Psychological wellbeing and living conditions
during the COVID-19 pandemic in Brussels

*Bien-être psychologique et conditions de vie pendant la pandémie de COVID-19 à Bruxelles*

*Psychologisch welzijn en leefomstandigheden tijdens de COVID-19-pandemie in Brussel*

Camila Arnal, Olivier Gennart, Chiara Inserra, Christophe Leys and Olivier Klein

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

OpenEdition
Journals

**Electronic version**

URL: https://journals.openedition.org/brussels/8220

DOI: 10.4000/153h2

ISSN: 2031-0293

**Translation(s):**

Psychologisch welzijn en leefomstandigheden tijdens de COVID-19-pandemie in Brussel - URL : https://journals.openedition.org/brussels/8266 [nl]

Bien-être psychologique et conditions de vie pendant la pandémie de COVID-19 à Bruxelles - URL :
https://journals.openedition.org/brussels/8296 [fr]

**Publisher**

Université libre de Bruxelles - ULB

**Electronic reference**

Camila Arnal, Olivier Gennart, Chiara Inserra, Christophe Leys and Olivier Klein, "Psychological wellbeing and living conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic in Brussels", *Brussels Studies* [Online], General collection, no 209, Online since 05 November 2025, connection on 10 December 2025. URL: http://journals.openedition.org/brussels/8220; DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/153h2

This text was automatically generated on December 10, 2025.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

The text only may be used under licence CC BY 4.0. All other elements (illustrations, imported files) may be subject to specific use terms.
# Psychological wellbeing and living conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic in Brussels

Bien-être psychologique et conditions de vie pendant la pandémie de COVID-19 à Bruxelles

Psychologisch welzijn en leefomstandigheden tijdens de COVID-19-pandemie in Brussel

Camila Arnal, Olivier Gennart, Chiara Inserra, Christophe Leys and Olivier Klein

## EDITOR'S NOTE

In order to see the figures in a better resolution, go to the article online and click on "Original" below it.

## AUTHOR'S NOTE

Camila Arnal carried out her doctoral work with a grant from the Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique - FNRS (FRS-FNRS).

## Introduction

<footnote n="1">¹ The COVID-19 pandemic unveiled and amplified many of the deep-rooted inequalities in urban life, and Brussels serves as a key example. As the city dealt with lockdowns, the way residents experienced these periods varied greatly depending on their socioeconomic status, living conditions and access to resources. Public debates flared up around the visibility of people in certain neighbourhoods, particularly those less</footnote>
privileged, and concerns arose regarding individuals travelling to their second residence [Mignon, 2020; Moens and Gijs, 2020]. These discussions reflected deeper, systemic disparities tied to the spatial and social fabric of Brussels.

2 Brussels, much like other European capitals, is marked by significant contrasts in living conditions. Disparities in access to green spaces, challenges within the housing market and the overall socioeconomic divide in the city highlight how different sectors of the population are affected by their environment. This paper investigates the factors influencing psychological wellbeing during the COVID-19 lockdowns in Brussels, focusing on how access to green space, living conditions and other environmental variables shaped the experiences of residents. These factors, as identified in existing scientific research, are unevenly distributed across the city, contributing to inequalities in wellbeing during the lockdown. Building on these insights, the discussion examines the broader implications of these disparities, reflecting on how systemic inequalities impact lockdown experiences and psychological outcomes. The study draws on existing scientific research on living conditions and mental health to explore how environmental factors, such as access to green spaces and housing conditions, shape psychological wellbeing. It is structured around key hypotheses which examine the interplay between these factors and wellbeing during the lockdown, offering a finely shaded perspective on how disparities in the urban environment contribute to mental health outcomes.

# 1. The relationship between socio-environmental factors and the wellbeing of the population in Brussels

## 1.1. Environmental factors: inequalities in living conditions in Brussels

3 Brussels is a city where sharp socioeconomic inequalities manifest themselves spatially and socially. Approximately one in four residents live below the poverty line, while 10-15 % of the population comprises an elite workforce employed by multinational corporations [Kesteloot and Loopmans, 2009]. This elite group, which includes EU officials and expatriates, enjoys privileged access to higher-quality housing, better services and public amenities, such as parks and recreational spaces. Meanwhile, a large segment of the population - including immigrants, refugees and undocumented individuals - lives in precarious conditions. These economic disparities are a defining characteristic of the urban structure of Brussels, and they play a key role in shaping access to resources, such as green spaces [Kesteloot and Loopmans, 2009].

4 The geography of urban green spaces in Brussels further reflects and reinforces these inequalities. Research demonstrates that urban green spaces improve both physical and mental health by offering residents spaces for relaxation, physical activity and stress relief [Van Den Berg et al., 2015]. In Brussels, residents who live in neighbourhoods with more green spaces, or who have a favourable perception of the greenery around them, tend to report better overall health and a lower risk of mortality from natural causes [Rodriguez-Loureiro et al., 2021]. However, access to these green spaces is highly uneven across the city. Disadvantaged neighbourhoods
often lack sufficient green spaces, which exacerbates existing health and social inequalities [Phillips et al., 2022].

The issue of unequal access to resources in Brussels is closely tied to the housing market. Over the past few decades, gentrification has transformed several of the city's central neighbourhoods, driving up housing prices and displacing long-time residents, particularly those from lower-income backgrounds [Van Criekingen, 2009]. This process has led to a growing concentration of low-income residents in the western districts of the city, which are characterised by lower-quality housing, fewer well-maintained public amenities and less access to green spaces [Van Hamme, Grippa and Van Criekingen, 2016]. Known as the “poor crescent”, this area has historically been home to the working-class population of Brussels, including many immigrants. Meanwhile, wealthier individuals and families live in the eastern outskirts of the city, where they enjoy more spacious homes and better access to amenities. This spatial segregation is exacerbated by rising property prices, which have made it increasingly difficult for low-income groups to secure affordable housing, leading to overcrowding, substandard living conditions and, in some cases, homelessness [Kesteloot and Loopmans, 2009]. Gentrification and its consequences have been discussed in several studies which document the historical shifts in the urban structure of Brussels and their implications in terms of social inequality [Van Hamme et al., 2016; Van Criekingen 2009; De Laet 2018].

