Bahman 1

Laila Bahman

WRIT 2

Professor Morland

16 November, 2021

COVID-19’s Impact in Economics and Psychology

The COVID-19 pandemic has undoubtedly had an unprecedented impact on society as a

whole. It has challenged everyone from young children who lacked vital socialization to adults

who were laid off from their jobs due to business closures. This pandemic was not just an issue

of public health, but was talked about throughout many different disciplines. The scholarly

journal, “COVID 19 and Its Mental Health Consequences” written by Anant Kumar and K.

Rajasekharan Nayar, discusses the concerns of declining mental health as a result of COVID-19

safety guidelines by taking a biological and psychological approach. Meanwhile, Muhammad

​Shafiullah’s “Do stock markets play a role in determining COVID-19 economic stimulus? A

cross-country analysis” examines the effects of the pandemic from an economic perspective.

While these two journals are both written to demonstrate the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic

lockdowns, they are from different disciplines which target their own respective discourse

communities through the use of jargon, subheadings and organization, and references used.

The psychology journal tackles the various mental health issues that have been intensified

as consequences of the pandemic. The authors argue that the fears invoked by the constant

misfortune surrounding COVID-19, as well as closures and limited resources and activities

available, have caused an overall decrease in mental health among everyone worldwide. The

language used in this paper is not too specific to the field, making it easy to understand to those

who may not be a part of the intended discourse community. This is partially because mental
 Bahman 2

health has become more common to talk about in recent years, especially due to the rise in

popularity of social media. The authors discuss how social media has become an outlet to share

“rumors and unauthenticated information [creating] fear, anxiety, and stress with a sudden and

near-constant stream of news reports about an outbreak.”1 The language used to discuss the

issues that this paper brings to light is, naturally, not super advanced or different than what the

average person may be used to even though the topics have already become widely known.

However, there is some vocabulary that may not be known to everyone. For example, the authors

mention “psycho-social consequences” and “psycho-social support.” which could leave the

audience confused at first glance. Despite the initial confusion, there are many context clues and

explanations within the surrounding sentences that can help draw conclusions of what the

authors are trying to say. This paper is more accessible to the average person due to the lack of

advanced jargon meant for experts in the field.

The economics paper carries a more advanced repertoire of jargon than the psychology

one. It solely discusses the findings from the research of whether stock market declines can

predict the COVID-19 stimulus packages given. The vocabulary and advanced ideas are thrown

onto the audience without giving clear explanations. They are expected to already have some sort

of background knowledge in economics in order to understand this paper. For example, someone

without a strong economics background may not understand how an “approach to measuring

changes beyond a particular threshold (such as one SD) is intuitive because we are interested in

identifying substantial stock market falls attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic, overlooking

1
Kumar, Anant, and Nayar, K. Rajasekharan. “COVID 19 and Its Mental Health Consequences.”
Journal of Mental Health (Abingdon, England), vol. 30, no. 1, Routledge, 2021, pp. 1–2,
doi:10.1080/09638237.2020.1757052.
 Bahman 3

day-to-day fluctuations”2 This excerpt refers to a function given that defines stock market rise.

The functions and graphs provided in this journal require outside knowledge, not just in

economics. There is also math terminology, such as standard deviation (SD), that may not be

common knowledge to someone who has not done math in a while. People who study economics

have a lot of practice with formulas of this nature and interpreting graphs like the ones provided,

so little explanation and context is necessary for them. Since it is lacking that context, it can be

inferred that the discourse community is very specific to that field.

The organization of the two journals greatly differs as well. The psychology paper is a lot

shorter and more concise than its economic counterpart. It almost feels like a summary of ideas.

