Advertisement

Examination of the Effect of Preference for Solitude on Subjective Well-Being and Developmental Change

  • Aya Toyoshima
  • Shinichi Sato
Article
  • 87 Downloads

Abstract

This study examined the associations of preference for solitude (PS) and social interactions with subjective well-being in three age groups: younger, middle-aged, and older adults. We conducted an Internet questionnaire survey of 1500 people: 500 younger adults (aged 29–31), 500 middle-aged adults (aged 49–51), and 500 older adults (aged 69–71). The questionnaire incorporated scales measuring PS, social interactions, and subjective well-being. The results of a multiple regression analysis, with positive affect as the dependent variable, showed that the interaction term, interacting with friends and PS in older adults, had a significant effect. Thus, interacting with friends was associated with higher positive affect among older adults who reported lower or average PS scores. However, among those with a higher PS scores, the effect of interacting with friends was relatively weak, in comparison to other groups. Moreover, the interaction between spending time alone and PS was significant for all age groups. Particularly, among older adults who frequently spent time alone, those who reported a higher PS tended to have higher positive affect than the other participants. Thus, when older adults preferred solitude, having little social interaction did not appear to inhibit their subjective well-being. However, PS was related to low levels of life satisfaction in all age groups. The results of this study suggest that spending time alone actually enhances positive affect; this partially explains how older adults adapt to their diminishing social networks.

Keywords

Preference for solitude Social interaction Subjective well-being Life satisfaction Spending time alone Adolescence Older adults Middle-aged adults 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by Japanese Sciences Research Grant [Basic study C: 15KT0090, representative of the study: Shinichi Sato]. The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest. We received supervision and advice on survey implementation from Associate Professor Yasuyuki Gondo from the Graduate School of Human Sciences, Osaka University. We would like to give him our sincerest gratitude.

