Content uploaded by Tore Bonsaksen
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Tore Bonsaksen on Jul 21, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
Creative Commons CC BY: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission
provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051211033821
Social Media + Society
July-September 2021: 1 –10
© The Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/20563051211033821
journals.sagepub.com/home/sms
Article
Introduction
Loneliness can be understood as comprising three core com-
ponents (Bekhet et al., 2008). First, loneliness indicates that
there is a perceived lack or deficiency in a person’s social
network, meaning that relationships with other people are
missing, scarce, or in other ways inadequate. Second, loneli-
ness cannot be objectively assessed, for example, by an
external observer. By its nature, feelings of loneliness are
based on the perception of the person, essentially underscor-
ing that loneliness is a subjective experience. Third, the
experience of loneliness is unpleasant and distressing. Thus,
while people sometimes want to be left alone (for a while),
they generally do not want to be lonely. Consequently, at its
core, loneliness emerges when a person feels a lack of rela-
tionships with others, and it highlights the emotional distress
present due to this lack of connection with others. While
acknowledging a common core of the loneliness experience,
several authors, building on Weiss’ (1973) seminal work,
have differentiated between two types of loneliness, often
denoted as social and emotional loneliness (Dahlberg &
McKee, 2014; de Jong Gierveld & Van Tilburg, 2010;
DiTommaso & Spinner, 1997; Dykstra & Fokkema, 2007;
Russell et al., 1984). In general terms, social loneliness refers
1033821SMSXXX10.1177/20563051211033821Social Media <span class="symbol" cstyle="Mathematical">+</span> SocietyBonsaksen et al.
research-article20212021
1Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences, Norway
2VID Specialized University, Norway
3University of Michigan, USA
4The University of Queensland, Australia
5Oslo Metropolitan University, Norway
6Northumbria University, UK
Corresponding Author:
Tore Bonsaksen, Department of Health and Nursing Science, Faculty of
Social and Health Sciences, Inland Norway University of Applied Sciences,
PO Box 400, 2418 Elverum, Norway.
Email: tore.bonsaksen@inn.no; @torebonsaksen
Loneliness and Its Association With
Social Media Use During the COVID-19
Outbreak
Tore Bonsaksen1,2 , Mary Ruffolo3, Janni Leung4,
Daicia Price3, Hilde Thygesen2,5 , Mariyana Schoultz6,
and Amy Østertun Geirdal5
Abstract
Social distancing rules during the COVID-19 pandemic changed social interaction for many and increased the risk of
loneliness in the general population. Social media use has been ambiguously related to loneliness, and associations may
differ by age. The study aimed to examine loneliness and its association with social media use within different age groups
during the COVID-19 pandemic. A cross-sectional online survey was conducted in Norway, the United Kingdom, the
United States, and Australia during April/May 2020, and 3,810 participants aged 18 years or above were recruited. Multiple
regression analyses were conducted to examine associations between social media use and social and emotional loneliness
within separate age groups. Emotional loneliness was higher among young adults and among those who used social media
several times daily. Adjusting by sociodemographic variables, using more types of social media was associated with lower
social loneliness among the oldest participants, and with higher emotional loneliness among the youngest participants.
Among middle-aged participants, using social media more frequently was associated with lower social loneliness. We found
that the associations between social media use and loneliness varied by age. Older people’s engagement on social media
may be a resource to reduce loneliness during the COVID-19 pandemic. We observed higher levels of loneliness among
high-frequent social media users of younger age.
Keywords
coronavirus, cross-national study, pandemic, social distancing
2 Social Media + Society
to the lack of an acceptable social network and is concerned
with having a sufficient number of relationships with other
people. Emotional loneliness, on the other hand, is con-
cerned with intimacy in the relationships and feelings of
attachment (Dahlberg & McKee, 2014; Dykstra & Fokkema,
2007). This study builds on this nuanced conceptualization
of loneliness.
Loneliness has received much attention during the
COVID-19 pandemic. In the early days of the pandemic out-
break, people were instructed to practice social distancing
(World Health Organization, 2020). Essentially, this implied
maintaining a physical distance from people outside the
household and when possible staying at home to prevent
spreading the coronavirus. Schools and nurseries were
closed, as were many shops and businesses (Blustein et al.,
2020), leading to an abrupt increase in unemployment rates
internationally (International Labor Organization, 2020).
Those who were able to work from home continued to work
in a sheltered environment. Due to the restrictive social dis-
tancing policies and a general sense of uncertainty during the
COVID-19 outbreak, the population’s mental health has
been subject to worldwide growing concern (Haider et al.,
2020; Kaufman et al., 2020; Mi et al., 2020; Serafini et al.,
2020). Specifically, one concern related to the implementa-
tion of pandemic guidelines is that feelings of loneliness may
increase due to increased social distancing practices
(Bonsaksen et al., 2021; Luchetti et al., 2020; Palgi et al.,
2020).
Despite somewhat differing conceptualizations and mea-
surement methods, loneliness has consistently been found to
be associated with poorer mental health. For example,
researchers have found associations between loneliness and
depression (Beutel et al., 2017; Luanaigh & Lawlor, 2008;
Palgi et al., 2020; Santini et al., 2016; Victor & Yang, 2012),
anxiety (Beutel et al., 2017; Palgi et al., 2020), suicidal ide-
ation and behavior (Beutel et al., 2017; Stickley & Koyanagi,
2016), and moderate to severe psychological distress in gen-
eral (Richard et al., 2017). Loneliness and its relationship to
mental health problems among older people have received
much research attention (Alpass & Neville, 2003; Bekhet &
Zauszniewski, 2012; Gerino et al., 2017; Losada et al., 2012;
Santini et al., 2016). However, in a study of a general popula-
tion sample from Germany, 10.5% of the total sample of par-
ticipants reported some degree of loneliness, with more
loneliness found among young people and less loneliness
found among older people (Beutel et al., 2017). In addition,
loneliness was higher among women, those living alone, and
those without a partner. Among those of younger age, a lon-
gitudinal study of British undergraduate students found that
loneliness predicted more depression, anxiety, and general
mental health problems over time (Richardson et al.,
2017). There was no evidence that mental health problems
increased loneliness over time; thus, a causal pathway from
loneliness to subsequent mental health problems was sug-
gested (Richardson et al., 2017).