These disparities in living conditions have direct consequences for psychological wellbeing, as research has demonstrated that secure housing and proximity to green spaces are strongly associated with lower stress levels and improved mental health [Van Den Berg et al., 2015; Rodriguez-Loureiro et al., 2021]. In contrast, the uneven distribution of these resources across Brussels reinforces pre-existing social inequalities, shaping the daily experiences of residents and their ability to cope with external stressors. The next section explores how these environmental factors influenced psychological wellbeing during the COVID-19 lockdowns.

## 1.2. Living conditions and psychological wellbeing

The relationship between living conditions and psychological wellbeing has been widely explored in the literature. Research consistently shows that housing quality and access to green spaces are critical factors which influence mental health outcomes [Jetten et al., 2020]. The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic heightened the relevance of these factors, as lockdowns forced people to remain in their homes for extended periods, amplifying the effects of poor living conditions on their mental health.

Wellbeing is a complex concept which encompasses various dimensions, including emotional health, social connections and environmental satisfaction. Access to green spaces is a key factor which has been closely linked to improved mental health outcomes. Studies have shown that green spaces provide opportunities for physical activity, relaxation and mental restoration, which can mitigate the negative impacts of stress and anxiety [Thompson et al., 2012]. During the COVID-19 lockdowns, the importance of green spaces became even more evident, as restrictions on movement limited the ability of residents to engage in social or recreational activities outside their homes. Those who had access to parks or gardens were able to benefit from outdoor activities which supported their physical and mental wellbeing, while those
without access to such spaces experienced higher levels of stress and psychological distress [see e.g. Bu *et al.*, 2022]. This is consistent with prior research [Grahn and Stigsdotter, 2003; Nielsen and Hansen, 2007].

Conversely, poor living conditions – such as overcrowding, lack of privacy and inadequate access to green areas – are associated with negative mental health outcomes, including depression, anxiety and social isolation. Overcrowded housing is particularly problematic, as it exacerbates feelings of confinement and limits opportunities for rest and relaxation [D’Alessandro *et al.*, 2020]. Several studies have demonstrated that residents of housing units with inadequate space, poor indoor quality and no access to private or communal gardens are more likely to report depressive symptoms and lower overall wellbeing [Rautio *et al.*, 2018]. These findings highlight the critical role of housing and environmental quality in supporting psychological health.

In Brussels, the uneven distribution of public green spaces across the 19 municipalities in the city further exacerbates existing inequalities associated with housing quality. The European Environment Agency (EEA) recommends that residents should have access to green spaces within a 15-minute walk from their homes [Barbosa *et al.*, 2007]. Affluent neighbourhoods tend to have better access to green spaces, parks and recreational facilities, while lower-income neighbourhoods – particularly those in the western “poor crescent” – often lack sufficient green areas [Stanners and Bourdeau, 1995]. This disparity has significant implications for both physical health and psychological wellbeing, as residents of areas with fewer green spaces are more likely to experience higher levels of stress and mental health challenges [Van Herzele and de Vries, 2012].

# 1.3. Social factors influencing wellbeing

## 1.3.1. Age and psychological wellbeing

Age plays a significant role in shaping psychological wellbeing, as it intersects with various socio-environmental and behavioural factors. Younger populations, particularly adolescents and young adults, tend to exhibit higher levels of anxiety compared to older individuals, partly due to developmental challenges, peer pressure and socioeconomic uncertainties [Twenge *et al.*, 2019]. This is particularly relevant in Brussels, where many of the city's poorest neighbourhoods are also among the youngest in terms of demographic composition. The youthful population in these areas faces additional stressors, such as inadequate housing, limited access to green spaces and high levels of unemployment, which can exacerbate feelings of anxiety and social exclusion [Van Hamme *et al.*, 2016]. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, where the social life of this segment of the population was especially curtailed, their wellbeing was strongly affected, e.g. as indicated by high levels of depression in the French-speaking Belgian student population [Schmits *et al.*, 2021]. Conversely, older adults, while potentially less susceptible to acute anxiety, may face other challenges such as loneliness and social isolation, particularly in areas with limited community spaces and social support networks. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, the fact that they were especially at risk may of course have been a source of anxiety and impaired wellbeing. These dynamics underline the importance of addressing age-specific needs in order to foster psychological wellbeing across different demographic groups.
1.3.2. Physical activity and wellbeing

12 Physical activity is one of the most modifiable predictors of psychological wellbeing, with robust evidence supporting its positive effects on mental health. Regular physical activity has been associated with lower levels of anxiety, depression and stress, as well as increased happiness and overall life satisfaction [Richards et al., 2015]. During the COVID-19 lockdowns, the ability to engage in outdoor physical activity emerged as a critical factor in maintaining mental health. Studies have shown that physical activity in natural environments, such as parks or gardens, has an even greater positive impact on psychological wellbeing than indoor activities. Activities in green spaces are linked to reduced tension, anger and depression and they promote feelings of revitalisation and energy [Thompson Coon et al., 2011]. However, in Brussels, access to outdoor spaces for physical activity is unequally distributed, with residents of wealthier neighbourhoods enjoying greater opportunities to benefit from these activities compared to those in less affluent areas [Stanners and Bourdeau, 1995]. This disparity likely compounds existing inequalities in psychological health, as residents of the “poor crescent” are less able to engage in outdoor activities which promote wellbeing.

1.3.3. Social support and community engagement

13 In addition to age and physical activity, factors such as community engagement and social support are critical for psychological wellbeing. Research highlights the protective role of social connections in mitigating stress and promoting resilience, particularly during times of crisis [Jetten et al., 2020]. The lockdowns imposed during the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted many forms of social interaction, exacerbating feelings of isolation and loneliness, especially for individuals with limited access to digital communication tools or strong social networks.

