Most researchers of loneliness trace the first notable work on loneliness to Weiss’ book in 1973.  This is interesting given that some researchers and existential philosophers suggested that loneliness is a universal emotion; felt by almost (if not) all persons at some point in time or another (Miujuskovic, 1979; Moustakas, 1961, 1972; Rotenberg, 1999).  Because of its recent arrival into academia, much research and theorizing on loneliness still needs to be done.  Since 1973, research has focused to a greater extent on the causes of loneliness and its association to other negative behavioral and emotional phenomena.

Initial work into loneliness, for example, has focused quite extensively on the causes of loneliness.  Previous theorizing on the causes of loneliness include the cognitive discrepancy model (McWhirter & Horan, 1996; Perlman & Peplau, 1982), a social skills/behavioral model (Duck, 1992; McWhirter & Horan, 1996), attachment theory (Weiss, 1973, 1989), psychodynamic theory (Hojat, 1989; Sullivan, 1953) and sociological models (Gordon, 1976).  Recently, Rokach and Brock (1996) have proposed a five factor model of the causes of loneliness including categories of personal inadequacies, developmental deficits, unfulfilled intimate relationships, relocation and significant separations and social marginality.  There is presently an abundance of theories and supporting research that have focused on the causes of loneliness.

            There is also an abundance of research about loneliness and its association to other behavioral and emotional problems.  For example, Kupersmidt, Sigda, Sedikides and Voegler (1999) have mentioned links between loneliness and emotional problems (low self-esteem, depression and social anxiety), social problems (peer rejection and victimization, lack of friendships and lack of high-quality friendships) and behavioral problems (shyness, social withdrawal, spending more time along, dating frequency and decreased participation in religious and extracurricular school activities).  Perlman and Landolt (1999) reported associations between loneliness and other psychosocial problems such as physical illness, suicide, alcohol use, poor psychological adjustment, aggression, low grades in university, stealing and vandalism.  There is an established empirical database of loneliness and its relationship to these problems.

 Loneliness and coping strategies. 

One area of research that has been less studied is the coping strategies used by lonely persons.  Research on coping strategies dates back to a seminal work done by Rubenstein and Shaver (1982).  However, very few subsequent studies have been conducted and there has been little theory building.  Theories are still needed to explain, for example, why certain lonely individuals choose one type of coping strategy over another.

The insightful work by Rubenstein and Shaver (1982) shed light on how people cope with loneliness.  Information was obtained from results of a newspaper survey with a large sample (n = 23,500).  Their measures of coping strategies focused more on behavioral than on mental coping strategies.  Rokach and Brock (1998) also investigated coping strategies used by lonely persons.  Their investigation focused both on behavioral strategies and mental strategies from a convenience sample of 633 persons and the results from their investigation yielded six basic ways of coping.  Similarities exist between Rubenstein and Shaver (1982) and Rokach and Brock (1998) in three coping strategies as depicted in Table 1 below:

Table 1

Similar coping strategies between two researches.

The other coping behavior described by Rubenstein and Shaver (1982) was spending money, whilst for Rokach and Brock (1998) the other categories involved mental coping: reflection and acceptance, self-development and understanding, and religion and faith.

Of particular interest are the common categories, sad passivity and distancing and denial.  Both categories share similar behaviors (e.g., alcohol and drug abuse, self-induced isolation), but the categories have been conceptualized rather differently.  Sad passivity was associated with the loneliest participants in the study by Rubenstein and Shaver (1982).  It was also negatively correlated with age suggesting that this might be a coping strategy associated with youth.  Rubenstein and Shaver (1982) described this coping strategy as “a state of lethargic self-pity that may well contribute to a vicious cycle of low self-esteem and social isolation” (p. 215).  Van Buskirk and Duke (1991) in a follow-up study concluded that lonely and non-lonely persons use sad passivity, however, it appears that chronically lonely individuals seem unable to break out of the vicious cycle of sad passivity. 

