All posts by admin

A Psycho-social Approach to Loneliness

The idea of a psycho-social model of loneliness is not new.   In the 1980’s Perlman and Peplau developed the discrepancy theory of loneliness which defines loneliness as  – “… the unpleasant experience that occurs when a person’s network of social relations is deficient in some important way, either quantitatively or qualitatively..” (Perlman and Peplau, 1981,p31). 

The key distinguishing feature of Perlman and Peplau’s work is that loneliness is understood to be a function of the individual’s perception. Whilst external / objective social conditions may have some influence, ultimately loneliness is a function of a perceived discrepancy between the type of relationships they have and what they want.  Loneliness is not automatically caused by a trigger event (e.g. retirement or bereavement), or by a set of social circumstances (e.g  living alone or being over 80); rather it is how a person understands and judges these things that determines whether a feeling of loneliness is experienced. There are internal cognitive processes, unique to the individual, which come into play to influence whether loneliness is the outcome.  

 “… the discrepancy between the desired and achieved social relations is typically perceived by the individual and labelled as loneliness.  But, according to a cognitive perspective, this discrepancy does not lead directly and inevitably to loneliness.  Several factors may affect the self labelling process and the intensity of the person’s reactions to their situation, and cognitive processes play a central role in modulating the loneliness experience.” (Perlman and Peplau, 1981 , p45)

These and other elements will be analysed for their psychological content throughout the rest of this paper.

Personality Traits

Personality traits or characteristics have been found to have a significant influence on the incidence and experience of loneliness (Long and Marin, 2000, Wang and Dong, 2018a, Mund and Neyer, 2015, Abdellaoui et al., 2018, Fees et al., 1999, Hensley et al., 2012, Chang and Dong, 2014, Cacioppo et al., 2006, de Jong-Gierveld, 1987, Schermer and Martin, 2019, L. Flett et al., 2016, Ernst and Cacioppo, 1999, Long and Martin, 2000).  Particular personality types have been found to be linked to loneliness:-

  • Increase risk of loneliness
    • Neuroticism: the tendency to be prone to psychological stress and to experience unpleasant emotions easily i.e. low emotional stability.  People who score high on neuroticism are much more likely to experience loneliness, indeed some research(Wang and Dong, 2018b) found that people with high levels of neuroticism were 3.59 times more likely to feel lonely. 
  • Protect against risk of loneliness
    • Conscientiousness: the tendency to be organised and dependable, show self discipline and prefer planned rather than spontaneous behaviour.  People with a high conscientiousness score had a 24% decreased risk of loneliness (Wang and Dong, 2018b).
    • Extraversion: the tendency to be energetic, assertive and to seek stimulation in the company of others.  People who score high on extraversion have a decreased risk of loneliness 

Interestingly, not only does research show that personality can affect the likelihood of becoming lonely, there is also evidence to suggest that being lonely in earlier life stages can shape evolving personality as one ages, potentially setting up a vicious cycle of isolation(Jarrett, 2015, Mund and Neyer, 2016).  Specifically, greater loneliness in youth appears to go hand in hand with slower decreases in neuroticism with age, and slower increases in conscientiousness (Mund and Neyer, 2016).  In other words, feeling lonely when young appears to shape the course of personality development in a way which increases the risk of loneliness in later life.  Other research also indicates that loneliness is ‘moderately heritable’ (Distel et al., 2010, Cacioppo et al., 2009)

Whilst it is important to consider the links between personality traits and loneliness, it must however be remembered that traits are not predictions; i.e. there is no evidence of a ‘psychological determinism’ whereby particular personality types will inevitably become lonely.  Personality type is one of many risk factors.  Whilst personality traits can be difficult to change, research (Hudson and Fraley, 2015, Hudson et al 2019) has shown that where people are motivated to do so, it is possible.  It also has to be remembered that most people can be helped to find ways to moderate or cope with particular negative outcomes associated with any particular type.

Cultural values and norms

One of the predisposing factors which is commonly neglected in discussions about loneliness is the impact of cultural values and stereotypes.   This refers to the way in which larger societal narratives can have a noticeable impact on individuals’ thoughts and feelings which in turn can affect cognitive processing and attribution.

Ageist attitudes and stereotypes are prevalent in mainstream cultural narratives and have been shown to be damaging to a number of aspects of older people’s health and psychological wellbeing (Robertson, 2017).   They have been shown to have a significant impact on the incidence of loneliness as well.  Research (Pikhartova et al., 2016) looked specifically at the role of ageist beliefs in the incidence of loneliness in later life. It demonstrated that those holding negative stereotypes about later life (i.e. expectations about it being a time of loneliness) were found to have an increased range of between 2.3-2.8 increased likelihood of experiencing loneliness.  Other research by (Menkin et al., 2016) demonstrated the counterfactual position.  In their research, participants with more positive expectations of ageing at baseline made more new friends 2 years later and had greater overall perceived support available 12mths later.  These (and related) research findings (Coudin and Alexopoulos, 2010, Shiovitz-Ezra et al., 2018)  suggest that there is a need to address ageism as part of any strategy to reduce loneliness.  As Pikhartova and colleagues concluded:-

