Social Support:

Theory, Research
and Applications
edited by

Irwin G. Sarason
Barbara R. Sarason
University of Washington
Seattle, Washington, USA

1985 Martinus Nijhoff Publishers

Dordrecht 1 Boston 1 Lancaster
Published in cooperation with NATO Scientific Affairs Division

LONELINESS RESEARCH:

BASIC CONCEPTS AND FINDINGS

L e t i t i a Anne Peplau
U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a , Los Angeles

Nothing, t h e o l d adage s a y s , i s as powerful a s an i d e a whose

time has come.
I n t h e s o c i a l s c i e n c e community, t h e r e c o g n i t i o n
t h a t s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s a r e e s s e n t i a l t o p e r s o n a l h e a l t h and
h a p p i n e s s , t h a t " f r i e n d s a r e good medicine," i s such a t i m e l y
idea.
Indeed, s o fundamental a r e s o c i a l t i e s t h a t s e v e r a l
independent r e s e a r c h t r a d i t i o n s have developed i n t h i s a r e a , each
with a somewhat d i f f e r e n t f o c u s . Thus t h e c o - e x i s t e n c e o f work on
s o c i a l s u p p o r t , l o n e l i n e s s and s o c i a l i s o l a t i o n a t t e s t s t o t h e
v i t a l importance of s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s . The independence of t h e s e
r e s e a r c h t r a d i t i o n s i s u n d e r s t a n d a b l e , g i v e n t h e i r h i s t o r i c a l and
disciplinary origins.
But t h e time i s now r i g h t f o r r e s e a r c h e r s
i n t h e s e s e p a r a t e f i e l d s t o become a c q u a i n t e d w i t h each o t h e r s '
work.
My g o a l i n t h i s paper i s t o o u t l i n e i n broad s t r o k e s c u r r e n t
r e s e a r c h on l o n e l i n e s s , summarizing key f i n d i n g s and i d e n t i f y i n g
I t h i n k t h a t t h o s e who
c o n c e p t u a l and m e t h o d o l o g i c a l i s s u e s .
study s o c i a l s u p p o r t w i l l f i n d work on l o n e l i n e s s b o t h c o m f o r t i n g ,
for
the
similarities
i t d i s p l a y s t o t h e i r own work, and
i n s t r u c t i v e , f o r t h e new p e r s p e c t i v e t h a t i t o f f e r s ( s e e a l s o
Rook, i n p r e s s ) .
Loneliness,
the
distressing
f e e l i n g t h a t one's
social
r e l a t i o n s h i p s a r e d e f i c i e n t i n some important way, i s a l l t o o
common a human e x p e r i e n c e .
I t h a s been e s t i m a t e d t h a t roughly one
American i n f o u r h a s f e l t l o n e l y i n t h e p a s t few weeks (Bradburn,
1969).
Perhaps 10% of t h e p o p u l a t i o n s u f f e r s from s e v e r e and
p e r s i s t e n t l o n e l i n e s s ( P e p l a u & Perlman, 1982). Although some
people a r e a t g r e a t e r r i s k f o r l o n e l i n e s s t h a n o t h e r s , no segment
of s o c i e t y i s t o t a l l y immune.

27 0

L e t i t i a Peplau

A BRIEF HISTORY OF WORK ON LONELINESS

Although Freud himself d i d n o t d i r e c t l y a d d r e s s t h e problem

of
loneliness,
the
earliest
psychological
d i s c u s s i o n s of
loneliness
were i n f l u e n c e d by t h e p s y c h o a n a l y t i c t r a d i t i o n .
Perhaps t h e f i r s t work on l o n e l i n e s s published i n E n g l i s h i s a
paper by Zilboorg t h a t appeared i n 1938. He l i n k e d l o n e l i n e s s t o
p e r s o n a l i t y t r a i t s of n a r c i s s i s m , egocentrism, and h o s t i l i t y ,
which he b e l i e v e d had t h e i r o r i g i n s i n f a u l t y p a r e n t i n g during
infancy.
F i f t e e n y e a r s l a t e r , S u l l i v a n (1953) gave l o n e l i n e s s a
p l a c e of prominence i n h i s theory of p e r s o n a l i t y development. He
wrote t h a t i n preadolescence, a powerful human need f o r intimacy
f i r s t emerges, making t e e n a g e r s e s p e c i a l l y v u l n e r a b l e t o the
d r i v i n g f o r c e of l o n e l i n e s s . About t h e sane time, Fromm-Reiclunann
(1959) p u b l i s h e d an i n f l u e n t i a l paper on l o n e l i n e s s , based on her
c l i n i c a l work w i t h s c h i z o p h r e n i c s .
She, t o o , emphasized t h a t
loneliness
is
a d i s t r e s s i n g and powerful e x p e r i e n c e , o f t e n
t r a c e a b l e t o childhood e x p e r i e n c e s i n t h e family. A common theme
i n t h e works of t h i s p e r i o d was t h a t l o n e l i n e s s i s a p a i n f u l
s u b j e c t i v e e x p e r i e n c e , d i s t i n c t from t h e o b j e c t i v e s t a t e of being
alone.
1960s, 6 4 new English- language p u b l i c a t i o n s on
In
the
l o n e l i n e s s appeared.
Some works, such a s t h o s e by C a r l Rogers
19731,
continued
to
draw
primarily
on
clinical
(1961,
observations.
Others, such a s
Lonely Crowd by Riesman,
G l a z e r , & Denny (19611, c a l l e d popular a t t e n t i o n t o t h e p o s s i b l e
impact of s o c i a l changes on p e r s o n a l r e l a t i o n s and l o n e l i n e s s .
Also e v i d e n t i n t h e 1960s was t h e beginning of e m p i r i c a l r e s e a r c h
on
loneliness.
For
example,
s e v e r a l s o c i o l o g i c a l surveys
i n v e s t i g a t e d l o n e l i n e s s and s o c i a l i s o l a t i o n among o l d e r a d u l t s
b o t h i n t h e United S t a t e s and i n Europe (e.g., Blau, 1961; Donson
& Georges,
1967; Lopata, 1969; Lowenthal, 1964; Shanas e t a l . ,
1968; T u n s t a l l , 1967).
I n t h e 1970s, work on l o n e l i n e s s expanded r a p i d l y , s p u r r e d by
book, L o n e l i n e s s :
Experience & Emotional &
Robert Weiss's
S o c i a l I s o l a t i o n (1973). Weiss o f f e r e d an i n t e r a c t i o n i s t view of
l o n e l i n e s s a s stemming b o t h from p e r s o n a l v u l n e r a b i l i t i e s and
situational
constraints
on
relationships.
More
recently,
loneliness
research
has
taken
many
directions.
Several
r e s e a r c h e r s have developed and v a l i d a t e d i n s t r u m e n t s t o a s s e s s
l o n e l i n e s s ( s e e review by R u s s e l l , 1982). I n p a r t because of t h e
a v a i l a b i l i t y of t h e s e l o n e l i n e s s s c a l e s , numerous s t u d i e s have
begun t o examine t h e p e r s o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and s o c i a l b e h a v i o r s
of l o n e l y p e o p l e ( s e e c h a p t e r by Jones i n t h i s volume), and t o
i n v e s t i g a t e t h e l i n k s between l o n e l i n e s s and p e r s o n a l well- being
( s e e Perlman & Peplau, i n p r e s s ) . One i n d i c a t i o n t h a t work on
loneliness
h a s joined " the e s t a b l i s h m e n t" i s t h a t NIMH has
sponsored two conferences on l o n e l i n e s s , one i n 1979 ( s e e Peplau 6
Perlman, 1982) and a second i n 1982 ( s e e Peplau & Goldston, i n
p r e s s ) . Today, r e s e a r c h on l o n e l i n e s s i s w e l l- e s t a b l i s h e d .

271

Lone l i n e s s Research
A DEFINITION OF LONELINESS

L o n e l i n e s s h a s been d e f i n e d i n a v a r i e t y of ways (Table 1).