The behaviors of the category distancing and denial however, are presented under a different conceptualization.  In this sense, the behaviors are self induced social isolation mechanisms meant “both as a measure for protecting, one’s vulnerable self and as an attempt to minimize further hurt that might be caused by failed attempts to associate with others” (Rokach & Brock, 1998, p. 6).  This attempt to protect oneself from future hurt may in fact have the effect of perpetuating or increasing loneliness, including the pain of loneliness resulting in further need to protect oneself. 

Previous researches have suggested both different and apparently similar types of coping strategies.  Of the three similar pairs of coping strategies in Table 1, the first two pairs seem to be very similar.  The coping strategies in the last pair, whilst sharing some commonality are conceptualized differently.  This project develops categories of coping strategies using elements from the two previous researches and adding several other coping strategies as well.  The results from this investigation consolidate these two bodies of literature and provide a model for understanding coping strategies and its relationship to loneliness.

 Phenomenological approach to loneliness and coping strategies. 

Another area requiring further research is the phenomenological investigation of loneliness or looking at the thoughts and experiences of lonely persons.  Weiss (1989), in his overview of research done on loneliness, has suggested that definitions of loneliness are not definitions at all, but rather “mini-theories.”  These mini-theories embody in them possible causes of loneliness however they are “insufficiently sensitive to loneliness’ status as a real phenomena” (Weiss, 1989, p. 8).  Little research has been done on people’s subjective descriptions of either loneliness or how they cope with it.  By not studying people’s subjective perceptions of how they describe their loneliness experiences and their attempts to cope with it, researchers do not have a comprehensive understanding of the phenomenon.

One purpose of this research is to develop a model of coping strategies.  By also undertaking a phenomenological study of loneliness and coping strategies, there will be a more complete understanding of any derived model of coping strategies.  In particular, a phenomenological approach may help highlight processes that cause lonely persons to choose certain coping strategies over others.  This project will also broaden the base of empirical investigations done phenomenologically into loneliness and coping strategies.

Culture, loneliness and coping strategies. 

Loneliness, coping strategies and their relationship to culture, is now beginning to be looked at in some detail, especially in cross-cultural comparisons.  Most theorizing about why loneliness occurs in Western societies revolves around the idea of social isolation.  For example, Gordon (1976) suggested that within American culture increasing individualism was causing an increase in loneliness.  The sense of community that existed especially within rural settings was being eroded and people no longer felt that they have others they can turn to for help.  Gordon (1976) also proposed that increased mobility had caused an increase in loneliness as well.  To her, loneliness within American culture is not only the result of “psychological baggage” but also because “American society alienates the potentially closest of friends, colleagues, loves and workmates” (Gordon, 1976, p. 22).  Little exists in the way of comparative data with more collectivist cultures to determine the differences in the levels and possible causes of loneliness.

In a study conducted by Neto and Barros (2000) some attempt was made to examine whether or not a culture that is based on more industrialized, competitive values (Portugal) would have members who were lonelier than members who had less industrialized and less competitive values (Cape Verde).  Their analysis revealed, rather interestingly, no significant differences between the two societies and the reported levels of loneliness in both adolescents and young adults.  This raises the important question of whether or not members from individualistic societies experience similar levels of loneliness as collectivist societies.

Rokach (1999) has conducted some initial research into cross-cultural comparisons on the how people from different cultures cope with loneliness.  Rokach (1999) did a cross-cultural comparison on three groups of people living in Canada with culturally distinct backgrounds, namely North American (mostly Canadian), South Asian, and West Indian.  The South Asian and West Indian groups were first generation immigrants into Canada.  One must initially note that these groups may not be representative of cultures from which they came.  Rokach (1999) investigated whether coping strategies were different for the three cultural groups.  The model of coping strategies was based on his own previous research into coping with loneliness (Rokach & Brock, 1998).  There were three important findings from his research.  Firstly, North Americans had the highest rated scores on the coping strategies of social support network and distancing and denial.  His second finding was that West Indians had the highest rated score for reflection and acceptance.  Thirdly, North Americans had an appreciably lower rated score for religion and faith than the other two groups with West Indians having the highest. 

