Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 29 (2011) 292 295

International Conference on Education and Educational Psychology (ICEEPSY 2011)

Social-Emotional Loneliness and Life Satisfaction

Azimeh Salimia
a

Department of Educational psychology,University of Shiraz, Shiraz, Iran

Abstract
The intent of this study was to examine the effects of social and emotional loneliness on life satisfaction. Gender differences
in loneliness is examined, too. A sample of 396 (172 male , 224 female) university students were selected from Shiraz
University. The short version of Social and Emotional Loneliness Scale for Adults(SELSA-S); the Satisfaction with Life
Scale(SWLS); and Demographic Information Form. Results of the independent t-test revealed that gender has an effect on
loneliness levels of the students and male students reported significantly greater emotional loneliness than female students.
In addition, the results of stepwise regression, indicated that social and emotional loneliness were significant negative
predictors of the life satisfaction, however emotional loneliness was stronger predictor, rather than social loneliness.

Published
by Elsevier
Ltd. Open
access
under under
CC BY-NC-ND
2011
2011 Published
by Elsevier
Ltd. Selection
and/or
peer-review
responsibilitylicense.
of Dr. Zafer Bekirogullari of Cognitive Counselling,
Selection
peer-review
under responsibility of Dr Zafer Bekirogullari.
Research &and/or
Conference
Services C-crcs.
Keywords: Social Loneliness, Emotional Loneliness,Life Satisfaction, Gender Differences.
1. Introduction
Loneliness is a basic fact of life and thus experienced to differing extents by everyone at some stage in their life.
Loneliness has been defined as the unpleasant experience that occurs when a person's network of social relationships
is significantly deficient in either quality or quantity' (Perlman & Peplau, 1984). Inparticular, the discrepancy that
exists between the interpersonal relationships one wishes to have, and those that one perceives they currently have,
makes the individual to experience loneliness. Loneliness is also a multidimensional phenomenon, varying in
intensity, and across causes and circumstances. For example, the loneliness of a child who has lost their mother is
experienced differently to the loneliness of a child who has no playmates(Heinrich & Gullone, 2006). In order to
discover this multidimensional nature of loneliness, Weiss (1973), distinguished between "emotional loneliness" that
is an absence of close or intimate relationships, whereas "social loneliness" that is a lack of social networks.
Despite loneliness is experienced by both males and females, some demographic variables such as gender, has
been shown to be related to individual differences in severity of loneliness. Nonetheless, gender differences that
have reported in adult loneliness are not consistent together. Some studies have shown males tended to be lonelier

Corresponding author. Tel: +98-711-2245545-50; fax: +98-711-2245543.

E-mail address: Azimeh.Salimi@gmail.com

1877-0428 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.
Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of Dr Zafer Bekirogullari.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.241

293

Azimeh Salimi / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 29 (2011) 292 295

than females(e.g., Tmkaya, Aybek & elik ,2008; Wiseman, Guttfreundb, & Luriec, 1995; Schultz, & Moore,
1986). Whereas several studies show females are lonelier than males ( e.g., Borys, & Perlman,1985; Bugay, 2007;
Page, & Cole, 1991), or no significant difference (e.g., Tornstam, 1992).
On the other hand, loneliness is one important indicator and vulnerability factor for life satisfaction. The life
satisfaction depends on ones cognitive and subjective evaluation. In other words, the life satisfaction is ones global
evaluation of some aspects of the quality of his/her life such as family, school, friend etc according to his/her criteria
(Diener, Emmons, Larsen & Griffin, 1985).
Numerous studies, In the literature, have proved that lonely people report lower rates of life-satisfaction (e.g.,
Swami et al., 2007; Neto, 1993; Goodwin, Cook, & Yung, 2001; Kim, 1997; Moore & Schultz, 1983), but little
research focuses on the distinction between emotional and social loneliness. This article provides insight into these
overlooked dimensions of loneliness and their relationships with life satisfaction in order to find out (1) whether the
loneliness and life satisfaction vary in accordance with gender of students; (2) whether there would be a significant
relationship between students' loneliness and life satisfaction; (3) which one of the loneliness dimensions (social
loneliness or emotional loneliness) is the stronger predictor of the life satisfaction.
2. Methods
Data were obtained from 396(172 male , 224 female) university students that selected through multi-stages
cluster random sampling; from Shiraz University (medicine,engineering and human sciences), Iran.
2.1.Measures
2.1.1. Social and Emotional Loneliness Scale for Adults- short form (SELSA-S)
The SELSA-S developed by DiTomasso, Brannen and Best (2004) and adapted to Persian by Jowkar and Salimi
(2009). The SELSA-S is a 15-item multidimensional measure of loneliness and comprises three subscales:
"Romantic","Family" and "social" loneliness. "Emotional loneliness" comes out of adding of romantic and family
loneliness scores. The reliability of the measure examined by internal consistency Chronbach alpha method. Alpha
coefficient for romantic, family and social loneliness were .92, .77 and .83, respectively. Validity of the measure
investigated by factor analysis method.
2.1.2. The Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS)
The SWLS (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985) is a 5-item scale that measures global life satisfaction.
The reliability of the measure examined by internal consistency Chronbach alpha method. Alpha coefficient for life
satisfaction was .82. Validity of the measures investigated by factor analysis method.
2.1.3. Demographic Information Form
A Demographic information form was used to obtain detailed information such as age, gender, grade, et cetera.
3. Results
Concering the first aim of the study, independent t-test was used in order to whether the scores for loneliness and
life satisfaction would vary according to students gender(Table 1).
Table 1. Comparison of girls and boys participants in study variables
Variable
Loneliness
Social Loneliness
Emotional Loneliness
Life Satisfaction