To date our repertoire of interventions of how to prevent/reduce loneliness (including services such as befriending or group based activities) have been largely unsuccessful. The linking of loneliness with individuals beliefs and expectations of what old age will be like suggests that, potentially, ‘mass campaigns’ to change these may be more effective in combating loneliness than the types of services currently offered. (Pikhartova et al., 2016, p548)

What this has shown is that cultural values (i.e. ageist attitudes in wider society) can impact on individual cognitive processes that compromise or undermine older people’s ability or motivation to make meaningful connections with others – thereby increasing the risk of loneliness.  The evidence suggests that ageist cultural values need to begin to be addressed in psycho-social initiatives to address loneliness.  

Life Transitions

Whilst the exact proportions are unknown, it is clear that the majority of older people who experience loneliness have begun to do so in later life as a result of some change in their circumstances, principally one or more of the major life events and transitions commonly experienced in later life (e.g. retirement, moving home, becoming a care, ill health, bereavement etc).  Of all of these, bereavement is by far the most common trigger.

Whist these major life events and transitions have a tendency to disrupt relationship networks, they tend to bring this about through their impact on psychological and emotional processes. As outlined by Robertson (2016), another framework drawn from the field of humanistic psychology (Dilts, 1990) is helpful in conceptualising this.  The elements outlined below are each likely to be impacted in different ways by major life events and the effect is likely to be felt at an emotional/psychological level:-  

  • Sense of purpose – impact on people’s motivation and meaning in life
  • Identity – impact on how people feel about their role and place in society
  • Beliefs – impact on what people believe to be true or important
  • Capabilities – how people’s talents and abilities are affected, which in turn affects a sense of self efficacy
  • Behaviour – what changes might be required in the actions the person takes in their day to day life – which can challenge people’s self confidence
  • Environment – what changes may be required in their living arrangements or where they carry out their day to day activities

The framework is useful in unpacking the breadth of psychological change that a transition in later life might occasion (for detailed outline of the internal dynamics of each major life event using this framework see Robertson, 2016).  

Sense of Purpose warrants special attention in relation to loneliness.  It has a unique power to motivate people towards involving themselves in the social realm and thereby generate or maintain social connections.  Research supports the notion that a sense of purpose is particularly connected with general wellbeing and protection against loneliness (Creecy et al., 1985, Stillman et al., 2009, Neville et al., 2018, Schaefer et al., 2013, Irving et al., 2017, Nygren et al., 2005, Bondevik and Skogstad, 2000, Tam and Chan, 2019). The lack of a strong sense of purpose can feed the (self)exclusion of older people from many forms of social engagement.  Without a purpose in life it is very difficult to have the motivation and self confidence to engage with others, and this deficit can therefore precipitate and sustain a negative cycle of isolation.

Multi dimensionality of loneliness

Much of the discussion of loneliness treats it almost as one single phenomenon.  This is not the case. Loneliness is not a uni-dimensional experience; in reality it has many dimensions and contexts which affect the emotional and psychological experience.  There are two key dimensions which require special attention– intensity of emotional distress and duration of the experience.

Intensity of emotional distress relates to the fact that there is a big difference between, on the one hand losing an intimate life long partner through bereavement, and on the other hand wishing that one had more acquaintances to engage with.  The difference is generally reflected in the distinction between ‘social’ and ‘emotional’ loneliness, first proposed by Wiess (1973) and supported by subsequent research (Dykstra and Fokkema, 2007, Russell et al., 1984, de Jong-Gierveld, 1987).  The experiences of each kind of loneliness are different and consequently the interventions similarly need to be tailored to address the different psychological and emotional characteristics (Dahlberg and McKee, 2014).  Whilst the literature refers to two categories it is perhaps more helpful to consider this aspect of loneliness along a continuum from low to high intensity ((Aiden, 2016).

Duration is another key consideration.  Experiencing loneliness most or all of the time is clearly much more damaging and will have different psychological and emotional dimensions than experiencing it occasionally.  Indeed, experiencing loneliness occasionally has been seen as an inevitable and positive phenomenon by some (Cacioppo and Patrick, 2008).  They propose that in the same way that hunger propels us to eat, so loneliness compels us to connect with others.  It could be argued that occasional loneliness is therefore only of relevance to public policy in so far as it sometimes develops into more frequent experiences, which then could develop into more serious chronic loneliness.  Duration is particularly relevant to understanding the psychological drivers of loneliness by virtue of its tendency to elicit a degree of ‘perceptual distortion’ in people experiencing loneliness (see below).

These two dimensions, intensity and duration, can usefully be combined in order to provide a framework for assessing the varying psychological aspects and what sort of interventions are required.   

People experiencing the sort of loneliness associated with section A for example are likely to require the most significant psychological assistance; whereas those in section D are unlikely to require any.  It is arguable that a lot of current social group type interventions tend to be  focussed on people in section C.  What is often missing are interventions supporting people in sections A & B.

