Cited by 61Digital Mental Health InterventionsCOVID-19 and Mental HealthHealth disparities and outcomes

The Impact of a Digital Intervention (Happify) on Loneliness During COVID-19: Qualitative Focus Group

Open access
Boucher, Eliane M, McNaughton, Emily C, Harake, Nicole, Stafford, Julia L, Parks, Acacia C·2021·JMIR Mental Health

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Loneliness is a growing area of concern, attracting attention as a public health concern due to its association with a variety of psychological and physical health problems. However, interventions targeting loneliness are less common than interventions for other mental health problems, such as depression and anxiety, and existing interventions focus primarily on building social skills and increasing opportunities for social interaction despite research suggesting these techniques are not the most effective. Furthermore, although there is an increasing need for scalable and convenient interventions, digital interventions for loneliness are even less common. OBJECTIVE: Using a qualitative approach, we explore how adults (18-64 years of age) who express wanting to be more connected to others experience loneliness and react to a digital mental health intervention targeting loneliness. METHODS: A total of 11 participants were recruited from a pilot randomized controlled trial exploring the impact of a digital mental health intervention, Happify Health, on loneliness among adults aged 18-64 years who indicated wanting to feel more connected to others when signing up for the platform. Participants were invited to participate in a 3-day asynchronous focus group about their experiences with loneliness, with Happify Health, and with social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic. All 11 participants completed the focus group in May 2020. RESULTS: Participants' responses were coded using thematic analysis, which led to identifying five themes, each with separate subthemes, that could be applied across the 3-day focus group: loneliness, relationships, social distancing, skill acquisition, and coping. Overall, we observed variability across participants in terms of the source of their loneliness, their perceptions of their social connections, and their motivation to reduce feelings of loneliness; however, participants commonly referred to negative self-perceptions as a cause or consequence of loneliness. Participants also varied in the extent to which they felt social distancing increased or decreased feelings of loneliness. In regard to the intervention, participants showed evidence of adopting skills they used to address their loneliness, particularly mindfulness and gratitude, and then using these skills to shift toward more active coping strategies following the intervention, including during the COVID-19 pandemic. CONCLUSIONS: The heterogeneity in participants' experiences with loneliness described during this focus group emphasizes the subjective and complex nature of loneliness. This highlights the importance of developing loneliness interventions that use a variety of strategies, including both direct and indirect strategies for reducing loneliness. However, based on our data, a key component to loneliness interventions is incorporating strategies for addressing underlying negative self-perceptions that stem from, but also contribute to, loneliness. This data also provides preliminary evidence that digital platforms may be an effective tool for disseminating loneliness interventions while providing the added benefit of offering a productive distraction when feeling lonely.

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 · 10.2196/26617

Cites

77 of 77 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?

  • Our results support a body of growing literature suggesting that evidence-based digital health interventions are valuable tools to support youth in areas such as depression, anxiety, loneliness, and general mental well-being.

    “In this regard, our results are encouraging as they support a body of growing literature suggesting that evidence-based digital health interventions are valuable tools to support youth in areas such as depression (Badawy and Radovic, 2020), anxiety (March et al., 2018), loneliness (Boucher et al., 2021), and general mental well-being (Seko et al., 2014; Dubad et al., 2018).”

    From Pilot study of a well-being app to support New Zealand young people during the COVID-19 pandemic (2021) · cites this paper as Boucher et al., 2021

    The Discussion (‘Experience With the Digital Intervention’; page not provided) reports that participants felt Happify gave them strategies for coping with loneliness, supporting its potential value. But the study examined adults aged 18–64, not youth specifically, and says its qualitative findings cannot establish whether the intervention reduced loneliness. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Boucher, E. M., McNaughton, E. C., Harake, N., Stafford, J. L., & Parks, A. C.
Corresponding author
Boucher, Eliane M
Venue
JMIR Mental Health
Published
2021-02-08
Volume
8
Issue
2
Pages
e26617
ISSN
2368-7959 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3124133264
Cited by
61
References
75
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 8
FWCI
9.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR Mental Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › COVID-19 and Mental Health
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
Keywords
loneliness, digital mental health interventions, COVID-19 pandemic, social distancing, social connectedness, negative self-concept, mindfulness, gratitude, coping strategies, loneliness interventions, social skills training

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