Across the world, the use of social media has become
widely adopted in people’s everyday lives (Boulianne, 2015;
Chou et al., 2009). In this context, social media is referred to
as applications that allow users to engage in virtual interac-
tions, with broader or narrower audiences (Meier & Reinecke,
2020). “Interactions” should be understood broadly—while
social media–based interaction may occur as direct interac-
tions between people at a given point in time, more delayed
forms of interaction, such as looking at or reading another
person’s social media posting hours or days later, are com-
mon ways to use social media. However, as the latter form
may be considered passive media consumption, rather than
interaction (in the ordinary meaning of the word), recent
research has suggested that the level of interactivity should
be considered a core dimension in the conceptualization of
social media use (Kaye, 2021). Further, people typically
speak of social media as brands—for example, they use
Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and so on. While studies have
often examined which brands of social media are most fre-
quently used within a given population or context (e.g.,
Martin et al., 2018), one can assume that using several
brands of social media regularly will be related to a larger
total amount of time spent interacting with them, and pos-
sibly also to a general preoccupation with social media
and “fear of missing out” (Fumagalli et al., 2021; Hunt
et al., 2018).
In relation to loneliness and mental health, it has been
argued that social media may serve as a source of social con-
nection and inclusion, and may therefore prevent or provide
relief from loneliness (Morahan-Martin & Schumacher,
2003; Nowland et al., 2018; Thomas et al., 2020). The alter-
native reasoning suggests that social media may serve as a
substitute for real-life social relationships. Specifically,
social media may create and sustain new stressors, such as
“fear of missing out,” and high-frequent social media use
may therefore be viewed as indicative of poorer mental
health, as shown in recent studies (Geirdal et al., 2021; Hunt
et al., 2018). Research has also suggested that different
aspects of the social media experience may produce different
effects for different groups of people. For example, Phu and
Gow (2019) reported that a higher number of Facebook
friends were associated with lower loneliness, while more
persistent use, indicating higher emotional connectedness to
the use of social media, predicted higher levels of loneliness.
Yang (2016) focused on the interaction between patterns of
use and the users’ personality traits, and found that using
social media for browsing and interaction was associated
with lower loneliness, but only for participants with low
social comparison orientation. Pittman and Reich (2016) dif-
ferentiated between types of social media, reporting results
in support of image-based social media being able to provide
enhanced intimacy, whereas text-based social media was not.
While effects are complex and differ depending on the social
media and outcome indicators used, a recent meta-review
found an overall small and negative association between
Bonsaksen et al. 3
social media use and mental health (Meier & Reinecke,
2020).
The above literature review suggests that social media use
is multi-dimensional, and that complex relationships exist
between social media use and its impacts on different groups
of people. Social media use is often measured with estimates
of time use, varying between measures such as frequency of
use within a given time frame (e.g., Geirdal et al., 2021) and
more specific measures such as the number of minutes or
hours spent on social media during a typical day (e.g., Ellison
et al., 2007). Clearly, research efforts need to go beyond
establishing simple associations between social media use
and various outcomes of interest. By far, social media is
more frequently used within the younger age groups (Feng
et al., 2019). Patterns and motives for their use have been
shown to vary between younger and older people (Kircaburun
et al., 2020), and thus, social media use may be differently
linked with loneliness across different age groups. More
knowledge about the use of social media in different age
groups, and how social media may be associated with loneli-
ness in these groups, can add nuance to our understanding of
social media and its significance for people of varying ages.
Therefore, in this study, historically situated within the
COVID-19 pandemic, the relationship between loneliness
and social media use is explored by age.
Study Aim
The aim of this study was to examine loneliness and its asso-
ciation with social media use within different age groups
during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Methods
An invitation to participate in this self-administered survey
was distributed via different social media in Norway, the
United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia during
April and May 2020. Each country had a landing site for the
survey at the researcher’s universities; OsloMet—Oslo
Metropolitan University, Norway; University of Michigan,
USA; University of Salford, UK; and the University of
Queensland, Australia, respectively. The initiator of the proj-
ect was A.Ø.G. from OsloMet, but all countries and universi-
ties had their own head of the project, due to ethical
considerations and permissions. The survey was translated
from Norwegian to English by the researchers according to
language and cultural contexts. To be included in the study,
participants had to be 18 years or older, understand Norwegian
or English, and live in Norway, the United States, the United
Kingdom, or Australia.
Measures
Sociodemographic Characteristics. Sociodemographic variables
included age group (18–24, 25–29, 30–34, . . ., 85 years
and above), sex (male vs. female), highest completed educa-
tion level (high school, associated/technical degree or lower
vs. bachelor’s degree or higher), cohabitation (living with
someone else vs. not), employment status (having full- or
part-time employment vs. not), and living area (rural/farm-
ing area, small town, medium-sized city, large city). For the
analysis, age groups were collapsed into 18–39, 40–59, and
60 years and above, representing young, middle-aged, and
old participants, respectively.