Perceptual Distortion

As indicated above, it is very important to note that people who have experienced sustained feelings of loneliness have been found to commonly develop harmful and self defeating internal narratives which then distort and undermine their ability to interact with others.  Psychological research into loneliness has found that such people tend to exhibit maladaptive and unhelpful thoughts and feelings about themselves (Cacioppo and Hawkley, 2009), other people, and (importantly) the perceived risks and threats arising from engaging in social interactions (Masi et al., 2011), particularly those involving groups of people.  Lonely people commonly exhibit a form of ‘perceptual distortion’ such that they are more likely to view relationships and social encounters negatively and pessimistically. 

” (Loneliness) produces an oversensitivity to minimal cues and a tendency to misinterpret or to exaggerate the hostile intent of others.”(Weiss, 1973)

This can set in train a powerful negative feedback loop whereby lonely people tend to withdraw even further from the very people who could alleviate their loneliness. They tend to assume that others aren’t interested in their company and that they will be rejected (Goll and al., 2014). As a result people can end up taking little initiative to instigate social connection and instead tend to find excuses to turn down social invitations they are offered.  Research (Masi et al., 2011, Jones et al., 1981, Anderson et al., 1983, Perlman and Peplau, 1981, Duck et al., 1994) indicates that lonely people tend to:-

  • approach social encounters with greater cynicism and interpersonal mistrust, 
  • rate other people and themselves more negatively
  • are more likely to expect others to reject them
  • have lower feelings of self worth
  • tend to blame themselves for social failures
  • hold more negative social expectations

…all of which results in them adopting behaviours that increase, rather than decrease, their likelihood of rejection (Cacioppo et al., 2009).  In essence, when people feel lonely for any length of time, they tend to think and act differently than people who do not feel lonely.  They develop ‘maladaptive social cognitions’ which influence behaviours, social interactions and feelings in a way which exacerbate feelings of sadness and loneliness (Masi et al., 2011). 

Social Exclusion 

The individually generated self-fulfilling prophecy outlined above can also feed into a group initiated process of social exclusion. There is evidence to suggest that social groups can tend to exclude lonely people – “While there are exceptions to the rule, by and large the general population tends to avoid lonely people and to marginalize them on society’s periphery”.  It has been found that lonely people tend to be connected with others who also suffer from loneliness.  Cacioppo et al (2009) set out an explanation for how social groups play their part in excacerbating  the individual’s experience of loneliness. “The phenomenon is described as a process of induction occurring within social networks.  Individuals who feel lonely become marginalised through a type of ‘social quarantine’ or exclusion, rather than seeking out and forming connections with other people by their own volition.  This implies that loneliness is perceived as being contagious, aversive, and something to be avoided, like emotional tuberculosis.  From this perspective, marginalized connections found among lonely individuals may be a result of attempts by the larger social network to preserve its structure.  Such attempts create barriers that limit the lonely individual’s interpersonal resources due to disconnection from primary support systems.”

Depression and Bereavement

There are two psychological/emotional states prevalent in later life which warrant special attention in any discussion about loneliness. 

Depression is worthy of special mention because it is commonly seen as ‘a gateway into loneliness’.  It is the most common mental disorder in older people, affecting about 20% of people over 65. There is a well evidenced strong association between loneliness and depression (Mann, 2018, Domènech-Abella et al., 2019).  Loneliness is both a predisposing factor for, and an outcome of, depression, and people with depression who have weak social networks have poorer recovery rates (Wang and Mann, 2018).  Depression has also been found to influence cognitive processes such that judgements about the adequacy of social interactions are interfered with (Burholt and Scharf, 2014). Unfortunately, depression is under-detected in older people, with only one in six older people with depression discussing their symptoms with their GP, and less than half of these receiving adequate treatment (Graham et al., 2011).  There is a strong case for depression to feature much more in discussions about loneliness and how to treat it,

Bereavement is also worthy of special mention.  There are over 603,000 deaths in the UK in 2015 (and 85% of these being people aged 65 and older), and yet death and bereavement barely feature in discussions about loneliness. This despite the fact that nearly 33% of bereaved people over 65 see themselves as very lonely, compared to just 5% of people of the same age who have not lost their partner(Seymour et al., 2018).Loneliness that comes from losing a life partner is generally experienced as a significant form of ‘emotional loneliness’ and it is questionable whether interventions promoting social connections begin to address the situation (Utz et al., 2013). In fact bereaved people often report lower levels of social isolation than others (Seymour et al., 2018), although there are indications that social support becomes more important in the longer term (Bennett and Victor, 2012, van Baarsen, 2002) .  Loss of a close partner can often result in ‘complicated grief’ for about 10-15% of bereaved people.  It can be a very powerful trigger into loneliness. It is noteworthy that older bereaved people are less likely to seek help than younger bereaved people and they are also less likely to be referred for bereavement support than younger people (Seymour et al., 2018).  This is particularly unfortunate given the evidence that bereavement support (one to one counselling or peer group support) can be effective in helping people address and move on from the trauma of losing someone who has been so emotionally important to them (Schut et al., 2001, Schut and Stroebe, 2005, Stewart et al., 2001, Arthur et al., 2010, Currier et al., 2010).  