However, v i r t u a l l y a l l d e f i n i t i o n s s h a r e t h r e e main p o i n t s of
agreement.
F i r s t , l o n e l i n e s s i s a s u b j e c t i v e e x p e r i e n c e and i s
not synonymous w i t h o b j e c t i v e s o c i a l i s o l a t i o n . As Paul T i l l i c h
(1952) observed i n
C o u r a ~ e t o BeL "Our language h a s w i s e l y
sensed t h e two s i d e s of...being a l o n e . It h a s c r e a t e d t h e word
" l o n e l i n e s s " t o e x p r e s s t h e p a i n of being a l o n e , and i t h a s
c r e a t e d t h e word " s o l i t u d e " t o e x p r e s s t h e g l o r y of being alone.''
TABLE 1
Definitions

of

Loneliness

Loneliness.. i s t h e exceedingly u n p l e a s a n t and d r i v i n g e x p e r i e n c e

connected
with
i n a d e q u a t e d i s c h a r g e of t h e need f o r human
intimacy, f o r i n t e r p e r s o n a l intimacy. ( S u l l i v a n , 1953, p. 290).

..

Loneliness i s a s e n t i m e n t f e l t by a person. . ( e x p e r i e n c i n g ) a
wish f o r a form o r l e v e l of i n t e r a c t i o n d i f f e r e n t from one
p r e s e n t l y e x p e r i e n c e d . ( L o p a t a , 1969, pp 249-250).
Loneliness i s caused n o t by b e i n g a l o n e b u t by b e i n g w i t h o u t some
d e f i n i t e needed r e l a t i o n s h i p o r s e t of r e l a t i o n s h i p s
Loneliness
appears always t o b e a r e s p o n s e t o t h e absence of some p a r t i c u l a r
type of r e l a t i o n s h i p o r , more a c c u r a t e l y , a response t o t h e
absence of some p a r t i c u l a r r e l a t i o n a l p r o v i s i o n . (Weiss, 1973,
p.17).

....

Loneliness ( i s ) t h e e x p e r i e n c i n g of a l a g between r e a l i z e d and

desired
interpersonal
relationships
as
disagreeable
or
u n a c c e p t a b l e , p a r t i c u l a r l y when t h e person p e r c e i v e s a p e r s o n a l
inability
t o r e a l i z e the desired interpersonal relationships
w i t h i n a r e a s o n a b l e p e r i o d of time. ( d e Jong- Gierveld, 1978,
p.221).
Loneliness
i s t h e u n p l e a s a n t e x p e r i e n c e t h a t o c c u r s when a
person's
network
of s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s is d e f i c i e n t i n some
important way, e i t h e r q u a n t i t a t i v e l y o r q u a l i t a t i v e l y . (Perlman 6
Peplau, 1981, p. 3 1 ) .
L o n e l i n e s s ( i s ) t h e absence o r p e r c e i v e d absence of s a t i s f y i n g
s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s , accompanied by symptoms of p s y c h o l o g i c a l
d i s t r e s s t h a t a r e r e l a t e d t o t h e a c t u a l o r p e r c e i v e d absence....!
propose t h a t s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s can be t r e a t e d a s a p a r t i c u l a r
c l a s s of r e i n f o r c e m e n t
T h e r e f o r e , l o n e l i n e s s can be viewed i n
part
as
a
response
to
t h e absence of important s o c i a l
r e i n f o r c e m e n t s . (Young, 1982, p. 380, i t a l i c s d e l e t e d ) .

....

272

L e t i t i a Peplau

Making t h i s d i s t i n c t i o n c l e a r l y h a s p e r m i t t e d r e s e a r c h e r s t o
i n v e s t i g a t e e m p i r i c a l l y t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o n e l i n e s s and
aloneness.
As e x p e c t e d , t h e r e i s a p o s i t i v e , b u t o n l y moderately
s t r o n g a s s o c i a t i o n between t h e two.
On t h e a v e r a g e , l o n e l y p e o p l e r e p o r t having fewer f r i e n d s and
l e s s c o n t a c t w i t h o t h e r p e o p l e (e.g.,
J o n e s , 1982; Perlman,
Gerson, & S p i n n e r , 1978; R u s s e l l , P e p l a u , & Cutrona, 1980). Both
t e e n a g e r s and a d u l t s a r e s i g n i f i c a n t l y more l i k e l y t o r e p o r t
f e e l i n g s of l o n e l i n e s s when they a r e a l o n e t h a n when t h e y a r e w i t h
o t h e r p e o p l e (Larson e t a l . , 1982).
Second, l o n e l i n e s s r e s u l t s from a d e f i c i e n c y i n a person's
socia 1 relationships.
This
deficiency
h a s been v a r i o u s l y
described.
Some (e.g., S u l l i v a n , 1953; Weiss, 1973) emphasize t h e
n o t i o n t h a t b a s i c human needs f o r i n t i m a c y a r e n o t b e i n g met.
O t h e r s (e.g.,
Perlman & P e p l a u , 1981) t a k e a more c o g n i t i v e view
t h a t t h e r e i s a d i s c r e p a n c y between t h e t y p e , q u a l i t y , o r q u a n t i t y
of r e l a t i o n s h i p s t h a t a p e r s o n wants and t h o s e t h a t t h e p e r s o n
p e r c e i v e s himself o r h e r s e l f a s having. A l l a g r e e , however, t h a t
some
sort
o f r e l a t i o n a l d e f i c i t i s a d e f i n i n g f e a t u r e of
loneliness.
T h i r d , t h e e x p e r i e n c e of l o n e l i n e s s i s a v e r s i v e . Although
some (e.g.,
Moustakas, 1975) have encouraged l o n e l y p e o p l e t o
emphasize
t h e opportunities loneliness provides f o r personal
growth and i n s i g h t , l o n e l y p e o p l e seldom view t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e a s
pleasant.
Loneliness i s t y p i c a l l y associated w i t h such f e e l i n g s
a s d e p r e s s i o n , e m p t i n e s s , a n x i e t y , boredom, h e l p l e s s n e s s , and
R u b e n s t e i n & Shaver, 1982; R u s s e l l , P e p l a u , &
desperation (e.g.,
Cutrona, 1980).
TYPES OF LONELINESS
Two ways of c l a s s i f y i n g l o n e l i n e s s have proved u s e f u l , one
based on t h e d u r a t i o n o f l o n e l i n e s s and a second based on t h e
n a t u r e of t h e r e l a t i o n a l d e f i c i t involved.
Chronicity.
L o n e l i n e s s can r a n g e from f l e e t i n g twinges of d i s c o m f o r t t o
s e v e r e and p e r s i s t e n t f e e l i n g s of i n t e n s e misery. R e s e a r c h e r s and
c l i n i c i a n s have l a r g e l y ignored t r a n s i e n t f e e l i n g s of l o n e l i n e s s ,
and f o c u s e d i n s t e a d on more e n d u r i n g l o n e l i n e s s . Young (1982)
r e c e n t l y proposed a d i s t i n c t i o n among t h r e e t y p e s of l o n e l i n e s s .
T r a n s i e n t o r everyday l o n e l i n e s s r e f e r s t o b r i e f and o c c a s i o n a l
l o n e l y moods. S i t u a t i o n a l l o n e l i n e s s o c c u r s when a p e r s o n h a s had
s a t i s f y i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p s u n t i l some s p e c i f i c change o c c u r s , such
as
moving t o a new town o r g e t t i n g d i v o r c e d .
Situational
l o n e l i n e s s can be s e v e r e l y d i s t r e s s i n g , b u t does n o t i n v a r i a b l y
l a s t f o r long time p e r i o d s . When a p e r s o n has lacked s a t i s f y i n g
s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s f o r a p e r i o d of two y e a r s o r more, Young

