| Literature DB >> 31644533 |
Ting Ren1, Xinguo Yu1, Weiwei Yang1.
Abstract
Considered as a key component of human capital, mental health has drawn substantial scholarly attention for its effect on people's health status and economic outcome. When facing the challenge of stress, people's heterogeneity in cognitive ability and non-cognitive ability causes difference in patterns of coping, resulting in different manifestations in mental health. Previous researches have shown that cognitive and non-cognitive abilities have positively direct or indirect effects on mental health, but few studies research their role of coping with air pollution. We used the China Family Panel Survey (CFPS) and matched individual data with county or district level PM2.5 information from NASA. The study found that air pollution has negative effect on mental health with every increase of 1μg/m3 in PM2.5 deteriorating mental health by 0.038 standard deviation, which is the total effect of air pollution. However, the direct effect of air pollution on mental health will decrease to 0.028 in absolute value when considering mediating effects. By employing different approaches, we found positive mediating effects via cognitive ability and non-cognitive ability. Individuals with high cognitive and non-cognitive abilities are able to accurately diagnose problems and select the optimal coping strategies, thus restoring positive mental health.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31644533 PMCID: PMC6808496 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0223353
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Global Prevalence of depressive disorders, by region and gender in 2017 source: Global burden of disease study 2017 (http://ghdx.healthdata.org/gbd-results-tool).
Fig 2The influence of air pollution on mental health, mediated by cognitive ability and non-cognitive ability.
Statistical description†.
| 2016 | 2014 | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variable | Obs | Mean | Std. Dev. | Min | Max | Obs | Mean | Std. Dev. | Min | Max |
| Depression | 13761 | 0 | 1 | -0.989 | 4.997 | 18229 | 0 | 1 | -0.761 | 5.509 |
| Cognitive ability | 13761 | 0 | 1 | -2.487 | 3.004 | 18229 | 0 | 1 | -1.687 | 2.174 |
| Non-cognitive ability | 13761 | 0 | 1 | -2.832 | 1.331 | 18229 | 0 | 1 | -2.897 | 1.408 |
| PM2.5 | 13761 | 38.625 | 16.775 | 2.642 | 80.97 | 18229 | 40.470 | 15.068 | 2.952 | 77.68 |
| Relative Income | 13761 | 2.411 | 1.009 | 1 | 5 | 18229 | 2.496 | 0.974 | 1 | 5 |
| Social Status | 13761 | 2.825 | 1.058 | 1 | 5 | 18229 | 2.893 | 0.981 | 1 | 5 |
| Age | 13761 | 49.879 | 15.183 | 18 | 98 | 18229 | 46.627 | 15.504 | 16 | 95 |
| Gender | 13761 | 0.494 | 0.500 | 0 | 1 | 18229 | 0.515 | 0.500 | 0 | 1 |
| Male | 6801 | (49.42%) | 9380 | (51.46%) | ||||||
| Female | 6960 | (50.58%) | 8849 | (48.54%) | ||||||
| Urban | 13761 | 0.481 | 0.500 | 0 | 1 | 18229 | 0.505 | 0.500 | 0 | 1 |
| Urban | 6672 | (48.48%) | 9361 | (51.35%) | ||||||
| Rural | 7089 | (51.52%) | 8868 | (48.65%) | ||||||
| Marital | 13761 | 2.111 | 0.775 | 1 | 5 | 18229 | 2.090 | 0.776 | 1 | 5 |
| Never married | 1111 | (8.07%) | 1755 | (9.63%) | ||||||
| Married | 11646 | (84.63%) | 15168 | (83.21%) | ||||||
| Cohabitation | 77 | (0.56%) | 101 | (0.55%) | ||||||
| Divorced | 219 | (1.59%) | 315 | (1.73%) | ||||||
| Widowed | 708 | (5.14%) | 890 | (4.88%) | ||||||
| Education Degree | 13761 | 2.564 | 1.329 | 1 | 7 | 18229 | 2.706 | 1.334 | 1 | 8 |
| Illiterate | 3779 | (27.46%) | 4107 | (22.53%) | ||||||
| Primary school | 3040 | (22.09%) | 4143 | (22.73%) | ||||||
| Junior high school | 3927 | (28.54%) | 5443 | (29.86%) | ||||||
| Senior high school | 1881 | (13.67%) | 2798 | (15.35%) | ||||||
| 3-year college | 704 | (5.12%) | 1059 | (5.81%) | ||||||
| Bachelor's degree | 404 | (2.94%) | 639 | (3.51%) | ||||||
| Master's degree | 26 | (0.19%) | 39 | (0.21%) | ||||||
| Doctoral degree | 0 | (0%) | 1 | (0.01%) | ||||||
†Notes: Depression is measured by the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) in 2016 and Kessler Screening Scale for Psychological Distress (K6) in 2014. Percentages of each category of categorical variables are in the parentheses.
