Cited by 116Neuroendocrine regulation and behaviorHealth disparities and outcomesDeath Anxiety and Social Exclusion

Loneliness and the Social Brain: How Perceived Social Isolation Impairs Human Interactions

Open access
Lieberz, Jana, Shamay‐Tsoory, Simone G., Saporta, Nira, Esser, Timo, Kuskova, Ekaterina, Stoffel‐Wagner, Birgit, Hurlemann, René, Scheele, Dirk·2021·Advanced Science

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Loneliness is a painful condition associated with increased risk for premature mortality. The formation of new, positive social relationships can alleviate feelings of loneliness, but requires rapid trustworthiness decisions during initial encounters and it is still unclear how loneliness hinders interpersonal trust. Here, a multimodal approach including behavioral, psychophysiological, hormonal, and neuroimaging measurements is used to probe a trust‐based mechanism underlying impaired social interactions in loneliness. Pre‐stratified healthy individuals with high loneliness scores ( n = 42 out of a screened sample of 3678 adults) show reduced oxytocinergic and affective responsiveness to a positive conversation, report less interpersonal trust, and prefer larger social distances compared to controls ( n = 40). Moreover, lonely individuals are rated as less trustworthy compared to controls and identified by the blinded confederate better than chance. During initial trust decisions, lonely individuals exhibit attenuated limbic and striatal activation and blunted functional connectivity between the anterior insula and occipitoparietal regions, which correlates with the diminished affective responsiveness to the positive social interaction. This neural response pattern is not mediated by loneliness‐associated psychological symptoms. Thus, the results indicate compromised integration of trust‐related information as a shared neurobiological component in loneliness, yielding a reciprocally reinforced trust bias in social dyads.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/advs.202102076

Cites

55 of 55 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Lonely individuals are less trusting of others and more anxious and pessimistic than less lonely people.

    “Loneliness is consistently associated with withdrawal from social interactions (Qualter et al., 2015), with lonely individuals being less trusting of others and more anxious and pessimistic than less lonely people (Cacioppo et al., 2006;Langenkamp, 2023;Lieberz et al., 2021).”

    From Investigating the interplay of loneliness and social isolation across adolescence: Findings from a nationally representative longitudinal study (2026) · cites this paper as Lieberz et al., 2021

    The Results sections report that high-lonely participants had less interpersonal trust and heightened anxiety symptoms than low-lonely controls. The Introduction describes anticipated rejection and negative attribution styles, but the paper does not establish that the high-lonely group was more pessimistic than controls. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 56 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Hawkley L. C., 2007, Series In Positive Psychology. Oxford Handbook Of Methods In Positive Psychology

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lieberz, J., Shamay‐Tsoory, S. G., Saporta, N., Esser, T., Kuskova, E., Stoffel‐Wagner, B., Hurlemann, R., & Scheele, D.
Affiliations
  • University Hospital Bonn (DE)
  • University of Haifa (IL)
  • University of Bonn (DE)
  • Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg (DE)
Corresponding author
  • Lieberz, Jana
  • Scheele, Dirk
Venue
Advanced Science
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2021-09-20
Volume
8
Issue
21
Pages
e2102076-e2102076
ISSN
2198-3844 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3200664259
Cited by
116
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 24 · 2025: 33 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 6
FWCI
14.45
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Advanced Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Neuroendocrine regulation and behavior
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
Keywords
loneliness, social isolation, interpersonal trust, oxytocin, emotional responsiveness, social distance, anterior insula, striatal activation, social interaction, neuroendocrinology
MeSH terms
Adult, Behavior, Brain, Female, Heart Rate, Humans, Immunoglobulin A, Interpersonal Relations, Loneliness, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Oxytocin, Saliva, Social Isolation, Trust, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review