Content uploaded by Muhammad Rehan Masoom
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Muhammad Rehan Masoom on Mar 06, 2017
Content may be subject to copyright.
Research J. Humanities and Social Sciences 2016; 7(4): 241-249 Muhammad Rehan Masoom
241
ISSN 0975 –6795 (print)
ISSN 2321–5828 (online)
Research J. Humanities and Social
Sciences. 7(4): October- December,
2016, 241-249
DOI:
Research Article
*Corresponding Author:
Muhammad Rehan Masoom
Assistant Profession,
School of Business and Economics,
United International University,
House #80, Road # 8A (Old-15),
Satmasjid Road, Dhanmondi,
Dhaka-1209, Bangladesh
E-mail: rehan_1611@yahoo.com
Received on 23.09.2015
Modified on 02.10.2015
Accepted on 15.10.2015
© A&V Publication all right reserved
Social Isolation: A Conceptual Analysis
Muhammad Rehan Masoom*
Assistant Profession, School of Business and Economics, United
International University, House #80, Road # 8A (Old-15), Satmasjid
Road, Dhanmondi, Dhaka-1209, Bangladesh
ABSTRACT:
Social Isolation is one of the central concepts in social sciences, and it is
encumbered with a multiplicity of meanings. It can be defined as the loss
of social relations in personal level or disengagement from essential
social institutions from societal level. There are certain similarities in the
operationalization of the overall notion of social isolation in the
theoretical framework, nonetheless, empirical inquiries suggested by
several researchers, exhibits inconsistency in affirming relevant
indicators. A principal concern is whether to apply objective indicators to
measure the socio-political condition and economic status of the target
community or the center should be on the nature of the social
relationships that they possess. With an attempt to single out the
operational definition among the plethora of definitions, the research
examines different scales of measuring Social Isolation.
KEY WORDS: Social Isolation, Measurement scale, Sociological
explanation, Disengagement, Alienation.
INTRODUCTION:
“Social Isolation” as a concept dominates the intellectual arena of
classical sociology and it remains a central idea to explain the human
condition of modern industrial lives in contemporary sociology. It is a
central theme in classics of Emile Durkheim, Robert Merton, Karl Marx,
Ferdinand Tönnies and Pitirim Sorokin as well as it is an essential
concept in modern theories of William Wilson and Ella McPherson. The
various synonyms of “Social Isolation” have a chief place in studies of
human relations; investigations of the ' alienated,' the 'marginal,' the
'obsessive,' the 'normless,' and the ' unattached ' individual all evidently
refer to the fundamental place occupied by the hypothesis of ‘Social
Isolation’ in contemporary social sciences[1]. In one form or another,
Social Isolation remains one of the central theses of investigating human
condition in the societies where industrialization and urbanization are
evidently in full flow. This paper explores the concepts of ‘social
isolation’ in different area of study in social sciences.
DISCUSSION:
Social isolation can be described structurally as the state of having
inadequacies of social interactions, an absence of contacts and
connections with people, relatives, and companions or even with
acquaintances on a micro-level, and with wide society on a macro-level.
It is “a state or process in which persons, groups, or cultures lose or do
not have communication or cooperation with one another, often resulting
in open conflict” (Random House Dictionary).
10.5958/2321-5828.2016.00044.9
Research J. Humanities and Social Sciences 2016; 7(4): 241-249 Muhammad Rehan Masoom
242
Social isolation is considered a risk factor in the
development of the social situation. The root cause of
social isolation lies in absence of proper social
relations. Advancement in living conditions, increased
number of high definition automobiles, increasing
bureaucratization and a complex matrix of other social
forces are serving to fragment, disobedient and
diminish contemporary man and thereby isolating him
from the very society that he himself is a part of. The
socially isolated individual can be characterized as one
he feels he has little or no influence or control over
socio-political events and who senses he cannot assert
himself as subject to modify his situation. Theories and
studies on observed social isolation of disadvantaged
have been comparatively diversified and frequently
been hindered by ethnocentric perspectives, and more
often than not, due to some inarticulate and untested
indicators. Nonetheless, multidisciplinary efforts among
sociologists, psychologists, anthropologists, and
historians have shed light on the phenomenon and
contributed significantly of construct a theoretical
framework as well as guided considerably in empirical
studies.