Effect of air pollution on mental health, mediated by cognitive and non-cognitive ability, 2016†.
| Depression | Cognitive ability | Non-cognitive ability | Depression | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PM2.5 | 0.038 | -0.059 | -0.052 | 0.028 |
| Cognitive ability | -0.112 | |||
| Non-cognitive ability | -0.053 | |||
| Covariates | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| County/District Fixed Effects | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Observations | 13761 | 13761 | 13761 | 13761 |
| Adjusted R2 | 0.134 | 0.461 | 0.504 | 0.143 |
†Notes: Standard errors in parentheses.
* p < 0.1
** p < 0.05
*** p < 0.01. Depression is measured by the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D). PM2.5 is a proxy for air pollution. Cognitive ability is composed of the score of immediate word recall test and the score of number series test, and non-cognitive ability is composed of the ability to express oneself (rated by the interviewers) and the extent of fluency of Mandarin (rated by the interviewers). To control for unobserved effects resulting from heterogeneity of different counties or districts which the interviewees live, county or district fixed effects are included in the models. OLS Model is employed in this table. The first column is run with depression regressed on PM2.5; the second column with the first mediator (cognitive ability) regressed on PM2.5; the third column with the second mediator (non-cognitive ability) regressed on PM2.5; and the fourth column with depression regressed on PM2.5 and both mediators (cognitive ability and non-cognitive ability).
Effect of air pollution on mental health, mediated by cognitive and non-cognitive ability, 2014†.
| Depression | Cognitive ability | Non-cognitive ability | Depression | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PM2.5 | 0.015 | -0.014 | -0.039 | 0.012 |
| Cognitive ability | -0.053 | |||
| Non-cognitive ability | -0.053 | |||
| Covariates | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| County/District Fixed Effects | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Observations | 18229 | 18229 | 18229 | 18229 |
| Adjusted R2 | 0.101 | 0.574 | 0.427 | 0.104 |
†Notes: Standard errors in parentheses.
* p < 0.1
** p < 0.05
*** p < 0.01. The explanation of variables and models is the same as those in Table 2, except that mental health is measured by the Kessler Screening Scale for Psychological Distress (K6), and cognitive ability is composed of the score of word test and the score of math test.
Robustness model: Effect of air pollution on mental health, mediated by cognitive and non-cognitive ability using logistic/probit model, 2016†.
| Logistic Model | Probit Model | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IV_Mandarin usage | Depression | Cognitive ability | IV_Mandarin usage | Depression | IV_Mandarin usage | Depression | Cognitive ability | IV_Mandarin usage | Depression | |
| PM2.5 | 0.038 | -0.059 | -0.169 | 0.030 | 0.038 | -0.059 | -0.087 | 0.030 | ||
| Cognitive ability | -0.119 | -0.119 | ||||||||
| IV_Mandarin usage | -0.019 | -0.019 | ||||||||
| Non-cognitive ability | 1.293 | 0.711 | ||||||||
| Covariates | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| County/District Fixed Effects | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Observations | 10214 | 13761 | 13761 | 10214 | 13761 | 10214 | 13761 | 13761 | 10214 | 13761 |
| Adjusted R2 | 0.134 | 0.461 | 0.141 | 0.134 | 0.461 | 0.141 | ||||
| Pseudo R2 | 0.496 | 0.427 | 0.495 | 0.428 | ||||||
†Notes: Standard errors in parentheses.
