Family Coping Strategies During Finland’s COVID-19 Lockdown

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

It’s been more than evident in the past months that COVID-19 pandemic and governmental, societal and individual reaction to it has significantly impacted the fabric of society at every level (family, community, work environment etc.). In this context, each study that brings insights on how lockdown strategies affected individuals, families or communities could provide tools for a better understanding of this complex phenomenon. Bearing this in mind, it is obvious that this paper addresses a topic that has been, for past months, and will further remain in the focus of scholars, policymakers and other stakeholders as the pandemic crisis is far from being put to a stop. Since we are in front of unconventional circumstances featuring unprecedented facets, empirical research is still needed for a better understanding of the real-life impact of pandemic crisis on social institutions (such as family for instance). Build upon a qualitative analysis, this manuscript provides a significant contribution on understanding Finnish families coping strategies during COVID-19 lockdown. Even though I’m more acquainted with quantitative methods, I find that, in this particular case, the qualitative approach could provide interesting insights on how family lives have adjusted during this period of time. This types of investigations could help us to understand if these adjustments are whether momentarily or permanent.

I appreciate that the context of the paper is firmly set and the theoretical framework in which the analysis is placed is clearly outlined. Additionally, the main goal is evidently highlighted from the beginning.

The literature review is relevant, relatively comprehensive and revolves around the soundness of social-ecological theory and previous studies on coping strategies during pandemics.

In terms of methodology, the manuscript applies mainly a qualitative approach constructed on analytical framework provided by social-ecological theory. It seems that the authors tried to simultaneously reach two goals: on one hand, to provide valuable insights on family coping strategies, and, on the other hand, to substantiate the validity of social-ecological theory as analytical tool. I believe that both of these aims were virtually reached. However, as the authors acknowledge, convenience sample strategy which has been employed for data collection could alter the quality of the empirical information, mostly in terms of statistical significance. Nevertheless, since, in this case, we deal with a qualitative analysis, I think that, as long as the authors are aware of this deficiency and they do not overstate their findings to draw absolute conclusions, the problem of statistical significance could be slightly overlooked.

The findings are clearly presented and structured in accordance with the analytical framework. In essence, the results provides valuable information on family coping strategies form three main perspectives: individual, family and macroenvironmental. For instance, for me it was interesting to find out, how parents are dealing with the problem of children screen time when online schooling is involved.

The discussion section is straightforward and sums up the main results. However, I would recommend that the authors should take into consideration the opportunity of adding a short conclusion paragraph. Even though, data collection strategy does not allow for overstated conclusions, I think that some lessons to be learned could be potentially drawn from this study. Such conclusions could add more value to this manuscript from a practical standpoint.

Author Response

Please see the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments to the Author

Thank you for the opportunity to review the article “Family Coping Strategies During Finland’s COVID-19 Lockdown.” This is a meaningful study that provides insights on family coping strategies in COVID-19 pandemic situations. My suggestions for revision are: 

(Please refer to the attached file.)

Comments for author File: Comments.pdf

Author Response

Please see the attached file.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

There are still limitations as it is a qualitative research method, but it is generally well revised according to the reviewer's comments.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf