Skip to main content
NCBI home page
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Jun 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Adolesc. 2019 Mar 29;73:1–13. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2019.03.006

Loneliness as a Mediator for College Students’ Social Skills and Experiences of Depression and Anxiety

Robert W Moeller 1, Martin Seehuus 1,2
PMCID: PMC6534439  NIHMSID: NIHMS1525813  PMID: 30933717

Abstract

Introduction

Rates of anxiety and depression are increasing among college undergraduates. Existing research has demonstrated a link between social skills and mental health outcomes. This study explores the relationship between verbal social skills (encoding and decoding) and anxiety and depression by measuring the extent to which loneliness mediates these relationships.

Methods

Baseline data from a cross-sequential study exploring college student mental health was used to analyze social skills, loneliness, as well as, depression and anxiety. A diverse group of students (n = 2,054; M = 19.95; SD = 1.26) participated from two residential colleges in the United States.

Results

Six mediation models were estimated, separately testing whether loneliness mediated the relationship between anxiety and depression and social expressiveness, sensitivity, and control. All six found that (a) anxiety and depression were separately predicted by the verbal encoding skills of social expressivity and social control and the decoding skill of social sensitivity, and (b) all of those relationships were mediated by loneliness. These models accounted for 37–38% of the variability in scores of depression and 17–20% of the variability in scores of anxiety.

Conclusions

The results of this study indicate verbal social skills play an important role in students experience of loneliness as well as depression and anxiety. Improving the social skills of students should be considered by colleges seeking to reduce the mental health burdens experienced by their students.

Keywords: college students, depression, anxiety, loneliness, social skills

Introduction

Colleges are reporting ongoing and dramatic increases in the number of students seeking mental health services, particularly for depression and anxiety (Kruisselbrink-Flatt, 2013; Pedrelli, Nyer, Yeung, Zulauf, & Wilens, 2015; Prince, 2015). For adolescents transitioning into emerging adulthood this period of development is known to be one of heightened susceptibility to experiences of loneliness (Qualter et al., 2015). Navigating new academic expectations and social contexts requires adept use of social skills that vary dramatically among students. In this paper we explore the relationship between social skills, depression and anxiety, specifically by exploring the mediating relation of loneliness between social skills and mental health outcomes.

Increased Mental Health Burden

Finding ways to reduce the mental health burdens, particularly depression and anxiety, among college students has become increasingly important. Over the past decade there has been a significant increase in the mental health burden amongst college students, with researchers referring to college student mental health as a crisis (Kruisselbrink-Flatt, 2013; Xiao et al., 2017). Data from the American College Health Association’s National College Health Assessment (ACHA-NCHA, 2009; 2017), college counseling centers (Gallagher, 2006; 2010; 2014) and individual college campuses (Beiter et al., 2015; Zivin, Eisenberg, Gollust, & Golberstein, 2009) all indicate high and, in many cases, increasing rates of depression and anxiety. Gallagher (2014) found that directors of college counseling centers (N = 275) were reporting large increases in rates of anxiety disorders and clinical depression over the previous five years. As colleges continue to work to treat students with mental health burdens, the research community continues to explore opportunities to better understand the etiology and opportunities to prevent mental health burdens in this population (Buchanan, 2012; Conley, Shapiro, Kirsch, & Durlak, 2017; Levin, Hayes, Pistorello, & Seeley, 2016).

For many traditional college age students, their experience in college coincides with important developmental milestones. The maturation from adolescence into emerging adulthood coincides with the development of multiple identities (Chickering & Reisser, 1993; Jones, 2013) and the balancing of autonomy and relatedness (Erikson, 1968; Ratelle, Simard, & Guay, 2013) that is a hallmark of young adulthood. For students in college, these developmental tasks occur in new and often challenging contexts. Students are expected to navigate demanding academic workloads while developing relationships with peers and forming new social networks. While much attention is paid to the beginning of this transition, particularly the challenges experienced by first year students (Bruffaerts et al., 2018; Wouters et al., 2013) the challenges continue beyond the first year. Aldiabat, Matani, & Navenec, (2014) argue that college students experience dual transitional stressors, transitioning to college while also transitioning from adolescence into adulthood. While the first-year stressors can add to mental health burdens, Beiter et al., (2015) found fourth year students had even higher rates of mental health burdens. This period of multiple transitions for many students is marked by the onset of depression and anxiety (Ibrahim, Kelly, Adams, & Glazebrook, 2013; Mortier et al., 2017; Price, McLeod, Gleich, & Hand, 2006).

Loneliness

For many students, the transition to college provides an ideal context to meet their development needs for greater autonomy from family while creating opportunities for more sophisticated relationships with peers. However, not all students develop the meaningful relationships they desire in college. For some students the experience of college includes a deep sense of loneliness. Peplau and Perlman’s (1982) cognitive discrepancy model defines loneliness as a cognitive discrepancy between desired and experienced social relationships. This model may be a particularly useful one for evaluating the experience of loneliness among college students, particularly since the experience of loneliness is not necessarily tied to social isolation (Richardson, Elliott, & Roberts, 2017). The cognitive discrepancy model helps to explain how loneliness can be present and problematic for students surrounded by peers on a college campus. Students can experience high levels of social contact but still feel lonely due to cognitive discrepancies between the desired quality of relationship and actual experiences (Hawkley, Burleson, Berntson, & Cacioppo, 2003; Richardson et al., 2017). Laursen & Hartl (2013) note that in the seminal work on adolescents conducted by Larson, Csikszentmihalyi & Graef (1982), time spent alone was not predictive of an adolescent’s experiences of loneliness; however, being alone on a weekend evening was most predictive of reported loneliness. Instead, it is the quality of the social contact and the match or mismatch with desired relationships, not the quantity of relationships that are most useful for understanding loneliness (Lodder, Scholte, Goossens, & Verhagen, 2017; Masi, Chen, Hawkley, & Cacioppo, 2011)

Loneliness and Mental Health

People who experience loneliness are more likely to experience a range of negative mental health outcomes including increased symptoms of depression and anxiety(Cacioppo, Grippo, London, Goossens, & Cacioppo, 2015). While loneliness is a reasonably common phenomenon that is experienced across the lifespan, the meaning and subjective experience of loneliness varies considerably by age (Nicolaisen & Thorsen, 2017; Rokach & Brock, 1997), with adolescents being particularly vulnerable to experiencing problematic or distressing loneliness (Danneel, Maes, Vanhalst, Bijttebier, & Goossens, 2018), in part due to the increasingly complex social behaviors with peers (Jones, Vaterlaus, Jackson, & Morrill, 2014; Lerner & Steinberg, 2004), enhanced social-cognitive and perspective taking skills (Choudhury, Blakemore, & Charman, 2006; Vetter, Leipold, Kliegel, Phillips, & Altgassen, 2013), and the interpersonal challenges associated with navigating the competing desires for autonomy and relatedness (Laursen & Hartl, 2013). Some adolescence and young adults experience an increased level of shame associated with loneliness – an internalization of a stigmatized message that there is something wrong with them if they are feeling lonely (Rokach, 2013; Rokach & Brock, 1997).

Existing research has demonstrated a strong connection between college students’ experience of loneliness and depression and anxiety (Richardson et al., 2017). In their study exploring mediators of loneliness on depression in college students Zawadzki, Graham, & Gerin, (2013) note rumination is a significant mediator, adding to the evidence of a cognitive discrepancy basis of loneliness. Others note that social self-efficacy is an important predictor of loneliness (Esen, Aktas, & Tuncer, 2013) and can mediate the relation between loneliness and depression for college students (Wei, Russell, & Zakalik, 2005). College students who experience shame related to their loneliness may be less likely to engage or enhance social skills to reduce the experience of loneliness. Additionally, there is reason to believe via longitudinal evidence that loneliness is a contributing factor to experiences of anxiety over time (Lim, Rodebaugh, Zyphur, & Gleeson, 2016).

Mental Health and Social Skills

The verbal and non-verbal social skills individuals utilize to cultivate, maintain and strengthen relationships have been demonstrated to be associated with mental health outcomes. Poor social skills are associated with higher rates of loneliness (Ozben, 2013; Panayiotou, Panteli, & Theodorou, 2016), anxiety (Caballo, Salazar, Irurtia, Olivares, & Olivares, 2014; de Lijster et al., 2018) and depression (Pereira-Lima & Loureiro, 2015; Segrin, 2000).