Towards the development of psycho-social interventions

This examination of the psychological and emotional aspects of loneliness provides a number of important pointers as to how interventions to address loneliness could become more holistic.  It is important that these considerations are taken into account in the Government’s commitment to “support all health and care systems to implement social prescribing connector schemes across the whole country” by 2023, otherwise there is the risk that the psychological drivers of loneliness will remain unaddressed.  This paper does not set out the solutions, but it does highlight a number of key issues to be taken into account:-

  • the importance of individual perception in determining whether a person experiences loneliness, and if so what form that loneliness will take. Social and demographic factors have some influence, but ultimately it is psychological / emotional / cognitive processes within the individual which determine the outcome.  Unhelpful internal narratives (i.e. maladaptive cognitions, perceptual distortion etc) require interventions which can work at this level.  Evidence based options include Cognitive Behavioural Therapy, Mindfulness and Positive Psychology – although work is required to develop delivery models which operate from whole population preventative initiatives right through to remedial work with individuals experiencing chronic loneliness
  • personality traits play a significant role in determining whether loneliness is experienced.  That having been said, personality is a risk factor rather than an inevitable predictor of loneliness, and personality is also open to volitional change. Understanding how personality types are linked to loneliness will be key to establishing how best to work with people to alleviate or prevent loneliness
  • Those working with people experiencing loneliness need to pay attention to how an individual attributes the causes of their loneliness – in order to help them generate the motivation and strategies to move forward
  • the provision of information about the psychological and emotional basis of loneliness could empower people at risk of loneliness to take more control of their inner world and wellbeing outcomes.
  • Highlighting and challenging ageist stereotypes could help some individuals to reset unhelpful internal narratives which increase the risk of loneliness
  • It is crucial that interventions to address loneliness concentrate more on helping older people to enrich the emotional quality of the relationships they have rather than trying just to increase the number of social contacts.  Research suggests that focussing on the quantity of social interactions actually goes against the grain of what sort of relationships people generally want in later life.  For example, research by Laura Carstensen and conceptualised within her Socio Emotional Selectivity theory (Carstensen et al., 1999), explains that the contraction in older people’s social networks is generally a function of a positive psychological re-prioritisation of time and effort towards more meaningful and emotionally rewarding interactions. Older people generally want to spend time with people who are more emotionally meaningful to them, rather than with larger numbers of acquaintances with whom there is less emotional connection.  This, and evidence from others (Marangoni and Ickes, 1989, de Jong-Gierveld, 1987, Rook, 1987) suggests that enhancing the quality of relationships in later life is likely to be far more effective in addressing loneliness than just increasing the number of social contacts.
  • Helping those at risk of loneliness to increase and strengthen their ‘sense of purpose’ and meaning in life is likely to be one of the most important psychological interventions.  People who have a strong sense of purpose are most likely to develop the sort of relationships they need in life.
  • Loneliness has strong links with mental health problems and therefore strategies to address loneliness need to pay more attention to how mental health services can meet the needs of those at risk of loneliness.  At the same time there is a careful balance to be achieved such that loneliness doesn’t become further stigmatised by a simplistic ‘branding’ as a mental health problem.
  • Staff working with people at risk of loneliness need to develop a better understanding of the emotional and psychological process which underpin loneliness.

Where possible it would seem most appropriate to integrate the psychological dimensions into some of the current socially based interventions rather than to develop a whole new raft of psychological interventions.

Guy Robertson
Director
Positive Ageing Associates
July 2020

Bibliography

ABDELLAOUI, A., CHEN, H. Y., WILLEMSEN, G., EHLI, E. A., DAVIES, G. E., VERWEIJ, K. J. H., NIVARD, M. G., DE GEUS, E. J. C., BOOMSMA, D. I. & CACIOPPO, J. T. 2018. Associations between loneliness and personality are mostly driven by a genetic association with Neuroticism. J Pers.

AIDEN, H. 2016. Isolation and Loneliness: an overview of the literature. London: British Red Cross.

ANDERSON, C. A., HOROWITZ, L. M. & FRENCH, R. D. 1983. Attributional style of lonely and depressed people. J Pers Soc Psychol, 45, 127-36.

ARTHUR, A., WILSON, E., JAMES, M., STANTON, W. & SEYMOUR, J. 2010. Bereavement care services: a synthesis of the literature. In: HEALTH, D. O. (ed.). London: Dept of Health.

BENNETT, K. M. & VICTOR, C. 2012. ‘He wasn’t in that chair’: what loneliness means to widowed older people. International Journal of Ageing and Later Life, 1, 33-52.

BONDEVIK, M. & SKOGSTAD, A. 2000. Loneliness, Religiousness, and Purpose in Life in the Oldest Old. Journal of Religious Gerontology, 11, 5-21.

BURHOLT, V. & SCHARF, T. 2014. Poor health and loneliness in later life: the role of depressive symptoms, social resources, and rural environments. The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences, 69, 311-324.

CACIOPPO, J. T., FOWLER, J. H. & CHRISTAKIS, N. A. 2009. Alone in the crowd: The structure and spread of loneliness in a large social network. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 977-991.

CACIOPPO, J. T. & HAWKLEY, L. C. 2009. Perceived social isolation and cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13, 447-454.

CACIOPPO, J. T., HAWKLEY, L. C., ERNST, J. M., BURLESON, M., BERNTSON, G. G., NOURIANI, B. & SPIEGEL, D. 2006. Loneliness within a nomological net: An evolutionary perspective. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 1054-1085.

CACIOPPO, J. T. & PATRICK, W. 2008. Loneliness: Human nature and the need for social connection, New York, USA, W.W. Norton & Company Ltd.

CARSTENSEN, L. L., ISAACOWITZ, D. M. & SUSAN, T. 1999. Taking time seriously: A theory of socioemotional selectivity. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 40, 209-54.

CHANG, E.-S. & DONG, X. 2014. Personality traints among community-dwelling chinese older adults in the greater Chicago area. AIMS Medical Science, 1, 73-86.

COUDIN, G. & ALEXOPOULOS, T. 2010. ‘Help me! I’m old!’ How negative aging stereotypes create dependency among older adults. Aging Ment Health, 14, 516-23.

CREECY, R. F., BERG, W. E. & WRIGHT, R. 1985. Loneliness Among the Elderly: A Causal Approach. Journal of Gerontology, 40, 487-493.

CURRIER, J. M., HOLLAND, J. M. & NEIMEYER, R. A. 2010. Do CBT-based interventions alleviate distress following bereavement? A review of the current evidence. INternational Journal of Cognitive Therapy, 3,77-93.

DAHLBERG, L. & MCKEE, K. J. 2014. Correlates of social and emotional loneliness in older people: evidence from an English community study. Aging Ment Health, 18, 504-14.

DE JONG-GIERVELD, J. 1987. Developing and testing a model of loneliness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 119-128.

DILTS, R. 1990. Changing belief systems with NLP, CA, Meta Publications.

DISTEL, M. A., REBOLLO-MESA, I., ABDELLAOUI, A., DEROM, C. A., WILLEMSEN, G., CACIOPPO, J. T. & BOOMSMA, D. I. 2010. Familial resemblance for loneliness. Behavior genetics, 40, 480-494.

DOMÈNECH-ABELLA, J., MUNDÓ, J., HARO, J. M. & RUBIO-VALERA, M. 2019. Anxiety, depression, loneliness and social network in the elderly: Longitudinal associations from The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing (TILDA). Journal of Affective Disorders, 246, 82-88.

DUCK, S., POND, K. & LEATHAM, G. 1994. Loneliness and the Evaluation of Relational Events. 11, 253-276.

DYKSTRA, P. A. & FOKKEMA, T. 2007. Social and Emotional Loneliness Among Divorced and Married Men and Women: Comparing the Deficit and Cognitive Perspectives. Basic and Applied Social Psychology,29, 1-12.

ERNST, J. M. & CACIOPPO, J. T. 1999. Lonely hearts: Psychological perspectives on loneliness. Applied and Preventive Psychology, 8, 1-22.

FEES, B. S., MARTIN, P. & POON, L. W. 1999. A Model of Loneliness in Older Adults. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 54B, P231-P239.

GOLL, J. & AL., E. 2014. Barriers to Social Participation among lonely older adults: the influence of social fears and identity. PLOS one, 10.

GRAHAM, C. C., CAMPION, J., KAISER, P. & EDWARDS, K. 2011. Management of depression in older people: why this is important in primary care. London: The Forum for Mental Health in Primary Care.

HENSLEY, B., MARTIN, P., MARGRETT, J. A., MACDONALD, M., SIEGLER, I. C., POON, L. W., JAZWINSKI, S. M., GREEN, R. C., GEARING, M., WOODARD, J. L., JOHNSON, M. A., TENOVER, J. S., RODGERS, W. L., HAUSMAN, D. B., ROTT, C., DAVEY, A. & ARNOLD, J. 2012. Life events and personality predicting loneliness among centenarians: findings from the Georgia Centenarian Study. J Psychol, 146, 173-88.

HM GOVERNMENT 2018. A connected society: A strategy for tackling loneliness – laying the foundations for change. In: DEPT FOR DIGITAL, C., MEDIA AND SPORT (ed.). London: HM Government.

HUDSON, N.W., & FRALEY, R.C. (2015). Volitional personality trait change: Can people choose to change their personality traits? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 109(3), 490-507.

HUDSON, N.W., BRILEY, D.A., CHOPIK, W.J., DERRINJER, J. (2019) You have to follow through: Attaining behavioural change goals predicts volitional personality change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol 117(4), 839-857.

IRVING, J., DAVIS, S. & COLLIER, A. 2017. Aging With Purpose: Systematic Search and Review of Literature Pertaining to Older Adults and Purpose. 85, 403-437.

JARRETT, C. 2015. Your personality can invite loneliness, and loneliness can shape your personality [Online]. The British Psychological Society.  [Accessed].