Loneliness. The loneliness scale (de Jong Gierveld & van Til-
burg, 2006) consists of six statements, all of which are rated
from 0 (totally disagree) to 4 (totally agree). It was designed
to measure two different aspects of loneliness, social loneli-
ness (e.g., “There are plenty of people I can rely on when I
have problems”) and “emotional loneliness” (e.g., “I experi-
ence a general sense of emptiness”). Previous factor-analytic
studies have found the six statements to load on two different
factors, and that they therefore should be treated as constitut-
ing two different scales reflecting the two different aspects of
loneliness (Bonsaksen et al., 2018; de Jong Gierveld & van
Tilburg, 2006). Cronbach’s αs in this study were .66 (mean
inter-item correlation: .39) and .86 (mean inter-item correla-
tion: .68) for the emotional loneliness and social loneliness
scales, respectively. For both scales, the score range was
0–12 with higher scores indicating more loneliness.
Social Media Use. Based on a list of the most widely used
social media in the United States (Perrin & Anderson, 2019),
the participants were asked to indicate (yes vs. no) whether
they had used any of the following 10 social media channels:
Facebook, YouTube, Snapchat, Instagram, LinkedIn, Twit-
ter, Pinterest, WhatsApp, Reddit, and Tumblr. As the first
indicator of how strongly social media were integrated with
the participants’ lives, the number of social media used was
calculated by adding the affirmative responses. To establish
a second indicator of social media’s integration with the par-
ticipants’ lives, the participants were asked how often they
had used social media in general (i.e., not for each type of
social media) after the COVID-19 outbreak. Response
options for this question were monthly or less frequently (1),
weekly (2), a few times per week (3), daily (4), or several
times daily (5).
Statistical Analysis
Social and emotional loneliness (means and standard devia-
tions) were calculated for each category of the independent
variables: age group, sex, education level, cohabitation,
employment status, living area, and social media use.
Depending on the number of group categories, group differ-
ences were examined using the one-way analysis of variance
(ANOVA) with Bonferroni correction, and the independent
t test. Adjusted associations between independent variables
and social and emotional loneliness were assessed with
4 Social Media + Society
multiple linear regression analyses. Within each age group,
social and emotional loneliness was assessed in relation to
the number of social media used and frequency of use, while
adjusting for sex, education level, cohabitation status, and
employment status. Statistical significance was set at p < .05.
Missing values were handled with the case-wise deletion
procedure, resulting in n varying between analyses.
Ethics
The data in this cross-sectional and cross-country study
were collected anonymously. All ethical rules were followed
in each country. The study was thereby quality assured and
approved by OsloMet and the regional committees for medi-
cal and health research ethics (REK; ref. 132066) in Norway,
reviewed by the University of Michigan Institutional Review
Board for Health Sciences and Behavioral Sciences (IRB
HSBS), and designated as exempt (HUM00180296) in the
United States, by University Health Research Ethics
(HSR1920-080) in United Kingdom, and (HSR1920-080;
2020000956) in Australia.
Results
Participants
The sample consisted of 3,810 individuals from Norway
(20.2%), the United States (36.6%), the United Kingdom
(36.0%), and Australia (7.2%). In the whole sample, 37.2%
were under the age of 40 years, 40.7% were aged 40–59 years,
while 21.9% were aged 60 years or above. The majority
(79.6%) were women, and 74.0% had education at the bach-
elor’s degree level or higher. Full- or part-time employment
was held among 70.7%, while 61.4% lived with a spouse or
partner. Social media was used daily or less frequently
among 27.8% of the sample, while a majority (71.5%)
reported the use of social media several times daily. On aver-
age, the participants reported using four different social
media brands.
In the total sample, the mean score on social loneliness
was 3.92 (SD = 3.01) and the mean score on emotional loneli-
ness was 6.03 (SD = 2.68). Table 1 displays the levels of
social and emotional loneliness according to sociodemo-
graphic characteristics and use of social media in sample
subgroups. Social loneliness did not differ between age
groups, while emotional loneliness was higher among the
younger age groups. Compared to women, male participants
had higher social loneliness and lower emotional loneliness.
Social and emotional loneliness varied significantly by the
education level, cohabitation, and employment status, with
higher levels of loneliness among those with lower educa-
tion, without a partner, and without employment. While
there were significant differences in loneliness between liv-
ing areas, these differences did not follow a linear pattern.
Significant group differences in social and emotional
loneliness were also revealed for different frequencies of
social media use. Due to the large differences in group sizes,
these analyses were re-run using a dichotomized social
media use variable (several times daily vs. daily or less
often). Using the dichotomized variable, social loneliness
was not significantly different between the groups, whereas
emotional loneliness was significantly higher among those
using social media several times daily, compared to those
using social media daily or less frequently (M = 6.19 vs.
M = 5.65, p < .001).
Adjusted Associations Between Social Media Use
and Loneliness
The results from the linear regression analyses are reported
in Table 2. Adjusted for sociodemographic variables (sex,
education, cohabitation, and employment), social media use
was not associated with social loneliness among those aged
18–39 years. Among those aged 40–59 years, using social
media more frequently was associated with lower levels of
social loneliness (β = −.06, p < .05). Among those in the old-
est age group, the use of more social media platforms was
associated with lower social loneliness (β = −.10, p < .05).
Among the sociodemographic variables, cohabitation and
employment were consistently associated with lower
reported social loneliness.
Among participants in the youngest age group, using
more social media platforms was associated with higher lev-
els of emotional loneliness (β = .09, p < .01). Social media use
was not associated with emotional loneliness among those in
the middle or old age groups. Across age groups, having
higher education and living with a spouse or partner were
consistently associated with lower emotional loneliness.