A key differentiator between college students who experience mental health challenges and those who do not may be associated with their social skills. With age, adolescents increasingly are able to further develop and employ social skills to create relationships with peers that are marked by higher levels of intimacy (Danneel et al., 2018). The ability to use social supports effectively and form relationships that help individuals who are experiencing distress reduce negative mental health outcomes has been articulated by the social skills deficit vulnerability model (Segrin, 2000; Segrin, McNelis, & Swiatkowski, 2016). The model has been tested in longitudinal studies of college students, demonstrating students’ with lower social skills were more likely to experience depression and loneliness during their transition to college (Segrin & Flora, 2000; Segrin et al., 2016). The effectiveness of an individuals’ ability to utilize social supports to deal with stressors, has a strong impact on the resulting mental health outcomes.

A gap in the research exists with regard to an understanding of how specific social skills may influence mental health outcomes, particularly in relation to experiences of loneliness. Based on the gaps in the research literature pertaining to social skills, loneliness and the mental health challenges of depression and anxiety, we seek to better understand potential opportunities for promoting college student mental health.

The current study utilizes baseline data from a cross-sequential study of college student mental health to test the following hypotheses: 1) The social skills of social expressivity and social control will be negatively correlated with report of more intense symptoms of depression and anxiety; 2) The social skill of social sensitivity will be positively correlated with depressive and anxious symptoms; 3) The relation between social expressivity and social control with depression and anxiety will be mediated by loneliness, such that higher scores of social expressivity and social control will result in lower scores of loneliness, which will in turn be related to lower scores on measures of symptoms of depression and anxiety; 4) The relation between social sensitivity and depressive symptoms will be mediated by loneliness, with students who have higher levels of social sensitivity experiencing more intense loneliness, and increased symptoms of depression and anxiety.

Methods

Study Design

Data for this article comes from a cross-sequential study exploring mental health trajectories among undergraduate college students. Data collection occurred during a two-week period in 2018 at two residential liberal arts colleges in the Northeast United States. Students at each school received an email invitation with a unique link to a Qualtrics™ survey along with a request to participate in the study. All enrolled undergraduate students (a total of 4,301) were contacted via email and 2,255 students participated for a response rate of 52.43%. Students who completed the survey were offered the chance to be entered into a raffle to win Amazon gift cards valued at either $50 or $100. The Institutional Review Board at the primary author’s institution approved the study protocol.

Participant Characteristics

Participants who did not complete all measures presented in this analysis (n = 201) were eliminated from the data set, leaving a final analytic data set of N = 2,054. Analyses were run to determine if there were significant differences in demographic or other variables of interest between completers and non-completers, with no significant differences. Approximately 60% of the sample was female, year in college was closely distributed among class years, and approximately 30% of participants identified as racial/ethnic minorities. Demographics are presented in full in Table 1. Compared to the profile of the two colleges, our sample overrepresents women, and Latino students, all other demographics match the college profiles.

Table 1.

Participant demographics N = 2,054

Variable n % M (SD)
Age 19.95
(126)
Gender
 Female 1,189 57.9
 Male 817 39.8
 Other 47 2.3
Race/Ethnicity
 Black 82 4.0
 Latino 193 9.4
 White 1,444 70.3
 API 181 8.8
 Mixed 47 2.3
 Other 98 4.8
 Missing 9 0.4
Sexual Orientation
 Heterosexual 1,642 79.9
 Gay/Lesbian 96 4.7
 Bisexual 153 7.4
 Other 163 7.9
Perceived SES
 Lower 224 10.9
 Middle 1,031 50.2
 Upper 798 38.9
 Missing 1 0
Year in college
 First 526 25.6
 Second 551 26.8
 Third 458 22.3
 Fourth 519 25.3
Open in a new tab

Measures

Demographic characteristics.

Participants were asked to self-report their race/ethnicity, gender, age, sexual orientation, and perceived socioeconomic status.

Loneliness.

The UCLA Loneliness Scale (v. 3) (Russell, 1996) was utilized to measure loneliness. The measure has 20 items with a response set ranging from never (1) to always (4). Items include statements such as, “How often do you feel that you lack companionship?” as well as, “How often do you feel alone?” The measure was found to be highly reliable, with a Cronbach’s Alpha of .94. Sum scores were computed for this measure.