* p < 0.1
** p < 0.05
*** p < 0.01. The explanation of variables is the same with those in Table 2. The first and sixth columns are run with the instrument (Mandarin used in interview) regressed on non-cognitive ability; the second and seventh columns with depression regressed on PM2.5; the third and eighth columns with the first mediator (cognitive ability) regressed on PM2.5; the fourth and ninth columns with the second mediator (Mandarin used in interview) regressed on PM2.5; and the fifth and tenth columns with depression regressed on PM2.5 and both mediators (cognitive ability and Mandarin used in interview). Both the first and third columns are employing Logistic model, while the sixth and eighth columns are using Probit model.
Robustness model: Effect of air pollution on mental health, mediated by cognitive and non-cognitive ability using logistic/probit model, 2014†.
| Logistic Model | Probit Model | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IV_Mandarin usage | Depression | Cognitive ability | IV_Mandarin usage | Depression | IV_Mandarin usage | Depression | Cognitive ability | IV_Mandarin usage | Depression | |
| PM2.5 | 0.015 | -0.014 | -0.106 | 0.014 | 0.015 | -0.014 | -0.042 | 0.014 | ||
| Cognitive ability | -0.063 | -0.063 | ||||||||
| IV_Mandarin usage | -0.016 | -0.016 | ||||||||
| Non-cognitive ability | 1.131 | 0.637 | ||||||||
| Covariates | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| County/District Fixed Effects | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Observations | 15944 | 18229 | 18229 | 15944 | 18229 | 15944 | 18229 | 18229 | 15944 | 18229 |
| Adjusted R2 | 0.101 | 0.574 | 0.103 | 0.101 | 0.574 | 0.103 | ||||
| Pseudo R2 | 0.491 | 0.423 | 0.490 | 0.423 | ||||||
†Notes: Standard errors in parentheses.
* p < 0.1
** p < 0.05
*** p < 0.01. The explanation of variables is the same with those in Table 3, and the explanations of models are the same as those in Table 4.
Fig 3The kernel density of mediating effects of cognitive and non-cognitive ability, 2016.
Fig 4The kernel density of mediating effects of cognitive and non-cognitive ability, 2014.
Estimate of mediating effects of cognitive and non-cognitive ability from monte carlo approach.
| 2016 | ||||||
| Variable | Obs | Mean | Std. Dev. | Min | Max | 95% Confidence Interval |
| The Indirect Effect via Cognitive Ability | 50000 | 0.007 | 0.002 | 0.001 | 0.019 | (0.003, 0.011) |
| The Indirect Effect via Non-cognitive Ability | 50000 | 0.003 | 0.001 | 0.000 | 0.007 | (0. 001, 0.005) |
| The Total Indirect Effects | 50000 | 0.010 | 0.003 | 0.001 | 0.022 | (0.005, 0.015) |
| Ratio of Total Indirect Effects to Direct Effects: 0.336 | ||||||
| 2014 | ||||||
| Variable | Obs | Mean | Std. Dev. | Min | Max | 95% Confidence Interval |
| The Indirect Effect via Cognitive Ability | 50000 | 0.001 | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.004 | (0.000, .002) |
| The Indirect Effect via Non-cognitive Ability | 50000 | 0.002 | 0.001 | 0.000 | 0.004 | (0.001, 0.003) |
| The Total Indirect Effects | 50000 | 0.003 | 0.001 | 0.001 | 0.007 | (0.002, 0.005) |
| Ratio of Total Indirect Effects to Direct Effects: 0.229 | ||||||