JONES, W. H., FREEMON, J. E. & GOSWICK, R. A. 1981. The persistence of loneliness: Self and other determinants1. 49, 27-48.

JOPLING, K. 2015. Promising approaches to reducing loneliness and isolation in later life. London: Campaign to End Loneliness & Age UK.

L. FLETT, G., GOLDSTEIN, A., G. PECHENKOV, I., NEPON, T. & WEKERLE, C. 2016. Antecedents, correlates, and consequences of feeling like you don’t matter: Associations with maltreatment, loneliness, social anxiety, and the five-factor model.

LONG, M. & MARIN, P. 2000. Personality, relationship closeness, and loneliness of oldest old adults and their children. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 55B, 311-319.

LONG, M. V. & MARTIN, P. 2000. Personality, Relationship Closeness, and Loneliness of Oldest Old Adults and Their Children. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 55, P311-P319.

MANN, F. 2018. In: AT?, L. A. M. H. W. A. W. (ed.) Research and Policy Hub, 7 Sept 2018: Campaign to End Loneliness. London.

MARANGONI, C. & ICKES, W. 1989. Loneliness: A Theoretical Review with Implications for Measurement. 6,93-128.

MASI, C. M., CHEN, H., HAWKLEY, L. C. & CACIOPPO, J. 2011. A meta-analysis of interventions to reduce loneliness. Pers Soc Psychol Rev, 15.

MENKIN, J. A., ROBLES, T. F., GRUENEWALD, T. L., TANNER, E. K. & SEEMAN, T. E. 2016. Positive expectations regarding aging linked to more new friends in later life. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci,00, 1-11.

MUND, M. & NEYER, F. 2015. The winding paths of the lonesome cowboy: Evidence for mutual influences between personality, subjective health and loneliness. Journal of Personality, 84, 646-657.

MUND, M. & NEYER, F. J. 2016. The Winding Paths of the Lonesome Cowboy: Evidence for Mutual Influences Between Personality, Subjective Health, and Loneliness. 84, 646-657.

NEVILLE, S., ADAMS, J., MONTAYRE, J., LARMER, P., GARRETT, N., STEPHENS, C. & ALPASS, F. 2018. Loneliness in Men 60 Years and Over: The Association With Purpose in Life. 12, 730-739.

NYGREN, B., ALÉX, L., JONSÉN, E., GUSTAFSON, Y., NORBERG, A. & LUNDMAN, B. 2005. Resilience, sense of coherence, purpose in life and self-transcendence in relation to perceived physical and mental health among the oldest old. Aging & Mental Health, 9, 354-362.

PERLMAN, D. & PEPLAU, L. A. 1981. Towards a social psychology of loneliness. In: DUCK, S. & GILMOUR, R. (eds.) Personal Relationships (Vol 3): Personal Relationships is Disorder. London: Academic Press.

PERLMAN, D. & PEPLAU, L. A. 1984. Loneliness research: A survey of empirical findings. Preventing the harmful consequences of severe and persistent loneliness. Rockville, MD, US: National Institute of Mental Health.

PIKHARTOVA, J., BOWLING, A. & VICTOR, C. 2016. Is loneliness in later life a self fulfilling prophecy? Ageing and Mental Health, 20, 543-9.

ROBERTSON, G. 2016. Transitions in Later Life: Scoping Research. London: Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation.

ROBERTSON, G. 2017. Ageing and ageism: the impact of stereotypical attitudes on personal health and well-being outcomes and possible personal compensation strategies. Self & Society, 45, 149-159.

ROOK, K. S. 1987. Reciprocity of social exchange and social satisfaction among older women. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 145-154.

RUSSELL, D., CUTRONA, C. E., ROSE, J. & YURKO, K. 1984. Social and Emotional Loneliness: an examination of Weiss’s typology of loneliness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 1313-1321.

SCHAEFER, S., BOYLAN, J., VAN REEKUM, C., LAPATE, R., NORRIS, C. & RYFF, C. D. 2013. Purpose in life predicts better emotional recovery from negative stimuli. PLoS ONE, 8.

SCHERMER, J. A. & MARTIN, N. G. 2019. A behavior genetic analysis of personality and loneliness. Journal of Research in Personality, 78, 133-137.

SCHUT, H. & STROEBE, M. 2005. Interventions to enhance adaptation to bereavement. Journal of Palliative Medicine, 8, 140-147.

SCHUT, H., STROEBE, M., VAN DEN BOUT, J. & TERHEGGEN, M. 2001. The Efficacy of Bereavement Interventions: Determining Who Benefits. In: STROEBE, M., HANSSON, R. O., STROEBE, W. & SCHUT, H. (eds.) Handbook of Bereavement Research: Consequences, Coping and Care. Washington: American Psychological Association.

SEYMOUR, C., BUSHNELL, J. & DOBSON, S. 2018. Good Grief: Older people’s experiences of partner bereavement. London: Independent Age.

