

Hoshino-Browne, E., Zanna, A. S., Spencer, S. J., Zanna, M. P.,
Kitayama, S., \& Lackenbauer, S. (2005). On the cultural guises of
cognitive dissonance: The case of Easterners and Westerners.
\emph{Journal of Personality and Social Psychology}, \emph{89}(3),
294--310. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.89.3.294

Jiao, W. Y., Wang, L. N., Liu, J., Fang, S. F., Jiao, F. Y.,
Pettoello-Mantovani, M., \& Somekh, E. (2020). Behavioral and Emotional
Disorders in Children during the COVID-19 Epidemic. \emph{The Journal of
Pediatrics}, S002234762030336X.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2020.03.013

Kauts, A., \& Kaur, B. (2016). A study of children's behaviour in
relation to family environment and technological exposure at pre primary
stage. \emph{MIER Journal of Educational Studies, Trends and Practices},
\emph{1}(2), Article 2.
http://www.mierjs.in/ojs/index.php/mjestp/article/view/12

Klein, T. P., Devoe, E. R., Miranda-Julian, C., \& Linas, K. (2009).
Young children's responses to September 11th: The New York City
experience. \emph{Infant Mental Health Journal}, \emph{30}(1), 1--22.
https://doi.org/10.1002/imhj.20200

Kondiba, B. V., \& Hari, K. S. (2018). Emotional maturity among joint
family and nuclear family children. \emph{The International Journal of
Indian Psychology}, \emph{6}(2), 109--112.
https://doi.org/10.25215/0602.217

Kreppner, K. (2013). \emph{Family Systems and Life-span Development}
(1st ed.). Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771280

Lee, J. (2020). Mental health effects of school closures during
COVID-19. \emph{The Lancet Child \& Adolescent Health},
S2352464220301097. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2352-4642(20)30109-7

Leventhal, H., Leventhal, E. A., \& Contrada, R. J. (1998).
Self-regulation, health, and behavior: A perceptual-cognitive approach.
\emph{Psychology \& Health}, \emph{13}(4), 717--733.
https://doi.org/10.1080/08870449808407425

Levitt, H. M., Bamberg, M., Creswell, J. W., Frost, D. M., Josselson,
R., \& Suárez-Orozco, C. (2018). Journal article reporting standards for
qualitative primary, qualitative meta-analytic, and mixed methods
research in psychology: The APA Publications and Communications Board
task force report. \emph{American Psychologist}, \emph{73}(1), 26--46.
https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000151

Levitt, H. M., Motulsky, S. L., Wertz, F. J., Morrow, S. L., \&
Ponterotto, J. G. (2017). Recommendations for designing and reviewing
qualitative research in psychology: Promoting methodological integrity.
\emph{Qualitative Psychology}, \emph{4}(1), 2--22.
https://doi.org/10.1037/qup0000082

Mackay, R. (2005). \emph{The Impact of Family Structure and Family
Change on Child Outcomes: A Personal Reading of the Research
Literature}.

Markus, H. R., \& Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self:
Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. \emph{Psychological
Review}, \emph{98}(2), 224--253.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224

Merriam-Webster Dictionary. (2020a). \emph{Definition of Joint family}.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/joint+family

Merriam-Webster Dictionary. (2020b). \emph{Definition of nuclear
family}. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nuclear+family

Patton, M. Q. (2015). \emph{Qualitative research \& evaluation methods:
Integrating theory and practice} (Fourth edition). SAGE Publications,
Inc.

Racine, N., Cooke, J. E., Eirich, R., Korczak, D. J., McArthur, B., \&
Madigan, S. (2020). Child and adolescent mental illness during COVID-19:
A rapid review. \emph{Psychiatry Research}, \emph{292}, 113307.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113307

Saunders, B., Sim, J., Kingstone, T., Baker, S., Waterfield, J.,
Bartlam, B., Burroughs, H., \& Jinks, C. (2018). Saturation in
qualitative research: Exploring its conceptualization and
operationalization. \emph{Quality \& Quantity}, \emph{52}(4),
1893--1907. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-017-0574-8

Scabini, E., \& Manzi, C. (2010). Identity in family processes. In S. J.
Schwartz, K. Luyckx, \& V. L. Vignoles, \emph{Handbook of identity
theory and research} (pp. 565--584). Springer.

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. \emph{Frontiers in Psychology}, \emph{11},
1713. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01713

Steiner, M., Allemand, M., \& McCullough, M. E. (2012). Do agreeableness
and neuroticism explain age differences in the tendency to forgive
others? \emph{Personality \& Social Psychology Bulletin}, \emph{38}(4),
441--453. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211427923

Strong, P. (1990). Epidemic psychology: A model. \emph{Sociology of
Health and Illness}, \emph{12}(3), 249--259.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.ep11347150

Sun, J., Harris, K., \& Vazire, S. (2019). Is well-being associated with
the quantity and quality of social interactions? \emph{Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology}. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000272

Sun, Y., \& Li, Y. (2002). Children's Well-Being during Parents' Marital
Disruption Process: A Pooled Time-Series Analysis. \emph{Journal of
Marriage and Family}, \emph{64}(2), 472--488.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2002.00472.x

Tiwari, G. K., Kashyap, A. K., Rai, P. K., Tiwari, R. P., \& Pandey, R.
(2020). \emph{The Collective-affirmation in Action: Understanding the
Success of Lockdown in India after the Outbreak of COVID-19}
{[}Preprint{]}. Preprints.
https://doi.org/10.22541/au.158949202.27402247

Tiwari, G. K., Pandey, R., \& Rai, P. K. (2020). \emph{Independent and
Interdependent Self-affirmations in Action: Understanding their dynamics
in India during COVID-19}. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/HW3CU

Tiwari, G. K., Rai, P. K., Dwivedi, A., \& Ray, B. (2020). \emph{The
Outbreak of COVID-19: A Narrative Thematic Analysis of the Perceived
Psychological distress and health Outcomes} {[}Preprint{]}. Preprints.
https://doi.org/10.22541/au.158955320.05988992

Tiwari, G. K., Singh, A. K., Parihar, P., Pandey, R., Sharma, D. N., \&
Rai, P. K. (2020). \emph{Understanding the perceived health outcomes of
children during COVID-19 pandemic} {[}Preprint{]}. Preprints.
https://doi.org/10.22541/au.158958012.27449923

United Nations Organization. (2020). \emph{Policy Brief: The Impact of
COVID-19 on children} (pp. 1--17).

Wang, G., Zhang, Y., Zhao, J., Zhang, J., \& Jiang, F. (2020). Mitigate
the effects of home confinement on children during the COVID-19
outbreak. \emph{The Lancet}, \emph{395}(10228), 945--947.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30547-X

Weber, J., \& Goldmeier, D. (1983). Medicine and the Media.
\emph{British Medical Journal}, \emph{287}(6389), 420--420.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.287.6389.420

World Health Organization. (2020). \emph{Coronavirus disease 2019
(COVID-19) Situation Report-193}.
https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/situation-reports/20200731-covid-19-sitrep-193.pdf?sfvrsn=42a0221d\_2

\selectlanguage{english}
\FloatBarrier
\end{document}