Lone l i n e s 6 Research

273

c l a s s i f i e s them a s c h r o n i c a l l y lonely.
These d i s t i n c t i o n s i n
c h r o n i c i t y seem i n t u i t i v e l y s e n s i b l e , and r e s e a r c h (e.g., H o j a t ,
1983)
has r e c e n t l y begun t o demonstrate d i f f e r e n c e s between
situationally
and
c h r o n i c a l l y l o n e l y people.
Whether a c u t e
s i t u a t i o n a l l o n e l i n e s s o r c h r o n i c l o n e l i n e s s i s more harmful t o
well- being i s an i m p o r t a n t q u e s t i o n f o r f u r t h e r i n v e s t i g a t i o n .
Nature o f s o c i a l d e f i c i t s .
--Types o f l o n e l i n e s s can a l s o be i d e n t i f i e d i n terms of t h e
s p e c i f i c s o c i a l d e f i c i t involved.
Probably t h e most p o p u l a r
(1973, 1974) d i s t i n c t i o n between
l o n e l i n e s s typology i s Weiss's
the l o n e l i n e s s of s o c i a l i s o l a t i o n and t h e l o n e l i n e s s of emotional
isolation.
I n h i s view, emotional l o n e l i n e s s i s based on t h e
absence of an i n t i m a t e attachment f i g u r e , such a s might be
provided f o r c h i l d r e n by t h e i r p a r e n t s o r f o r a d u l t s by a spouse
o r i n t i m a t e f r i e n d . S o c i a l l o n e l i n e s s o c c u r s when a p e r s o n l a c k s
a sense of s o c i a l connectedness o r community t h a t might be
provided by having a network of f r i e n d s and a s s o c i a t e s a t work o r
school.
Weiss b e l i e v e s t h a t emotional l o n e l i n e s s i s t h e more
s e r i o u s c o n d i t i o n , and t h a t t h e two t y p e s of l o n e l i n e s s a r e
a s s o c i a t e d w i t h d i s t i n c t i v e a f f e c t s ( s e e Rubenstein 6 Shaver,
1982)
A c o n s i d e r a t i o n of t y p e s of l o n e l i n e s s p o i n t s t o one of t h e
most p r e s s i n g needs f o r o u r u n d e r s t a n d i n g of s o c i a l t i e s , namely
t h e development of a comprehensive a n a l y s i s of t h e b a s i c f u n c t i o n s
of s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s ( s e e a l s o Rook 6 Peplau, 1982). Weiss's
typology of l o n e l i n e s s grew o u t of h i s own a n a l y s i s of what he
called
six
basic
" p r o v i s i o n s t'
of
social
r e l a t i o n s h i p s:
attachment,
social
integration,
opportunity f o r nurturance,
r e a s s u r a n c e of worth, a s e n s e of r e l i a b l e a l l i a n c e , and t h e
o b t a i n i n g of guidance.
Weiss (1974) suggested t h a t no s i n g l e
r e l a t i o n s h i p can p r o v i d e a l l of t h e s e e s s e n t i a l i n g r e d i e n t s , and
so a s a t i s f a c t o r y s o c i a l l i f e r e q u i r e s a network of d i f f e r e n t
types of r e l a t i o n s h i p s .
S o c i a l s u p p o r t r e s e a r c h e r s have a l s o
proposed taxonomies of t y p e s of s o c i a l s u p p o r t (e.g.. House, 1981;
Kahn & Antonucci, 1980). For example, Cohen and Hoberman (1983)
distinguish
among
social
support
t h a t p r o v i d e s belonging,
self- esteem, a p p r a i s a l and t a n g i b l e a i d . I n h e r c h a p t e r i n t h i s
volume, Karen Rook i d e n t i f i e s t h r e e b a s i c c l a s s e s of r e l a t i o n s h i p
functions:
h e l p o r a s s i s t a n c e ; companionship and intimacy; and
t h e s o c i a l r e g u l a t i o n s of i n d i v i d u a l behavior.
Although t h e r e i s no d e a r t h of p r o p o s a l s about t h e f u n c t i o n s
of s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s , most a r e based on i n t u i t i o n and common
s e n s e , n o t on t h e o r y o r d a t a .
Nor does t h e r e seem t o be much
consensus about what s t r a t e g y might b e s t be used t o develop a
systematic
taxonomy
of
relationship
functions
and
their
corresponding r e l a t i o n a l d e f i c i t s .
Such a n u n d e r t a k i n g seems
e s s e n t i a l , however.
A taxonomy of r e l a t i o n s h i p f u n c t i o n s would
permit U s t o a s k , f o r i n s t a n c e , whether a l l r e l a t i o n a l d e f i c i t s

274

L e t i t i a Peplau

l e a d t o l o n e l i n e s s . My hunch i s t h a t t h e y do n o t . Does a person

who can't
g e t a l i f t t o t h e a i r p o r t o r who can't f i n d a r e l i a b l e
o r merely f r u s t r a t e d ?
A taxonomy of
mechanic f e e l l o n e l y
r e l a t i o n s h i p f u n c t i o n s might a l s o h e l p t o c l a r i f y t h e d i f f e r e n c e
( i f t h e r e i s o n e ) between l o n e l i n e s s and p e r c e i v e d s o c i a l s u p p o r t ,
s i n c e t h e two might be l i n k e d t o d i f f e r e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p f u n c t i o n s .
The t a s k of mapping t h e major c l a s s e s of r e l a t i o n s h i p f u n c t i o n s ,
of i d e n t i f y i n g t h e t y p e s of r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n which t h e s e f u n c t i o n s
can and t y p i c a l l y do g e t met, and l i n k i n g t h e s e t o s u b j e c t i v e
f e e l i n g s of l o n e l i n e s s and s o c i a l s u p p o r t seems e s s e n t i a l .

--

HOW TO MEASURE LONELINESS

Given
that
loneliness i s a subjective experience, i t s
measurement must u l t i m a t e l y r e l y i n one way o r a n o t h e r on v e r b a l
( F o r a review of measures a s s e s s i n g l o n e l i n e s s , see
self- report.
R u s s e l l , 1982). One common approach has been t o a s k p e o p l e one o r
more d i r e c t q u e s t i o n s about t h e i r f e e l i n g s of l o n e l i n e s s . A
t y p i c a l survey i t e m comes from Bradburn's (1969) Af f e c t Balance
S c a l e , and a s k s i f t h e p e r s o n had f e l t "very l o n e l y o r remote from
o t h e r people" d u r i n g t h e p a s t few weeks. A c r o s s - n a t i o n a l survey
of o l d e r a d u l t s (Shanas e t a l . , 1968) simply asked r e s p o n d e n t s i n
g e n e r a l how o f t e n t h e y were l o n e l y .
I n r e c e n t y e a r s , c o n s i d e r a b l e e f f o r t has gone t o developing
and v a l i d a t i n g m u l t i p l e - i t e m l o n e l i n e s s s c a l e s , b o t h i n t h e United
Rubenstein 6 Shaver, 1982; Young, 19821, and i n
S t a t e s (e.g.,
Europe (de Jong- Gierveld, 1982). I l l u s t r a t i v e of t h e s e measures
i s t h e UCLA L o n e l i n e s s S c a l e ( R u s s e l l , P e p l a u , 6 Cutrona, 1980;
R u s s e l l , 1982).
T h i s s c a l e h a s twenty i t e m s , t e n worded i n a
p o s i t i v e o r s o c i a l l y - s a t i s f i e d d i r e c t i o n (e.g., "There a r e people
who r e a l l y u n d e r s t a n d me") and t e n i n a n e g a t i v e o r lonely
"There i s no one I can t u r n t o " ) . Respondents
d i r e c t i o n (e.g.,
indicate
how
of t e n
( n e v e r , r a r e l y , sometimes, of t e n ) each
statement
d e s c r i b e s them.
T h i s s c a l e , l i k e most l o n e l i n e s s
measures, i s q u i t e g l o b a l and does n o t i d e n t i f y t h e s p e c i f i c type
of r e l a t i o n s h i p , such a s m a r r i a g e o r f r i e n d s h i p , t h a t i s missing.
( F o r a new s c a l e t h a t does d i s t i n g u i s h t y p e s of r e l a t i o n s h i p s , see
6 Sennat,
1983).
The UCLA S c a l e performs w e l l on
Schmidt
t r a d i t i o n a l psychometric c r i t e r i a . I t has a c o e f f i c i e n t a l p h a of
'94 and a t e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y of .73 o v e r a 2-month period.
I t h a s been shown t h a t v o l u n t e e r s f o r a l o n e l i n e s s c l i n i c and
members of such a t - r i s k groups a s p e o p l e s e e k i n g h e l p w i t h s o c i a l
s k i l l s , divorced a d u l t s , and p r i s o n inmates s c o r e high on the
measure.
We have a l s o provided e v i d e n c e f o r t h e d i s c r i m i n a n t
v a l i d i t y of t h e s c a l e , showing t h a t i t measures l o n e l i n e s s per s e ,
n o t merely r e l a t e d concepts such a s d e p r e s s i o n , a n x i e t y , o r s o c i a l
i n h i b i t ion.
The development of r e l i a b l e and convenient l o n e l i n e s s s c a l e s
h a s provided a u s e f u l impetus t o r e s e a r c h , l e a d i n g t o much new