Social isolation can be seen as an indication that the
individual's interpersonal problems have reached to be
great to the point that he has lost his competent of
functioning in interpersonal relationships. It is a set of
problems that arise with the feeling of disengagement,
consequently encountering interpersonal difficulties and
eventually results in interpersonal incompetent. It is
considered as symptoms of a dysfunctional society in
which ethical structures collapsed or were rendered
meaningless [2]. The advancement of science and
technology often resulted in creating “anomie”
characterized by ethical and social isolation particularly
in disconnected, disengaged, peripatetic and rootless
societies [3]. In industrialized societies, alienation will
lead to a state of total isolation [4]. Societies
(Gesellschaft) in which only self-interests prevail, make
individuals remain in isolation and veiled hostility
toward each other, however, neighborly relations exists
only because of “fear of clever retaliation restrains
them from attacking one another” [5]. Urban lives
centered more on day-to-day interactions rather than
longtime relationships that resulted in “impersonal,
superficial, transitory, and segmental” contacts and
engendered “reserve, indifference and a blasé outlook”
that people tend to use to “immunize” themselves
against the expectations of others, for which only
selfish utilization of interpersonal contacts become the
only factor of communication [6].
Social isolation exacerbates the effects of being
concentrated in very poor areas because such isolation
limits inner-city residents' opportunities only to those
found in their socially disadvantaged neighborhoods.
Cut off from mainstream society, underclass individuals
lack exposure to conventional role models such as
stably employed adults and to marriageable partners, as
well as access to job networks [7].Although, there
emerged tremendous amount of social media, but which
people can establish ties, the level of confidence on
social relations decreased. This is particularly because
of the changes in core network structure [8]. A group of
persons, who are segregated from the larger society, are
more exposed to the feeling of anomie. Further, the
financial situations of the neighbor contributed to level
of anomie any individual face [9].
Pitirim Sorokin indicates that social Isolation is more
evident among the people who have been migrated
from different social conditions and find themselves
unable to form satisfactory personal relationships in
new environment particularly because they experience
rootlessness [10]. Almost over a century ago, he
discussed the effect of such isolation, both in negative
and positive term. He mentions that this mobility
increases creativity and adaptability of the isolates,
nonetheless, in Sorokin’s terms, "diminishes intimacy
and increases psychosocial isolation and loneliness."
(1927: 525). Due to differences in ascent or even
language, Sorokin adds, individuals may unable to form
intimacy with people around them. Evelyn Ellis (1952)
proposes an alternative view and indicates that social
isolation can be considered as a cause of upward
mobility [11]. The experiences of social deprivation in
childhood and early adolescent may evoke the isolates
to rise in the social structure in their adulthood.
However, those who climb up in the social structure in
their later life may stumble upon the same
complicatedness of forming close ties with others.
Thus, an unchanged superficial and temporary
relationship with primary group continues and
individual remains socially isolates. However, Robert
Merton (1957) considers that although a potentially
disruptive effect may occur when an individual shift his
or her class position, the feeling of isolation
nonetheless, can be substantially ameliorated [2]. He
indicates that if the socially isolates have got the
opportunity to absorb the norms, values and sanctions
Research J. Humanities and Social Sciences 2016; 7(4): 241-249 Muhammad Rehan Masoom
243
of the dominant segment of the society, especially those
of the middle class, should easily gain the acceptance
among the general people.
Robert Ellis and Clayton Lane (1967) outlined three
different hypotheses that reflect the idea of Pitirim
Sorokin [12]. Based on the analysis of Sorokin, they
proposes, the dissociative hypothesis that upward
mobility is itself a disruptive social experience which
leaves the individual for an appreciable period without
roots or effective social support. The compensatory
hypothesis, founded on the discussion of Evelyn Ellis,
that this situation stems from early childhood
deprivation and the attendant inability to form effective
primary group relations. Robert Merton’s discussion is
the origin of the ameliorative hypothesis, that the value
assimilation necessary for upward movement brings
acceptance by the new group. Their research on lower-
class adolescents who were entering a high-status
university supports neither the compensatory
hypothesis, not the ameliorative hypothesis. However,
they shows that the lower-class adolescents encounter a
disproportionate share of isolating experiences and
personal strain, both as viewed through the eyes of
institutional observers and as realized in personal
experience.
