Loneliness

Feeling lonely at times is very human. There are different kinds of loneliness:  

• feeling as though you don't have enough (or any) friends
• feeling unseen or unknown by those you know
• difficulty feeling good when alone or making use of one's time 

Sometimes we suffer because of a false belief about ourselves: "If I'm alone, then something must be wrong w/me. Perhaps I'm unlovable." This feeling may be a symptom of insufficient self-love.

On the other hand, growing up in a society that promotes a dependence upon or even an addiction to external things for a sense of well being -  food, clothes, drugs, other people -  leaves many of us floundering when left all to ourselves.

Some of us may have internalized the false view that to be happy is to be surrounded by others at all times, regardless of how we may feel in their company.

And yet, if we can learn to be truly intimate w/ourselves, then we’re never alone. This sort of intimacy, however, isn’t always easy to come by. It may take facing the wounded, deficient parts of ourselves, as well as the wonderful, abundant parts.

In many families such parts were rejected & denied & therefore went underground, perhaps festering into a low-grade depression. Therapy frequently involves facing & integrating these rejected parts & experiences. These neglected parts of ourselves often carry a heavy burden of shame.

Shame too can isolate us from others, contributing to our loneliness. Group therapy & other mutually accepting relationships can offer an antidote to shame, as we explore our common vulnerability & see that our deepest secrets are not the terrible beasts we imagined.

Written by: Mark Evans, Ph.D.,University of Oregon Counseling Center

They expounded on the positive relationship between isolation & the artistic process, implying that managing the loneliness of the operation was pivotal to producing a creative work. Though many artists seek voluntary solitude as a means to spark the Muse & focus on a project, constructive aloneness isn't tantamount to a state of loneliness.

In fact, when adolescents were tested for loneliness & creativity to determine if this correlation existed, an inverse relationship was found (Mahon, Yarcheski & Yarcheski, 1996). Adolescents who rated themselves highest on creativity engaged in complex, emotional attachments, which offset loneliness.

Moreover, those who rated highest on loneliness were less likely to engage in creative endeavors as the bulk of their energy was allotted to alleviating their state of loneliness.

Along this line, loneliness is also not the self-imposed isolation sought for spiritual purposes. Taoists speak of a state known as "returning" which is the centering of the self after having been involved in the day's social activities (Deng, 1992).

Returning constitutes isolation from others to cleanse oneself of their influences. The same is true of monks & nuns of many religions who live a cloistered existence, sometimes abandoning speech or other forms of human interaction as a means to achieve greater enlightenment on spiritual matters. Again, this is chosen solitude alleviating distractions & designed to achieve a specific goal & doesn’t accurately reflect the distressful, unwanted state of loneliness.

Types of Loneliness

Loneliness can be divided into 2 categories with separate symptomology & differing courses of treatment (Weiss, 1973). The first area is the loneliness of emotional isolation brought about by the loss of a significant relationship in one's life through death or divorce.

The only means by which this loneliness can be remedied is by finding another equally important relationship to fill the void, not just by becoming socially active in a superficial, non-intimate manner.

Emotional isolation is strongly reminiscent of a child's fear of abandonment (Weiss, 1973). In addition, this loneliness type is often accompanied by hyper-alertness & anxiety, which makes the individual oversensitive to social cues leading them to misinterpret or exaggerate the intentions of others whether positive or negative (Weiss, 1973). This hypersensitivity further dampens the likelihood of filling the void they experience.

It’s no coincidence that emotional isolation is compared to the fearful abandonment feelings of childhood. Attachment styles learned in childhood as a means of relating to a caregiver are repeated thru adulthood as one bonds in other significant relationships (Baron & Byrne, 2000).

Therefore an individual who achieves a secure attachment style with a caregiver in childhood is less likely to experience loneliness as an adult as they have developed trust & social skills that facilitate interpersonal relationships (Baron & Byrne, 2000). Moreover, they're likely to have higher self-esteem, which enhances their desirability.

Once this individual has access to a network of social interaction, the symptoms usually dissipate. However, Weiss believed there were as many as 6 different types of relationships that are all required by an individual (Vincenzi & Grabosky, 1987) & a deficit in any one of them could produce feelings of social loneliness.

Those relationships include attachments which he defines as associations in which one feels a sense of safety & security such as with a spouse or parent; social integration wherein a network of relationships is provided in a group setting such as a neighborhood, church or club & opportunity for nurturance which entails all associations that involve the individual acting as caregiver or simply being responsible for another's well being in some fashion.