14 In Brussels, disparities in access to community resources and opportunities for social engagement are complex and are often linked to neighbourhood socioeconomic status. While working-class neighbourhoods in Brussels have a strong tradition of community life, research suggests that inequalities persist in access to civic participation and institutional resources. Studies have shown that citizens in lower-income districts are less likely to engage in formal participatory mechanisms, such as digital civic platforms, compared to residents in more affluent areas [Pak et al., 2017]. Similarly, socio-spatial segregation in Brussels has resulted in a concentration of disadvantaged communities in areas with fewer public services, which may create structural barriers to engagement in civic life [Corijn and Vloeberghs, 2009]. Furthermore, studies indicate that marginalised groups, particularly migrants and low-income populations, often experience lower levels of political participation and formalised social engagement [Jacobs and Rea, 2011]. These findings suggest that, while vibrant community networks exist in many disadvantaged neighbourhoods, inequalities in institutional participation and access to public resources are important factors which shape opportunities for social inclusion. It is crucial to address these disparities in order to foster inclusive urban communities which support psychological wellbeing for all.
# 2. Evaluating the impact of the COVID-19 lockdown on the residents of Brussels

## 2.1. Working hypotheses

15 The COVID-19 pandemic amplified existing inequalities in Brussels, notably with respect to living conditions and access to green spaces. A syndemic perspective is required in order to understand the impact of the pandemic on Brussels residents, taking into account the interaction of biological, social and environmental factors in shaping health outcomes [Jetten et al., 2020]. From this perspective, it becomes clear that the disparities in access to housing and green spaces played a significant role in determining how different segments of the population experienced the lockdown.

16 While affluent residents had the advantage of living in larger homes with access to private gardens or nearby parks, lower-income residents were often confined to smaller, overcrowded flats without adequate space for outdoor activities or social distancing. In the neighbourhoods of the “poor crescent” with higher immigrant populations such as Molenbeek, higher infection rates were reported during the first wave of the pandemic, and these areas were often stigmatised in media coverage [Rea et al., 2022]. However, these reports frequently overlooked the structural factors which contributed to the heightened vulnerability of these neighbourhoods, such as overcrowded housing, economic precariousness and limited access to public green spaces [Gibson et al., 2021]. By failing to acknowledge these systemic issues, media narratives reinforced harmful stereotypes regarding immigrant communities, while neglecting the broader social and environmental determining factors of health.

17 Our objective in 2020 was to assess how the COVID-19 lockdowns affected the wellbeing of different segments of the Brussels population, with a special focus on how living conditions – specifically housing quality and access to green spaces – shaped their experiences. By examining these factors from a syndemic approach, our aim was to understand the extent to which structural inequalities influenced the mental health and wellbeing of residents during the pandemic.

18 In short, 4 hypotheses were drawn from our theoretical approach:

19 **Hypothesis 1:** The priorities of the inhabitants of Brussels regarding green spaces have changed due to the pandemic. During the pandemic, greater importance was attributed to both private and public green spaces compared to before the pandemic.

20 **Hypothesis 2:** The available space in a participant's home is a positive predictor of his or her wellbeing (increasing happiness and decreasing anxiety and depression).

21 **Hypothesis 3:** We predict that the age of participants influences their level of wellbeing during a pandemic. Younger people have a lower level of wellbeing (age increases happiness and decreases anxiety and depression).

22 **Hypothesis 4:** Finally, in keeping with the literature, we hypothesised that the level of activity of the residents of Brussels (i.e. exercising or going to a public green space on a regular basis) is a predictor of the level of wellbeing of participants, as it increases happiness and decreases anxiety and depression.
## 2.2. Method

In order to probe our hypotheses, data were collected through an online survey shared via social networking platforms. We also searched for participants by word of mouth and contacted social media groups located in the Brussels-Capital Region which agreed to share the online questionnaire with their members. All of the data are accessible via the Open Science Framework OSF platform¹.

### 2.2.1. Participants

The survey was published online in the first phase of the pandemic in Belgium, in May 2020. Lockdown in Belgium began in March 2020. The residents of Brussels had therefore been in lockdown for two months at that time. The sample consisted of 315 individuals (there were 254 women in the sample, with an average age of 38 years and a standard deviation of 17), including 290 Belgians, 18 French nationals, 6 from other European countries, and 1 person from outside Europe. Our sample included more women than men: several studies have found that women show a higher level of participation in surveys and greater willingness to self-disclose compared to men [Smith, 2008; Sax et al., 2003]. Respondents included 122 employees, 20 self-employed, 64 caregivers, 6 students, 30 teachers, 16 unemployed, 48 who indicated “other” and 9 who preferred not to say what they did for a living.

### 2.2.2. Data and procedure

We began by asking participants a series of questions regarding certain characteristics of their living spaces: the type of accommodation (house or flat); whether they had a private garden or a terrace (or not); the number of rooms in their home; and the number of people they lived with. We also estimated the space available to them in their home based on the number of people living together and the number of rooms available in their living space. We measured the public green space of participants based on the amount of public green space available in their municipality of residence according to Englert [2016].

Moreover, we examined how priorities have changed when choosing a living space due to the lockdown experience. We asked participants how much they prioritised having a private green space and living near a public green space when choosing their housing (on a scale from 1 = “not a priority” to 5 = “the most important element in choosing a home”). Afterwards, we asked them to what extent they would consider private and public green space as a priority today (from 1 = “not a priority” to 5 = “the most important element in choosing a home”). Finally, we analysed the (self-reported) behaviour of participants during the lockdown. We investigated the presence of healthy behaviour by measuring how often participants reported taking part in sports (from 1 = “never” to 6 = “almost every day”) and going to public green spaces (from 1 = “never” to 3 = “very often”). As the two scales were highly correlated (r = .63), we standardised and averaged them to form a single index of physical activity.

In order to address wellbeing by considering both positive and negative emotional states (referred to as “emotional valence”, which describes the intrinsic positivity or negativity of an emotional experience), we decided to measure happiness as well as anxiety and depression, as happiness is a necessary but not sufficient condition for
achieving high levels of wellbeing [Sen, 1993]. However, as happiness and wellbeing are highly correlated, it is still one of the useful measures for identifying levels of wellbeing within a population [Wren-Lewis, 2014]. In addition to its association with happiness, wellbeing also correlates with other constructs, such as depression and anxiety. As highlighted by Sen [1993], wellbeing encompasses more than just positive emotions; it involves the absence of constraints, such as mental health issues, which hinder an individual's ability to fully realise their capabilities. In order to measure anxiety and depression, we used the Hopkins anxiety and depression symptom checklist (25-item French version translated by Lancelot [2015]). Happiness was measured using the French version of the subjective happiness scale with 4 items [Lyubomirsky and Lepper, 1999], translated by Kotsou and Leys [2017].