Discussion
This study aimed to examine loneliness and its association
with social media use within different age groups during the
COVID-19 pandemic. Unadjusted analyses revealed that
compared to their counterparts, emotional loneliness was
higher among those in the youngest age group and among
those using social media several times daily. Adjusting for
sociodemographic variables, using more social media plat-
forms was associated with lower social loneliness among the
oldest participants, while it was associated with higher emo-
tional loneliness among the youngest participants. Among
those aged 40–59 years, using social media more frequently
was associated with lower levels of social loneliness. The
sociodemographic variables were associated with social and
emotional loneliness in a mostly consistent pattern across
age groups.
In this study, levels of social loneliness were similar
across age groups, whereas emotional loneliness was higher
among those in the youngest age group. Thus, it appears the
Bonsaksen et al. 5
level of social deprivation was similar across age groups,
whereas the youngest participants were more inclined to suf-
fer emotionally. This finding brings nuance to the knowledge
about loneliness among young adults and underscores the
significance of understanding the young person’s psycho-
logical response to their social world. Relying on a mere
count of the relevant social contacts may obscure rather than
reveal loneliness in this age group. While much research has
focused on loneliness problems among those of old age
(Alpass & Neville, 2003; Bekhet & Zauszniewski, 2012;
Gerino et al., 2017; Losada et al., 2012; Santini et al., 2016),
a general population study from the United Kingdom found
a U-shaped distribution with higher levels of loneliness
among those younger than 25 years and older than 65 years
(Victor & Yang, 2012). In Germany, Beutel and coworkers
(2017) found a linear decrease in loneliness with increasing
age. The international comparisons extend support to the
notion that younger people (in addition to older aged indi-
viduals) may be particularly vulnerable to experiencing lone-
liness. However, measurement issues may also be relevant
for the understanding of loneliness in various age groups, as
a large Norwegian general population study yielded differing
results depending on whether direct (e.g., “Do you feel
lonely?”) or indirect measures of loneliness (such as the
loneliness scale used in this study) were used (Nicolaisen &
Thorsen, 2014).
Adjusting for sociodemographic variables, using more
types of social media was associated with lower social lone-
liness among those aged 60 years or above. Although this
broadly composed age group consists of employed and
retired individuals alike, people commonly experience a
decline in social contact in older age (Cornwell et al.,
2008)—due to, for example, retirement, reduced capacity for
participation and socializing, own or others’ health problems,
or a combination of these. However, according to Havighurst’s
(1963) theory of active aging, life satisfaction may be best
sustained if the old person maintains the roles and activities
of middle life, with the necessary adjustments. For older per-
sons, using and learning to use new social media may be one
way of communicating and interacting with family, friends,
Table 1. Social and Emotional Loneliness According to Sociodemographic Characteristics and Frequency of Social Media Use.
Characteristics Social loneliness Emotional loneliness
n M SD p value n M SD p value
Age group (years) .65 <.001
18–39 1,415 3.94 3.00 1,417 6.70 2.63
40–59 1,542 3.94 3.12 1,541 5.77 2.66
60+826 3.83 2.82 826 5.39 2.57
Sex <.01 <.01
Male 715 4.25 3.12 716 5.72 2.85
Female 3,016 3.81 2.97 3,016 6.08 2.63
Education level <.001 <.001
High school or lower 983 4.41 3.20 982 6.54 2.81
Bachelor’s degree or higher 2,805 3.75 2.93 2,807 5.86 2.62
Cohabitation <.001 <.001
Yes 2,327 3.46 2.80 2,324 5.57 2.54
No 1,201 4.59 3.17 1,201 6.92 2.76
Employment <.001 <.001
Full- or part-time 2,679 3.70 2.96 2,681 5.93 2.64
No 1,109 4.45 3.07 1,108 6.29 2.77
Living area <.01 <.01
Rural/farming area 279 3.76 3.15 277 5.55 2.93
Small town 837 4.07 3.04 839 5.92 2.60
Medium-sized city 1,221 4.13 3.02 1,224 6.23 2.66
Large city 1,452 3.69 4.95 1,450 6.03 2.69
Social media use <.05 <.001
Monthly or less frequent 15 4.80 3.03 15 5.40 2.17
Weekly 39 5.23 4.06 39 5.74 2.77
A few times per week 106 4.20 2.83 105 5.79 2.58
Daily 896 3.98 3.00 895 5.64 2.71
Several times daily 2,707 3.88 3.00 2,711 6.19 2.67
ANOVA: analysis of variance.
Statistical tests are one-way ANOVA F test (age groups, living area, and social media use) and independent t tests (all other variables). Cohabitation refers
to “living with spouse or partner.”
6 Social Media + Society
and acquaintances, and may extend their social network.
Thus, this way of using social media may indeed be a tool for
preventing or reducing loneliness, as suggested from previ-
ous research (Nowland et al., 2018; Sum et al., 2008). During
the COVID-19 situation, under circumstances where older
people are generally considered at risk of a fatal outcome if
infected by the coronavirus, their use of social media to stay
in touch with others may be particularly important (Dahlberg,
2021). Even for those in the middle age group, using social
media more frequently was associated with lower levels of
social loneliness. Possibly, the loneliness burden arising
from reduced opportunities to socialize with family, friends,
and colleagues during the pandemic may be somewhat lifted
by being able to connect with others via social media.
In contrast, using a larger number of social media was
associated with higher emotional loneliness among those in
the youngest age group. Although different measures of
social media use are employed (number of social media used
vs. frequency of use), a salient abstraction of the results is
that while more use of social media was related to less loneli-
ness among those of middle and old age, it was related to
more loneliness among those of younger age. Possibly, the
discrepancy may be explained by varying motives for social
media use. Among the middle-aged and old participants, a
motive for using social media may be stimulation—using
social media to connect with others stimulates interaction
and has been found to reduce loneliness over time (Teppers
et al., 2014). In contrast, using social media to compensate
for poor social skills in the real world has been associated
with increased loneliness over time (Teppers et al., 2014). In
addition, excessive use of social media (“Facebook addic-
tion”) and the internet, in general, has been found to be
related to higher levels of loneliness (Błachnio et al., 2016;
Odacı & Kalkan, 2010). An inclination toward social com-
parison and toward presenting a “liminal self” (Kerrigan &
Hart, 2016)—editing and re-inventing yourself online—may
be stronger among younger compared to older adults.
