The role of state feelings of loneliness in the situational regulation of social affiliative behavior: Exploring the regulatory relations within a multilevel framework

Abstract

Previous empirical evidence suggests that the engagement in social interactions across different everyday contexts occurs in a manner highly responsive to a person’s social affiliation needs. As has been shown repeatedly, social engagement (as well as disengagement) can be predicted from earlier situational need states, implying that homeostatic principles underlie a person’s social affiliative behaviors. However, little is known about the role of emotion in these regulative processes. For this reason, the present exploratory study investigated the predictive role of state feelings of loneliness in subsequent engagement in social interaction. Since loneliness is conceptually associated with both the need to reaffiliate as well as self-protecting tendencies potentially hindering engagement in social contact, the study investigated the possibility of both increases and decreases in social contacts resulting from state feelings of loneliness. Adopting an experience sampling methodology (ESM), a sample of 65 participants was recruited from a local university and was followed for 14 days. Subjects were prompted several times a day to rate their feeling states and the quantity of social interactions, using a fixed interval assessment schedule. Statistical analyses using multilevel analysis indicated that state feelings of loneliness had complex quadratic effects upon subsequent social interaction, leading to both increases and decreases in subsequent social interaction. Moreover, these effects were contingent upon previous engagement in social interaction, implying spillover effects across social contexts that are conditionally mediated by feelings of loneliness. These findings clearly imply an important, albeit complex role of state feelings of loneliness in the regulation of social affiliation, both as a predictor and a consequence of social interaction. These exploratory findings are discussed against the background of methodological and conceptual limitations, and several recommendations for future studies are made.

Opposing Association of Situational and Chronic Loneliness with Interpersonal Distance

“…For instance, the experimental induction of state loneliness using hypnosis resulted in increased fear of negative evaluation, lowered self-esteem, and increased shyness, which would be expected to reduce the chance of a positive social interaction [ 4 ]. In a more recent study, state loneliness had complex effects, leading to both increases and decreases in subsequent social interaction [ 55 ]. Therefore, the second aim of the current study was to explore whether perceived situational loneliness that is related to COVID-19 impacts interpersonal distance preferences differently than chronic loneliness.…”

No person is an island: Unpacking the work and after-work consequences of interacting with artificial intelligence.

“…While there may be adaptive outcome of social deprivation stemming from interactions with AI as described above, other (particularly recent) research has articulated a likelihood that there may be an alternative mechanism that results in more maladaptive effects outcomes as well (Reissmann et al, 2021, p. 2)-specifically, these authors noted that when there is a difference "between a person's desired and actually attained levels" of affiliation, one possible reaction may be loneliness-a passive response to socially unfulfilling interactions (Cacioppo & Patrick, 2008;Rokach & Brock, 1996). While interactions with AI should activate social regulatory processes, these interactions are mechanical and inorganic in nature (Ackerman & Kanfer, 2020;Huang & Rust, 2021), which may lead the social regulatory process to signal a sense of social isolation that manifests as loneliness (Ozcelik & Barsade, 2018;Reissmann et al, 2021). Indeed, it seems likely that interacting with AI may be a lonely endeavor in the workplace-for example, previously routine activities such as seeking a second opinion on a proposed solution for a client can now be provided instantaneously (and more accurately) by an AI system (Ransbotham et al, 2017).…”

“…Yet, on the other hand, such situations may trigger a maladaptive coping response. Specifically, recent affiliation-based work has identified the potential for heightened feelings of loneliness (Reissmann et al, 2021), which may not only have negative implications for well-being by triggering insomnia (Barnes et al, 2015; K. Graham & Schmidt, 1999; Moss, 2018), but also may prompt individuals to engage in more avoidant types of behavior such as after-work drinking.…”

Why Loneliness Matters in Clinical Practice: A Primer for Clinical- and Neuro-Psychologists.

“…A further challenge relates to our lack of understanding on how levels of loneliness vary in the moment, and their role in predicting future chronic loneliness vs. social engagement. Consequently, there has been a growing interest in the use of highresolution digital assessment methods (e.g., experience sampling methodology [ESM]) to gain a more finegrained picture of daily fluctuations in loneliness or short-term flare-ups in response to specific triggers (Buecker et al, 2020;Reissmann et al, 2021;van Roekel et al, 2014). These studies open new opportunities for understanding the temporal dynamics of loneliness.…”