Peggy Thoits (1983) offers another hypothesis drawing
upon symbolic interactionist theory, and coined it as
"identity accumulation hypothesis" [13]. It defines social
isolation as the possession of few social identities, and
consider, “the more identities possessed by an actor, the
less psychological distress he/she should exhibit.”
Importantly, social identities that guide behaviors and
make any social acts meaningful are, in point of fact,
enacted in role relationships. He finds socially isolated
individuals suffer less from identity loss and also
benefit less from identity gain than integrated
individuals.
Social isolation is prevalent if any person lacks the
essential social support that incorporates both tangible
assistance and emotional comfort along with the aid of
the deeds of others [14]. Sometimes, people start to
regard themselves as socially isolated solely due to the
experience that they are declined to acquire a good
education to obtain a decent and respectable
employment. This results in the feeling that they may
encounter an appropriation of being corrupt very
unreasonably by the virtuous part of the civil society.
Henceforth, they begin to count themselves being
repudiated by members of the respectable community
and choose to disentangle from the larger society.
Ironically, they begin to get limited opportunity to
become a member of an integrated society as equitably
with those who are rightfully cited for being corrupt [15].
Living in a rather poor community of a society raises
social isolation and diminishes access to social support.
Jane Elliott (2005) examines the influence of
neighborhood poverty and social networks on labor
market experiences of less-educated urban job seekers
[16]. Despite relatively similar job seeking strategies
employed by the slum and camp dwellers, and the
residents outside of that, the hiring process magnifies
the residential contexts. Elliott concludes that any effort
to get secured in formal employment in any labor
market is frequently characterized by expanding
dependencies upon non-poor neighbors and personal
contacts with them.
Debra Vandervoort (2000) investigated the relationship
between gender and social support, and found that
despite the equal level of satisfaction with the available
social support network, men were more isolated than
women [17]. She indicates the contention that men, in
general, satisfy their emotional needs by discussing
with their spouses, while women satisfy their need by
taking with their female friends.
The people, who are socially excluded, are often
exposed to labor market marginality, and faces poverty
and social isolation. This works as a reinforcement of
long-term non-involvement in formal economy of the
country. The risk of social isolation depends upon
broader cultural patterns, structure of the household and
general sociability that is strongly related to the social
context. Duncan Gallie, Serge Paugam and Sheila
Jacobs (2003) shows that unemployment will increase
the vulnerability of becoming poor and in the end,
poverty makes it more complicated to go back to a
decent employment [18]. Thus, a cruel cycle of exclusion
is being created. Even though social isolation and
unemployment may not be directly associated, the
problem of poverty is a not unusual trait among the
socially isolates. However, on the basis of cross-
cultural and biographical sources, Peter Suedfeld
(1974) indicates that while isolation may be primarily
stressful, adaptation to the situation occurs in time and
shapes the cultural norms, roles and expectancies
among the isolates and eventually develops a sense of
solitude among them [19].
Research J. Humanities and Social Sciences 2016; 7(4): 241-249 Muhammad Rehan Masoom
244
Thus, studies suggest that the people who are not
economically well off and are being isolated due to
socio-political situation have the common ground of not
having enough confidence to bring positive changes for
them by participation in social aspects and developing
social relations. Whether the issue is poverty, or
political mistreatment, these people are coming to
consider it as neither have they had control over that
nor they can bring changes to that. Although they are
very concerned that this very situation is shaping their
both personal and social lives, many efforts went in
vain to covert the views into social action and are
leaving many of them frustrated. This is anticipated in
part, to a sentiment among at least some of them, who
are socially secluded in the plane of an unresponsive
and uncaring community. This very sense of isolation
can drive to a failure to be connected with society and
social development and therefore can bring severe
adverse consequences. This may have an adverse
impact on self-esteem and consequently, decreases the
social and financial opportunities. However, while
there can be an agreement of how to define ‘Social
Isolation’, how to measure the concept as a variable is
rather depends on the researcher’s point of view.