References

  1. Bates, A. P. (1964). Privacy—A useful concept? Social Forces, 42, 429–434.  https://doi.org/10.2307/2574986.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Burger, J. M. (1995). Individual differences in preference for solitude. Journal of Research in Personality, 29, 85–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carstensen, L. L. (1991). Selectivity theory: Social activity in life-span context. Annual Review of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 11, 195–217.Google Scholar
  4. Chipperfield, J. G., Perry, R. P., & Menec, V. H. (1999). Primary and secondary control-enhancing strategies: Implications for health in later life. Journal of Aging and Health, 11(4), 517–539.  https://doi.org/10.1177/089826439901100403.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Diener, E., Diener, M., & Diener, C. (1995). Factors predicting the subjective well-being of nations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 851–864.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.851.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Hawkley, L. C., Burleson, M. H., Berntson, G. G., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2003). Loneliness in everyday life: Cardiovascular activity, psychosocial context, and health behaviors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(1), 105–120.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.1.105.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Heatherton, T. F., & Wyland, C. L. (2003). Assessing self-esteem. In L. J. Shane & C. R. Snyder (Eds.), Positive psychological assessment: A handbook of models and measures (pp. 219–233). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Heckhausen, J., & Schulz, R. (1993). Optimisation by selection and compensation: Balancing primary and secondary control in life span development. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 16, 287–303.  https://doi.org/10.1177/016502549301600210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Heckhausen, J., & Schulz, R. (1995). A life-span theory of control. Psychological Review, 102(2), 284–304.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.102.2.284.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Heckhausen, J., Wrosch, C., & Schulz, R. (2010). A motivational theory of life-span development. Psychological Review, 117(1), 32–60.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0017668.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. Heinrich, L., & Gullone, E. (2006). The clinical significance of loneliness: A literature review. Clinical Psychology Review, 26(6), 695–718.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Hobfoll, S. E. (2002). Social and psychological resources and adaptation. Review of General Psychology, 6(4), 307–324.  https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.6.4.307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ishii, K. (2016). Internet use and culture: An empirical test based on international comparative survey data. Journal of Media, Information and Communication, 1, 1–14.Google Scholar
  14. Kahn, J. H., Hessling, R. M., & Russell, D. W. (2003). Social support, health, and well-being among the elderly: What is the role of negative affectivity? Personality and Individual Differences, 35(1), 5–17.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00135-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Koyano, K., Shibata, H., Haga, H., & Suyama, Y. (1989). Structure of a life satisfaction index: Multidimensionality of subjective well-being and its measurement. Japanese Journal of Gerontology, 11, 99–125.Google Scholar
  16. Lang, F. R., Staudinger, U. M., & Carstensen, L. L. (1998). Perspectives on socioemotional selectivity in late life: How personality and social context do (and do not) make a difference. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 53B(1), 21–30.  https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/53B.1.P21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Larson, R. W. (1990). The solitary side of life: An examination of the time people spend alone from childhood to old age. Developmental Review, 10, 155–183.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0273-2297(90)90008-R.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Long, C. R., & Averill, J. R. (2003). Solitude: An exploration of benefits of being alone. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 33, 21–44.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5914.00204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Long, C. R., Seburn, M., Averill, J. R., & More, T. A. (2003). Solitude experiences: varieties, settings, and individual differences. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 578–583.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167203029005003.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Nakahara, J. (2011). Deliberation on factor structure on affective well-being scale and the development of its short version. Japanese Journal of Gerontology, 32, 434–442.Google Scholar
  21. Namikawa, T., Tani, I., Wakita, T., Kumagai, R., Nakane, A., & Noguchi, H. (2012). Development of a short form of the Japanese Big-Five Scale, and a test of its reliability and validity. The Japanese Journal of Psychology, 83(2), 91–99.  https://doi.org/10.4992/jjpsy.83.91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Pennebaker, J. W. (1989). Confession, inhibition, and disease. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (vol 22, pp. 211–244). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  23. Pinquart, M., & Sörensen, S. (2001). Influences on loneliness in older adults: A meta-analysis. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 23, 245–266.  https://doi.org/10.1207/S15324834BASP2304_2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Silverstein, M., & Bengtson, V. L. (1994). Does intergenerational social support influence the psychological well-being of older parents? The contingencies of declining health and widowhood. Social Science and Medicine, 38(7), 943–957.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0277-9536(94)90427-8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Storr, A. (1988). Solitude: A return to the self. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  26. Toyoshima, A., & Sato, S. (2013). Relationship between social support and mental health mediated by loneliness among the middle-aged and elderly: An investigation using the UCLA Loneliness Scale Version 3. Japanese Journal of Gerontology, 35(1), 29–38.Google Scholar
  27. Toyoshima, A., & Sato, S. (2017). Examination of the relationship between preference for solitude and emotional well-being after controlling for the effect of loneliness. Osaka Human Sciences, 3, 171–183.Google Scholar
  28. Wada, S. (1996). Construction of the Big Five Scales of personality trait terms and concurrent validity with NPI. The Japanese Journal of Psychology, 67(1), 61–67.  https://doi.org/10.4992/jjpsy.67.61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wahl, H. W., Becker, S., Burmedi, D., & Schilling, O. (2004). The role of primary and secondary control in adaptation to age-related vision loss: A study of older adults with macular degeneration. Psychology and Aging, 19(1), 235.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Waskowic, T., & Cramer, K. M. (1999). Relation between preference for solitude scale and social functioning. Psychological Reports, 85(3), 1045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Watt, A. D., Konnert, C. A., & Speirs, C. E. C. (2017). The mediating roles of primary and secondary control in the relationship between body satisfaction and subjective well-being among middle-aged and older women. The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 72(4), 603–612.  https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbv098.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wrosch, C., Heckhausen, J., & Lachman, M. E. (2000). Primary and secondary control strategies for managing health and financial stress across adulthood. Psychology and Aging, 15(3), 387–399.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.15.3.387.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Osaka UniversityOsakaJapan

Personalised recommendations