Loneliness R e ~ e a r c h

27 5

information about t h e p e r s o n a l and s i t u a t i o n a l c o r r e l a t e s of

l o n e l i n e s s (e.g.,
Jones i n t h i s volume). These s c a l e s have a l s o
been u s e f u l i n a s s e s s i n g t h e e f f e c t i v e n e s s of i n t e r v e n t i o n s t o
a l l e v i a t e l o n e l i n e s s (e.g.
J o n e s , Hobbs, & Hockenbury, 1982).
An important b u t unanswered q u e s t i o n i s whether s c o r e s on
measures
of l o n e l i n e s s and of p e r c e i v e d s o c i a l s u p p o r t a r e
interrelated.
The g e n e r a l c o n t e n t of a t l e a s t some s o c i a l s u p p o r t
measuress such a s t h e S o c i a l Support Q u e s t i o n n a i r e (SSQ) developed
by Sarason* Levine, Basham* and Sarason (1983) seems somewhat
s i m i l a r t o t h e c o n t e n t of l o n e l i n e s s s c a l e s , a l t h o u g h t h e response
format i s q u i t e d i f f e r e n t ,
Indeed, a r e c e n t s t u d y ( S a r a s o n ,
Sarason* Hacker,
&
Basham, i n p r e s s ) found a s i g n i f i c a n t
c o r r e l a t i o n between t h e SSQ and t h e UCLA L o n e l i n e s s S c a l e , I t i s
a l s o noteworthy t h a t many of t h e r e p o r t e d c o r r e l a t e s of t h e SSQ,
such a s a n x i e t y , d e p r e s s i o n s and i n t r o v e r s i o n a r e a l s o c o r r e l a t e s
of t h e UCLA L o n e l i n e s s S c a l e ( R u s s e l l s P e p l a u s & Cutrona* 1980).
A more s y s t e m a t i c comparison of measures of l o n e l i n e s s and s o c i a l
support seems a f r u i t f u l d i r e c t i o n f o r f u t u r e r e s e a r c h . One g o a l
would
b e t o determine i n which p o p u l a t i o n s and under what
circumstances measures o f l o n e l i n e s s and s o c i a l s u p p o r t i d e n t i f y
t h e same i n d i v i d u a l s a s e x p e r i e n c i n g r e l a t i o n a l d e f i c i t s .

THE CAUSES OF LONELINESS

A
concern w i t h e t i o l o g y h a s c h a r a c t e r i z e d much of t h e
understanding
t h e c a u s e s of
research
on
loneliness.
In
loneliness, it i s u s e f u l t o d i s t i n g u i s h predisposing f a c t o r s t h a t
h e i g h t e n a person's v u l n e r a b i l i t y t o l o n e l i n e s s and p r e c i p i t a t i n g
e v e n t s t h a t t r i g g e r t h e o n s e t of l o n e l i n e s s .
Factors

P r e d i s ~ o s ea Person t o L o n e l i n e s s

C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e p e r s o n . It i s c l e a r t h i t some people
a r e more s u s c e p t i b l e t o l o n e l i n e s s t h a n o t h e r s . A l a r g e number of
s t u d i e s (reviewed i n Peplau 6 Perlman* 1982; Perlman 6 P e p l a u s i n
press),
conducted
mainly
but not exclusively with college
s t u d e n t s , have examined t h e p e r s o n a l i t y c o r r e l a t e s of l o n e l i n e s s .
F a i r l y good e v i d e n c e l i n k s l o n e l i n e s s t o s h y n e s s , i n t r o v e r s i o n ,
lower a f f i l i a t i v e t e n d e n c i e s , a l a c k of a s s e r t i v e n e s s , e x t e r n a l
locus
of
control,
greater
self- consciousness
and
lower
There i s a l s o e v i d e n c e t h a t some l o n e l y people may
self- esteem.
have f a u l t y s o c i a l s k i l l s .
Jones (19821, f o r example* s u g g e s t s
t h a t l o n e l y p e o p l e a r e of t e n s e l f - f o c u s e d and nonresponsive i n
t h e i r i n t e r a c t i o n s w i t h o t h e r s . Presumably s t h e 6 e f a c t o r s a f f e c t
l o n e l i n e s s because t h e y make i t d i f f i c u l t f o r people t o s u s t a i n
s a t i s f y i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p s , o r t o i n i t i a t e new r e l a t i o n s h i p s t o
r e p l a c e ones t h a t have been l o s t (e.g., by moving o r d i v o r c e ) .
Childhood e x p e r i e n c e s may a l s o i n f l u e n c e t h e l i k e l i h o o d t h a t
a person w i l l become l o n e l y . I n p a r t i c u l a r s l o n e l y people have

276

L e t i t i a Peplau

( o r a t l e a s t b e l i e v e they have) p a r e n t s who were c o l d e r and l e s s

nurturant.
I n one study (Brennan 6 Auslander, 1979), f o r example,
lonely teenagers r e p o r t e d g r e a t e r p a r e n t a l r e j e c t i o n and l e s s
encouragement
to
strive
f o r p o p u l a r i t y than d i d nonlonely
teenagers.
Another f i n d i n g i s t h a t lonely people a r e more l i k e l y
t o be t h e c h i l d r e n of divorce (Shaver & Rubenstein. 1980). The
younger the person was when t h e d i v o r c e occurred, t h e g r e a t e r the
p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t they w i l l r e p o r t l o n e l i n e s s i n adulthood. These
childhood experiences may a f f e c t l a t e r l o n e l i n e s s i n many ways,
such a s depriving a person of o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o g a i n s o c i a l s k i l l s ,
f o s t e r i n g f e e l i n g s of low self- esteem, o r c r e a t i n g f e e l i n g s of
interpersonal mistrust.
Loneliness
has a l s o been linked t o s e v e r a l demographic
f a c t o r s ( s e e review by Perlman & Peplau, i n p r e s s ) . There i s a
well-documented a s s o c i a t i o n of l o n e l i n e s s and age, but counter to
s t e r e o t y p e , l o n e l i n e s s i s g r e a t e s t among adolescents and declines
with i n c r e a s i n g age.
Whether t h i s i s a developmental p a t t e r n
associated
with aging o r a cohort e f f e c t due, perhaps, t o
g e n e r a t i o n a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n w i l l i n g n e s s t o r e v e a l f e e l i n g s of
l o n e l i n e s s cannot be determined from e x i s t i n g cross- sectional
data.
There i s a l s o good evidence t h a t married people a r e l e s s
l i k e l y t o be lonely than o t h e r s . It should be noted, however,
t h a t some married people (18% i n one l a r g e survey, c i t e d i n
Perlman 6 Peplau, i n p r e s s ) do r e p o r t l o n e l i n e s s . Variations i n
t h e e x t e n t of l o n e l i n e s s among t h e never- married, divorced, and
widowed have not been c o n s i s t e n t a c r o s s s t u d i e s . Loneliness i s
common among t h e widowed b u t , a s might be expected, seems t o
d e c l i n e over time (e.g., Lopata, Heinemann, 6 Baum, 1982).
The i s s u e of whether men o r women a r e more v u l n e r a b l e t o
l o n e l i n e s s has not been resolved. I n g e n e r a l , no sex d i f f e r e n c e s
have been found on multi- item l o n e l i n e s s s c a l e s , such a s the UCLA
Loneliness Scale.
On single- item q u e s t i o n s , however, such as
those
used
i n surveys, women a r e more l i k e l y t o describe
themselves a s lonely than a r e men. Whether t h i s i s due t o a r e a l
gender
difference
in
l o n e l i n e s s , o r t o a gender b i a s i n
s e l f- d i s c l o s u r e about l o n e l i n e s s i s not known. F i n a l l y , t h e r e i s
good evidence t h a t l o n e l i n e s s v a r i e s by socio-economic s t a t u s ;
l o n e l i n e s s i s more common among lower income groups. Data on
p o s s i b l e r a c i a l and e t h n i c d i f f e r e n c e s i n l o n e l i n e s s a r e not
current l v available.
C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t h e environment. Some s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n s
a r e undoubtedly more conducive t o l o n e l i n e s s than o t h e r s , although
researchers
are
only
beginning
to
examine
this
topic
s y s t e m a t i c a l l y ( J o n e s , Cavert , S n i d e r , & Bruce, i n p r e s s ) . S o c i a l
psychological theory suggests s e v e r a l f e a t u r e s of s i t u a t i o n s t h a t
may i n c r e a s e t h e r i s k of l o n e l i n e s s . For example, l i f e s i t u a t i o n s
vary i n t h e o p p o r t u n i t i e s they provide f o r s o c i a l c o n t a c t and the
i n i t i a t i o n of new r e l a t i o n s h i p s . Some c o n s t r a i n t s such as time,
d i s t a n c e , and money, a r e fundamental.
The s i n g l e parent on a
t i g h t budget may not be a b l e t o a f f o r d t h e b a b y s i t t e r who would
-