# 3. Results

## 3.1. Priorities regarding green spaces

In order to test hypothesis 1 (the priorities of the residents of Brussels have changed with respect to the importance of public and private green space), we analysed the results of the questionnaire regarding reported priorities by performing a paired samples t-test. The goal was to compare the results before and after and to see whether greater priority was placed on having a private garden and having public green space nearby.

We found that priorities have changed and that at the time of the survey both having a private garden (before $M = 3.18$ vs. after $M = 4$) and having a public garden (before $M = 3$ vs. after $M = 3.70$) are perceived as more important in the choice of housing. This effect is significant, in terms of both private green space – $t(314) = -13.3, p < .001$, Cohen's $d = 1.072$ – and public green space – $t(314) = -9.5, p < .001$, Cohen's $d = 1.070$.

In addition, the effect size (Cohen's $d$) is slightly larger for private green space compared to public green space, suggesting that the pandemic increased the demand for personal outdoor areas more than the need for proximity to public green spaces. This may reflect a heightened perception of control, safety and accessibility associated with private gardens. Figure 1 represents these findings visually, showing the increase in perceived importance of both private gardens and public parks before and after the first lockdown. The mean values and confidence intervals illustrate a clear upward shift in housing priorities, with a greater effect observed for private gardens.
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>Figure 1. Priorities with respect to green space in the choice of housing before and after the first lockdown</figcaption></figure>

## 3.2. How housing space and behaviour impact wellbeing

We computed correlation coefficients between the main variables of the study: the age of participants (Age), public green space available in the neighbourhood (Public green space), the presence or absence of a private garden (Private green space), space available in the participants' homes (Housing Space, in square metres), the amount and duration of sports activity and the time spent in green space (Activity), anxiety and depression levels, and subjective happiness (see Table 1). To test hypotheses 2 and 3, we focused specifically on the associations involving anxiety, depression and subjective happiness.

We observed a significant positive correlation between age and housing space. This may reflect the effects of the course of life, such as older adults remaining in larger homes where they previously raised children.

Regarding age, two relationships stood out. First, a significant negative correlation was found between age and anxiety and depression, suggesting that younger participants reported higher levels of psychological distress. Second, there was a significant positive correlation between age and subjective happiness, indicating that younger individuals also reported lower levels of happiness. These findings support the hypothesis that younger age is associated with lower wellbeing during the pandemic.

Private green space was positively correlated with happiness – but not significantly – and negatively correlated with anxiety and depression, indicating that access to private gardens may be beneficial for mental health during lockdown conditions. In terms of physical activity, we observed a significant negative correlation between activity levels
and anxiety and depression and a positive correlation between activity and happiness. These results highlight a link between greater physical activity and greater wellbeing, suggesting that staying active may help mitigate psychological distress in times of crisis. It is important to emphasise that these analyses are correlational in nature. While they reveal associations between variables, they do not imply causality. It is also important to keep in mind that after applying a Bonferroni correction of 15 comparisons (the number of correlation coefficients in table 1), only correlations with ***p < .001 remain significant.

<table><caption>Table 1. Correlation table between variables (N = 315)</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>1</th><th>2</th><th>3</th><th>4</th><th>5</th><th>6</th><th>7</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1. Age</td><td>1</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>2. Housing space</td><td>.263***</td><td>1</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>3. Public green space</td><td>.039</td><td>.133*</td><td>1</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>4. Activity</td><td>.060</td><td>.116*</td><td>.060</td><td>1</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>5. Anxiety and depression</td><td>-.295***</td><td>-.079</td><td>-.057</td><td>-.144*</td><td>1</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>6. Subjective happiness</td><td>.187***</td><td>.059</td><td>.051</td><td>.211***</td><td>-.360***</td><td>1</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>7. Private green space</td><td>.033</td><td>.177**</td><td>.172**</td><td>.033</td><td>-.128*</td><td>.086</td><td>1</td></tr></tbody></table>

Note: *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001 All p-values indicate statistical significance (no correction applied). We calculated the Pearson coefficient when both variables are continuous. For ordinal variables, we calculated the Spearman coefficient. The dichotomous variable *Private garden* was recoded (0 = No private garden, 1 = Yes, I have a private garden) prior to analyses. Correlations involving this variable and continuous measures correspond to point-biserial correlations.

We conducted two multiple linear regressions. All the hypothesised variables were taken into account to predict our two main dependent variables.

### 3.2.1. Anxiety and depression

A multiple regression including age, housing space, public green space, private garden and activity as predictors was statistically significant, explaining about 11 % of the variance in anxiety/depression (see Table 2, top part). Age was a strong negative predictor, indicating that younger participants reported higher levels of anxiety and depression. Physical activity also predicted lower levels of anxiety/depression. In addition, having access to a private garden was associated with lower anxiety/depression scores, although the effect was small. Housing space and access to public green space were not significant predictors.

### 3.2.2. Subjective happiness

A second regression including the same predictors was also significant for 9 % of the variance in subjective happiness (see Table 2, bottom part). Age was a positive
predictor of happiness, indicating that older participants reported higher levels of subjective wellbeing. Physical activity was likewise a strong positive predictor. By contrast, housing space, public green space and private garden were not significant predictors of subjective happiness.

<table><caption>Table 2. Multiple linear regressions</caption><thead><tr><th colspan="6">Anxiety and depression (R<sup>2</sup> = .110)</th></tr><tr><th>Predictors</th><th>B</th><th>S.E</th><th>β</th><th>t</th><th>p</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Age</td><td>-.010</td><td>.002</td><td>-.286</td><td>-5.134</td><td>&lt; .001</td></tr><tr><td>House Space</td><td>.018</td><td>.051</td><td>.033</td><td>.361</td><td>.719</td></tr><tr><td>Public Green</td><td>-.260</td><td>.548</td><td>-.026</td><td>-474</td><td>.636</td></tr><tr><td>Private garden</td><td>-.140</td><td>.070</td><td>-.111</td><td>-1.994</td><td>0.047</td></tr><tr><td>Activity</td><td>-.039</td><td>.018</td><td>-.118</td><td>-2.175</td><td>.030</td></tr></tbody><thead><tr><th colspan="6">Subjective happiness (R<sup>2</sup> = .088)</th></tr><tr><th>Predictors</th><th>B</th><th>S.E</th><th>β</th><th>t</th><th>p</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Age</td><td>.014</td><td>.004</td><td>.181</td><td>3.194</td><td>.002</td></tr><tr><td>House Space</td><td>-.057</td><td>.112</td><td>-.0295</td><td>-.508</td><td>.612</td></tr><tr><td>Public GreenSpace</td><td>.441</td><td>1.215</td><td>.020</td><td>.363</td><td>.717</td></tr><tr><td>Private Garden</td><td>.211</td><td>.155</td><td>.076</td><td>1.360</td><td>.175</td></tr><tr><td>Activity</td><td>.154</td><td>.039</td><td>.215</td><td>3.900</td><td>&lt; .001</td></tr></tbody></table>