male
M
39.89
11.08
27.52
14.92

female
SD
9.81
3.15
7.77
4.02

M
35.35
10.53
23.60
15.45

SD
9.94
3.72
8.27
3.97

Sig.

4.52
1.55
4.79
1.30

.000
N.S
.000
N.S

294

Azimeh Salimi / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 29 (2011) 292 295

As shown in Table 1, male loneliness score (M= 39.89, SD= 9.81) is significantly higher than female students
(M=35.35, SD=9.94)(t= 4.52, p<0.001). Further analysis showed that this distinction is only in the emotional
loneliness and males reported significantly greater emotional loneliness (M= 27.52, SD= 7.77) than females(M=
23.60, SD= 8.27)(t= 1.30, p<0.001).
The second aim of the study was to investigate the association between loneliness and life satisfaction.For this
reason, Pearson correlation coefficient was computed(Table 2). As shown in Table 2, There is a considerable
negetive correlation between loneliness and life satisfaction(r=-0.44, p <0.001). Furthermore the correlation between
emotional loneliness and life satisfaction(r=-0.38, p <0.001) is stronger than the correlation between social
loneliness and life satisfaction (r= -0.27, p <0.001).
Table 2. Correlation matrix of social-emotional loneliness and life satisfaction
Variable
1. Loneliness
2. Social Loneliness
3. Emotional Loneliness
4. Life Satisfaction
* p<0.05

1
1
0.58**
0.93**
-0.44**

1
0.25**
-0.27**

1
-0.38**

** p<0.001

For the third research question, a stepwise regression analysis was used to determine the more predictive variable
for life satisfaction(Table 3). The stepwise results revealed that social loneliness and emotional loneliness have a
considerable contribution in predicting the life satisfaction, but emotional loneliness is the stronger negative
predictor of the life satisfaction.
Table 3. stepwise regression analysis results in predicting the life satisfaction
Steps
1

Prediction Variables
Emotional Loneliness

R
0.37

R2
0.13

B
-0.17

-0.37

t
7.89

Sig.
.000

Emotional Loneliness
Social Loneliness

0.40

0.16

-0.15
-0.20

-0.31
-0.17

6.60
3.70

.000
.000

4. Discussion
In this study, loneliness levels of the students were determined by using SELSA-S and Male students loneliness
(M=39.89) was higher than females(M=35.35). This specific finding of the study is consistent with some previous
findings( e.g., Tmkaya et al., 2008; Wiseman et al., 1995; Moore & Schultz, 1983).
A strong possible explanation is that females talk about feelings males and share their feelings with the friends
more openly than males, so they experience the lower level of loneliness. Enochs and Roland (2006; cited in
Tmkaya et al., 2008) have emphasized that males keep their feelings under control, and they do not cry in
comparison with females. In addition, developing close relationships require self-disclosure. Regarding to Dindia
and Allen (1992) women disclosed themselves slightly more than men; So that they have experience loneliness less.
Another possible explanation is that the social support networks, such as family or peer are likely to be stronger for
females than males in Iranian culture.
further analyses showed that this gender difference is only observed in emotional loneliness; hence males and
females only have significant difference in emotional loneliness. According to weiss (1973) Emotional loneliness
results from the lack of a close, intimate attachment to another person; whereas social loneliness results from the
lack of a network of social relationships in which the person is part of a group of friends who share common
interests and activities. It seemes that, nowadays in big cities, there is no difference in quantity and expance of social
relationship of males and females. So the social loneliness level in males and females is not significantly different.
On the other hand, in females, the quality of social relationships is better and intimacy in relationships is deeper than
males; So the emotional loneliness of females is lower than males. As already mentioned, developing close and

Azimeh Salimi / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 29 (2011) 292 295

