The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale: concurrent and discriminant validity evidence
Abstract
The development of an adequate assessment instrument is a necessary prerequisite for social psychological research on loneliness. Two studies provide methodological refinement in the measurement of loneliness. Study 1 presents a revised version of the self-report UCLA (University of California, Los Angeles) Loneliness Scale, designed to counter the possible effects of response bias in the original scale, and reports concurrent validity evidence for the revised measure. Study 2 demonstrates that although loneliness is correlated with measures of negative affect, social risk taking, and affiliative tendencies, it is nonetheless a distinct psychological experience.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Russell et al. (1980) tested this scale among 237 individuals and it demonstrated good reliability (Alpha = 0.94).”
From How personal nostalgia influences giving to charity (2011) · cites this paper as Russell et al. (1980)
In the citing paper
“The internal consistency (Cronbach α at baseline) in this study was 0.89.”
From Schema-Informed Digital Mental Health Intervention for Maladaptive Cognitive-Emotional Patterns: Randomized Controlled Trial (2025) · cites this paper as [22]
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Measuring individual differences in empathy: Evidence for a multidimensional approach.
Davis, M. H. (1983) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.44.1.113 · Cited by 10,272
Social Relationships and Mortality Risk: A Meta-analytic Review
Holt-Lunstad, J., Smith, T. B., & Layton, J. B. (2010) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000316 · Cited by 7,272
“Perception of loneliness Feelings of isolation, disconnectedness, and not belonging N Loneliness Scale [221] N UCLA Loneliness Scale [222]”
BackgroundRomantic love conceptualized as an attachment process.
Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.3.511 · Cited by 6,247
Loneliness and Social Isolation as Risk Factors for Mortality: A Meta-Analytic Review
Holt-Lunstad, J., Smith, T. B., Baker, M., Harris, T., & Stephenson, D. (2015) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691614568352 · Cited by 6,043
A Short Scale for Measuring Loneliness in Large Surveys: Results From Two Population-Based Studies
Hughes, M. E., Waite, L. J., Hawkley, L. C., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2004) · Research on Aging · doi:10.1177/0164027504268574 · Cited by 4,781
Metadata
- Authors
- Russell, D., Peplau, L. A., & Cutrona, C. E.
- ORCID
- Cutrona, Carolyn E.
- Venue
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
- Published
- 1980-09
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 472-480
- ISSN
- 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-1315
- OpenAlex
- W4243663932
- Cited by
- 5,173
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 308 · 2025: 361 · 2024: 352 · 2023: 371 · 2022: 355 · 2021: 381 · 2020: 274 · 2019: 209 · 2018: 159 · 2017: 172 · 2016: 161 · 2015: 169 · 2014: 148 · 2013: 134 · 2012: 128
- FWCI
- 17.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
- Keywords
- UCLA Loneliness Scale, loneliness, psychometric validation, concurrent validity, discriminant validity, scale revision
- MeSH terms
- Anxiety, Depression, Female, Humans, Loneliness, Male, Psychological Tests, Social Isolation
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