## 4. Discussion

This study examined how socio-environmental factors influenced psychological wellbeing among Brussels residents during the first COVID-19 lockdown, with particular attention to inequalities shaped by urban conditions. In our analyses, age and physical activity emerged as consistent positive predictors of wellbeing: older participants reported lower levels of anxiety/depression and greater happiness, while those engaging in more physical activity also showed better mental health outcomes. Access to a private garden was associated with slightly lower levels of anxiety/depression, but it was not a significant predictor of greater subjective happiness. By contrast, housing space and public green space did not emerge as significant predictors when controlling for other variables in our regression models. These findings provide further evidence of the importance of urban environments in shaping mental health
outcomes, while also highlighting the complexity of these relationships and the need to
examine them beyond the mere availability of space.

39

A key result from this study was the shift in priorities regarding green spaces following the first lockdown. After two months of lockdown, participants reported assigning greater importance to both private gardens and nearby public parks if they had to choose a place to live, highlighting the fundamental role of outdoor spaces in coping with prolonged confinement. Previous studies have shown that access to green environments enhances psychological resilience, which is consistent with our findings. Interestingly, while public green spaces were already considered valuable before the pandemic, the reported increase in priority given to private gardens suggests that restrictions on mobility may have emphasised the importance of having personal access to outdoor areas. These results align with previous findings on how urban green spaces serve as vital resources for mental and emotional wellbeing [Van Den Berg et al., 2015].

40

Regression results from our study showed that access to private green space was associated with lower levels of anxiety and depression, indicating that individuals with gardens experienced slightly reduced psychological distress during lockdown. Although this effect was weaker than expected and did not extend to subjective happiness, it nonetheless suggests that private gardens may serve as a modest protective factor. Previous research has also highlighted that the benefits of green spaces may vary depending on type and accessibility [D'Alessandro et al., 2020], which helps contextualise our findings.

41

In our data, physical activity emerged as a strong and consistent predictor of psychological wellbeing. Participants reporting higher levels of activity also reported greater happiness and lower levels of anxiety and depression. These results align with existing research highlighting the protective effects of physical activity on mental health, particularly in times of crisis [Thompson et al., 2011; Richards et al., 2015; Thompson et al., 2012; Zhang and Chen, 2019]. Given the unequal distribution of green spaces across Brussels, it remains possible that residents in less affluent municipalities faced greater barriers to being active, thereby exacerbating socioeconomic disparities in wellbeing. In this study, the activity variable reflected a mix of behaviours (including sports and time spent outdoors). General engagement in physical activity was significantly linked to psychological wellbeing in our sample.

42

Age was a significant predictor in both regression models, with younger participants reporting higher anxiety and depression and lower happiness levels. This finding from our sample reinforces evidence that the pandemic affected younger individuals disproportionately [O'Connor *et al.*, 2021; Clair *et al.*, 2021]. This finding highlights the need for targeted interventions to support younger people during crises, particularly in urban settings where their access to coping mechanisms, such as outdoor spaces and social interactions, may be more restricted. Implementing youth-specific mental health programmes, such as counselling services, peer-support networks and accessible recreational spaces, could mitigate the psychological toll of future crises. Additionally, urban planning should consider the creation of more inclusive outdoor spaces which cater to younger populations, ensuring that public areas serve as environments for socialisation and mental wellbeing.

43

While this study was exploratory in nature and provides valuable insights regarding the environmental determining factors of wellbeing during the pandemic, some
limitations should be noted. Although the sample size of 315 participants is informative, it remains limited. In addition, the sample was not representative of the Brussels population, which limits the generalisability of the findings. Furthermore, the study was conducted during the first lockdown, meaning that we cannot determine whether the levels of happiness, anxiety and depression of participants remained stable throughout the pandemic or whether they fluctuated in response to changing restrictions. Longitudinal studies, such as the one conducted by Sciensano [Braekman et al., 2022], offer a broader perspective on how psychological wellbeing evolved over time. Unlike our cross-sectional data, Sciensano's longitudinal design revealed that fluctuations in anxiety and depression were closely tied to the severity of lockdown measures. Periods of stricter restrictions corresponded with higher psychological distress, while the easing of measures led to improvements in mental health. Although the study focused on Belgium as a whole and did not specifically address the socioeconomic inequalities unique to Brussels, it complements our findings by providing a nationwide perspective.

The uneven representation of the municipalities of Brussels in the sample, with a higher proportion of participants from some municipalities (such as Schaerbeek) compared to others (such as Molenbeek-Saint-Jean), may also limit the generalisability of the findings. Furthermore, the overrepresentation of women (80,6 % of participants) could have influenced the results, particularly given that women tend to be more affected by structural inequalities which heighten psychological distress during crises such as the COVID-19 pandemic [Rodriguez-Rey et al., 2020; Tull et al., 2020]. The lack of control over the sampling method resulted in this gender imbalance [Smith, 2008] which should be considered when interpreting the findings.

Finally, the cross-sectional nature of this study limits causal inferences. While we identified associations between variables, future longitudinal research could help establish whether these relationships persist over time and determine the extent to which green spaces provide a protective effect against mental health challenges.

Despite these limitations, our results underscore the importance of green spaces and physical activity as protective factors against psychological distress during public health crises. These findings extend beyond the context of pandemics. Poor living conditions, such as inadequate access to green spaces, likely have a continuous impact on wellbeing, even during periods of societal normalcy. Addressing these disparities is not only crucial for managing future crises but also for fostering long-term mental health and social cohesion. Future research should further explore how socio-environmental inequalities shape psychological wellbeing and investigate the lasting benefits of green spaces and physical activity in enhancing resilience. These insights could inform public policies aimed at creating more equitable urban environments which support the mental and physical health of all residents. Our findings suggest that interventions focused on promoting active lifestyles and ensuring equitable access to private or semi-private green spaces may be particularly effective in enhancing urban wellbeing.

