Cited by 102COVID-19 and Mental HealthHealth disparities and outcomesSocial impacts of COVID-19

Changes in social relationships during an initial “stay-at-home” phase of the COVID-19 pandemic: A longitudinal survey study in the U.S.

Open access
Philpot, Lindsey M., Ramar, Priya, Roellinger, Daniel L., Barry, Barbara A., Sharma, Pravesh, Ebbert, Jon O.·2021·Social Science & Medicine

Abstract

Rationale Severe acute respiratory syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS CoV-2), the virus that causes COVID-19, and consequent social distancing directives have been observed to negatively impact social relationships but the impact of these changes on the quality of social relationships at a population level has not been explored.Objective To evaluate changes in social relationships in a U.S. population sample during a time of social distancing.Methods We deployed a matched, longitudinal survey design of the National Institutes of Health Adult Social Relationship Scales to assess the social aspects of emotional support, instrumental support, friendship, loneliness, perceived hostility, and perceived rejection from a time without social distancing (February 2018) to a time where social distancing directives were active (May 2020). Changes in social relationships were compared using paired t-tests, and generalized linear regression models were constructed to identify subpopulations experiencing differential changes in each subdomain of social relationships during social distancing.Results Within our sample population, individuals experienced an increased sense of emotional support, instrumental support, and loneliness, and decreased feelings of friendship and perceived hostility during a period of social distancing. Individuals with low self-rated health experienced a decreased sense of emotional support, and females experienced increased feelings of loneliness compared with males.Conclusions Social distancing measurably impacts social relationships and may have a disproportionate impact on females and individuals with lower self-rated health. If novel emergent infectious diseases become more commonplace, social interventions may be needed to mitigate the potential adverse impact of social distancing on social relationships.

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 · 10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113779

Cites

40 of 40 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?

  • Young women report greater risk for loneliness and emotional difficulties than men amidst the pandemic.

    “For example, young women report greater risk for loneliness and emotional difficulties than men amidst the pandemic (Elmer et al., 2020, Philpot et al., 2021).”

    From Young Adult Adaptability to the Social Challenges of the COVID-19 Pandemic: The Protective Role of Friendships (2022) · cites this paper as Philpot et al., 2021

    The Results section (page unavailable) reports greater increases in loneliness among female than male respondents during social distancing. It does not establish this finding specifically for young women—the sample’s average age was 60—or report a comparable gender difference in emotional difficulties. (LLM, conf=0.89)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Differences based on gender and sexual orientation replicate earlier findings demonstrating greater risks for females and sexual minority young adults.

    “The differences based on gender and sexual orientation also replicate earlier findings demonstrating greater risks for females (Elmer et al., 2020, Philpot et al., 2021) and sexual minority young adults (Baumel et al., 2021).”

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

4 of the 44 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Philpot, L. M., Ramar, P., Roellinger, D. L., Barry, B. A., Sharma, P., & Ebbert, J. O.
Affiliations
  • Mayo Clinic (US)
  • Mayo Clinic Health System (US)
Corresponding author
Philpot, Lindsey M.
Venue
Social Science & Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2021-04
Volume
274
Pages
113779
ISSN
0277-9536 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3129271121
Cited by
101
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 15
FWCI
15.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Social Science & Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Social impacts of COVID-19
Keywords
COVID-19 pandemic, social distancing, interpersonal relationships, loneliness, emotional support, instrumental support, friendship, perceived hostility, perceived rejection, self-rated health, sex differences
MeSH terms
COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, Adult, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Quarantine, Surveys and Questionnaires, United States, Pandemics

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