Does Loneliness Thrive in Relational Freedom or Restriction? The Culture-Loneliness Framework

Abstract

Loneliness is a common experience with major negative consequences for well-being. Although much research has examined protective and risk factors for loneliness, we know little about its cultural underpinnings. The few studies that exist seem paradoxical, suggesting that loneliness is higher in cultures where tighter and more demanding (i.e., more restrictive) cultural norms about social relationships decrease the risk of social isolation. At the same time, loneliness is lower among individuals who hold more restrictive norms or perceive such norms among others around them. We move beyond previous research by generating the culture-loneliness framework, suggesting that loneliness occurs across all levels of restrictiveness, but through different predominant types of isolation. More restrictive (i.e., more, tighter, or more demanding) norms about social relationships may better protect from physical isolation (i.e., a lack of social interaction or relationships) but increase the likelihood of emotional and perceived isolation (i.e., a lack of individually satisfying relationships or relationships that do not fulfill cultural ideals). We evaluate this framework by reviewing research at both the individual and the cultural levels, and discuss its theoretical and practical implications.

Loneliness across cultures with different levels of social embeddedness: A qualitative study

“…Clearly, such differences need to be interpreted with caution because of our small samples and convenience sampling—a robust interpretation would require in‐depth ethnological knowledge and quantitative research. Nevertheless, theoretically, a higher likelihood of solitude and social isolation in less embedded cultures (e.g., due to the option of living alone or divorcing) may indeed make solitude a more common and salient cause of loneliness (Heu et al, 2020). By contrast, in more socially embedded cultures, less freedom to choose one's relationships may more often bind individuals to unfulfilling (potentially loneliness‐eliciting) relationships (Heu et al, 2020; Kito, Yuki, & Thomson, 2017).…”

“…Nevertheless, theoretically, a higher likelihood of solitude and social isolation in less embedded cultures (e.g., due to the option of living alone or divorcing) may indeed make solitude a more common and salient cause of loneliness (Heu et al, 2020). By contrast, in more socially embedded cultures, less freedom to choose one's relationships may more often bind individuals to unfulfilling (potentially loneliness‐eliciting) relationships (Heu et al, 2020; Kito, Yuki, & Thomson, 2017). As much as social interaction may ease the loneliness of the socially isolated, solitude may ease the loneliness of those whose relationships are unresponsive (e.g., unsupportive, less emotionally close).…”

“…When compared to other parts of the world, these countries share a number of cultural elements (i.e., they contain some similar shared beliefs, norms, or values; Chiu, Gelfand, Yamagishi, Shteynberg, & Wan, 2010). For instance, they are generally characterized by higher individualism (Hofstede, Hofstede, & Minkov, 2010), lower relational stability (i.e., cultural norms to hold on to existing social relationships; Heu, Hansen, & van Zomeren, 2019), or less restrictive norms about social relationships (i.e., fewer, less strict, and less demanding norms about social relationships; Heu et al, 2020). As such, the cultures in these countries can be described as less socially embedded 2 : Individuals are less embedded in tight social networks (e.g., families or communities), spend more time or are more likely to live alone, have less stable and less long‐lasting relationships, and are more independent from each other when making choices.…”

The Mediating Role of Psychological Distress in Excessive Gambling Among Young People: A Four-Country Study

“…One possible explanation for this result could be that there are multiple ways to attempt to cope with distress, and gambling is not among the most attractive alternatives if one does not already have a strong predisposition towards gambling. As discussed earlier, in loneliness, social relationships are qualitatively or quantitatively deficient, [20] with varying degrees and roles in different social normative environments. Thus, in collectivistic and socially cohesive societies such as Spain and South Korea, the role of loneliness -probably coming from lack of satisfying relationships -might be stronger in addictive behaviours such as excessive gambling.…”

“…Loneliness is an unpleasant experience, and chronic loneliness due to prior experiences of isolation can be a major source of psychological distress in people [18,19]. Different social normative environments might increase the risk of loneliness for different reasons, with a lack of satisfying relationships being more probable in stricter cultures and physical isolation being more probable in lenient cultures [20]. One possible explanation for excessive behaviours lies in the adoption of a high controlled orientation, which typically predicts poor well-being on a personal level [21].…”