*Thank you to the residents of Brussels who kindly took the time to answer the questionnaire.*
BIBLIOGRAPHY

BARBOSA, O., TRATALOS, J. A., ARMSWORTH, P. R., DAVIES, R. G., FULLER, R. A., JOHNSON, P. and GASTON, K. J., 2007. Who benefits from access to green space? A case study from Sheffield, UK. In: *Landscape and Urban Planning*. 19/11/2007. Vol. 83, no. 2-3, pp. 187-195.

BRAEKMAN, E., DELVAUX, N., CHARAFEDDINE, R., DEMAREST, S., DRIESKENS, S., GISLE, L. and VAN DER HEYDEN, J., 2022. Anxiety and depression in Belgium during the first 15 months of the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal study. In: *Behavioral Sciences*. 12/05/2022. Vol. 12, no. 5, p. 141. Available from: https://www.mdpi.com/2076-328X/12/5/141DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/bs12050141.

BU, F., MAK, W. H., STEPTOE, A., WHEELER, B. W. and FANCOURT, D., 2022. Urban greenspace and anxiety symptoms during the COVID-19 pandemic: A 20-month follow up of 19,848 participants in England. In: *Health & Place*. Vol. 77, article 77102897. [online].

CLAIR, R., GORDON, M., KROON, M. and REILLY, C., 2021. The effects of social isolation on well-being and life satisfaction during pandemic. In: *Humanities and Social Sciences Communications*. 27/01/2021. Vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 1-6. Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-021-00710-3

CORIJN, E AND VLOEBERGHS, W., 2009. *The Brussels Reader: A Small World City to Become the Capital of Europe*. Brussels: VUBPress.

D'ALESSANDRO, D., GOLA, M., APPOLLONI, L., DETTORI, M., FARA, G. M., REBECCHI, A. and CAPOLONGO, S., 2020. COVID-19 and Living Spaces challenge. Well-being and Public Health recommendations for a healthy, safe, and sustainable housing. In: *Acta Bio Medica: Atenei Parmensis*. 20/07/2020. Vol. 91, no. 61.

DE LAET, S., 2018. The working classes are also leaving Brussels. An analysis of the suburbanisation of low-income populations. In: *Brussels Studies*. 12/03/2013. No. 121. Available from: http://journals.openedition.org/brussels/1633

ENGLERT, M., LUYTEN, S., VERMEULEN, S., QUITTELIER, B. and WAYENS, B., 2016. La commune et ses habitants en quelques mots. In: *Zoom sur les communes*. Bruxelles: Institut Bruxellois de statistique et d'Analyse et Observatoire de la santé et du social de Bruxelles-capitale (Commission communautaire commune).

GIBSON, B., SCHNEIDER, J., TALAMONTI, D. and FORSHAW, M., 2021. The impact of inequality on mental health outcomes during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review. In: *Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne*. 02/2021. Vol. 62, no. 1, p. 101.

GRAHN, P. and STIGSDOTTER, U. A., 2003. Landscape planning and stress. In: *Urban forestry & urban greening*, 12/2003. Vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 1-18.

GRULOIS, G. and LELOUTRE, G., 2021. *La fabrication de l'infrastructure sociale et du logement à Anderlecht: Territoires-projets*. Brussels: Éditions de la Faculté d'Architecture La Cambre-Horta de l'Université libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles.

JACOBS, D. and REA, A., 2011. *The End of National Models? Integration Courses and Citizenship Trajectories in Europe*. In: *International Journal on Multicultural Societies*. 2007. Vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 59-76.
JETTEN, J., REICHER S. D., HASLAM S. A. and CRUWYS T., 2020. *Together apart: The psychology of COVID-19*. City Road: Sage Publication.

KESTELOOT, C. and LOOPMANS, M., 2009. Social inequalities. In: *Brussels Studies*. Synopsis, CFB. 03/03/2009. No. 15. Available from: https://journals.openedition.org/brussels/1009

KOTSOU, I. and LEYS, C., 2017. Echelle de bonheur subjectif (SHS): Propriétés psychométriques de la version française de l'échelle (SHS-F) et ses relations avec le bien-être psychologique, l'affect et la dépression. In: *Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement*. 01/2017. Vol. 49, no. 1, p. 1.

LANCELOT, P., 2015. *Consensus d'experts sur une traduction en français d'une échelle d'auto-évaluation de la dépression, a "Hopkins Symptom Checklist 25" via une procédure Delphi et une traduction retour en anglais*. Doctoral thesis in Medecine. Brest: Université de Brest-Bretagne occidentale. Available from: https://dumas.ccsd.cnrs.fr/dumas-01208035/document.

LELOUTRE, G., 2017. Le Park System d'Anderlecht : Construction d'un espace public pour la couronne verte de Bruxelles. In: *Bruxelles Patrimoines*. 09/2017. Vol. 22-23, pp. 114-129.

LYUBOMIRSKY, S. and LEPPER, H. S., 1999. A measure of subjective happiness: Preliminary reliability and construct validation. In: *Social Indicators Research*. 02/1999. Vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 137-155.

MIGNON, S., 2020. Bruxelles : Un centre-ville moins aisé, vecteur de propagation du virus. In: *Le Soir*. 13/10/2020. Available from: https://www.lesoir.be/331167/article/2020-10-13/bruxelles-un-centre-ville-moins-aise-vecteur-de-propagation-du-virus.

MOENS, B. and GIJS, C., 2020. How Brussels is preparing for the non-rentrée. In: *Politico*. 28/08/2020. Available from: https://www.politico.eu/article/how-brussels-is-preparing-for-the-non-rentrée/.

NIELSEN, T. S. and HANSEN, K. B., 2007. Do green areas affect health? Results from a Danish survey on the use of green areas and health indicators. In: *Health & Place*. 27/03/2007. Vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 839-850.