27 7

h n e l i n e s s Research

t i m e f o r a d u l t s o c i a l a c t i v i t i e s . C o n s t r a i n t s may a l s o
limit t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y of p o t e n t i a l f r i e n d s and l o v e r s . P e o p l e
who a r e " d i f f e r e n t " from t h o s e around them--the only b l a c k f a m i l y
i n t h e neighborhood, t h e o n l y s i n g l e p e r s o n i n t h e apartment
complex-may have fewer o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o form r e l a t i o n s h i p s . For
example, because women l i v e c o n s i d e r a b l y l o n g e r t h a n men, o l d e r
widowed
women
have fewer p r o s p e c t s f o r r e m a r r i a g e and a r e
s i g n i f i c a n t l y l e s s l i k e l y t o remarry t h a n a r e o l d e r widowed men.
F i n a l l y , i t i s a l s o l i k e l y t h a t some s o c i a l s e t t i n g s f o s t e r
s u p e r f i c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n s t h a t may n o t s a t i s f y intimacy needs. For
i n s t a n c e , i n a workplace t h a t c r e a t e s c o m p e t i t i o n o r hostility
among co- workers, f r i e n d l y r e l a t i o n s a r e u n l i k e l y t o develop.
In
summary,
a
variety
of p e r s o n a l and environmental
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s can p r e d i s p o s e an i n d i v i d u a l t o l o n e l i n e s s , But
p r e d i s p o s i n g f a c t o r s do n o t i n v a r i a b l y l e a d t o l o n e l i n e s s . The
shy t e e n a g e r who h a s been i n t h e same s c h o o l system s i n c e
k i n d e r g a r t e n may, o v e r t h e y e a r s , have developed a s a t i s f y i n g
s o c i a l l i f e d e s p i t e b e i n g shy. Only when t h e t e e n a g e r 1 6 f a c e d
with making new f r i e n d s , p e r h a p s when going away t o c o l l e g e , w i l l
shyness b e a problem. The e x p e r i e n c e of l o n e l i n e s s i s t r i g g e r e d
by some change i n a p e r s o n O s l i f e .
Events t h a t P r e c i p i t a t e
--

Loneliness

P r e c i p i t a t i n g e v e n t s a r e f a c t o r s s u c h a s moving t o a new
community o r s e p a r a t i n g from a spouse t h a t change a p e r s o n s
s o c i a l l i f e i n some s i g n i f i c a n t way. P r e c i p i t a t i n g e v e n t s c r e a t e
a mismatch between t h e p e r s o n s a c t u a l s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s and t h e
person's
s o c i a l needs o r d e s i r e s * A change i n e i t h e r p a r t of t h e
e q u a t i o n w i t h o u t a c o r r e s p o n d i n g change i n t h e o t h e r can c r e a t e
loneliness.
Perhaps most o f t e n , l o n e l i n e s s r e s u l t s from a change i n t h e
p e r s o n s a c t u a l s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s L such a s t h e l o s s of an important
relationship
or
separation
from
a
loved
one.
Divorce,
bereavement,
and
geographic
m o b i l i t y a r e common c a u s e s of
When Cutrona (1982) asked c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s what
loneliness.
i n i t i a t e d t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e s of l o n e l i n e s s , t h e t h r e e most f r e q u e n t
answers were l e a v i n g f a m i l y and f r i e n d s t o b e g i n c o l l e g e , t h e
breakup of a d a t i n g r e l a t i o n s h i p , and problems w i t h a f r i e n d o r
A d e c r e a s e i n t h e q u a n t i t y o r q u a l i t y of s o c i a l t i e s i s
relative.
a typical precursor t o loneliness.
L o n e l i n e s s can a l s o b e t r i g g e r e d by e v e n t s t h a t change a
p e r s o n e s s o c i a l n e e d s o r d e s i r e s . Our needs f o r human c o n t a c t a r e
not c o n s t a n t .
When we a r e working f e v e r i s h l y on an overdue
r e p o r t , we may c r a v e s o l i t u d e and t r y t o avoid p e o p l e a s much a s
possible.
When we a r e s e x u a l l y a r o u s e d , we may a r d e n t l y d e s i r e
t h e company of a p a r t i c u l a r p a r t n e r .
One i m p l i c a t i o n i s t h a t
f e e l i n g s of l o n e l i n e s s a r e probably n o t c o n s t a n t through out t h e
day o r week, b u t r a t h e r v a r y depending on o u r g o a l s and a c t i v i t i e s
(Larson
et
al.,
1982).
I n a d d i t i o n t o t h e s e short- term
O

L e t i t i a Pepla"
f l u c t u a t i o n s i n s o c i a l n e e d s , more major changes can a l s o occur.
Ten- year- old c h i l d r e n seldom complain of l o n e l i n e s s because the!
l a c k a b o y f r i e n d o r g i r l f r i e n d . But sometime d u r i n g adolescence,
combinat i o n
of
maturation
and changing social
through
a
e x p e c t a t i o n s , t h e d e s i r e f o r a d a t i n g p a r t n e r becomes intense. 1f
t h e r i g h t p a r t n e r d o e s n o t m a t e r i a l i z e , t h e teenager's f e e l i n g s of
l o n e l i n e s s may become e q u a l l y i n t e n s e . The g e n e r a l p o i n t i s that
changed s o c i a l needs and wants t h a t a r e n o t accompanied by
a p p r o p r i a t e changes i n a c t u a l s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s can precipitate
loneliness.
COGNITIVE FACTORS I N LONELINESS
The
possible
importance
of
c o g n i t i v e f a c t o r s i n the
e x p e r i e n c e o f l o n e l i n e s s h a s f r e q u e n t l y been d i s c u s s e d , although
e m p i r i c a l r e s e a r c h i s l i m i t e d . One f a c t o r c o n c e r n s t h e personal
s t a n d a r d s t h a t p e o p l e u s e i n e v a l u a t i n g t h e i r s o c i a l relationships
( P e p l a u , M i c e l i , & Morasch, 1982). S u b j e c t i v e a.ssessments of the
q u a n t i t y and q u a l i t y of i n t e r p e r s o n a l t i e s a r e comparative, and
i n v o l v e judging o n e s e l f a g a i n s t a v a r i e t y of s t a n d a r d s . These
s t a n d a r d s may n o t b e c o n s c i o u s l y - a r t i c u l a t e d , b u t t h e y a r e evident
i n t h e c o m p l a i n t s of t h e l o n e l y : "I don't have enough f r i e n d s " or
"No one r e a l l y c a r e s about me." Both o u r own p a s t experience and
s o c i a l comparisons w i t h o t h e r s i n f l u e n c e o u r judgments of the
adequacy of o u r s o c i a l t i e s . For example, one s t u d y (Perlman b
Goldenberg, 1981) found t h a t s t u d e n t s who b e l i e v e t h e y have fever
f r i e n d s t h a n t h e i r p e e r s a r e l i k e l y t o be l o n e l y . Another study
(Cutrona,
1982)
demonstrated t h a t s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h current
r e l a t i o n s h i p s i s a f f e c t e d n o t only by comparisons w i t h p e e r s , but
a l s o w i t h one's own p r e v i o u s r e l a t i o n s h i p s . We need t o know more
or
a b o u t t h e s e s u b j e c t i v e s t a n d a r d s f o r e v a l u a t i n g t h e adequacy
inadequacy
of s o c i a l t i e s .
Once p e o p l e d e c i d e t h a t t h e i r s o c i a l l i f e i s inadequate, they
a r e t y p i c a l l y m o t i v a t e d t o t r y t o u n d e r s t a n d t h e c a u s e s of their
plight.
D i s c o v e r i n g t h e r e a s o n s f o r one's l o n e l i n e s s helps to
make s e n s e o f a d i f f i c u l t s i t u a t i o n and may s u g g e s t possible
remedies.
Our r e s e a r c h a t UCLA ( P e p l a u , R u s s e l l , & Heim, 1979;
Michela, P e p l a u , & Weeks, 1982) i n d i c a t e s t h a t p e o p l e g i v e varied
e x p l a n a ti o n s
for
l o n e l i n e s s,
varying
along
dimensions of
internality
(blaming
the
s e l f v e r s u s e x t e r n a l c a u s e s ) and
s t a b i l i t y ( c i t i n g unchangeable c a u s e s v e r s u s changeable ones)
(Michela, P e p l a u , 6 Weeks, 1982).
There i s some evidence that
d e p r e s s i o n , a common c o r r e l a t e of l o n e l i n e s s , may b e most likely
when a p e r s o n a t t r i b u t e s t h e i r l o n e l i n e s s t o i n t e r n a l , stable
causes,
s u c h a s b e i n g p h y s i c a l l y u n a t t r a c t i v e o r having an
unpleasant personality.
Coming t o blame o n e s e l f f o r loneliness
m y a l s o c o n t r i b u t e t o t h e f r e q u e n t l i n k between l o n e l i n e s s and
ina ally,
low *elf- esteem ( P e p l a u , M i c e l i , & Morasch, 1982).
a l t h o u g h good d a t a o n t h i s p o i n t do n o t e x i s t , it has been