SHIOVITZ-EZRA, S., SHEMESH, J. & MCDONNELL/NAUGHTON, M. 2018. Pathways from Ageism to Loneliness. In: AYALON, L. & TESCH-RÖMER, C. (eds.) Contemporary Perspectives on Ageism.Cham: Springer International Publishing.

STEWART, M., CRAIG, D., MACPHERSON, K. & ALEXANDER, S. 2001. Promoting positive affect and diminishing loneliness of widowed seniors through a support intervention. Public Health Nurs, 18, 54-63.

STILLMAN, T. F., BAUMEISTER, R. F., LAMBERT, N. M., CRESCIONI, A. W., DEWALL, C. N. & FINCHAM, F. D. 2009. Alone and Without Purpose: Life Loses Meaning Following Social Exclusion. Journal of experimental social psychology, 45, 686-694.

TAM, K. Y. Y. & CHAN, C. S. 2019. The effects of lack of meaning on trait and state loneliness: Correlational and experience-sampling evidence. Personality and Individual Differences, 141, 76-80.

UTZ, R., SWENSON, K., CASERTA, M., LUND, D. & DEVRIES, B. 2013. Feeling Lonely Versus Being Alone: Loneliness and Social Support Among Recently Bereaved Persons.

VAN BAARSEN, B. 2002. Theories on Coping With LossThe Impact of Social Support and Self-Esteem on Adjustment to Emotional and Social Loneliness Following a Partner’s Death in Later Life. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 57, S33-S42.

VICTOR, C., MANSFIELD, L., KAY, T., DAYKIN, N., LANE, J., DUFFY, L., TOMLINSON, A. & MEADS, C. 2018. An Overview of Reviews: the effectiveness of interventions to address loneliness at all stages of the life course. London: What Works Centre for Wellbeing.

WANG, B. & DONG, X. 2018a. The association between personality and loneliness: findings from a community dwelling chinese ageing population. Gerontology & Geriatric Medicine, 4, 1-9.

WANG, B. & DONG, X. 2018b. The Association Between Personality and Loneliness: Findings From a Community-Dwelling Chinese Aging Population. Gerontology & geriatric medicine, 4,2333721418778181-2333721418778181.

WANG, J. & MANN, F. 2018. Associations between loneliness and perceived socal support and outcomes of mental health problems: a systematic review. BMC Psychiatry, 18.

WEINER, B. 1985. An attributional theory of achievement motivation and emotion. Psychological Review, 92,548-573.

WEISS, R. S. 1973. Loneliness: The experience of emotional and social isolation, Cambridge, MA, US, The MIT Press.

Negative stereotypes trigger loneliness & dependency in older people

The attitudes that people have about ageing have been shown to have a significant impact on the health and wellbeing in later life. An interesting study focused on the impact of internalised ageism on feelings of loneliness and dependency.

The research found that exposure to a negative ageing-stereotype increased self-reported loneliness compared to a positive ageing-stereotype or a control condition. Additionally, participants were more risk averse in the negative age-stereotype condition than in the positive age-stereotype or control condition. The results highlight that the mere activation of negative stereotypes can cause older people to adopt a condition that is reminiscent of dependent states, where they complain about their loneliness but remain passive, avoiding any behavioural initiative or risk taking.

A second aspect of the research showed that priming ageing stereotypes influenced health perception and extraversion, with participants in the negative condition declaring being in a more deteriorated state of health and describing themselves as less extraverted than their counterparts in the positive stereotype condition. A crucial finding of this part of the research was the fact that stereotype priming impacts older people’s help-seeking behaviour. More specifically, a negative age-stereotype priming increased help-seeking compared to a positive age stereotype priming.

The researchers concluded that the implications of their findings were straightforward – “The mere activation of a negative stereotype leads older individuals to feel lonely, to depreciate their health status, to avoid taking any risks and to systematically seek for help in their social environment. These effects are similar to those symptoms that are frequently encountered in an institutionalized context of enhanced dependency.”

The research can be accessed here.

Attributing illness to ‘old age’ increases risk of mortality

The dissemination of stereotypical beliefs about ageing have led to endorsement of the myth that ‘to be old is to be ill.’ This negative stereotype can have very concerning effects on health and longevity.

An interesting piece of research examined older people’s beliefs about the causes of their chronic illness (ie, heart disease, cancer, diabetes, etc.) and tested the hypothesis that attributing the onset of illness to ‘old age’ is associated with negative health outcomes. A series of multiple regressions (controlling for chronological age, gender, income, severity of chronic conditions, functional status and health locus of control) demonstrated that ‘old age’ attributions were associated with more frequent perceived health symptoms, poorer health maintenance behaviours and a greater likelihood of mortality at 2-year follow-up. The probability of death was more than double among participants who strongly endorsed the ‘old age’ attribution as compared to those who did not (36% vs. 14%).

The findings are further evidence of the toxic impact of internalised negative stereotypes about ageing and should be considered as an important component of interventions to improve the health and wellbeing of older people.

The research can be found by clicking here.

