Cited by 262Stress Responses and CortisolHealth disparities and outcomesHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control

Loneliness and acute stress reactivity: A systematic review of psychophysiological studies

Brown, Eoin G., Gallagher, Stephen, Creaven, Ann‐Marie·2018·Psychophysiology

Abstract

Physiological reactivity to acute stress has been proposed as a potential biological mechanism by which loneliness may lead to negative health outcomes such as cardiovascular disease. This review was conducted to investigate the association between loneliness and physiological responses to acute stress. A series of electronic databases were systematically searched (PsycARTICLES, PsycINFO, Medline, CINAHL Plus, EBSCOhost, PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Science Direct) for relevant studies, published up to October 2016. Eleven studies were included in the review. Overall, the majority of studies reported positive associations between loneliness and acute stress responses, such that higher levels of loneliness were predictive of exaggerated physiological reactions. However, in a few studies, loneliness was also linked with decreased stress responses for particular physiological outcomes, indicating the possible existence of blunted relationships. There was no clear pattern suggesting any sex- or stressor-based differences in these associations. The available evidence supports a link between loneliness and atypical physiological reactivity to acute stress. A key finding of this review was that greater levels of loneliness are associated with exaggerated blood pressure and inflammatory reactivity to acute stress. However, there was some indication that loneliness may also be related to blunted cardiac, cortisol, and immune responses. Overall, this suggests that stress reactivity…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/psyp.13031

Cites

21 of 21 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brown, E. G., Gallagher, S., & Creaven, A.
Affiliations
University of Limerick (IE)
Corresponding author
Brown, Eoin G.
Venue
Psychophysiology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-11-20
Volume
55
Issue
5
Pages
e13031-e13031
ISSN
  • 0048-5772 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8986
OpenAlex
W2769091254
Cited by
262
References
21
Citations by year
2026: 20 · 2025: 57 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 66 · 2022: 21 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 8
FWCI
0.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychophysiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Irish Research Council (GOIPG/2015/2374)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Behavioral Neuroscience › Stress Responses and Cortisol
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Keywords
loneliness, physiological stress response, blood pressure reactivity, cortisol, cardiac response, immune response, cardiovascular risk, blunted stress response
MeSH terms
Blood Pressure, Humans, Inflammation, Loneliness, Stress, Psychological

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