--

--

Loneliness Research

27 9

suggested t h a t when l o n e l i n e s s p e r s i s t s o v e r time, t h e r e may be a

typical
a t t r i b u t i o n a l s h i f t toward more i n t e r n a l and s t a b l e
causes, w i t h a r e l a t e d i n c r e a s e i n d e p r e s s i o n and d e c r e a s e i n
self- esteem ( P e p l a u , R u s s e l l , 6 Heim, 1979).
LONELINESS AND PSYCHOLOGICAL WELL-BEING
L o n e l i n e s s r e s e a r c h e r s have u s u a l l y s t a r t e d w i t h t h e premise
t h a t l o n e l i n e s s i s i t s e l f a d i s t r e s s i n g and harmful e x p e r i e n c e ,
worthy of s t u d y i n i t s own r i g h t . Hence i t h a s n o t n e c e s s a r i l y
been c o n s i d e r e d i m p o r t a n t t o demonstrate t h a t l o n e l i n e s s l e a d s t o
o t h e r forms of mental d i s t u r b a n c e . Nonetheless, i n r e c e n t y e a r s ,
t h e r e h a s been growing i n t e r e s t i n i d e n t i f y i n g t h e harmful mental
h e a l t h consequences of s e v e r e and p e r s i s t e n t l o n e l i n e s s (Peplau 6
Goldston, i n p r e s s ) .
The most f i r m l y e s t a b l i s h e d l i n k between l o n e l i n e s s and
p s y c h o l o g i c a l well- being i s t h e c o r r e l a t i o n of l o n e l i n e s s and
depression.
S t u d i e s u s i n g s h o r t s e l f - r e p o r t s of d e p r e s s i o n f i n d
t h a t p e o p l e who s a y they a r e l o n e l y a l s o say t h e y f e e l d e p r e s s e d
(e.g.,
Perbnan, Gerson, & S p i n n e r , 1978; R u s s e l l , Peplau, 6
Ferguson, 1978).
S t u d i e s u s i n g l o n g e r d e p r e s s i o n s c a l e s such a s
the Beck Depression I n v e n t o r y a l s o f i n d a s t r o n g a s s o c i a t i o n
between l o n e l i n e s s and d e p r e s s i o n (e.g., Bragg, 1979; R u s s e l l e t
al.,
1980; Weeks, Michela, Peplau, & Bragg, 1980; Young, 1982).
A t t h e same time, i t i s i m p o r t a n t t o r e c o g n i z e t h a t l o n e l i n e s s and
d e p r e s s i o n a r e d i s t i n c t a l t h o u g h p a r t i a l l y o v e r l a p p i n g phenomena
Not a l l l o n e l y p e o p l e a r e
( R u s s e l l , Peplau, & Cutrona, 1980).
d e p r e s s e d , and n o t a l l d e p r e s s e d p e o p l e a r e l o n e l y . T h i s f i n d i n g
l e d Bragg (1979) t o propose a d i s t i n c t i o n between " depressed
l o n e l i n e s s " and " nondepressed l o n e l i n e s s . " I n a s t u d y of c o l l e g e
s t u d e n t s , Bragg found t h a t d e p r e s s e d l o n e l i n e s s was a s s o c i a t e d
w i t h f a i r l y g l o b a l n e g a t i v i t y , s e e n i n d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n n o t only
with s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s , b u t a l s o w i t h s c h o o l , work, and many f a c e t s
of
life.
I n c o n t r a s t , nondepressed l o n e l y p e o p l e expressed
d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n o n l y w i t h t h e i r s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s ; t h e y were n o t
n e c e s s a r i l y unhappy about o t h e r a s p e c t s of t h e i r l i v e s . More
r e c e n t l y , Young ( i n p r e s s ) has proposed t h a t " lonely d e p r e s s i o n"
be c o n s i d e r e d a major subtype of d e p r e s s i o n i n which s o c i a l
d e f i c i t s a r e of c e n t r a l importance.
Evidence about l o n e l i n e s s and o t h e r a s p e c t s of p s y c h o l o g i c a l
adjustment i s more l i m i t e d . Diamant and Windholz (1981) found a
strong
r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o n e l i n e s s and s c o r e s on Zung * s
C l i n i c a l Index of S u i c i d e P o t e n t i a l .
Lonely p e o p l e have been
found
to
score
h i g h e r t h a n t h e nonlonely on measures of
n e u r o t i c i s m (Berg e t a l , 1981; Diamant 6 Windholz, 1981; H o j a t ,
1982).
I n s t r u c t u r e d p s y c h i a t r i c examinations, l o n e l y o l d people
were more o f t e n judged t o have mental symptoms needing t r e a t m e n t
(Berg e t a l . , 1981). Among c o l l e g e s t u d e n t s , l o n e l i n e s s h a s been
l i n k e d t o i n d i c e s of poor p e r s o n a l i t y i n t e g r a t i o n and g e n e r a l

