Originally written for the Tackling Loneliness Hub which is funded by Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport of the United Kingdom and run by Neighbourly Lab and Campaign to End Loneliness and the Centre for Loneliness Studies:

 

We need a holistic approach to loneliness with a robust evidence base

Loneliness is being debated in contemporary society more than at any other time in our history. Most of us will feel lonely at some point in our lives, and this feeling can be triggered by personal characteristics (e.g. age, disability, gender), as well as life transition points (e,g, being diagnosed with a health condition or becoming a carer). Wider societal influences such as the design of cities and towns, the culture of workplaces, and the role of technology also play a critical role, having the potential to prevent, exacerbate or ameliorate loneliness. Given the estimated cost of loneliness to individual health and well-being, the health and social care system, businesses and the economy, it is essential that we take a holistic approach to both understanding and remedying loneliness.

 

The Impact of COVID-19 on Loneliness

Evidence suggests that loneliness might be on the increase, transcending all population groups, and across the life course.  This has arguably escalated even further since Covid-19, as everyday activities such as working, learning, and shopping have moved online, making it more difficult for people to form and maintain meaningful relationships outside of the home and immediate neighbourhood.

Young adults in the UK (age 16-24) are the most lonely group, often triggered by social media usage, with older people, and their declining health and loss of friends and family, the next most lonely. Those in mid-life (age 45-65) are increasingly experiencing loneliness, and are more lonely than their counterparts in past generations, thus  emphasising the potential escalation of loneliness. This ‘sandwich generation’  are finding it increasingly difficult to maintain social relationships, whilst balancing paid work and caring for both elderly parents and grandchildren.

 

A Global Phenomenon: Loneliness Worldwide

Interest in loneliness is becoming a global phenomenon. The USA and Australia report similar levels of loneliness to the UK (with around half the population feeling lonely). Levels are reported to be even higher in countries such as Brazil and Turkey.  No wonder then, that many suggest that there is a loneliness ‘epidemic’.

Responses vary internationally with some countries leading the way with a national approach. The UK government appointed a minister for loneliness in 2018, followed by Japan in 2021. In the US, Surgeon General Vivek Murphy set up a loneliness advisory in 2023, and the UK and Denmark have both developed a national strategy to tackle loneliness. However, beneath these overarching strategies, and elsewhere in the world, loneliness is being tackled in a piecemeal way, often by charitable organisations in local communities and predominately targeted at the individual rather than wider societal and structural changes.

 

Success Stories: Individual-Based Interventions

Examples of successful individual based interventions, which have been robustly evaluated, include mindfulness programmes which help participants to accept, understand and control their feelings. One study of mindfulness for young adults, for example, suggests that it helps participants to feel better equipped to manage future instances of loneliness. Interventions based around activities which people enjoy are particularly effective, as they are able to draw in and connect like-minded people who can then go on to forge meaningful relationships with each other beyond the specific intervention.

A study of a horticultural activity programme, involving an eight week gardening activity for older nursing home residents in Taiwan, for example, found that those who participated demonstrated statistically significant reductions in loneliness and depression, compared to the control group. Intergenerational initiatives can also be effective bringing together old and young to participate together in bonding activities, art being a particularly effective tool.

A randomised controlled trial of an Intergenerational Arts and Heritage-Based Intervention in Singapore called Project ARTISAN found that there were significant positive effects in the treatment group in comparison with the waitlisted control group in terms of promoting life satisfaction, quality of life and reducing loneliness. The initiative involved young people and older adults meeting each week for three hours, over a five week period, in a local museum to engage in storytelling and creative art-making activities.

Such individual based interventions can certainly help bring people together and foster opportunities for meaningful relationships, however wider societal and structural approaches are arguably required for more socially connected communities.

Intergenerational living through co-housing, pioneered in Denmark, is one promising strategy, a combination of individual low and densely built properties, usually built on the outer edges of cities, provide accommodation for all ages, for  individuals, groups and families. The design incorporates common shared facilities, where everyday living activities, such as cooking and eating together take place,  creating a community to encourage social contact.

On a wider wide scale, the 15 minute city, whereby most daily necessities and services are to be located within a 15 minute walk, bike, or public transport ride from any point in the city, is a revival of a past urban planning concept. The model is being adopted in a number of cities worldwide, including Paris, Barcelona, Vancouver, Seattle, and Melbourne and has the potential to make in-roads into loneliness by fostering stronger community ties and promoting social interaction.

 

Barriers to Tackling Loneliness Effectively

Despite many endeavours to remedy loneliness across the globe, it remains a difficult policy area. Challenges in finding a solution to loneliness primarily stem from its focus on relationships, feelings, and emotions.

To remedy loneliness, individuals need to have meaningful relationships, with themselves; with others; with the places and spaces where they inhabit (in other words a sense of belonging). This requires a holistic approach to loneliness which cuts across many policy and service areas – housing, health, crime and safety, transport, education.

A further complication relates to the challenges of evaluating and measuring the impact of interventions which touch on so many aspects of our lives and are subjective in nature. These include: difficulty in implementing randomised controlled trials, the inappropriateness of existing loneliness measurement scales for evaluating changes in loneliness as a direct result of interventions, and the piecemeal approach to loneliness services which are often run by voluntary sector organisations with limited financial resources.

A recent Cochrane Campbell review by the World Health Organization confirms the lack of a robust evidence base, reporting inconsistent findings on the effectiveness of loneliness interventions across all ages and groups, and most reviews classified as critically low quality.

