Cited by 197Health disparities and outcomesCultural Differences and ValuesPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 168 of the 168 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Loneliness across time and space

Open access
Luhmann, Maike, Buecker, Susanne, Rüsberg, Marilena·2022·Nature Reviews Psychology

Abstract

People feel lonely when their social needs are not met by the quantity and quality of their social relationships. Most research has focused on individual-level predictors of loneliness. However, macro-level factors related to historical time and geographic space might influence loneliness through their effects on individual-level predictors. In this Review, we summarize empirical findings on differences in the prevalence of loneliness across historical time and geographical space and discuss four groups of macro-level factors that might account for these differences: values and norms, family and social lives, technology and digitalization, and living conditions and availability of individual resources. Regarding historical time, media reports convey that loneliness is on the rise, but the empirical evidence is mixed, at least before the COVID-19 pandemic. Regarding geographical space, national differences in loneliness are linked to differences in cultural values (such as individualism) but might also be due to differences in the sociodemographic composition of the population. Research on within-country differences in loneliness is scarce but suggests an influence of neighbourhood characteristics. We conclude that a more nuanced understanding of the effects of macro-level factors on loneliness is necessary because of their relevance for public policy and propose specific directions for future research.

Overview

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 · 10.1038/s44159-022-00124-1

Cites

168 of 168 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 9

  1. Baarck, J. et al. Loneliness In The EU. Insights From Surveys And Online Media Data. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2760/28343 (Publications Office of the European Union, 2021). · DOI
  2. Hofstede, G. Cultures And Organizations. Comparing Values, Behaviors, Institutions, And Organizations Across Nations 2nd edn (Sage Publications, 2001).
  3. Twenge, J. M., Campbell, S. M., Hoffman, B. J. & Lance, C. E. Generational differences in work values: leisure and extrinsic values increasing, social and intrinsic values decreasing. J. Manag. 36, 1117–1142 (2010).
  4. Bloom, D. & Canning, D. Global demographic change: dimensions and economic significance. Pop. Aging Human Cap. Accum. Product. Growth 34, 17–51 (2008).
  5. Billiet, J., Koch, A. & Philippens, M. in Measuring Attitudes Cross-Nationally: Lessons From The European Social Survey Ch. 6 (eds Jowell, R. et al.) 107–129 (Sage Publications, 2007).
  6. Rokach, A. The effect of gender and culture on loneliness: a mini review. Emerg. Sci. J. 2, 59–64 (2018).
  7. Lykes, V. A. & Kemmelmeier, M. What predicts loneliness? Cultural difference between individualistic and collectivistic societies in Europe. J. Crosscultural Psychol. 45, 468–490 (2014).
  8. Wong, Y. J., Wang, S.-Y. & Klann, E. M. The emperor with no clothes: a critique of collectivism and individualism. Arch. Sci. Psychol. 6, 251–260 (2018).
  9. Wang, X. D., Wang, X. L. & Ma, H. Handbook Of Mental Health Assessment (Chinese Mental Health Journal Press, 1999).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 197

Metadata

Authors
Luhmann, M., Buecker, S., & Rüsberg, M.
Affiliations
Ruhr University Bochum (DE)
Corresponding author
Luhmann, Maike
Venue
Nature Reviews Psychology
Published
2022-11-07
Volume
2
Issue
1
Pages
9-23
ISSN
2731-0574 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4308434869
Cited by
197
References
167
Citations by year
2026: 55 · 2025: 83 · 2024: 41 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 2
FWCI
4.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Reviews Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Cultural Differences and Values
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Keywords
loneliness, macro-level factors, cross-national differences, cultural values, individualism, socio-demographic structure, neighborhood characteristics, digitalization, living conditions, social needs, public policy

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