Weiss also identified relationships for reassurance of worth which highlight acknowledgement of a person's skills & abilities such as in a work setting; reliable alliances which involve having support & others to count on & finally guidance relationships which are based on having sources when it’s necessary to seek advice.

The absence or paucity of any of these associations could bring about social loneliness, as the many facets of an individual's social needs aren’t being met.

Measuring Loneliness

Questions arise as to why it's so challenging to identify & measure loneliness when the condition is so prevalent. Loneliness isn’t a measurable condition like having a fever, but is more comparable to fatigue, which can range from the barely noticeable to the completely incapacitating (Weiss, 1973).

Gauging such a broad range of a non-tangible quality is beyond scientific instrumentation, yet surveys indicate about 1 in 4 individuals experience some level of loneliness at any given time (Weiss, 1973).

The second hurdle to understanding loneliness is the unwillingness many have to reveal their mental state, assuming they can self-diagnose their problem as one of loneliness. Most are reticent to disclose their feelings due to the negative response from others that could result in further isolation (Perlman & Joshi, 1987). By admitting to loneliness, they're also conceding a lack of success at interpersonal relationships & possibly accepting a label of undesirability.

Thru the Actor-Observer Effect we erroneously attribute an individual's loneliness to his own character flaws, social ineptitude, or personality that makes him undesirable as a friend or mate, whereas we would view our own loneliness as circumstantial & not indicative of our social desirability level.

This type of judgment or an ambivalent response of both denigration & sympathy would easily justify an individual's preference for silence. Moreover, though disclosure may alleviate tension & possibly create new social attachments, it could just as easily elicit disdain from those who adhere to beliefs in self-reliance & the individualism enhanced by American culture (Perlman & Joshi, 1987).

Our romanticized images of the lone cowboy or solitary soldier are especially damaging to those who question their fortitude when faced w/an inability to uphold such stringent parameters of solitude.

The most common method of measuring a client's level of loneliness is thru the UCLA Loneliness Scale developed to assess subjective feelings of loneliness or social isolation. The original version of this scale was composed of statements used by lonely individuals to describe feelings of loneliness, which the test subject then rated on a 4-point continuum from "never" to "often" (Russell, Peplau, & Ferguson, 1978).

The test statements were worded in a negative direction, however & due to concerns that this may skew the test taker's responses a revised version was developed in 1980 to include 10 positive & 10 negative statements (Russell, Peplau, & Cutrona, 1980). A 3rd version of this scale was released in 1996 w/a simplified vocabulary to better test less educated individuals.

Who Are the Lonely?

Trying to determine which sex is lonelier has presented a challenge for scientists. As stated earlier, admitting to loneliness can have negative ramifications, but those can be increased based on gender. Men, assigned the societal role of stoic pillars impervious to emotional swings, are viewed w/greater negativity than women when admitting feelings of loneliness (Cramer & Neyedly, 1998).

Therefore it’s logical to assume that men are less likely to divulge these feelings when asked directly. Research has supported this reluctance hypothesis & therefore when subjects are tested directly on the matter women are found to be the lonelier of the genders. However, when the aspect of loneliness is masked w/in the test's construction, such as in the UCLA Loneliness Scale, men & those w/higher masculine attributes of either sex are typically rated the lonelier (Cramer & Neyedly, 1998).

The difference in scores can be attributed to the male's unwillingness to admit to this perceived fault not only to others but perhaps to himself as well. The self-serving bias, blaming feelings of loneliness on an external predicament, may also be utilized to bolster self-esteem & retain a facade.

The terminally ill also account for a significant portion of the lonely. The distress of a terminal illness such as cancer or AIDS is compounded by the knowledge that social interaction will lessen for the patient (Rokach, 2000). The individual, faced w/losing his life, must also contend with the loss of social interaction, friends, family & employment.

Friends of the patient, uncertain of how to deal with a dying companion & hesitant to ponder their own inescapable demise, withdraw rather than face the distress this situation engenders. Current research indicates a relationship between immunity & social support; endorsing the notion that societal withdrawal contributes to a body's weakening ability to fight disease (Rokach, 2000).

Therefore, since humans are highly social creatures meant to live in communities, we suffer on both a mental & physical level when those affiliations are withheld. Loneliness for the terminally ill can hasten an illness.