Sense of purpose reduces mortality

Purpose in life refers to the sense that life has meaning and direction and that one’s goals and potential are being achieved or are achievable. Greater purpose in life has been shown to be associated with several psychological outcomes, including a more positive outlook on life, happiness, satisfaction, and self-esteem. Most importantly research has also found that sense of purpose appears to reduce mortality.

One piece of research examined the association of purpose in life with mortality in >1200 community-dwelling older persons. During 5 years of follow-up, greater purpose in life was associated with a substantially reduced risk of death; more specifically, the hazard rate of a person with a high score on the purpose in life measure was about 57% of that for a person with a low score. The association of purpose in life with mortality did not vary by age, gender, education, or race, and the finding persisted after adjustment for several important covariates, including depressive symptoms, disability, neuroticism, the number of medical conditions, and income.

The finding that purpose in life is related to longevity in older people suggests that aspects of human flourishing—particularly the tendency to derive meaning from life’s experiences and possess a sense of intentionality and goal directedness that guides behaviour—contribute to health and wellbeing in later life.

To access the full report click here.

Older people feel ‘younger’ when they have sense of control

Research shows that older adults who feel they have greater control over their lives tend to feel younger. This is important because both ‘feelings of control’ and ‘feeling younger’ are associated with better health and wellbeing outcomes for older people. For example, younger perceived age is associated with longer life expectancy and good mental health. Importantly the results indicate that both beliefs about control and age can change daily, which means that these beliefs also may be changed through various interventions including psychological and personal development strategies.

For further details on the research click here

Pessimism shortens lives

Research into the differing outcomes associated with optimism and pessimism highlights significantly differing results between the two.

The phenomena of ‘pessimism’ or ‘optimism’ can be understood by examining how people explain life events (i.e. their explanatory style). Optimists explain positive events in terms of personal, permanent causes and negative events in terms of external, temporary causes. Pessimists react in the opposite way.

In the study a total of 839 patients completed an Optimism/Pessimism scale between 1962 and 1965 as self-referred general medical patients. Thirty years later, the status of each of these patients was ascertained. Among these, a 10-point score increase on the Optimism-Pessimism scale (eg, more pessimistic) was associated with a 19% increase in the risk of mortality.

The researchers concluded that a pessimistic explanatory style is significantly associated with mortality.

For further information on the study click here

Contributing to others improves wellbeing

Meaning and purpose can be severely challenged in later life as society generally fails to perceive older people as having a meaningful role to play. New research has added to the growing body of evidence to suggest that having a strong sense of meaning and purpose plays a very significant part in wellbeing in later life. The study looked at the phenomenon of ‘generativity’ – the concern with giving to others or leaving a legacy. It tested whether greater self perceptions of generativity were linked to feelings of connectedness, self worth, and positive emotions. They compared those people who felt they had achieved their desired level of generativity in life with those who felt that they had failed to meet their expectations.

Higher ratings of perceived contributions to the welfare of others were associated with greater current and future propensity to experience positive emotions and interact with others and with life’s challenges in a positive way. It was also associated with greater self worth and life satisfaction. Contributing to the wellbeing of others is therefore indicated as an important dimension of ageing positively. Developing a sense of meaning and purpose in life is critical to health and wellbeing in later life.

For the full research paper click here

Neurological basis of improving emotional stability over age

Contrary to the pervasive negative stereotypes of ageing, emotional functions actually tend to improve in later life, however, the brain mechanisms underlying these changes in emotional function over age remain unknown. This study demonstrate that emotional stability improves steadily over seven decades (12–79 years) and demonstrates some of the neurological changes involved. The improvement in emotional function was found to be independent from the common loss of ‘grey matter’ in the brain. The researchers propose “an integrative model in which accumulated life experience and the motivation for meaning over acquisition in older age contribute to plasticity of medial prefrontal systems, achieving a greater selective control over emotional functions.” 

To read the original research paper click here

Gratitude lessens death anxiety

Death anxiety is a negative psychological reaction to the prospect of our mortality. It is related to human beings’ inability to accept mortality and is a common phenomenon. This study investigated whether a brief gratitude intervention could reduce death anxiety.  Participants in the gratitude cohort were asked to recall and then write for about 20 minutes about gratitude-inducing events for which they felt “grateful, thankful, or appreciative.”  Participants in the gratitude cohort reported lower death anxiety than those in the control groups. By re-examining life events with a thankful attitude, people may become less fearful of death due to a sense that life has been well-lived. Because gratitude can be induced using a very brief procedure, there are broad applications in clinical and health-care settings for the relief of death anxiety.

To see the original research paper click here

Mindfulness has the power to reduce people’s experience of loneliness

Lonely older adults have increased risk of illness and premature death. Various behavioural treatments have attempted to reduce loneliness and its associated health risks, but have had limited success. This study tested whether the 8-week Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction (MBSR) program (compared with a control group) reduces loneliness and reduces the inflammation often associated with loneliness in older adults. Consistent with study predictions, the MBSR program reduced loneliness, compared to small increases in loneliness in the control group. This work provides an initial indication that MBSR may be a novel treatment approach for reducing loneliness and related inflammation in older adults.

To access the full study click this link.