These findings suggest that different cultures influence how individuals cope with their loneliness.  In particular, West Indian and South Asian cultures, often described as more religious, may influence their members to rely on the religion and faith coping mechanism.  In contrast, the more “alienating North American culture, with its emphasis on competitiveness and impersonal social relations (see Ostrov & Offer, 1980), appeared to endorse distancing and denial significantly more than those who immigrated from the West Indies or South Asia” (Rokach, 1999, p. 226).  These findings suggest that coping strategies may be culturally differentiated but what was unclear was how the levels of loneliness were differentiated across cultures. 

With regards to this review of loneliness and coping strategies on a cross-cultural level, two important points need to be noted.  Firstly, it not clear if loneliness is in fact experienced at different levels across different cultures.  The research has been inconclusive, and preliminary research by Neto and Barros (2000) suggests that there may be no difference across cultures.  The distributions of levels of loneliness across cultures may have a great deal of overlap.  Secondly, initial research by Rokach (1999) found that there are cross-cultural differences in coping strategies.  The current project, by measuring both the level of loneliness and different types of coping strategies across cultures, may be able to provide a more cohesive cross-cultural model of loneliness and coping strategies.  For example, if the levels of loneliness are different across cultures, and the coping strategies are also different, then one can begin to question whether the norm in one culture causes people to cope with loneliness in a less effective manner than people in the other culture.  This model will be useful in future cross-cultural loneliness research.

Developmental approach to loneliness and coping strategies. 

It has been suggested by a few theorists that loneliness and how people cope with it can be conceptualized as a developmental phenomenon.  Several investigators have noted that the strength of loneliness is not evenly distributed over the life span of an individual.  For instance, Rubenstein and Shaver (1982) pointed out that in their investigations loneliness was negatively correlated with age, suggesting that it is a problem associated with youth.  Peplau, Bikson, Rook and Goodchilds (1982) and Brennan (1982) have reported a similar trend.  While several different researchers have suggested a variety of reasons why loneliness seems abundant at this age (Brennan, 1982; Larson, 1999; Sullivan, 1953; Weiss, 1973), of particular importance is the relationship between age and the differential use of coping strategies.

Adolescents may use ineffective coping strategies to try and dispel their feelings of loneliness.  Rubenstein and Shaver (1982) found that adolescents were the most lonely and used sad passivity to cope with their loneliness more so that any other age group.  Adolescents’ use of sad passivity may help explain why at this age there is the greatest amount of loneliness. 

Rokach and Brock (1998) do not have similar comparison of coping strategies across age.  Given the trends found by Rubenstein and Shaver (1982) and that the aim of this project is to develop new model of loneliness coping strategies, it would be of interest to examine if a similar trend of the distribution of coping strategies across age, holds for these new consolidated coping strategies.  By providing a more comprehensive model an improved understanding of the relationship between age, loneliness, and coping strategies can be obtained.

Internet use, loneliness and coping strategies.

A recent study conducted by Kraut et al. (1998) revealed that use of the Internet might significantly increase loneliness.  They did a two year longitudinal study to examine the effects of the Internet on people who had never before had access to the Internet.  One finding was that use of the Internet increases loneliness purportedly via social isolation.   That finding has spawned a fury of debates about the legitimacy of the claim and evoked a need for further research to either evaluate this claim.

This project attempts to address the finding by Kraut et al. (1998) that the Internet causes loneliness.  The problem with this finding is that people use the Internet differently.  Internet uses can vary from solitary to sociable functions and the word “Internet” is too broad a term to apply as a cause of loneliness.  What would be of greater utility is to research what determines Internet use among lonely persons and how these uses of the Internet may causes loneliness.  The relationship of Internet use and loneliness may be moderated by the additional third factor of coping strategies and may help explain this relationship.  It is suggested here that people who use the Internet, especially to cope with their loneliness, use the Internet in a way that parallels their general coping strategy for loneliness.  Coping strategies therefore will allow us to explain the relationship between loneliness and Internet use.  Some initial basis for this prediction comes from the findings of research by Korgaonkar and Wolin (1999), which demonstrated that people who use the Internet to cope with their loneliness often use the Internet for escape activities similar to coping strategies of sad passivity.