Most of the paper’s content is just evaluating mental health concerns that COVID-19 has brought

about, and its side effects. For example, one of the paragraphs goes into depth on how over

emphasizing the need to wash hands induces unnecessary anxiety and fear in many. The authors

write that “OCD and related maladaptive behaviors particularly due to consistent promotion of

handwashing to mitigate the coronavirus infection and its spread is a serious concern.”3 This

seems like an idea that many would not even consider. Being told to wash hands does not seem

that it would provoke OCD and anxiety, but the authors bring attention to it, therefore, making it

important to the paper as it is new information. Despite this, it is not given its own section in the

paper. It is instead added in the middle of one of the pre-existing paragraphs. The entire paper is

written in one section; there are no subheadings to break it up. From this, it can be inferred that

2
Shafiullah, Muhammad, et al. “Do Stock Markets Play a Role in Determining COVID‐19
Economic Stimulus? A Cross‐country Analysis.” World Economy, John Wiley & Sons, Inc,
2021, doi:10.1111/twec.13130.
3
Kumar, Anant, and Nayar, K. Rajasekharan. “COVID 19 and Its Mental Health Consequences.”
Journal of Mental Health (Abingdon, England), vol. 30, no. 1, Routledge, 2021, pp. 1–2,
doi:10.1080/09638237.2020.1757052.
 Bahman 4

everything holds a similar amount of significance to the paper and that every piece of

information should transition into the next.

On the other hand, the economics paper is a lot more structured and clearly laid out. It

includes an abstract and five other main sections, two of which being the introduction and

concluding comments section. This helps break apart all the information into chunks, making it

slightly easier to process all the information. This is especially useful in really long research

papers like this. Since the psychology paper was not nearly as long, it did not need to be broken

apart. Having one section for literature review, one section describing the data and methodology,

and one section for results makes the economics paper more organized when looking for

something specific, which makes it essential. Within these chapters are also visual models and

representations, including tables, graphs and formulas. While some of these may be more

difficult to understand for people outside of the discourse community, people with the

background knowledge would appreciate the addition of these elements as it helps visualize the

arguments.

There are also differences in the kinds of sources used by the authors to create these

scholarly journals. In the psychology paper, there are a variety of primary and secondary sources

used. Many of the sources come from the World Health Organization, the American

Psychological Association, and the Center for Disease Control and Prevention. All of which are

primary sources. There are also a variety of secondary sources used. This includes different news

sources like The Guardian, Business Today, Psychiatric Times, and some news sources from

India. However, it seems that the economics paper utilized more reliable primary sources. Some

examples being Pew Research, the World Health Organization, the National Bureau of Economic

Research, Cambridge University Press, and other scholarly articles and books. There are many
 Bahman 5

different kinds of sources used in this paper (books, journals, articles, and press conferences) as

well as a variety of sources. Most of the references in the psychology paper came from either the

World Health Organization or were news articles from India, which does not provide the authors

or audience with much variety in perspectives on the issue of mental health. This is opposed to

the economic paper, where the bibliography provided the authors and audience with a broad

range of economic perspectives and opinions that will back the main claim and make sure it is

accurate.

The COVID-19 pandemic has been talked about consistently for almost two years now,

as it has truly turned everyone’s lives upside down. It has had an interdisciplinary impact in

many different ways across the world, and even though psychology and economics both fall

under the umbrella of social sciences, the impacts are very different. These impacts are discussed

in many different ways, but the authors of these two scholarly journals specifically attract their

intended audiences through the use of jargon, organization methods, and different kinds of

sources.
 Bahman 6

Works Cited

Kumar, Anant, and Nayar, K. Rajasekharan. “COVID 19 and Its Mental Health Consequences.”

Journal of Mental Health (Abingdon, England), vol. 30, no. 1, Routledge, 2021, pp. 1–2,

doi:10.1080/09638237.2020.1757052.

https://search.library.ucsb.edu/permalink/01UCSB_INST/1876c7q/cdi_proquest_miscella

neous_2395630015

Shafiullah, Muhammad, et al. “Do Stock Markets Play a Role in Determining COVID‐19

Economic Stimulus? A Cross‐country Analysis.” World Economy, John Wiley & Sons,

Inc, 2021, doi:10.1111/twec.13130.

https://search.library.ucsb.edu/permalink/01UCSB_INST/1876c7q/cdi_proquest_miscella

neous_2549209533