Gartly Jaco (1954) proposes following array of factors
can be regarded as provisional criteria of social
isolation, (a) Anonymity, (b) High Spatial Mobility, (c)
Remote Location of Friends, (d) Low Frequency of
Participation in Groups and Institutions, (e) Low
Occupational Participation, (f) Low Frequency of
Participation with Other Communities [20]. The General
Social Survey (GSS) in United States in America used
issues like “there is no one with whom they discuss
important matters” to detect the socially Isolated in
1985 and in 2004. Melvin Seeman (1959) has presented
five distinct meanings of alienation: (I) Powerlessness
defined as the expectancy or probability held by the
individual that his own behavior cannot determine the
occurrence of the outcomes, or reinforcements, he
seeks; (II) Meaninglessness, a situation in which the
individual is unclear as to what he ought to believe—
when the individual's minimal standards for clarity in
decision-making are not met; (III) Normlessness, which
occurs when high expectancy that socially unapproved
behaviors are required to achieve given goals; (IV)
Social isolation indicates the assigned low reward
value to goals or beliefs that are typically highly valued
in the given society, and (V) self-estrangement refers to
the degree of dependence of the given behavior upon
anticipated future rewards [21].
Dwight Dean (1961) recommended a subscale to
measure social isolation, with others like measuring
powerlessness and meaninglessness [22]. The conceptual
explanations of these are radically inconsistent from
that of Seeman. Social Isolation, according to Dean,
indicates the feeling of detachment or disconnection
from the group or of isolation from the societal
standards. Powerlessness, he designates as helplessness
and normlessness as purposelessness and struggles with
norms. Like, Seeman and Dean, Fred Waisanen (1963)
thinks “Social Isolation” as a sub-dimension of
alienation and designates it as losing effective and
meaningful ties with the people [23]. The other sub-
dimensions are normlessness that occurs if the
individual lacks comprehension with the system's edicts
and norms, and powerlessness that stems if any person
lacks control for exchange. Claude Fischer (1973)
tested the hypothesis obtained from Louis Wirth (1938)
that urban people are predominantly exhibited to
alienation [24]. He counts two dimensions, (1)
‘powerlessness’, that is operationalized with a
discernment of personal subsistence scale; (2) social
isolation that is operationalized by scales and items
indicating a mistrust of others (and interpretable as a
sense of anomie. Exploring these dimensions, he
observes no correlation of the size of Standard
Cosmopolitan Demographic Area with powerlessness,
whereas, assumed social isolation was weakly but
consistently connected. Apparently, measuring
powerlessness can be disregarded. Robert Weiss (1983)
shows that ‘social isolation’ stems from loneliness,
which is a typical response to a critical situation [25]. He
thinks feelings like exhaustion, anxiety, unrest and
marginality are the upshot of social isolation (Weiss,
1983: 236).
CONCLUSION:
There are certain similarities in the operationalization
of the overall notion of social isolation in the theoretical
framework, nonetheless, empirical inquiries suggested
by several researchers, exhibits inconsistency in
affirming relevant indicators. A principal concern is
whether to apply objective indicators to measure the
socio-political condition and economic status of the
target community or the center should be on the nature
of the social relationships that they possess. Another
way to express, there is a predicament to examine social
isolation, either in the macro-level, by linking to the
traditional context and social circumstances or adopting
proposed scales, a micro-level interpretation, to
measure the attitude to reach the determination of the
Research J. Humanities and Social Sciences 2016; 7(4): 241-249 Muhammad Rehan Masoom
245
level of social isolation. The dilemmas of the
measurement result from the problems of decent
indicators. Indicators are either impersonal - a distinct
set of observable events that can be classified and
replicated or personal - non-observable and different
from researcher to researcher. The key issue is to
comprehend what are the observed elements to be
separated that can be applied as conducive indicators to
social isolation. While numerous investigators have
successfully illustrated the probability of some sorts of
contextual measurement procedures, there is a
deficiency of methodological erudition on multiple-
item of multi-dimensional and context-bound measures
of social isolation. One primary source of the difficulty
to assess social isolation is to associate this with socio-
political and socio-economic concerns of the
respondents who are undergoing social isolation. The
idiosyncratic scales, developed and utilized by
countless notable researchers to assess the level of
social isolation are more useful and less obscure than
that of theoretically addressed variables suggested by
classical scholars.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST:
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
REFERENCES:
1. Nisbet, Robert (1953) The Quest for Community: A Study in the
Ethics of Order and Freedom. New York: Oxford
2. Merton, Robert K. (1957) Social Theory and Social Structure
(Rev. Ed.), Glencoe,Ill.: The FreePress,
3. Durkheim, Emile (1997, original 1897). Suicide. New York: The
Free Press.
