Functions of Social Support and Self-Verification in Association with Loneliness, Depression, and Stress

Wright, Kevin B.; King, Shawn; Rosenberg, Jenny

doi:10.1080/10810730.2013.798385

Cited by 42 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 83 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The role of perceived social support as a buffer and protective barrier to loneliness has been well documented [91][92][93]. Infidelity is known to destroy a person's social support system as a result of no longer having access to resources that would help them cope with the stressors associated with the devastating situation [86].…”

Section: Infidelity: Social Support and Lonelinessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intimacy, Loneliness & Infidelity

Rokach¹,

Philibert-Lignières

2015

TOPSYJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores the experience of loneliness in intimacy, with a special focus on infidelity. First, the notion of intimacy and love are examined and related to the concept of loneliness. To be in love is often thought to exclude being lonely but research shows otherwise.' Loneliness is exacerbated when intimacy is shattered by interpersonal events like infidelity. A review of recent literature regarding infidelity is presented. The concepts of depression, social support, selfesteem, and betrayal as a result of infidelity are examined and linked to loneliness. Also included, is a small discussion regarding the psychological distress and loneliness of the adulterer, before and after the revelation of infidelity. It is further asserted that loneliness is a two-way construct when speaking of infidelity; not only is it a salient product of infidelity, but also a strong predictor of its occurrence.Keywords: Betrayal, depression, infidelity, intimacy, loneliness, marriage, social support.People are social animals, and have a basic human need to belong, to be part of an intimate, lasting, caring relationship with a partner who is close and deeply concerned about us. Yearning to fulfill that need, we establish close contact and develop intimate relationships [1]. THE NATURE OF INTIMACYIntimacy is a multifaceted concept and is composed of knowledge, caring, interdependence, mutuality, trust, and commitment [2]. Partners, in an intimate relationship, possess extensive personal, confidential, and private knowledge about each other. That rich information, which the partners usually share with one another, may include their histories, preferences, and desires that they would not be so ready to reveal to other people. Caring is a hallmark of intimate relations. Intimate partners care about each other and feel affectionate towards their partner. Intimate partners' lives are intertwined and they affect each other continually. The extent to which they need and influence each other, i.e. their interdependence, impacts their partner meaningfully and does so in many areas of life, in different ways, and over long periods of time [1]. Intimate couples often exhibit mutuality, thinking of themselves as -us‖ [3] and seeing themselves as overlapping in various respects. Trust and intimacy are closely related. So, trusting relationship is established when the partners know that it is safe to open up and that their partner will be there to support and respond to their needs [4]. Finally, intimate partners are committed to their relationship; they expect them to go on indefinitely and *Address correspondence to this author at the York University, Canada; E-mail: arokach@yorku.ca for that they are ready to invest time, effort, and the resources at their disposal.Establishing and maintaining close, intimate relationships with a significant other has been recognized as a fundamental human motivation [5]. In that context, marriage is perceived as the most intimate adult bonding, serving as a primary source of affection, love, ...

show abstract

Section: Infidelity: Social Support and Lonelinessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Intimacy, Loneliness & Infidelity

Rokach¹,

Philibert-Lignières

2015

TOPSYJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Accordingly, when negative affect increases, the positive effect of social support on perceived stress decreases. It is an expected result to find the moderator role of negative affect as a mental health parameter related to both social support (Brannan et al, 2013;Green et al, 2012;Wright et al, 2014;Zhou et al, 2013) and stress (Al Nima et al, 2013;Hamama et al, 2013;Green et al, 2012;Jou & Fukada, 2002) between the two variables. Negative affect being related to neuroticism (Berry & Hansen, 1996;Watson, Clark, & Tellegen 1988) and the tendency of individuals with negative affect to be introverted may lead these individuals to be less involved in social interactions, and in turn, let them perceive less social support.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Meanwhile, negative affect has a negative relation with social support (Brannan, Biswas-Diener, Mohr, Mortazavi, & Stein, 2013;Green et al, 2012;Wright et al, 2014;Zhou, Zhu, Zhang, & Cai, 2013) and a positive relation with stress (Al Nima et al, 2013;Hamama et al, 2013;Green et al, 2012;Jou & Fukada, 2002). While there are no studies investigating the intervening variable role of positive and negative affect on the relationship between social support and stress, in light of the researches mentioned above it could be hypothesized that positive and negative affect could differentiate the relation between the two variables.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Previous studies have shown that social support is one of the stress coping sources that predicts perceived stress in college students (Matheny et al, 2002) and only support from family, friends, and faculty have a protective factor function against stress (Bland, Melton, Welle, & Bigham, 2012). Furthermore, there are various relational studies indicating that stress decreases in college students when social support increases (i.e., Chao, 2012;Green, DeCourville, & Sadava, 2012;Luo & Wang, 2009;Pengilly & Dowd, 2000;Reifman & Dunkel-Schetter, 1990;Wright, King, & Rosenberg, 2014). It has also been revealed that social support provides a moderator function between stress and psychological wellbeing (Chao, 2011(Chao, , 2012 and between stress and depression (Pengilly & Dowd, 2000).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Moderating Role of Positive and Negative Affect on the Relationship between Perceived Social Support and Stress in College Students