Compared to their counterparts, people with high social
comparison orientation have been shown to have poorer
self-perception, lower self-esteem, and more negative affect
balance (Vogel et al., 2015), and those presenting a liminal
self on social media have been found to experience greater
loneliness (Thomas et al., 2020). Such experiences can read-
ily be aligned with the items comprising the emotional lone-
liness scale, such as feeling empty and rejected. Therefore, a
stronger tendency among young adults toward social com-
parison (Callan et al., 2015) and possibly toward presenting
with a façade may contribute to explain why more use of
social media was related to more loneliness in the younger
age groups.
Finally, one should consider these results in the COVID-
19 context. It is possible that younger and middle-aged par-
ticipants, to a larger extent than those of older age, use social
media to seek information about the pandemic. Exposure to
information about COVID-19 developments can also occur
without being sought; the social media’s algorithms are
designed to ensure that information presents itself in the
newsfeed in part based on one’s own and one’s friends’ pre-
vious involvements (Alvarado & Waern, 2018). Possibly,
attempts to disentangle the information from the disinforma-
tion—handling the “infodemic”—may add to the burden
during already difficult times (Leung et al., 2020; Schoultz
et al., 2021). In contrast, people in the oldest age group may
still be inclined to seek and get their news from traditional
media, such as newspapers, radio, and TV (Holt et al., 2013).
Future research is needed to examine the motives and meth-
ods of social media use across generations, and their associa-
tions with loneliness.
Study Limitations
The study has several limitations. The data were collected
using a cross-sectional online survey; therefore assumptions
about causal relationships should not be made. Although
loneliness is treated as an outcome in this study, it is equally
possible that feelings of loneliness can increase social media
use. The representativity of the four populations of the four
respective countries is unknown. The sample had a majority
Table 2. Linear Regression Analyses Showing Adjusted Associations Between Social Media Use and Loneliness Within Age Groups.
Independent variables Social loneliness Emotional loneliness
Age 18–39 years Age 40–59 years Age 60+ years Age 18–39 years Age 40–59 years Age 60+ years
Female sex −.05 −.02 −.09* .01 .02 .14***
Having higher education −.11*** −.06* −.01 −.09** −.08** −.08*
Living with spouse/partner −.10*** −.21*** −.20*** −.23*** −.16*** −.13**
Having employment −.07* −.14*** −.08* −.09** −.13*** −.02
Number of SM used −.02 −.02 −.10* .09** −.04 .04
Using SM more frequently −.03 −.06* −.02 .04 .05 .06
Explained variance (%) 4.3 8.0 6.2 9.8 5.9 5.8
SM: social media.
Table content is standardized β weights.
*p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
Bonsaksen et al. 7
of female and urban participants, and the distributions of age
and education were similar to general population statistics.
Response to the general population–targeted advertisement
in Australia was low, resulting in a large proportion of par-
ticipants being recruited among followers of the university’s
social media postings. Thus, the Australian participants were
commonly younger and had postgraduate degrees.
The sample was recruited through advertisements
released by the university through social media and by per-
sonal postings and shares on social media. Thus, generaliz-
ing the results beyond a population of relatively frequent
social media users should be done with caution. The degree
of disease outbreak and social distancing policies differed
between states within the United States, and between the
four countries.
The study used relatively crude measures of social media
use. In some analyses, frequency of use was dichotomized
into two categories, and the number of social media used was
calculated from a list of social media that is not extensive.
However, the list was constructed based on well-known and
popular social media channels (Perrin & Anderson, 2019).
Cronbach’s α of the emotional loneliness scale was lower
than the recommended .70 threshold. However, lower inter-
nal consistency estimates are common for shorter scales
(Ponterotto & Ruckdeschel, 2007; Streiner & Norman,
2008), such as the three-item emotional loneliness scale.
However, the mean inter-item correlation (r = .39) well
exceeded the .20 threshold that has been suggested for short
scales (Briggs & Cheek, 1986).
The large age group intervals allowed for significant
developmental differences between participants within the
defined intervals. Thus, within age groups, there may be
variations in social media use, loneliness, and their associa-
tion that is not accounted for by this study.
Conclusion
This study examined loneliness and its association with
social media use within different age groups during the
COVID-19 pandemic. We found that the associations varied
by age: using more social media, or using them more fre-
quently, was associated with lower social loneliness among
the middle-aged and old participants, while more social
media use was associated with increased emotional loneli-
ness among the younger participants. Thus, while younger
people may be encouraged to spend their time differently,
and/or to be more conscious about how they use social
media, people in the older age group may use social media to
find joy and possibility for connection with others during a
time where regular social contact is severely limited.
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect
to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, author-
ship, and/or publication of this article.
ORCID iDs
Tore Bonsaksen https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6315-1111
Hilde Thygesen https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5942-0662
References
Alpass, F. M., & Neville, S. (2003). Loneliness, health and depres-
sion in older males. Aging & Mental Health, 7(3), 212–216.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1360786031000101193
Alvarado, O., & Waern, A. (2018, April 21–26). Towards algorith-
mic experience: Initial efforts for social media contexts [Paper
presentation]. Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on
Human Factors in Computing Systems, Montreal, QC, Canada.
Bekhet, A. K., & Zauszniewski, J. A. (2012). Mental health of
elders in retirement communities: Is loneliness a key factor?
Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 26(3), 214–224. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.apnu.2011.09.007
Bekhet, A. K., Zauszniewski, J. A., & Nakhla, W. E. (2008).
Loneliness: A concept analysis. Nursing Forum, 43(4), 207–
213. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6198.2008.00114.x
Beutel, M. E., Klein, E. M., Brähler, E., Reiner, I., Jünger, C.,
Michal, M., . . . Tibubos, A. N. (2017). Loneliness in the gen-
eral population: Prevalence, determinants and relations to men-
tal health. BMC Psychiatry, 17(1), 97. https://doi.org/10.1186/
s12888-017-1262-x
Błachnio, A., Przepiorka, A., Boruch, W., & Bałakier, E. (2016).
Self-presentation styles, privacy, and loneliness as predic-
tors of Facebook use in young people. Personality and
Individual Differences, 94, 26–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
paid.2015.12.051
Blustein, D. L., Duffy, R., Ferreira, J. A., Cohen-Scali, V.,
Cinamon, R. G., & Allan, B. A. (2020). Unemployment
in the time of COVID-19: A research agenda. Journal of
Vocational Behavior, 119, 103436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jvb.2020.103436
Bonsaksen, T., Opseth, T. M., Misund, A., Geirdal, A. Ø., Fekete,
O. R., & Nordli, H. (2018). The de Jong Gierveld Loneliness
Scale used with Norwegian clubhouse members: Psychometric
properties and associated factors. International Journal of
Psychosocial Rehabilitation, 22(2), 88–100.
Bonsaksen, T., Schoultz, M., Thygesen, H., Ruffolo, M., Price, D.,
Leung, J., & Geirdal, A. Ø. (2021). Loneliness and its asso-
ciated factors nine months after the COVID-19 outbreak: A
cross-national study. International Journal of Environmental
Research and Public Health, 18(6), 2841. https://doi.org
/10.3390/ijerph18062841
Boulianne, S. (2015). Social media use and participation: A meta-
analysis of current research. Information, Communication &
Society, 18(5), 524–538. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X
.2015.1008542
Briggs, S. R., & Cheek, J. M. (1986). The role of factor analy-
sis in the development and evaluation of personality scales.
Journal of Personality, 54(1), 106–148. https://doi.org/10
.1111/j.1467-6494.1986.tb00391.x
8 Social Media + Society
Callan, M. J., Kim, H., & Matthews, W. J. (2015). Age differences
in social comparison tendency and personal relative depriva-
tion. Personality and Individual Differences, 87, 196–199.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.08.003
Chou, W.-y. S., Hunt, Y. M., Beckjord, E. B., Moser, R. P., &
Hesse, B. W. (2009). Social media use in the United States:
Implications for health communication. Journal of Medical
Internet Research, 11(4), Article e48. https://doi.org/10.2196/
jmir.1249
Cornwell, B., Laumann, E. O., & Schumm, L. P. (2008). The
social connectedness of older adults: A national profile.
American Sociological Review, 73(2), 185–203. https://doi.
org/10.1177/000312240807300201
Dahlberg, L. (2021). Loneliness during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Aging & Mental Health, 25(7), 1161–1164. https://doi.org/10.
1080/13607863.2021.1875195
Dahlberg, L., & McKee, K. J. (2014). Correlates of social and emo-
tional loneliness in older people: Evidence from an English
community study. Aging & Mental Health, 18(4), 504–514.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2013.856863
de Jong Gierveld, J., & van Tilburg, T. (2006). A 6-item scale for
overall, emotional, and social loneliness. Confirmatory tests on
survey data. Research on Aging, 28(5), 582–598. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0164027506289723
de Jong Gierveld, J., & Van Tilburg, T. (2010). The De Jong
Gierveld short scales for emotional and social loneliness:
Tested on data from 7 countries in the UN generations and
gender surveys. European Journal of Ageing, 7(2), 121–130.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-010-0144-6
DiTommaso, E., & Spinner, B. (1997). Social and emotional
loneliness: A re-examination of Weiss’ typology of loneli-
ness. Personality and Individual Differences, 22(3), 417–427.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(96)00204-8
Dykstra, P. A., & Fokkema, T. (2007). Social and emotional
loneliness among divorced and married men and women:
Comparing the deficit and cognitive perspectives. Basic
and Applied Social Psychology, 29(1), 1–12. https://doi.org
/10.1080/01973530701330843
Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of
Facebook “friends”: Social capital and college students’ use
of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated
Communication, 12(4), 1143–1168. https://doi.org/10.1111/
j.1083-6101.2007.00367.x
Feng, G., Zhang, Y., & Lin, Z. (2019). A meta-analysis of the
effects of sociodemographic factors on social media adoption.
International Journal of Communication, 13, 30.
Fumagalli, E., Dolmatzian, M. B., & Shrum, L. J. (2021).
Centennials, FOMO, and loneliness: An investigation of the
impact of social networking and messaging/VoIP apps usage
during the initial stage of the coronavirus pandemic. Frontiers
in Psychology, 12, Article 620739. https://doi.org/10.3389/
fpsyg.2021.620739
Geirdal, A. Ø., Ruffolo, M., Leung, J., Thygesen, H., Price, D.,
Bonsaksen, T., & Schoultz, M. (2021). Mental health, qual-
ity of life, wellbeing, loneliness and use of social media in a
time of social distancing during the COVID-19 outbreak. A
cross-country comparative study. Journal of Mental Health,
30(2), 148–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638237.2021.187
5413
Gerino, E., Rollè, L., Sechi, C., & Brustia, P. (2017). Loneliness,
resilience, mental health, and quality of life in old age: A
structural equation model. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, Article
2003. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02003
Haider, I., Tiwana, F., & Tahir, S. (2020). Impact of the COVID-
19 pandemic on adult mental health. Pakistan Journal of
Medical Sciences, 36(COVID-19-S4), S90–S94. https://doi.
org/10.12669/pjms.36.COVID19-S4.2756
Havighurst, R. J. (1963). Successful aging. In R. H. Williams, C.
