Why loneliness requires a multidimensional approach: a critical narrative review

Brendan E. Walsh, Jonathan Rottenberg, Robert C. Schlauch
{"title":"Why loneliness requires a multidimensional approach: a critical narrative review","authors":"Brendan E. Walsh, Jonathan Rottenberg, Robert C. Schlauch","doi":"10.1038/s44220-024-00382-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"An immense corpus of work documents deleterious effects of loneliness on physical health, cognition, psychological symptoms, and wellbeing. In this Review, we argue that the widespread assumption that loneliness is unidimensional may lead to imprecise interpretations of findings and hamper intervention efforts. We critically revisit a longstanding multidimensional loneliness framework that posits two distinct dimensions: emotional loneliness (perceived lack of intimate connections) and social loneliness (perceived deficits in social networks). We demonstrate how distinguishing loneliness dimensions may provide a clearer picture of the nature of loneliness and its correlates, risk factors and consequences. For instance, emotional loneliness appears to be a more severe typology that overlaps greatly with pathology, whereas social loneliness is more reflective of deficits in social connectedness and social support. We additionally evaluate the utility of this multidimensional framework in the domains of clinical practice and public health and provide suggestions to stimulate further research. This Review discusses the multidimensional conceptualization of loneliness and the utility of this framework for clinical practice and public health.","PeriodicalId":74247,"journal":{"name":"Nature mental health","volume":"3 2","pages":"175-184"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature mental health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s44220-024-00382-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

An immense corpus of work documents deleterious effects of loneliness on physical health, cognition, psychological symptoms, and wellbeing. In this Review, we argue that the widespread assumption that loneliness is unidimensional may lead to imprecise interpretations of findings and hamper intervention efforts. We critically revisit a longstanding multidimensional loneliness framework that posits two distinct dimensions: emotional loneliness (perceived lack of intimate connections) and social loneliness (perceived deficits in social networks). We demonstrate how distinguishing loneliness dimensions may provide a clearer picture of the nature of loneliness and its correlates, risk factors and consequences. For instance, emotional loneliness appears to be a more severe typology that overlaps greatly with pathology, whereas social loneliness is more reflective of deficits in social connectedness and social support. We additionally evaluate the utility of this multidimensional framework in the domains of clinical practice and public health and provide suggestions to stimulate further research. This Review discusses the multidimensional conceptualization of loneliness and the utility of this framework for clinical practice and public health.

Abstract Image

为什么孤独需要一种多维的方法:一种批判性的叙事回顾
大量的工作记录了孤独对身体健康、认知、心理症状和幸福感的有害影响。在这篇综述中,我们认为孤独感是单向度的普遍假设可能会导致对研究结果的不精确解释,并阻碍干预工作。我们批判性地重新审视了一个长期存在的多维孤独框架,该框架假定了两个不同的维度:情感孤独(感知到缺乏亲密联系)和社交孤独(感知到社交网络的缺陷)。我们展示了如何区分孤独维度可以更清楚地了解孤独的本质及其相关因素、风险因素和后果。例如,情感孤独似乎是一种更严重的类型,与病理学有很大的重叠,而社交孤独更多地反映了社会联系和社会支持的缺陷。我们还评估了这一多维框架在临床实践和公共卫生领域的效用,并提出了促进进一步研究的建议。本综述讨论了孤独感的多维概念化以及该框架在临床实践和公共卫生中的应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信