2015

EDUC SCI-THEOR PRACT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During college years, which are known as a stressful time, students may often face stress personally, socially, academically, economically, and so forth in various areas of life. One of the important sources that students use to cope with stress is social support. Students can cope with stress easier via the support they receive from their friends or family. While social support is seen as a protective mechanism against stress, some psychological factors may have increasing or decreasing effects on this support. Positive and negative affects, two opposing indicators of individual psychological adjustment, may function differently in this context. In the current study, the moderator roles of positive and negative affect on the relationship between perceived social support and stress in college students was investigated. The sample consisted of 479 undergraduate students from the faculty of education in a public university. Data was collected using the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support, the Perceived Stress Scale, and the Positive and Negative Affect Scale. In data analysis, hierarchical multiple regression analysis based on the steps of Baron and Kenny's (1986) moderating model was used. The research findings indicate that negative affect has a moderator role in the relationship between perceived social support and stress, whereas positive affect does not have a similar function. Accordingly, as negative affect increases, the positive effect of social support on perceived stress decreases.

show abstract

“…The buffering effect of social support remains a stress research topic that is still not settled. Given the fact that work stress is widespread and has serious job, health, and personal consequences, research continues on role of social support as a mechanism that buffers the negative effects of work stress [1]- [8]. One issue that has been put forth is that personal dispositions that make individuals more vulnerable to stressors need to be incorporated into research on job stress since such variables may influence the job stressor-stress symptom relationship [9]- [12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Revisiting the Buffering Hypothesis: Social Support, Work Stressors, Stress Related Symptoms, and Negative Affectivity in a Sample of Public School Teachers

Heshizer¹,

Knapp²

2016

OALib

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study tests if forms of social support have a buffering effect on the relationship between actual workplace risk job stress and psychosomatic work stress taking into account Negative Affectivity (NA). The buffering effect maintains that social support acts a moderator variable that enables individuals to withstand the adverse impact of work stress on psychological states such as psychosomatic stress and job stress. Additionally, as suggested in the job stress literature, a measure that assesses an individual's predisposition to be effected by the presence of work stressors, negative affectivity, which is a personality variable that involves the experience of negative emotions and poor self-concept, is included. Low negative affectivity is characterized by frequent states of calmness and confidence while high negative affectivity with unease and lack of confidence. Negative affectivity may influence the degree to which stressful events affect the level of stress experienced by individuals. Thus previous studies that report a relationship between work stressors and work related stress symptoms may overstate the actual impact that stressors have because negative affectivity has not been incorporated as a control variable. This study will also examine whether social support continues to buffer the relationship between stressors and stress symptoms when NA is included in the model. Based on the relevant literature, hypotheses are stated on the effect that NA has on the stressor-stress symptom relationship and if social support buffers (moderates) the relationship between stressors with NA as a model variable. These hypotheses are tested with a sample of urban, public school teachers from a large metropolitan school district. Implications of study outcomes and suggestions for future research are discussed.

show abstract

Functions of Social Support and Self-Verification in Association with Loneliness, Depression, and Stress

Cited by 42 publications

References 83 publications

Intimacy, Loneliness & Infidelity

Intimacy, Loneliness & Infidelity

The Moderating Role of Positive and Negative Affect on the Relationship between Perceived Social Support and Stress in College Students

Revisiting the Buffering Hypothesis: Social Support, Work Stressors, Stress Related Symptoms, and Negative Affectivity in a Sample of Public School Teachers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About