Depression and Anxiety.

The short-form version of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS-21) (Henry & Crawford, 2005) was used to measure symptoms of depression and anxiety. Participants read 14 statements (seven for depression and seven for anxiety) and indicate over the past week how much each of those statements applied to them. A four-point set of answer choices were available ranging from “Did not apply to me at all” (0) to “Applied to me very much, or most of the time (3). Examples of the depression items include, “I found it difficult to work up the initiative to do things” as well as, “I felt that I had nothing to look forward to.” Items measuring anxiety include, “I was worried about situations in which I might panic and make a fool of myself”, as well as, “I felt scared without any good reason.” Sum scores were created for both depression and anxiety. Both subscales used in this analysis (depression and anxiety) had acceptable internal reliability. The depression subscale had a Cronbach’s alpha of .91 and the anxiety subscale had a .82.

Social Skills Inventory.

An abridged version of the 90 Social Skills Inventory (SSI) (R. E. Riggio, 1986) was used. For this analysis we focus on the verbal encoding and decoding social skills of social control (SC), social expressivity (SE) and social sensitivity (SS), which were validated by Oldmeadow, Quinn, & Kowert, (2013) as an abridged version of the SSI. Each social skill was measure utilizing four items on a five-point scale ranging from “Not at all like me” (1) to “Exactly like me” (5). Riggio (1986) describes SC as an ability to regulate verbal behaviors and adjust how one presents themselves based on social contexts. Social expressivity measures the verbal ability to initiate conversation, engage others in social interactions with verbal interactions (Riggio, 1986). Finally, SS measures verbal decoding, with individuals scoring high in SS may be hyper vigilant in their decoding, and overly focused on cues about their behavior and how it they are perceived by others (Riggio, 1986). Examples of each subscale include: SC, “I am often chosen to be the leader of a group,” SE, “At parties I enjoy talking to a lot of different people,” and SS, “I am very sensitive of criticism” (Oldmeadow et al., 2013). The three sub scales were deemed reliable with Cronbach’s alphas of .80 for SC, .92 for SE and .86 for SS.

Analysis

Six mediation models were tested. Since no manipulation was used and these data are cross-sectional, all of these models are measurement-of-mediation models. These models tested whether the relationship between each of the three social skills constructs and anxiety and depression was mediated by loneliness. Covariates theoretically expected to be associated with either social skills, anxiety, or depression were included, and were dummy coded. Year in school was dummy coded, with first year set as the reference category, and three separate dummy variables coded for second, third, and fourth year. Each of the coefficients reported (below) for those dummy variables can be interpreted as the difference between the reference category (first year) and the specific category. The significance value can be interpreted as a test of whether the difference between the reference category and the category of interest is significantly different than zero. Dummy coding was used for year in school (as opposed to treating year as a continuous measure) because we did not have theoretical support for the idea that there was a continuous pattern of change across time in college.

Similarly, gender and race were also dummy coded, with man as the reference category (against woman and other gender identity) and White as the reference category (against Latinx, Black, Asian, more than one, and other racial identity). Consistent with Hayes (2017), significance values for the c-c’ path are not reported, but 95% confidence intervals are. All confidence intervals are based on 5,000 bootstrap samples and were constructed with a percentile approach. All mediation models were estimated using PROCESS 3.1 (Hayes, 2017).

Results

Bivariate correlations were examined for depression, anxiety and loneliness with the three social skills. The social skills of expressivity and control were both negatively correlated with depression, anxiety and loneliness, while social sensitivity was positively correlated with the three variables. A correlation matrix with means and standard deviations is presented in Table 2.

Table 2.

Correlation Matrix

1 2 3 4 5 6
1 Depression .60** .62** −.25** −.20** .20**
2 Anxiety .41** −.15** −.14** .23**
3 Loneliness −.41** −.27** .15**
4 Social Expressivity .41** .06**
5 Social Control −.03
6 Social Sensitivity
Mean 9.09 7.03 42.38 12.47 12.51 13.93
Standard Deviation 9.37 7.63 11.53 4.33 3.61 3.71
Open in a new tab

Notes.