Along that same vein, the recently disabled have a propensity to succumb to loneliness (Evans & Dingus, 1987). Poor emotional adjustment after becoming significantly disabled is not uncommon & often the individual assumes he is less capable than what his limitations actually allow. This includes not only issues regarding personal care but also social interaction. Their self-imposed solitude brings about a period of loneliness that’s often alleviated once they better understand their abilities & relay those to family & friends.

The elderly, who in this context constitutes a broad age range from 55 to 90, are also a group that collectively faces the issue of loneliness. At this life stage significant relationships come to an end. One may lose a spouse thru death or divorce.

Friendships cease due to death or retirement relocation. Children leave the nest for college or to begin their own lives, perhaps in other cities & focus their energy away from the nuclear family.

Moreover, due to failing health or an inability to drive or walk, an older person may become housebound furthering their isolation from the community (Moore & Schultz, 1987). More revealing, however, is the locus of control attribution in the aged. Those who internalize the responsibility & control of their own lives were found to be less lonely than those who felt they had little control over the latter part of their lives (Moore & Schultz, 1987).

In short, those who believed loneliness & isolation were a requisite facet of old age took fewer steps to alleviate solitude & therefore experienced greater depression & feelings of detachment from community & family.

These findings are enhanced by additional studies on the elderly, which indicate having few social contacts, or living alone doesn't assure a state of loneliness (Mullins, Johnson, & Anderson, 1987). In fact, time spent w/family was less enjoyable for the elderly than a visit w/a neighbor or someone of their age group.

This can be attributed to the fact that relationships w/family tend to be obligatory whereas those w/friends are a matter of choice. This further emphasizes the need for a perceived internal locus of control over social interaction as a means of alleviating loneliness.

Moreover, findings indicate the greater issue wasn't the frequency of visits, but rather the perception that test subjects had access to family & friends when they desired to engage in social activity (Mullins, Johnson, & Anderson, 1987). This confirms our definition of loneliness as not a matter of solitude but rather feelings of being marginalized.

Another less obvious group of lonely individuals is those who have a strong need to differentiate from others. Joubert studied the correlation between the need for uniqueness & loneliness utilizing Snyder & Fromkin's Need for Uniqueness Scale & the UCLA Loneliness Scale.

His assertion was that some who experience loneliness do so because personality characteristics "serve to make them, in effect, aversive stimuli to others (Joubert, 1987)." Conformity occurs because of our human desire to be liked & the desire to be right, also known as normative social influence & informational social influence (Baron & Byrne, 2000).

However, for some the need for personal control & individuality supplants the interest in being liked or in being perceived as "right".

Snyder & Fromkin's Need for Uniqueness Scale tests 3 factors (Joubert, 1987).

The first measures the lack of concern towards others' reactions to one's differing ideas & behaviors. The 2nd measures an individual's desire to not follow the rules & the 3rd tests a willingness to publicly defend uncommon beliefs.

Joubert felt the most interesting factor in terms of a correlation to loneliness was the 2nd, a disinterest in following the rules since "norm violators are met with exclusion (Joubert, 1987)." The testing did indicate a strong correlation proving that those who strive for individuation do so at the expense of social relationships w/others who value a collectivist focus. 

Causes of Loneliness

Regardless of one's stand on Darwinism or evolutionary biology, most agree that humankind is a species that has lived until recently in small, stable tribes wherein only adult males are likely to be alone for the purpose of hunting.

To be isolated from the tribe, especially as a vulnerable member such as a child, is a situation of great peril. It’s therefore part of our survival instinct that requires us to maintain proximity & ties to others (Bowlby, 1973).

Protection from 4-legged predators may seem an unlikely concern in the modern age, but new foes & challenges have arisen that create value in community such as providing emotional or financial support.

Therefore, those without the interconnectivity of community feel the fear of isolation on an instinctual level, which causes distress over their ability to survive the modern predator.

Infants & toddlers demonstrate purer reflections of our inherited instincts as years of nurturing have yet to amend & supplement the raw information provided thru our genes. An infant's initial bond with its mother, therefore, comprises the first lesson on how this child's "tribe" will provide for & defend him.

This primary interaction provides the child with an attachment style, which he’ll use as a template for further relationships throughout his life.