280

L e t i t i a Peplau

maladjustment from t h e Tennessee Self-concept S c a l e (Goswick &

J o n e s , 1981).
Among a d o l e s c e n t s , l o n e l i n e s s i s a s s o c i a t e d with
poor g r a d e s , e x p u l s i o n from s c h o o l , running away from home, t h e f t
and vandalism (Brennan & Auslander, 1979). One survey (Rubenstein
& Shaver, 1982) found t h a t l o n e l y people r e p o r t more psychosomatic
symptoms such a s headaches, poor a p p e t i t e , and t i r e d n e s s . In
summary, s t u d i e s o f l o n e l i n e s s a r e c o n s i s t e n t with s t u d i e s of
s o c i a l support i n showing t h a t perceived r e l a t i o n a l d e f i c i t s can
be d e t r i m e n t a l t o mental h e a l t h .
It should be n o t e d , however, t h a t i n s t u d i e s of l o n e l i n e s s
and
psychological
adjustment, most i s s u e s of c a u s a l i t y a r e
currently uncertain.
S t u d i e s of l o n e l i n e s s and psychological
have
t y p i c a l l y been c o r r e l a t i o n a l and have used
well- being
I n some c a s e s , t h e d i r e c t i o n of c a u s a l i t y
cross- sectional data.
i s c l e a r . For example, it seems improbable t h a t l o n e l i n e s s causes
bereavement.
I n o t h e r c a s e s , however, i t i s a m a t t e r of judgement
whether l o n e l i n e s s i s considered t h e cause o r t h e e f f e c t , o r
whether
causality
is
considered t o be b i d i r e c t i o n a l .
For
i n s t a n c e , i t i s l i k e l y t h a t c h r o n i c l o n e l i n e s s can l e a d t o
d e p r e s s i o n , b u t i t i s a l s o p o s s i b l e t h a t d e p r e s s i o n may i t s e l f
l e a d t o d i s r u p t i o n s i n a person's s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s t h a t r e s u l t
i n loneliness.
LONELINESS AND SOCIAL SUPPORT
I n reviewing l o n e l i n e s s r e s e a r c h w i t h an eye t o work on
s o c i a l s u p p o r t , t h r e e unresolved i s s u e s a r e s a l i e n t .
First,
what i s t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between l o n e l i n e s s and
perceived s o c i a l s u p p o r t ? I n a very g e n e r a l way, t h e concepts of
loneliness
and s o c i a l support can be viewed a s o p p o s i t e s :
loneliness
refers
t o t h e experience of d e f i c i t s i n s o c i a l
relations;
social
support
refers
to
t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y of
interpersonal
resources.
But
a c l o s e r examination r e v e a l s
d i f f e r e n c e s of emphasis between t h e two a r e a s ( s e e Rook's a n a l y s i s
elsewhere i n t h i s volume). For i n s t a n c e , s o c i a l support r e s e a r c h
h a s given prominence t o i n s t r u m e n t a l a s s i s t a n c e , a theme l a r g e l y
I t i s n o t c l e a r whether
absent from s t u d i e s of l o n e l i n e s s .
r e s e a r c h e r s should be encouraged t o use t h e concepts of l o n e l i n e s s
and perceived s o c i a l support i n more r e s t r i c t e d and d i f f e r e n t i a t e d
ways, o r t o t r e a t them e s s e n t i a l l y a s synonyms. A key empirical
q u e s t i o n i s whether s c o r e s on measures of l o n e l i n e s s and perceived
s o c i a l support a r e c o n s i s t e n t l y h i g h l y c o r r e l a t e d .
I n other
words, a r e both measures i d e n t i f y i n g t h e same i n d i v i d u a l s as
having problematic s o c i a l t i e s ?
Second, what a r e t h e b a s i c f u n c t i o n s of s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s , and
which of t h e s e a r e most v i t a l t o p e r s o n a l well- being? Both
l o n e l i n e s s and s o c i a l support r e s e a r c h make assumptions, seen most
clearly
i n t h e c o n t e n t of measuring i n s t r u m e n t s , about the
important f e a t u r e s o r f u n c t i o n s of s o c i a l bonds. We need a more

Loneliness Research

281

systematic
e f f o r t t o a n a l y z e t h e d i v e r s e c o n t e n t of s o c i a l
exchanges, and t o develop taxonomies of key f u n c t i o n s . Only then
w i l l we be i n a p o s i t i o n t o a s k which k i n d s of s o c i a l d e f i c i t s a r e
most d e t r i m e n t a l t o m e n t a l h e a l t h .
F i n a l l y , what a r e t h e l i n k s between o b j e c t i v e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s
of s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s and p e r c e p t i o n s of l o n e l i n e s s and/or l a c k of
social support?
Both r e s e a r c h t r a d i t i o n s d i s t i n g u i s h between
objective
features
of s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s (e.g.,
frequency of
contact,
amount
of
time
together,
t y p e of r e l a t i o n s h i p ,
r e c i p r o c i t y of exchange) and s u b j e c t i v e p e r c e p t i o n s of s o c i a l
ties.
We a r e only b e g i n n i n g , however, t o understand t h e l i n k s
between t h e s e o b j e c t i v e s and s u b j e c t i v e e x p e r i e n c e s , and t h e
p r o c e s s e s by which an i n d i v i d u a l t r a n s l a t e s one i n t o t h e o t h e r .
This i s a n important d i r e c t i o n f o r f u t u r e r e s e a r c h , and one where
l o n e l i n e s s and s o c i a l support r e s e a r c h e r s might p r o f i t a b l y s h a r e
i d e a s and methodologies.

REFERENCES
P e r s s o n , G.,
& Svanborg, A. (1981).
Berg, S.,
Mellstrom, D.,
L o n e l i n e s s i n t h e Swedish aged. J o u r n a l
Gerontolox~~
342-349.

Blau, 2. (1961). S t r u c t u r a l c o n s t r a i n t s of f r i e n d s h i p i n o l d age.

429-439.
American S o c i o l o x i c a l Review&
Bradburn, N * (1969).
Chicago : A l d i n e

structure

~ p s ~ c h o l o x i c a lwell-beinx.

Bragg, M. E. (1979). A comparative s t u d y of l o n e l i n e s s and

d e p r e s s i o n ( D o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of C a l i f o r n i a ,
Los
Angeles).
Dissertation Abstracts International&
79-13710.
6 Auslander,
N.
(1979). Adolescent l o n e l i n e s s : &
Brennan, T.,
ex~lorator~
Study
s o c i a l and p s y c h o l o ~ i c a l~ r e d i S ~ 0 S i t i 0 ~
and t h e o r y
( N a t i o n a l I n s t i t u t e of Mental H e a l t h , J u v e n i l e
Problems D i v i s i o n , Grant No. ROI-MH 289 12-01). Boulder, CO.:
B e h a v i o r a l Research I n s t i t u t e .

,.

Cohen, S.,
& Hobennan, H. M. (1983). P o s i t i v e e v e n t s and s o c i a l
s u p p o r t s a s b u f f e r s of l i f e change s t r e s s . J o u r n a l of Applied
Social P s y c h o l o ~ z&
~ ~ 99-125.

282

Letitia Peplau

Cutrona, C. E. (1982). Transition to college: Loneliness and the

process of social adjustment.
In L. A. Peplau & D. Perlman
(Eds.),
Loneliness:
A sourcebook of current theory, research
and therapy. New York: Wiley-Interscience.

DeJong-Gierveld,
J.
(1978).
The
construct of loneliness:
Components and measurement. Essence. 2 (4),221-237.
DeJong-Gierveld,
J.,
&
Raadschelders, J. (1982). Types of
In L. A. Peplau & D. Perlman (~ds.), Loneliness:
loneliness.
A sourcebook & current theory, research & therapy. New
York : Wiley-Interscience.
Diamant,
L.,
& Windholz, G. (1981).
Loneliness in college
Some therapeutic considerations. Journal of College
students :
Student Personnel & 515-522.
Donson, C.,
& Georges, A. (1967). Lonely-land & bedsitter-land.
Bala, N. Wales: Chapples.
From-Reichmann , F.

1959). Loneliness. Psychiatry

& 1-15.

Goswick, R. A.,
& Jones, W. H. (1981). Loneliness, self-concept
Ps~cholog~
237-240.
and adjustment. Journal

Hojat, M. (1983). Comparison of transitory and chronic loners on

selected personality variables. British Journal of Psycholo~y,.
& 199-202.
House, J . S. (1981). Work stress and social suvvort. Reading* MA:
Addison-Wesley.
W. (1982). Loneliness and social behavior. In L. A. Peplau
D. Perlman (Eds.),
Loneliness:
A sourcebook of current
therapy. New York: Wiley-Interscience.
theory, research

Jones,
&

Cavert, C. W.,
Snider, R. L., 6 Bruce, T. (in
Jones. W. H.,
press). Relational stress:
An analysis of situations and
events associated with loneliness.
In S. Duck & D. Perlman
(Eds.).
S a ~ eSeries in Personal Relationships, Vol. 1. London:
Sage.
Jones, W. H., Hobbs, S. A,, & Hockenbury, D. (1982). Loneliness
and social skill deficits. Journal
Personality and Social
psycho lo^^ & 682-689.
Kahn, R. L., & Antonucci, T. (1980). Convoys over the life cycle:
Attachment, roles, and social support. In P. B. Baltes & 0.
Brim (Eds.) , Lif esvan development
behaviorL (Vol. 3)
Boston: Lexington Books.