*

p > .05,

**

p > .01

Loneliness Mediates the Relationships Between Social Skills and Anxiety

As Figure 1 illustrates and Table 3 enumerate, the relationship between social expressivity and anxiety was mediated by loneliness. Participants higher in social expressivity reported lower levels of loneliness (a = −1.05, p < .001), and those higher in loneliness reported higher levels of anxiety (b = 0.28, p < .001). The complete model accounted for 17% of the variability in anxiety (R2 = .19). While there was no evidence found that social expressivity had a direct effect on anxiety (c’ = 0.06, p = .15), the bootstrapped confidence interval for the indirect effect (ab = −0.30) was entirely below zero (−0.35 to −0.25). That suggests that higher levels of social expressivity were associated with lower levels of loneliness, which in turn was associated with lower levels of anxiety.

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Open in a new tab

Mediation of the relationship between social expressivity and anxiety by loneliness.

Table 3.

Loneliness Mediates the Relationship Between Social Expressivity and Anxiety

Regression path B t P LLCI ULCI
a path
(Social Expressivity to Loneliness)		 −1.05 −19.71 < .001 −1.16 0.95
b path
(Loneliness to Anxiety)		 0.28 19.13 < .001 0.25 0.31
c path
(total effect of Social Expressivity on Anxiety)		 −0.24 1.45 < .001 −0.32 −0.27
c′ path
(direct effect of Social Expressivity on Anxiety)		 0.06 1.45 0.15 −0.02 0.13
c - c′ path
(indirect effect of Social Expressivity on Anxiety)		 −0.30 −0.35 −0.25
Covariates
 Year in school
  First year Reference category
  Second year 0.82 1.78 0.07 −0.08 1.71
  Third year 0.67 1.39 0.17 −0.28 1.61
  Fourth year 0.37 0.79 0.43 −0.55 1.28
 Gender
  Man Reference category
  Woman 1.55 4.54 < .001 0.88 2.22
  Other gender identity 5.83 5.03 < .001 3.55 8.1
 Race / ethnicity
  White Reference category
  Latinx 0.51 0.89 0.37 −0.61 1.64
  Black 1.75 2.05 0.04 0.08 3.43
  Asian 0.23 0.39 0.70 −0.93 1.39
  More than one −0.37 −0.33 0.74 −2.54 1.8
  Other racial identity 0.54 0.68 0.5 −1.01 2.09
Open in a new tab

Notes. Coefficients for covariates are from the Total Effects model. Total effects R2 = .19, F(12, 2019) = 39.67, p < .001

Further, the relationship between social sensitivity and anxiety was mediated by loneliness. See Figure 2 and Table 4. Participants higher in social sensitivity reported higher levels of loneliness (a = 0.57, p < .001), and those higher in loneliness reported higher levels of anxiety (b = 0.25, p < .001). The complete model accounted for 21% of the variability in anxiety (R2 = .21). In addition to the direct effect that social sensitivity had on anxiety (c’ = 0.33, p < .001), the bootstrapped confidence interval for the indirect effect (ab = 0.14) was entirely above zero (0.11 to 0.19). That suggests that higher levels of social sensitivity were both directly associated with higher levels of anxiety, and also related to higher levels of loneliness, which in turn was also related to higher levels of anxiety.

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Open in a new tab

Mediation of the relationship between social sensitivity and anxiety by loneliness.

Table 4.

Loneliness Mediates the Relationship Between Social Sensitivity and Anxiety

Regression path B t P LLCI ULCI
a path
(Social Sensitivity to Loneliness)		 0.57 8.34 < .001 0.43 0.70
b path
(Loneliness to Anxiety)		 0.25 18.76 < .001 0.23 0.28
c path
(total effect of Social Sensitivity on Anxiety)		 0.48 10.67 < .001 0.39 0.57
c′ path
(direct effect of Social Sensitivity on Anxiety)		 0.33 7.94 < .001 0.25 0.42
c - c′ path
(indirect effect of Social Sensitivity on Anxiety)		 .014 0.11 0.19
Covariates
 Year in school
  First year Reference category
  Second year 0.67 0.45 .14 −0.21 1.56
  Third year 0.60 0.47 .20 −0.33 1.53
  Fourth year 0.30 0.46 .51 −0.60 1.20
 Gender
  Man Reference category
  Woman 1.05 0.34 < .001 0.39 1.71
  Other gender identity 6.07 1.14 < .001 3.84 8.30
 Race / ethnicity
  White Reference category
  Latinx 1.26 0.57 .03 0.14 2.37
  Black 2.61 0.84 < .001 0.96 4.27
  Asian 0.76 0.58 .19 −0.37 1.90
  More than one 0.01 1.09 .99 −2.12 2.14
  Other racial identity 1.02 0.78 .19 −0.50 2.55
Open in a new tab