295

intimate relationships require self-disclosure and self-disclosure is easier for females, so females have less emotional
loneliness than males.
The analyses have not pointed out a meaningful difference between the life satisfaction and the gender.
According to Tmkaya et al., (2008) in our century, both males and females carry equal responsibilities regarding
the life and they, both, struggle with the similar daily life concerns such as finishing the school, being successful at
exams, finding a job, having a good career and establishing good job relationships.
Another purpose of the study was relationship between loneliness and life satisfaction that was examined by
some researchers who have stressed that there is a significant negative association between life satisfaction and
loneliness( e.g., Goodwin et al., 2001; Kim, 1997; Schumaker, Shea & Marnat,1993; Moore & Schultz, 1983).
Similarly, the results of this study revealed that life satisfaction negatively correlated with loneliness. The life
satisfaction depends on ones cognitive and subjective evaluation of life. Additionally a person's thoughts about
themselves and others, influence the likelihood of their forming satisfying relationships, because these cognitions
impact on how they interact, as well as how they interpret interpersonal situations (Murphy & Kupshik, 1992; cited
in Heinrich, & Gullone, 2006). According to the Previous studies lonely individuals have generally negative view of
themselves and the world(Perlman & Peplau, 1981); So that these negative subjective evaluations of these people
from life lead to life dissatisfaction.
The results of the present study showed also that emotional loneliness is stronger negative predictor of life
satisfaction rather than social loneliness. As would expect Social friendships are almost the source of close
friendships; however social friendships are much easier to achieve than close friendships. Hence the absence of
close relationships (i.e., emotional loneliness) is more painful than the absence of social friendships(i.e., social
loneliness). Therefore emotional loneliness is a stronger negative predictor for life satisfaction.
References
Borys, S., & Perlman, D.(1985). Gender differences in loneliness, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 11, 6374.
Bugay, A. (2007). Loneliness and Life Satisfaction of Turkish University Students. [http://www.ece.salford.ac.uk/proceedings/theme2.php?id=2].
Diener, E. Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satifaction with life scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1),71-75.
Dindia K, Allen M. (1992). Sex differences in self-disclosure: a meta-analysis. Psychol Bull., 112(1),106-24.
DiTommasso, E., Brannen, C. & Best, L. A. (2004). measurement and validity characteristics of the short version of the social and emotional
loneliness scale for adults. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64(1), 99-119.
Goodwin, R., Cook, O., & Yung, Y. (2001). Loneliness and life satisfaction among three cultural groups. Personal Relationships, 8, 225-230.
Heinrich, L. M., Gullone, E. (2006). The clinical significance of loneliness: A literature review. Clinical Psychology Review, .26(6), 695-718.
Jowkar, B.,& Salimi, A. (2009). Evaluation of the Psychometric Characteristics of the Persian short version of the Social and Emotional
Loneliness Scale for Adults. Persian Journal of Shahed University, 16(81).
Kim, O. (1997). Loneliness: A predictor of health peceptions among older Korean immigrants. Psychological Reports, 81, 591-594.
Moore, D., & Schultz, N. R. (1983). Loneliness at adolescence: Correlates, attributions and coping. Journal of Youth and Adolescence., 12, (2),

Neto, F. (1993). Satisfaction with life scale: Psychometrics properties in an adolescent sample. Journal of Youth and Adolescence., 22( 2), 125134.
Page, R. M. & Cole, G. E. (1991).Demographic predictors of self reported loneliness in adults. Psychological Reports, 68, 939-945.
Perlman, D. & Peplau, L.A. (1984) Loneliness research: survey of empirical findings, in: L.A. Peplau & S.E. Goldston (Eds) Preventing the
Harmful Consequences of Severe and Persistent Loneliness(Washington, DC, US Government Printing Office).
Perlman, D., & Peplau, L.A. (1981). Toward a social psychology of lonclincss. In S. W. Duck B R. Gilmour (Eds.), Personal relationships: Vol.
3. Personal relationships in disorder (pp. 3 1-56). London: Academic Press.
Schumaker, J., Shea, J., & Marnat, G. (1993). Loneliness and life satisfaction in Japan and Australia. Journal of Psychology, 127, 65-71.
Swami, V., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Sinniah, D., Maniam, T., Kannan, K., Stanistreet, D., & Furnham, A. (2007). General health mediates the
relationship between loneliness, life satisfaction and depression. Social psychiatry and psychiatric epidemiology ., 42,(2),. 2, 161-166.
Tornstam, L. (1992). Loneliness in Marriage. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 9, 197-217.
7PND\D6$\EHN%dHOLN0$QLQYHVWLJDWLRQRIVWXGHQWVOLIHVDWLVIDFWLRQDQGORQHOLQHVVOHYHOLQDVDPSOHRf Turkish students.
International Journal of Human Sciences [Online]. 5:1. Available: http://www.insanbilimleri.com.
Weiss, R. S. (1973). Loneliness: The Experience of Emotional and Social Isolation. Cambridge, Mass. The mit Press
Wisemana, H., Guttfreundb, D.G., & Luriec, I. (1995). Gender differences in loneliness and depression of university students seeking
counselling. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 23(2), 231-243.