O'CONNOR, R. C., WETHERALL, K., CLEARE, S., MCCLELLAND, H., MELSON, A. J., NIEDZWIEDZ, C. L. and ROBB, K. A., 2021. Mental health and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic: longitudinal analyses of adults in the UK COVID-19 Mental Health & Wellbeing study. In: *The British Journal of Psychiatry*. 06/2021. Vol. 218, no. 6, pp. 326-333.

PAK, B., CHUA A. and VANDE MOERE A, 2017. FixMyStreet Brussels: Online Civic Engagement and Socioeconomic Inequality. In: *Journal of Urban Technology*. 10/04/2017. Vol. 24, no. 2, pp. 65-87

PHILLIPS, A., CANTERS, F. and KHAN, A. Z., 2022. Analyzing spatial inequalities in use and experience of urban green spaces. In: *Urban Forestry & Urban Greening*. 08/2022. Vol. 74, no. 127674.

RAUTIO, N., FILATOVA, S., LEHTINIEMI, H. and MIETTUNEN, J., 2018. Living environment and its relationship to depressive mood: a systematic review. In: *International Journal of Social Psychiatry*. 02/2018. Vol. 64, no. 1, pp. 92-103.

REA, A., RACAPÉ, J. and FOURTUNIER, C., 2022. Les inégalités sociales et de santé du COVID-19. In: *Revue Médicale de Bruxelles*. 04/09/2022. Vol. 43, pp. 439-444.

RICHARDS, J., JIANG, X., KELLY, P., CHAU, J., BAUMAN, A. and DING, D., 2015. Don't worry, be happy: cross-sectional associations between physical activity and happiness in 15 European countries. In: *BMC public health*. 31/01/2015. Vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 1-8.
RODRIGUEZ-LOUREIRO, L., CASAS, L., BAUWELINCK, M., LEFEBVRE, W., VANPOUCKE, C., VANROELEN, C. and GADEYNE, S. 2021. Social inequalities in the associations between urban green spaces, self-perceived health and mortality in Brussels: Results from a census-based cohort study. In: *Health & Place*. 07/2021. Vol. 70, no. 102603.

RODRIGUEZ-REY, R., GARRIDO-HERNANSAIZ, H. and COLLADO, S., 2020. Psychological impact and associated factors during the initial stage of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic among the general population in Spain. In: *Frontiers in psychology*. 23/06/2020. Vol. 11, no. 1540.

SAX, L. J., GILMARTIN, S. K. and BRYANT, A. N., 2003. Assessing Response Rates and Nonresponse Bias in Web and Paper Surveys. In: *Research in Higher Education*. 08/2003. Vol. 44, pp. 409-432.

SCHMITS, E., DEKEYSER, S., KLEIN, O., LUMINET, O., YZERBYT, V. and GLOWACZ, F., 2021. Psychological distress among students in higher education: one year after the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. In: *International journal of environmental research and public health*. 12/07/2021. Vol. 18, no. 14, p. 7445.

SEN, A., 1993. Capability and well-being. In: *The quality of life*. 03/1993. Vol. 30, pp. 270-293.

SMITH, W. G., 2008. Does Gender Influence Online Survey Participation? A Record-linkage Analysis of University Faculty Online Survey Response Behavior. In: *ERIC Document Reproduction Service*. 01/01/2008. No. ED 501717.

STANNERS, D., and BOURDEAU, P., 1995. The urban environment. In: STANNERS, D., BOURDEAU, P. (Eds.), Europe's Environment: The Dobříš Assessment. Copenhagen: European Environment Agency, pp. 261-296.

STEIN, M. B. and HEIMBERG, R. G. (2004). Well-being and life satisfaction in generalized anxiety disorder: Comparison to major depressive disorder in a community sample. In: *Journal of affective disorders*. 04/2004. Vol. 79, nos. 1-3, pp. 161-166.

THOMPSON COON, J., BODDY, K., STEIN, K., WHEAR, R., BARTON, J. and DEPLEDGE, M. H., 2011. Does participating in physical activity in outdoor natural environments have a greater effect on physical and mental wellbeing than physical activity indoors? A systematic review. In: *Environmental science & technology*. 01/03/2011. Vol. 45, no. 5, pp. 1761-1772.

THOMPSON, C. W., ROE, J., ASPINALL, P., MITCHELL, R., CLOW, A. and MILLER, D., 2012. More green space is linked to less stress in deprived communities: Evidence from salivary cortisol patterns. In: *Landscape and urban planning*. 15/04/2012. Vol. 105, no. 3, pp. 221-229.

TULL, M. T., EDMONDS, K. A., SCAMALDO, K. M., RICHMOND, J. R., ROSE, J. P. and GRATZ, K. L., 2020. Psychological outcomes associated with stay-at-home orders and the perceived impact of COVID-19 on daily life. In: *Psychiatry research*. 07/2020. Vol. 289, no. 113098.

TWENGE, J. M., COOPER, A. B., JOINER, T. E., DUFFY, M. E. and BINAU, S. G., 2019. Age, period, and cohort trends in mood disorder indicators and suicide-related outcomes in a nationally representative dataset, 2005-2017. In: *Journal of Abnormal Psychology*. 04/2019. Vol. 128, no. 3, pp. 185-199.

VAN DEN BERG, M., WENDEL-VOS, W., VAN POPPEL, M., KEMPER, H., VAN MECHELEN, W. and MAAS, J., 2015. Health benefits of green spaces in the living environment: A systematic review of epidemiological studies. In: *Urban forestry & urban greening*. 2015. Vol. 14 no. 4, pp. 806-816.

VAN HAMME, G., GRIPPA, T. and VAN CRIEKINGEN, M., 2016. Migratory movements and dynamics of neighbourhoods in Brussels. In: *Brussels Studies*. General collection. 21/03/2016, no. 97. Available from: https://journals.openedition.org/brussels/1338?lang=en
VAN HERZELE, A. and DE VRIES, S. 2011. Linking green space to health: A comparative study of two urban neighbourhoods in Ghent, Belgium. In: *Population and Environment*. 02/10.2011. Vol. 34, no. 2, pp. 171-193.

VAN CRIEKINGEN, M., 2009. Moving in/out of Brussels' historical core in the early 2000s: migration and the effects of gentrification. In: *Urban studies*. 04/2009. Vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 825-848.

WREN-LEWIS, S. 2014. How successfully can we measure well-being through measuring happiness? In: *South African Journal of Philosophy*. 31/10/2014. Vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 417-432.