Notes. Coefficients for covariates are from the Total Effects model. Total effects R2 = .21, F(12, 2019) = 45.94, p < .001

The relationship between social control and anxiety was mediated by loneliness. See Figure 3 and Table 5. Participants higher in social control reported lower levels of loneliness (a = −0.78, p < .001), and those higher in loneliness reported higher levels of anxiety (b = 0.27, p < .001). The complete model accounted for 19% of the variability in anxiety (R2 = .19). While there was no evidence found that social control had a direct effect on anxiety (c’ = −0.08, p = .07), the bootstrapped confidence interval for the indirect effect (ab = −0.21) was entirely below zero (−0.25 to −0.17). That suggests that higher levels of social control were associated with lower levels of loneliness, which in turn was associated with lower levels of anxiety.

Figure 3. Mediation of the relationship between social control and anxiety by loneliness.

Figure 3.

Open in a new tab

Notes. *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001 Covariates modeled: race/ethnicity, gender, and year in college (all dummy coded). See Tables 3 through 6 for covariate values.

Table 5.

Loneliness Mediates the Relationship Between Social Control and Anxiety

Regression path B t P LLCI ULCI
a path
(Social Control to Loneliness)		 −0.78 −11.51 < .001 −0.92 −0.65
b path
(Loneliness to Anxiety)		 0.27 19.17 < .001 0.24 0.29
c path
(total effect of Social Control on Anxiety)		 −0.29 −6.25 < .001 −0.39 −0.20
c′ path
(direct effect of Social Control on Anxiety)		 −0.08 −1.82 .07 −0.17 0.01
c - c′ path
(indirect effect of Social Control on Anxiety)		 −0.21 −0.25 −0.17
Covariates
 Year in school
  First year Reference category
  Second year 0.96 2.09 0.04 0.06 1.86
  Third year 0.72 1.48 0.14 −0.23 1.66
  Fourth year 0.55 1.18 0.24 −0.37 1.47
 Gender
  Man Reference category
  Woman 1.48 4.32 < .001 0.81 2.14
  Other gender identity 6.02 5.2 < .001 3.75 8.29
 Race / ethnicity
  White Reference category
  Latinx 0.38 0.67 0.51 −0.74 1.51
  Black 1.61 1.89 0.06 −0.07 3.29
  Asian 0.23 0.39 0.69 −0.93 1.40
  More than one −0.73 −0.66 0.51 −2.91 1.45
  Other racial identity 0.60 0.75 0.45 −0.95 2.15
Open in a new tab

Notes. Coefficients for covariates are from the Total Effects model. Total effects R2 = .19, F(12, 2019) = 39.80, p < .001

The covariates included in the model showed a relatively consistent pattern, with students identifying as women or as another gender identity being consistently higher in anxiety (in all model), and students who identify as Black being higher in two out of three models, with the coefficient falling just short of significance for the model including social control. Participants identifying as Latinx had higher anxiety only for the model including social sensitivity.

Loneliness Mediates the Relationship Between Social Skills and Depression

As Figure 4 illustrates and Table 6 enumerates, the relationship between social expressivity and depression was mediated by loneliness. Participants higher in social expressivity reported lower levels of loneliness (a = −1.05, p < .001), and those higher in loneliness reported higher levels of depression (b = 0.50, p < .001). The complete model accounted for 38% of the variability in depression (R2 = .38). While there was no evidence found that social expressivity had a direct effect on depression (c’ = 0.00, p = .91), the bootstrapped confidence interval for the indirect effect (ab = −0.52) was entirely below zero (−0.59 to −0.46). That suggests that higher levels of social expressivity were associated with lower levels of loneliness, which in turn was associated with lower levels of depression.

Figure 4.

Figure 4.