Tibbits, & W. Donohue (Eds.), Processes of aging: Social and
psychological perspectives (Vol. 1, pp. 299–320). University
of Michigan; Atherton Press.
Holt, K., Shehata, A., Strömbäck, J., & Ljungberg, E. (2013). Age
and the effects of news media attention and social media use on
political interest and participation: Do social media function as
leveller? European Journal of Communication, 28(1), 19–34.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323112465369
Hunt, M. G., Marx, R., Lipson, C., & Young, J. (2018). No more
FOMO: Limiting social media decreases loneliness and depres-
sion. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 37(10),
751–768. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2018.37.10.751
International Labor Organization. (2020). Almost 25 million jobs
could be lost worldwide as a result of COVID-19, says ILO
[Press release]. https://www.ilo.org/global/about-the-ilo/news-
room/news/WCMS_738742/lang–en/index.htm
Kaufman, K. R., Petkova, E., Bhui, K. S., & Schulze, T. G. (2020).
A global needs assessment in times of a global crisis: World
psychiatry response to the COVID-19 pandemic. BJPsych
Open, 6(3), Article e48. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjo.2020.25
Kaye, L. K. (2021). Exploring the “socialness” of social media.
Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 3, 100083. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.chbr.2021.100083
Kerrigan, F., & Hart, A. (2016). Theorising digital personhood: A
dramaturgical approach. Journal of Marketing Management,
32(17–18), 1701–1721. https://doi.org/10.1080/0267257X
.2016.1260630
Kircaburun, K., Alhabash, S., Tosuntaş, Ş. B., & Griffiths, M. D.
(2020). Uses and gratifications of problematic social media use
among university students: A simultaneous examination of the
big five of personality traits, social media platforms, and social
media use motives. International Journal of Mental Health and
Addiction, 18(3), 525–547. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-
018-9940-6
Leung, J., Schoultz, M., Chiu, V., Bonsaksen, T., Ruffolo, M.,
Thygesen, H., . . . Geirdal, A. Ø. (2020). Concerns over the
spread of misinformation and fake news on social media—
Challenges amid the coronavirus pandemic [Paper pre-
sentation]. 3rd International Electronic Conference on
Environmental Research and Public Health. https://sciforum.
net/manuscripts/9078/manuscript.pdf
Losada, A., Márquez-González, M., García-Ortiz, L., Gómez-
Marcos, M. A., Fernández-Fernández, V., & Rodríguez-
Sánchez, E. (2012). Loneliness and mental health in a
representative sample of community-dwelling Spanish older
adults. The Journal of Psychology, 146(3), 277–292. https://
doi.org/10.1080/00223980.2011.582523
Luanaigh, C. O., & Lawlor, B. A. (2008). Loneliness and the health
of older people. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry,
23(12), 1213–1221. https://doi.org/10.1002/gps.2054
Bonsaksen et al. 9
Luchetti, M., Lee, J. H., Aschwanden, D., Sesker, A., Strickhouser,
J. E., Terracciano, A., & Sutin, A. R. (2020). The trajectory of
loneliness in response to COVID-19. American Psychologist,
75(7), 897–908. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000690
Martin, F., Wang, C., Petty, T., Wang, W., & Wilkins, P. (2018).
Middle school students’ social media use. Journal of
Educational Technology & Society, 21(1), 213–224. http://
www.jstor.org/stable/26273881
Meier, A., & Reinecke, L. (2020). Computer-mediated communica-
tion, social media, and mental health: A conceptual and empir-
ical meta-review. Communication Research. Advance online
publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650220958224
Mi, L., Jiang, Y., Xuan, H., & Zhou, Y. (2020). Mental health and
psychological impact of COVID-19: Potential high-risk fac-
tors among different groups. Asian Journal of Psychiatry, 53,
102212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajp.2020.102212
Morahan-Martin, J., & Schumacher, P. (2003). Loneliness and
social uses of the Internet. Computers in Human Behavior,
19(6), 659–671.
Nicolaisen, M., & Thorsen, K. (2014). Who are lonely? Loneliness
in different age groups (18–81 years old), using two mea-
sures of loneliness. The International Journal of Aging and
Human Development, 78(3), 229–257. https://doi.org/10.2190/
AG.78.3.b
Nowland, R., Necka, E. A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2018). Loneliness
and social internet use: Pathways to reconnection in a digi-
tal world? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13(1),
70–87.
Odacı, H., & Kalkan, M. (2010). Problematic Internet use, lone-
liness and dating anxiety among young adult university stu-
dents. Computers & Education, 55(3), 1091–1097. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.05.006
Palgi, Y., Shrira, A., Ring, L., Bodner, E., Avidor, S., Bergman,
Y., . . . Hoffman, Y. (2020). The loneliness pandemic:
Loneliness and other concomitants of depression, anxiety and
their comorbidity during the COVID-19 outbreak. Journal of
Affective Disorders, 275, 109–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jad.2020.06.036
Perrin, A., & Anderson, M. (2019). Share of U.S. adults using
social media, including Facebook, is mostly unchanged since
2018. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/04/10/
share-of-u-s-adults-using-social-media-including-facebook-is-
mostly-unchanged-since-2018/
Phu, B., & Gow, A. J. (2019). Facebook use and its associa-
tion with subjective happiness and loneliness. Computers
in Human Behavior, 92, 151–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
chb.2018.11.020
Pittman, M., & Reich, B. (2016). Social media and loneliness:
Why an Instagram picture may be worth more than a thousand
Twitter words. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 155–167.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.084
Ponterotto, J. G., & Ruckdeschel, D. (2007). An overview of coef-
ficient alpha and a reliability matrix for estimating adequacy of
internal consistency coefficients with psychological research
measures. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 105(3, Pt I), 997–1014.