The specifics of this attachment style can procure a lifetime of trusting & fulfilling relationships or create the foundation for isolation & loneliness as well as lowered self-esteem (Baron & Bryne, 2000). If a child's caregiver is trustworthy & reliable in meeting the child's needs as the majority of mothers are, the child will develop a secure attachment style believing in the basic goodness of others, having strong empathy, higher self-esteem & general positive interaction with others.

However, if the caregiver fails to provide the child w/that basic interpersonal trust, one of two other attachment styles will arise. The insecure-avoidant individual is hostile & distant towards others & rarely seeks help from those who might assist him.

The insecure-ambivalent child is highly dependent on others yet remains non-compliant, unenthusiastic & unsociable (Baron & Bryne, 2000). Since it’s preferable to be around secure individuals who feel good about themselves & their environment, those who’ve cultivated other attachment styles are likely to find themselves w/fewer relationships than they desire. From their first failed relationship w/their mother, they’re likely to become one of the lonely.

Treatment for Loneliness

It’s no surprise that group therapy has proven highly effective in the treatment of loneliness (Evans & Dingus, 1987). Assuming that loneliness consists of both emotional & social estrangement, providing interaction w/others alleviates a degree of the perceived marginalization found in social loneliness.

Moreover, reciprocal assistance w/in the group addresses issues of trust allowing the lonely to take initial steps to solve their problem while simultaneously understanding they aren’t alone in their loneliness.

Recipients of group treatment are also able to identify improvement thru peer evaluation as well as their own identification of symptom relief (Evans & Dingus, 1987). Unlike many affective disorders, clients can report accurately on their own progress.

It’s also important to clarify that organized group therapy differs from random sociability (Evans & Dingus, 1987). A lonely person's efforts to regain a social network may lead to awkward situations where they perceive themselves as the "fifth wheel".

Well meaning friends & family, for example, may try to assist w/a new widow's sense of isolation only to exacerbate her condition. She feels more like a burden & an obligation - than a guest. Therefore haphazard attempts to interact may have the opposite effect whereas a controlled group environment designed to address issues while simultaneously establishing interpersonal trust among members is more likely to achieve the end goal.

A formal therapeutic approach isn’t always required or sought by those dealing w/loneliness. It is more likely the individual will address the problem using his own resources & ingenuity by generating supplementary relationships (Weiss, 1973).

Supplementary relationships don’t come about thru standard interaction but rather are sought by the lonely for the sole purpose of alleviating the distress of solitude. Examples include joining a gardening club when having no previous interest in that hobby or by seeking a therapist simply to have someone to talk w/even if it requires payment.

Supplementary relationships are understood as being of a limited duration, ending when the individual no longer requires the support or interaction provided. In fact, those who maintain supplementary relationships, such as w/a singles' club, beyond a prescribed point actually incur lower self-esteem (Weiss, 1973).

They perceive their dependence on the transition community as indicative of their inability to form true relationships. With supplementary relationships there’s a sense of contrived community & therefore there’s often an eagerness to move beyond what the group has to offer as quickly as possible & avoid further contact.

Further Study of Loneliness

There are multiple directions for the study of loneliness in the future as this aspect of psychology is far from exhausted. First the measurement instruments used to gauge the existence & severity of loneliness are few & lacking.

Though the UCLA Loneliness Scale is in its 3rd iteration, it remains a "unidirectional measure of a multidimensional construct" (Hojat & Crandall, 1987). Measurement scales for different types of loneliness that better grade intensity would be ideal.

In addition, Hojat & Crandall believe there is too great an emphasis on the objective measures & much is to be gained thru observation & soft, open ended studies rather than hard, statistically based measures. Perhaps the anecdotal methods that began the study of loneliness are worth a second visit.

In addition, a further investigation & distinction should be made between emotional & social loneliness. This typology has been the long-standing norm for decades & is ripe for a confrontation if further insight identifies different or more types of loneliness especially in light of our changing world since Weiss' initial & virtually unchallenged, assessment in the early 1970’s.

Along this line, it would be worthwhile to further apply the "state vs. trait" query to the subject of loneliness. Additional measures could tell us if an individual's loneliness is a personality trait requiring long-term therapy or a transitory condition better addressed w/patience & outreach efforts.

Other issues for further study would include a better understanding of the neurobiophysiological factors contributing to an individual's loneliness. Hojat & Crandall conclude the work done on loneliness hasn’t focused on possible biochemical contributions to the problem. Moreover, if a biochemical problem is identified, pharmacotherapy could be employed along w/standard therapeutic methods to help clients.