Open in a new tab

Mediation of the relationship between social expressivity and depression by loneliness.

Table 6.

Loneliness Mediates the Relationship Between Social Expressivity and Depression

Regression path B t P LLCI ULCI
a path
(Social Expressivity to Loneliness)		 −1.05 19.71 < .001 −1.16 −0.95
b path
(Loneliness to Depression)		 0.50 31.45 < .001 0.47 0.53
c path
(total effect of Social Expressivity on Depression)		 −0.52 −11.20 < .001 −0.61 −0.43
c′ path
(direct effect of Social Expressivity on Depression)		 0.00 0.11 .91 −0.08 0.09
c - c′ path
(indirect effect of Social Expressivity on Depression)		 −0.52 −0.59 −0.46
Covariates
 Year in school
  First year Reference category
  Second year −0.21 −0.38 0.71 −1.29 0.87
  Third year −0.32 −0.56 0.58 −1.46 0.81
  Fourth year −0.68 −1.21 0.23 −1.78 0.42
 Gender
  Man Reference category
  Woman 0.27 0.65 0.52 −0.54 1.07
  Other gender identity 7.78 5.58 < .001 5.05 10.52
 Race / ethnicity
  White Reference category
  Latinx 1.68 2.43 0.02 0.33 3.03
  Black 1.66 1.62 0.11 −0.35 3.68
  Asian 0.06 0.08 0.94 −1.34 1.46
  More than one 1.13 0.85 0.40 −1.49 3.74
  Other racial identity 1.22 1.28 0.20 −0.65 3.08
Open in a new tab

Notes. Coefficients for covariates are from the Total Effects model. Total effects R2 = .38, F(12, 2019) = 105.11, p < .001

Further, the relationship between social sensitivity and depression was mediated by loneliness, presented in Figure 5. Participants higher in social sensitivity reported higher levels of loneliness (a = 0.57, p < .001), and those higher in loneliness reported higher levels of depression (b = 0.48, p < .001). The complete model accounted for 40% of the variability in depression (R2 = .40). In addition to the direct effect that social sensitivity had on depression (c’ = 0.28, p < .001), the bootstrapped confidence interval for the indirect effect (ab = 0.27) was entirely above zero (0.20 to 0.34). That suggests that higher levels of social sensitivity were both directly associated with higher levels of depression, and also related to higher levels of loneliness, which in turn was also related to higher levels of depression.

Figure 5.

Figure 5.

Open in a new tab

Mediation of the relationship between social sensitivity and depression by loneliness.

The relationship between social control and depression was mediated by loneliness presented in Figure 6. Participants higher in social control reported lower levels of loneliness (a = −0.78, p < .001), and those higher in loneliness reported higher levels of depression (b = 0.49, p < .001). The complete model accounted for 39% of the variability in depression (R2 = .39). In addition to the direct effect that social control had on depression (c’ = 0.11, p < .05), the bootstrapped confidence interval for the indirect effect (ab = −0.38) was entirely below zero (−0.46 to −0.31). That suggests that higher levels of social control were both directly associated with lower levels of depression, and also related to lower levels of loneliness, which in turn was also related to lower levels of depression.

Figure 6. Mediation of the relationship between social control and depression by loneliness.

Figure 6.

Open in a new tab

Notes. *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001. Covariates modeled: Race/Ethnicity, Gender, and Year in College (all dummy coded). See Tables 3 through 6 for covariate values.

As with the models predicting anxiety, the covariates in the models predicting depression were similarly relatively consistent. Identifying as a gender other than man or woman was consistently associated with more depressive symptoms, as was identifying as Latinx. Identifying as Black was significantly associated with more depression only when modeling the effect of Social Sensitivity.

Discussion

Students’ reported experiences of loneliness strongly mediated the relations between the two encoding social skills of social expressivity and social control with the mental health outcome of anxiety. Social expressivity skills involve being more able to initiate conversations and better engage others (Riggio, 1986), and the ability to engage others is an important skill to have in order to reduce the experience of loneliness (Cacioppo et al., 2015) and increase happiness and self-esteem (Panchal & Joshi, 2013). In the language of the cognitive discrepancy model of loneliness, the ability to initiate social contact (social expressivity) results in reduced discrepancy between desired and experienced social relationships – less loneliness and, these results show, lower levels of depressive and anxious symptoms.