 

Charting the Path Ahead: Strengthening Our Understanding of Loneliness

Although we have some way to go in gaining a full understanding of which kinds of loneliness interventions work best, for which groups, the World Health Organisation has already made some inroads creating a database of in-person interventions for reducing social isolation and loneliness, and this is a good starting point for anyone wishing to tackle loneliness.

 

By Professor Andrea Wigfield

 

References

Besse, R., Whitaker, W. K., & Brannon, L. A. (2022). Reducing Loneliness: The Impact of Mindfulness, Social Cognitions, and Coping. Psychological Reports, 125(3), 1289-1304. https://doi.org/10.1177/003329412199777921

Chu HY, Chen MF, Tsai CC, Chan HS, Wu TL. (2019) Efficacy of a horticultural activity program for reducing depression and loneliness in older residents of nursing homes in Taiwan, Geriatr Nurs, Jul-Aug;40(4):386-391. doi: 10.1016/j.gerinurse.2018.12.012. Epub 2019 Feb 19. PMID: 30792050.

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(6),1054-1085. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2005.11.007

de Jong Gierveld, J. and van Tilburg, T. (2006), 6-Item Scale for Overall, Emotional, and Social Loneliness: Confirmatory Tests on Survey Data, Research on Ageing 28(5) pp. 582-598

Hawkley, L.C., and Capitanio, J.P. (2015), Perceived social isolation, evolutionary fitness and health outcomes: A lifespan approach, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London,370(1669),20140114. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2014.0114

Ho AHY, Ma SHX, Tan MKB, Bajpai RC. (2021), A Randomized Waitlist-Controlled Trial of an Intergenerational Arts and Heritage-Based Intervention in Singapore: Project ARTISAN, Front Psychol, Sep 6;12:730709. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.730709. PMID: 34552538; PMCID: PMC8450511.HM Government (2018), A connected society A strategy for tackling loneliness – laying the foundations for change, DCMS:London

Holt-Lunstad, J. , Smith, T.B., Bradley Layton, J. (2010), Social Relationships and Mortality Risk: A Meta-analytic Review, PLoS Med 7(7): e1000316. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000316

Holt-Lunstad, J., Smith, T.B., Baker, M., Harris, T., & Stephenson, D. (2015). Loneliness and social isolation as risk factors for mortality: A meta-analytic review, Perspectives on Psychological Science,10(2),227-237. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691614568352

Jeste, D.V. Lee, E. E., Cacioppo, S (2020), Battling the Modern Behavioral Epidemic of Loneliness, Suggestions for Research and Interventions, JAMA Psychiatry. 2020;77(6):553-554. doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2020.0027

Leigh-Hunt, N., Bagguley, D., Bash, K., Turner, V., Turnbull, S., Valtorta, N., and Caan, W. (2017), An overview of systematic reviews on the public health consequences of social isolation and loneliness, Public Health,152,157-171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2017.07.035

Maes, M., Nelemans, S.A., Danneel, S., Fernández-Castilla, B., Van den Noortgate, W., Goossens, L., and Vanhalst, J.(2019). Loneliness and social anxiety across childhood and adolescence: Multilevel meta-analyses of cross-sectional and longitudinal associations, Developmental Psychology,55(7),1548-1565. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000719

Martín-María, N., Caballero, F. F., Miret, M., Tyrovolas, S., Haro, J. M., Ayuso-Mateos, J. L., & Chatterji, S. (2019), Differential impact of transient and chronic loneliness on health status. A longitudinal study, Psychology & Health, 35(2), 177–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/08870446.2019.1632312

Murphy, V. (2023), Our Epidemic of Loneliness and Isolation, The U.S. Surgeon General’s Advisory on the Healing Effects of Social Connection and Community, Office of the Surgeon General. https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/surgeon-general-social-connection-advisory.pdf

National Partnership against Loneliness (NPE) (2023), Together against loneliness – a national 2040 Strategy for reducing loneliness in Denmark, https://sammenmodensomhed.dk/

ONS (2019), Measuring loneliness: guidance for use of the national indicators on surveys: Methodological guidance on how to use the recommended loneliness questions for adults and children and how to interpret and report the findings https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/wellbeing/methodologies/measuringlonelinessguidanceforuseofthenationalindicatorsonsurveys

Perlman, D., and Peplau, L.A. (1981), Toward a social psychology of loneliness. In S. Duck and R. Gilmour (Eds.), Personal relationships in disorder (Vol. 3, pp. 31–56). Academic Press.

Russell, D. W. (1996), UCLA Loneliness Scale (Version 3): Reliability, validity, and factor structure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 66(1), 20–40. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa6601_2

Thomas KS, Akobundu U, Dosa D. ( 2016), More Than A Meal? A Randomized Control Trial Comparing the Effects of Home-Delivered Meals Programs on Participants’ Feelings of Loneliness, J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci, Nov;71(6):1049-1058. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbv111. Epub 2015 Nov 26. PMID: 26613620.

van Tilburg,T.G. (2021), Social, Emotional, and Existential Loneliness: A Test of the Multidimensional Concept, The Gerontologist, Volume 61, Issue 7, October 2021, Pages e335–e344, https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnaa082

Welch, V. et.al. (2024) In person interventions to reduce social isolation and loneliness: An evidence and gap map, Campbell Systematic Reviews, Wiley, DOI: 10.1002/cl2.1408

WHO https://www.who.int/initiatives/decade-of-healthy-ageing/evidence-gap-map/sil-inperson

Wigfield, A. (2024), Loneliness for Dummies, John Wiley and Sons:Hoboken