The Dynamics of Social Experiences in the Context of Extended Lockdown

Abstract

Social interaction and loneliness have received much research interest. However, the direction of their relationship is unclear—does social interaction shape loneliness, or does loneliness shape willingness to interact? We explored dynamics of these social experiences under exceptional circumstances: COVID-19 lockdowns, which were necessary for public health but impacted people’s social lives. Specifically, we investigated the relationship between social interaction and loneliness in and out of lockdown in Australia. We used experience sampling methodology to follow 233 people across one week (Mage=30; 8,495 surveys) in a period that spanned one of the longest lockdowns in the world. While loneliness did not predict subsequent social interaction, having a social interaction predicted lower subsequent loneliness, particularly in (vs. out of) lockdown. These findings suggest social interactions may limit loneliness, especially during physical isolation. In short, times when we are apart from others may be times we benefit from interacting with them most.

Everyday emotional functioning in COVID-19 lockdowns.

“…We observed an association between lockdown and high arousal negative emotions in general (e.g., anxiety). But this effect did not extend to emotions in the context of social interactions, which fits with recent work suggesting lockdown did not drastically damage people's social experiences (Tran et al, 2022). Further, neither dataset revealed an effect of lockdown on low arousal positive emotions (e.g., relaxed).…”

“…To capture emotional functioning in social interactions, we conducted analyses on Dataset 2 using only observations on which participants reported a recent social interaction. If participants did not report a recent social interaction, they completed an equal number of alternate survey items, not reported here (but see Tran et al, 2023). Participants indicated having had a social interaction since the last survey on 63% of occasions, resulting in 5,272 observations for Dataset 2.…”