Finally, longitudinal research is required to better understand how developmental problems in childhood result in adult loneliness.

With our modern culture suffering from unprecedented case numbers of depression, therapists would do well to consider the aspects of loneliness & how a lack of relationships & poor attachment styles contribute to the isolation & despondency we feel.

Moreover, as new generations reach adulthood having been raised away from extended family & often under the care of daycare centers or a series of non-family members less invested in their well being, the level of detachment may rise.

Our society increases in numbers yet our sense of belonging is lessened. Helping clients understand their problem as one of loneliness & assist them w/bypassing the cultural stigma is the first step to alleviating the distress.

Feeling Lonely

How can I foster growth in my marriage?

By taking a look at what others have identified as traits that are desirable in a marriage, we can take steps to strengthen our own. The late David Mace, a well-known marriage counselor, identified 8 qualities necessary for a successful marriage. These 8 qualities are:

1. The spouses respect each other.
2. They meet crises successfully.
3. They're loyal & faithful to each other.
4. They reinforce & support each other.
5. They're truthful & open w/each other.
6. They share the same basic values.
7. They're mutually affectionate.
8. They share the same goals.

Ideas to help yourself kick stress-related overeating w/these simple tips.

We’ve all done it. You know the feeling. You’re just finished dinner & you’re reaching for a bag of popcorn from the pantry. You can’t understand it, why are you still eating?

You’ve already had lasagna, salad, a couple of chocolate chip cookies, some pretzels & a container of yogurt & now you’re hunting down the popcorn. All you know is, you're stressed out & eating just seems like the right thing to do.

Cut it out.

Overeating has become more than a habit; it’s become an American national pastime. We know the consequences of polishing off a meal of cheeseburgers & fries w/a container of ice cream, yet we do it anyway. And then we feel even worse. So what’s going on?

More & more people are finding that emotional eating can become a habit that’s nearly impossible to break. If we have a bad day, we reach for Twinkies. If we’re sad or bored, it’s time to pull out the crackers. Stressed? There’s some left-over pizza in the fridge… we’re allowing our emotions to rule our guts.

Some experts attribute it to something called “emotional hunger.” In today’s stressful, overworked society, many people turn to food for comfort from stress, loneliness, even fear.

True, the chemical links between food & the body are just starting to be understood, but almost everyone experiences a feeling of contentment when the belly is full.

It’s biological… just watch your satiated dog or cat happily curl up to nap once when they’ve taken care of their hunger needs. Contentment & a feeling of fullness go hand-in-hand.

But understanding how to stop it is sometimes a little more complicated. With every human body so different & every personality so unique, what works for one person may not be right for you & vice versa. But understanding how stress-related overeating works might just be enough of a tip-off to help you kick the habit for good.

When you’re stressed out, the human body will throw its endocrine glands into overdrive in order to produce more of the stress hormone cortisol. This works well if you’re confronted by danger & have to make a fight-or-flight decision; the feelings of hunger than follow such a situation is simply the body trying to make up for the energy spent fighting, or fleeing from, the perceived enemy.

However, if your enemy is your mortgage, your credit card bills & the fact that your car broke down, no energy is being expelled to fight or flee. But the cortisol is still pumping thru your system in the anticipation of physical activity.

With no activity, however, there’s no burning calories & the excess calories will simply go straight to your waistline. Leaving you, most probably, more stressed & worried than before.

In order to fight your stress-related overeating, be aware of what it is that's causing the panic in the first place. Re-evaluate your position; is this a situation you can get out of? Stress doesn’t just cause the human body to overeat; it has severe complications on your health in a number of ways, ranging from insomnia to elevating your blood pressure.

If it’s a situation that’s just not avoidable at this time, then try new activities to beat the stress. Mediation, tai chi & yoga are often recommended; even upping your physical activity level with regular exercise can be an effective stress-buster.

If you still find yourself reaching for the fried chicken, keep in mind that this craving will subside if you simply wait it out. Or try guzzling a glass of water for that instant feeling of fullness.

If that doesn’t work, shake yourself out of the craving’s tunnel-vision effect for a minute and prepare yourself a consciously healthful snack such as fruit or vegetables w/a yogurt or peanut butter spread, a handful of low-fat multigrain crackers with fat-free cheese or a low-cal smoothie.

Finally, try to distract yourself – go for a walk, flip through a magazine, call a friend. Getting through the craving is the number one thing you can do to help beat stress-related overeating.