Cited by 168Health disparities and outcomesAttachment and Relationship DynamicsMental Health Treatment and Access

Social Relationships, Adversity and Neurosis: A Study of Associations in a General Population Sample

Henderson, Scott, Byrne, D. G., Duncan-Jones, P., Scott, Ruth, Adcock, Sylvia·1980·British Journal of Psychiatry

Abstract

Summary: A standardized study of the point prevalence of non-psychotic disorder was carried out on a systematic sample of Canberra residents (N = 756). Rates were estimated for PSE CATEGO diagnoses and the Index of Definition. The association between neurosis and deficiencies in social relationships was examined, using the Interview Schedule for Social Interaction (ISSI). An objective measure of exposure to adversity was also obtained at interview. Both attachment and social integration (affectionally close and more diffuse relationships) were found to be negatively associated with neurosis. This association holds in its own right, in addition to an interaction with the load of adversity. The associations are weaker for men. The significance of this work lies in its demonstration of an association between neurosis and the lack of social ties, and in its attempt to obtain a specification of those elements in social relationships which, when deficient, may be associated with neurosis. The direction of causality has now to be investigated.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1192/bjp.136.6.574

Cites

1 of 1 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?

  • Prior evidence indicates that self-reports of perceived social connectedness are a stronger predictor of well-being than is social connectedness per se.

    “First, prior evidence indicates that self-reports of perceived social connectedness are a stronger predictor of well-being than is social connectedness per se (Henderson, 1981;Henderson, Byrne, Duncan-Jones, Scott, & Adcock, 1980), in particular when individuals experience stressful events (Cohen & Wills, 1985).”

    From Nostalgia-Evoked Inspiration: Mediating Mechanisms and Motivational Implications (2015) · cites this paper as Henderson, Byrne, Duncan-Jones, Scott, & Adcock, 1980

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Henderson, S., Byrne, D. G., Duncan-Jones, P., Scott, R., & Adcock, S.
Affiliations
Australian National University (AU)
Venue
British Journal of Psychiatry
Published
1980-06
Volume
136
Issue
6
Pages
574-583
ISSN
  • 0007-1250 (ISSN-L)
  • 1472-1465
OpenAlex
W2087222463
Cited by
168
References
1
Citations by year
2022: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
33.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The British Journal of Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
neurosis, interpersonal relationships, adversity, social integration, attachment, social ties, non-psychotic mental disorders, prevalence, sex differences, causal direction
MeSH terms
Australia, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Life Change Events, Male, Neurotic Disorders

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