4. Marx, Karl (Published in 1959 write notes on Estranged Labour)
Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844;
5. Tonnies, Ferdinand (1957) Community and Society:
Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft (translated and edited by Charles
P. Loomis) The Michigan State University Press
6. Wirth, Louis (1938) Urbanism as a Way of Life, The American
Journal of Sociology, Vol. 44, No. 1, (Jul., 1938), pp. 1-24 The
University of Chicago Press.
7. William Julius Wilson (1987) The Truly Disadvantaged: The
Inner City, the Underclass, and Public Policy
8. McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., and Brashears, M. E. (2006).
Social isolation in America: Changes in core discussion networks
over two decades. American Sociological Review,71(3), 353-
375.
9. Bell, W (1957) “Anomie, Social Isolation and the Class
Structure”, in Sociometry, Vol. 20, No. 2, June 1957, p. 112. 166.
10. Sorokin, Pitirim A. (1927) Social Mobility, New York: Harper
and Bros.
11. Ellis, E. (1952). Social psychological correlates of upward social
mobility among unmarried career women. American Sociological
Review, 558-563.
12. Ellis, R. A., and Lane, W. C. (1967). Social mobility and social
isolation: a test of Sorokin's dissociative hypothesis. American
sociological review, 237-253.
13. Thoits, P. A. (1983). Multiple identities and psychological well-
being: A reformulation and test of the social isolation hypothesis.
American Sociological Review, 174-187.
14. Kahn, R. L., and Antonucci, T. C. (1981) Convoys of social
support: A life-course approach. In: S. B. Kiesler, J. N. Morgan,
and V. K. Oppenheimer (eds.), Aging: Social Change. New
York: Academic Press, pp. 383-405.
15. Davis, D. S. (1984). “Good People Doing Dirty Work: A Study
Of Social Isolation”. Symbolic Interaction,7(2), 233-247.
16. Elliott, J. R. (1999). Social isolation and labor market insulation.
The Sociological Quarterly,40(2), 199-216.
17. Vandervoort, D. (2000). Social isolation and gender. Current
Psychology,19(3), 229-236.
18. Gallie, D., Paugam, S., and Jacobs, S. (2003). Unemployment,
poverty and social isolation: Is there a vicious circle of social
exclusion?. European Societies,5(1), 1-32. Taylor and Francis.
19. Suedfeld, P. (1974). Social isolation: A case for interdisciplinary
research. Canadian Psychologist/ Psychologie canadienne,15(1),
1.
20. Jaco , E. Gartly (1954) “The Social Isolation Hypothesis and
Schizophrenia” American Sociological Review Vol. 19, No. 5,
pp. 567-577
21. Seeman, M. (1959). “On the meaning of alienation”. American
sociological review, 783-791.
22. Dean, D. G. (1961). Alienation: Its meaning and measurement.
American Sociological Review, 753-758.
23. Waisanen, F. B. (1963). Stability, Alienation, and Change*. The
Sociological Quarterly,4(1), 18-30.
24. Fischer, C. S. (1973). On urban alienations and anomie:
powerlessness and social isolation. American Sociological
Review, 311-326.
25. Weiss, R. S. (1973). Loneliness: The experience of emotional and
social isolation. Cambridge, MA, US: The MIT Press.