Loneliness Research

283

Larson, R.,
Csikszentimihalyi M., & Graef, R. (1982). Time alone
in daily experience: Loneliness or renewal? In L. A. Peplau
& D. Perhnan (Eds . I ,
Loneliness: 4 sourcebook of current
theory. research
therapy. New York: Wiley-Interscience.
Lopata, H. 2. (1969). Loneliness: Forms and components. Social
248-261.
Problems 1969,
Lopata, H. Z., Heinemann, G. D., & Baum, J. (1982). Loneliness:
Antecedents and coping strategies in the lives of widows. In
L. A. Peplau & D. Perlman (Eds.), Loneliness: A sourcebook of
current
theory.
research
therapy.
New York:
Wiley-Interscience.
Lowenthal, M. F. (1964).
Social isolation and mental illness in
old age* American Sociological ReviewL & 54-70.
Michela, J. L., Peplau, L. A,, & Weeks, D. G. (1982). Perceived
dimensions
of
attributions
for
loneliness. Journal of
Personality and Social psycho lo^^ & 929-936.
Moustakas,
C. E. (1975). Portraits & loneliness
Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:
Prentice-Hall.

and

love.

Peplau, L. A., & Goldston, S. E. (Eds.) (in press). Preventing the

harmful consecauences of severe and persistent loneliness.
U.S. Government Printing Office.
Peplau, L. A*, Miceli, M., & Morasch, B. (1982). Loneliness and
In L. A. Peplau & D. Perlman (Eds.),
self-evaluation.
Loneliness: A sourcebook & current theoryk research &
therapy. New Fork: Wiley-Interscience.
Peplau L. A.,
& Perlman, D. (1982). Loneliness: A nourcebook of
current
theoryL research
therapy. New York:
Wiley
Inter sc ience

Peplau, L. A.,
Russell, D., & Heim, M. (1979). The experience of
loneliness.
In I. H. Frieze, D. Bar-Tal, & J. S. Carroll
(Eds.),
avproaches & social problems: A~plicationsof
attribution theory. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Perlman, D., Gerson, A. C., & Spinner, B. (1978). Loneliness among
senior
citizens:
An empirical report. EssenceL L (4),
23 9-248.
Perhan, D'.,
&
Goldenberg,
S.
(1981).
Friendship among
adolescents.
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
American Psychological Association, Los Angeles, 1981.

284

L e t i t i a Peplau

Perlman, D., 6 Peplau, L. A. (1981). Toward a s o c i a l psychology of

S. Duck 6 R. Gilmour (Eds.),
Personal
loneliness.
In
r e l a t i o n s h i p s in d i s o r d e r . London: Academic P r e s s .
Perlman, D..
6 Peplau, L. A. ( i n p r e s s ) . L o n e l i n e s s r e s e a r c h : A
survey of e m p i r i c a l f i n d i n g s .
I n L. A. Peplau & S. E.
Goldston (Eds. , Preventing t h e harmful conseauences of severe
and p e r s i s t e n t l o n e l i n e s s . U. S. Government P r i n t i n g Off i c e .
Riesman, D.,
G l a z e r , N., & Denny, R. (1961).
l o n e l y crowd: A
study d
c h a n ~ i n k American c h a r a c t e r . New Haven: Yale
University Press.

Rogers. C. R.
(1961). The l o n e l i n e s s of contemporary man a s seen
- i n "The c a s e of E l l e n West." Annals of ~ s y c h i t h e r a ~ ~ ~
22-27.
Rogers, C. R. (1973). The l o n e l y person and h i s e x p e r i e n c e s i n an
C a r l Rogers
encounter group. I n C. R. Rogers (Ed.),
encounter groups. New York: Harper 6 Row.
Rook, R. S. ( i n p r e s s ) . S o c i a l s u p p o r t , l o n e l i n e s s and s o c i a l
isolation:
Toward b r i d g i n g t h e gaps.
I n P. Shaver ( E d . ) ,
Review & P e r s o n a l i t y & S o c i a l P S Y C ~ O ~ O JVo1.5.
ZY.
Beverly
H i l l s , CA: Sage.
(1982). P e r s p e c t i v e s on h e l p i n g the
Rook, K. S., & Peplau, L.A.
lonely.
I n L. A. Peplau & D. Perlman (Eds.) , Loneliness: A
sourcebook
c u r r e n t t h e o r y , r e s e a r c h & therapy. New York:
Wiley- Interscience.
C. M.,
6 Shaver, P.
(1982). The e x p e r i e n c e of
Rubenstein,
loneliness.
I n L. A. Peplau 6 D. Perlman ( ~ d s . ) , Loneliness:
t h e r a m . New
A sourcebook & c u r r e n t t h e o r y L r e s e a r c h
York: Wiley- Interscience.
R u s s e l l . D. (1982). The measurement of l o n e l i n e s s .
1nL.A.
Peplau 6 D. Perlman (Ed6 . I , Loneliness:
& sourcebook &
current
theory,
research
& therapy.
New
York:
Wiley- Interscience.
R u s s e l l , D.,
Peplau, L.A.,
6 Cutrona, C.E. (1980). The r e v i s e d
UCLA L o n e l i n e s s S c a l e :
Concurrent and d i s c r i m i n a n t v a l i d i t y
P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l P s ~ c h o l o m ~
evidence. J o u r n a l
47 2-480.

R u s s e l l . D., P e p l a u , L. A*, 6 Ferguson, M. (1978). Developing a

measure of l o n e l i n e s s . J o u r n a l & P e r s o n a l i t y Assessemnt &
290-294.

Loneliness Research

285

Levine, H. M.,
Basham, R. B., & Sarason, B. R.
Sarason, I.G.,
(1983).
Assessing
social
support:
The social support
-questionnaire
~ou=nal
Personalitv and Social ~ s ~ c h o l &
& 127-139.

Sarason, B. R., Sarason, I. G., Hacker, T. A., & Basham, R. B. ( in

press).
Concomitants
of social support:
Social skills,
physical attractiveness and gender.
Journal & Personalitv
and Social Psycholoev.
-Schmidt,
N.,
& Sermat, V. (1983).
Measuring loneliness in
different relationships. Journal & Personalitv and Social
Psycholoev 44 ( 5 1 , 1038-1047.
Shanas, E., Townsend, P., Wedderburn, D., Friis, H., Milhoj, P., &
Stehouwer,
J.
(1968).
Old people &J three industrial
societies. New York: Atherton.
&
Rubenstein, C. (1980). Childhood attachment
Shaver,
P.,
experience and adult loneliness. In L, Wheeler (~d.1, Review
of Personality and Social psycho lo^^^ Vol.1. Beverly Hills,
CA: Sage, 1980.

Sullivan, H.
New York:

S. ( 1953 1.
W. W. Norton.

Tillich, P. (1952).
University Press.
Tunstall, J.
Inc

(1967).

interpersonal theory

psychiatry.

courage & & New Haven,

Old and alone. New York:

Ct: Yale

Humanities Press,

Weeks, D. G., Michela, J. L., Peplau, L.A.,

& Bragg, M. E.
(1980).
The relation between loneliness and depression: A
structural
equation analysis. Journal & Personality g&.
Social P s ~ c h o l o ~ y ~ 1238-1244.
Weiss, R. S. (1973). Loneliness: The experience & emotional
social isolation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

It. S. (1974). The provisions of social relationships. In

Rubin (Ed.),
Doing
others. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.

Weiss,
2.

Young, J.E. (1982). Loneliness, depression and cognitive therapy:

Theory and application. In L. A. Peplau & D. Perlman (Eds.),
Loneliness:
A sourcebook
current theoryb research &
therapy. New ~ & k : Wiley-Interscience.

286

Letitia Peplau

Young, J. E. (in press).

Loneliness and depression. In L. A.
Peplau
6 S. E.
Goldston (Eds.1, Preventink .t& harmful
con6eauences & severe & persistent loneliness. U. S,
Government Printing Off ice.
Zilboorg,
45-54.

G.

(1938).

Loneliness.

Atlantic

Monthly.

January,