ZHANG, Z. and CHEN, W., 2018. A systematic review of the relationship between physical activity and happiness. In: *Journal of happiness studies*. 24/03/2018. Vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 1305-1322.

## NOTES

1. Project link, including data: https://osf.io/fzxuv/

## ABSTRACTS

This study investigated how socio-environmental factors influenced psychological wellbeing among Brussels residents during the first COVID-19 lockdown. A cross-sectional survey of 315 participants assessed age, socioeconomic status, housing conditions, access to public and private green space, physical activity, and psychological outcomes (happiness, anxiety, depression). Regression analyses showed that age and physical activity were consistent predictors of wellbeing: younger participants reported greater anxiety and lower levels of happiness, while higher physical activity was associated with reduced distress and greater happiness. Access to a private garden predicted slightly lower levels of anxiety and depression but was not linked to greater happiness. Housing space and municipal-level availability of public green space were not significant predictors of wellbeing when controlling for other factors. Participants nonetheless reported assigning greater importance to both private and public green spaces after lockdown. Findings highlight the protective role of physical activity and suggest that equitable access to outdoor spaces is essential for urban wellbeing.

Cette étude visait à examiner l'influence des facteurs socioenvironnementaux sur le bien-être psychologique des habitants de Bruxelles lors du premier confinement lié à la COVID-19. Une enquête transversale menée auprès de 315 participants a permis d'évaluer les variables suivantes : âge, conditions de logement, accès à des espaces verts publics et privés, activité physique et effets psychologiques (bonheur, anxiété, dépression). Des analyses de régression ont montré que l'âge et l'activité physique étaient des variables prédictives constantes du bien-être : parmi les participants, les plus jeunes ont fait état d'un niveau d'anxiété plus élevé et d'un sentiment de bonheur plus faible, tandis qu'une activité physique plus intense était associée à une diminution de la détresse et à un plus grand bonheur. La possibilité d'accéder à un jardin privé prédisposait à une légère diminution de l'anxiété et de la dépression, sans toutefois donner lieu à un sentiment de bonheur accru. La surface de logement et la disponibilité d'espaces verts publics au niveau communal ne constituaient pas des variables prédictives significatives du bien-
être lorsque d'autres facteurs étaient pris en compte. Les participants ont néanmoins indiqué qu'ils accordaient une plus grande importance aux espaces verts privés et publics après le confinement. Les résultats mettent en évidence le rôle protecteur de l'activité physique et indiquent qu'un accès équitable à des espaces extérieurs est essentiel pour la résilience urbaine.

Deze studie onderzocht de invloed van sociale omgevingsfactoren op het psychologisch welzijn van de Brusselaars tijdens de eerste coronalockdown. In het kader van een cross-sectionele bevraging bij 315 deelnemers werden leeftijd, sociaal-economische status, woonomstandigheden, toegang tot openbare en private groene ruimten, fysieke activiteit en psychologisch welzijn (geluk, angst en depressie) geëvalueerd. Uit de regressieanalyses bleek dat leeftijd en fysieke activiteit consistente voorspellers van welzijn waren: jongere deelnemers rapporteerden meer angst en minder geluk, terwijl meer fysieke activiteit geassocieerd werd met minder angst en meer geluk. De toegang tot een eigen tuin voorspelde iets minder angst en depressie, maar werd niet in verband gebracht met meer geluk. Bewoonbare oppervlakte en de beschikbaarheid van openbare groene ruimte binnen de gemeente waren geen significante voorspellers van welzijn wanneer er gecontroleerd werd voor andere factoren. De deelnemers gaven wel aan meer belang te hechten aan zowel openbare als private groene ruimten na de lockdown. De bevindingen benadrukken de beschermende rol van fysieke activiteit en wijzen erop dat de gelijke toegang tot buitenruimten essentieel is voor een veerkrachtige stad.

## INDEX

**Trefwoorden** sociale ongelijkheden, leefmilieu, huisvesting, levenskwaliteit, gezondheid, stadsplanning

**Mots-clés:** inégalités sociales, environnement, logement, qualité de vie, santé, planification urbaine

**Keywords:** disability, discrimination, mobility, public transport

**Subjects:** 4. santé – qualité de vie – inégalités sociales

## AUTHORS

### CAMILA ARNAL

Camila Arnal holds a PhD in Psychology from Université libre de Bruxelles, where she conducted research on social inequalities, intergroup dynamics, resilience and conspiracy theories. She has worked with NGOs to promote the inclusion of migrants and their psychological wellbeing. Latest publication: ARNAL, C., KOLINSKY, R., en KLEIN, O., 2022. Le complotisme : maladie des mal-pensants? In: *Cahiers de psychologie clinique*. 2022. Vol. 58, no. 1, pp. 111-131. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3917/cpc.058.0111. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3917/cpc.058.0111
camila.arnal[at]ulb.be

### OLIVIER GENNART

Olivier Gennart studied architecture at UCLouvain (Belgium) and UC Berkeley (USA), and specialises in the sustainability of urban spaces and architectural design, integrating ecological principles to create environments which promote equality and social integration. He has contributed towards several international projects, including the California Tower Project.
olivier.gennart[at]gmail.com
## CHIARA INSERRA

Chiara Inserra completed an Erasmus+ research placement at Université libre de Bruxelles in 2021 after a master's degree in clinical and social psychology. From 2021 to 2023, she worked as a researcher at the University of Turin and Val d'Aosta on various social psychology projects. She is currently in charge of international mobility support for young people in occupational integration at Parcours le Monde Sud-Ouest in Toulouse.

chia.inserra[at]gmail.com

## CHRISTOPHE LEYS

Christophe Leys is a professor in the Faculty of Psychology, Educational Sciences and Logopedics at Université libre de Bruxelles, and a psychotherapist. His research focuses on several areas: psychological data analysis, psychological distress (including anxiety and depression, post-traumatic stress, etc.), wellbeing, resilience and pro-social behaviour.

christophe.leys[at]ulb.be

## OLIVIER KLEIN

Olivier Klein is a professor of social psychology at Université libre de Bruxelles. He and Vincent Yzerbyt are the authors of *The Psychology of Vaccination* (Routledge) and one of the creators of the popular science podcast *Milgram de savoirs*.

olivier.klein[at]ulb.be