https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.105.3.997-1014
Richard, A., Rohrmann, S., Vandeleur, C. L., Schmid, M., Barth,
J., & Eichholzer, M. (2017). Loneliness is adversely associated
with physical and mental health and lifestyle factors: Results
from a Swiss national survey. PLOS ONE, 12(7), Article
e0181442. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181442
Richardson, T., Elliott, P., & Roberts, R. (2017). Relationship
between loneliness and mental health in students. Journal of
Public Mental Health, 16(2), 48–54. https://doi.org/10.1108/
JPMH-03-2016-0013
Russell, D., Cutrona, C. E., Rose, J., & Yurko, K. (1984). Social
and emotional loneliness: An examination of Weiss’s
typology of loneliness. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 46(6), 1313–1321. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-
3514.46.6.1313
Santini, Z. I., Fiori, K. L., Feeney, J., Tyrovolas, S., Haro, J. M., &
Koyanagi, A. (2016). Social relationships, loneliness, and men-
tal health among older men and women in Ireland: A prospec-
tive community-based study. Journal of Affective Disorders,
204, 59–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2016.06.032
Schoultz, M., Leung, J., Bonsaksen, T., Ruffolo, M., Thygesen, H.,
Price, D., & Geirdal, A. Ø. (2021). Mental health, information
and being connected: Qualitative experiences of social media use
during the COVID-19 pandemic from a trans-national sample.
Healthcare, 9(6), 735. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare9060735
Serafini, G., Parmigiani, B., Amerio, A., Aguglia, A., Sher, L.,
& Amore, M. (2020). The psychological impact of COVID-
19 on the mental health in the general population. QJM: An
International Journal of Medicine, 113(8), 531–537. https://
doi.org/10.1093/qjmed/hcaa201
Stickley, A., & Koyanagi, A. (2016). Loneliness, common men-
tal disorders and suicidal behavior: Findings from a general
population survey. Journal of Affective Disorders, 197, 81–87.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2016.02.054
Streiner, D. L., & Norman, G. R. (2008). Health measurement
scales—A practical guide to their development and use
(4th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Sum, S., Mathews, R. M., Hughes, I., & Campbell, A. (2008).
Internet use and loneliness in older adults. Cyberpsychology
& Behavior, 11(2), 208–211. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb
.2007.0010
Teppers, E., Luyckx, K., Klimstra, T. A., & Goossens, L. (2014).
Loneliness and Facebook motives in adolescence: A lon-
gitudinal inquiry into directionality of effect. Journal of
Adolescence, 37(5), 691–699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adoles-
cence.2013.11.003
Thomas, L., Orme, E., & Kerrigan, F. (2020). Student loneliness:
The role of social media through life transitions. Computers &
Education, 146, 103754.
Victor, C. R., & Yang, K. (2012). The prevalence of loneliness
among adults: A case study of the United Kingdom. The
Journal of Psychology, 146(1–2), 85–104. https://doi.org/10.1
080/00223980.2011.613875
Vogel, E. A., Rose, J. P., Okdie, B. M., Eckles, K., & Franz, B.
(2015). Who compares and despairs? The effect of social
comparison orientation on social media use and its outcomes.
Personality and Individual Differences, 86, 249–256. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.06.026
Weiss, R. S. (1973). Loneliness: The experience of emotional and
social isolation. MIT Press.
World Health Organization. (2020). Infection prevention and con-
trol during health care when novel coronavirus (nCoV) infec-
tion is suspected. https://www.who.int/publications-detail/
10 Social Media + Society
infection-prevention-and-control-during-health-care-when-
novel-coronavirus-(ncov)-infection-is-suspected-20200125
Yang, C.-C. (2016). Instagram use, loneliness, and social compari-
son orientation: Interact and browse on social media, but don’t
compare. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking,
19(12), 703–708.
Author Biographies
Tore Bonsaksen (MSc, Inland Norway University of Applied
Sciences) is a professor of mental health at Inland University of
Applied Sciences and professor of occupational therapy at VID
Specialized University. His research interests include mental health
in various populations; the organization, delivery, and outcomes of
mental health services; occupational health; and teaching and learn-
ing in higher education.
Mary Ruffolo (PhD, University of Michigan) is a professor of
social work at the University of Michigan. Her research interests
include integrated behavioral health and primary care, organiza-
tional factors that influence sustaining evidence-based inter-
ventions/programs in community behavioral health settings,
and adapting efficacious mental health interventions for at-risk
populations.
Janni Leung (PhD, University of Queensland) is a researcher at the
University of Queensland. Her research interests include the epide-
miology of mental health and addictive behaviors.
Daicia Price (MSW, University of Michigan) is a clinical assistant
professor of social work at University of Michigan. Her research
interests include mental health, workforce development, and racial
equity.
Hilde Thygesen (PhD, Oslo Metropolitan University) is a professor
at Oslo Metropolitan University and professor at VID Specialized
University. Her research interests include technology, social media,
care, and ethics.
Mariyana Schoultz (PhD, Northumbria University) is senior lecturer
in mental health at Northumbria University. Her research interests
include mental health, social media, inflammatory bowel disease,
mindfulness-based interventions, psychological first aid, and psy-
chological therapies.
Amy Østertun Geirdal (PhD, Oslo Metropolitan University) is a
professor of social work at Oslo Metropolitan University. Her
research interests include mental health and quality of life in vari-
ous populations; the organization and outcomes of mental health
services; social work and social policy; and higher education.