A similar effect may be occurring with the variable of social control. Greater social control skills mean greater ability to (a) navigate a wide range of social contexts, and (b) adjust their self-presentation. This signals both a social sophistication and an ability to adapt to the cultural norms in a particular context (Riggio, 1986) and similar to social expressivity is associated with greater levels of happiness (Panchal & Joshi, 2013). For both social expressiveness and social control, the direct relationship to symptoms of anxiety drops to near zero when loneliness is included as a mediator, suggesting that most of the effect that social expressiveness and social control have on anxiety is mediated by loneliness.

Students who had higher scores in social sensitivity experienced greater levels of both loneliness and anxious symptoms when compared to those with lower scores in this particular skill. This may be due to a decoding bias which leads them to be more egocentric, and potentially view social interactions more negatively and with more anxiety (Knowles, Lucas, Baumeister, & Gardner, 2015; Riggio, 1986). The direct path between social sensitivity and anxiety remains meaningful even when the mediated path is estimated, which suggests that loneliness only accounts for some of the mechanism of action. Social sensitivity has been demonstrated to be associated with higher rates of social anxiety and self-consciousness (Somerville, 2013; Strahan, 2003), as well as more less positive relationships with others (Knowles et al., 2015).

All three models testing loneliness as a mediator in the relationship between all three social skills (encoding skills, or social expressivity and social control; and the decoding skill of social sensitivity) and symptoms of depression were found to predict a significant amount of the overall variability. Models predicted between 38% and 39% of the depressive symptoms observed. The c’ path (the direct path) was accounted for a significant amount of variability in depression for social sensitivity and social control but not social expressivity. That is, while loneliness accounted for virtually all the effect that social expressivity had on depression, for social sensitivity and social control, some of the effect was accounted for via the indirect path through loneliness, and some of the effect was accounted for by the direct relationship between social sensitivity and social control on depression.

This relationship between social sensitivity and elevated symptoms of depression can be understood in a number of ways, although due to the cross-sectional nature of the data, we are unable to ascertain the causal relations between these variables. However, one reasonable interpretation of the data is that students who engage in higher rates of socially sensitive decoding experience increased loneliness, which in turn is associated with more depressive symptoms. Considering depression is associated with poor executive functioning (Cacioppo & Hawkley, 2009; Cotrena, Branco, Shansis, & Fonseca, 2016), it could be that the impaired executive function is itself associated with a negative bias in the decoding of social information (Henry, von Hippel, Molenberghs, Lee, & Sachdev, 2016; Masi et al., 2011), resulting in experiences of loneliness. Combined, this may mean that higher levels of social sensitivity may lead to greater experiences of loneliness as individuals are more likely to negatively encode social signals and withdraw from social settings. That is, individuals who are higher in social sensitivity may find their hyper awareness of other’s views of them inhibit their engagement in social interactions (Knowles et al., 2015; Riggio & Kwong, 2009).

Others have argued that the connection between loneliness and depression is mediated by rumination (Zawadzki et al., 2013), with the experience of rumination and depression leading to impairments in executive functioning (Snyder, 2013; Watkins & Brown, 2002). Additionally, it is possible that individuals who are high in social sensitivity are dispositionally more prone to loneliness, through some as of yet unexplored shared etiology, whether through greater expectations of social connection or a reduced ability to meet those expectations. Those higher levels of loneliness then lead to more intense depressive symptomology. Research exploring the directionality of loneliness and depression among college students has found loneliness increased rates of depression over time (Richardson et al., 2017), which supports the causal direction implied by our model. However, other work in adult and young adult populations has found a bidirectional relationship between depression and loneliness (Cacioppo, Hughes, Waite, Hawkley, & Thisted, 2006; Matthews et al., 2016). Additional research is needed to better understand the relations between loneliness and depression among adolescence and emerging adults.

The two social encoding variables both had negative relationships with loneliness, indicating those students high in social expressivity and social control experienced lower rates of loneliness. Similar to the direct effects on loneliness discussed with the models predicting anxiety, these two encoding skills offer an opportunity for individuals to better align their desire for relationships with their lived experiences.

Of the two verbal encoding variables, only social control had a direct effect on depression after the mediating influence of loneliness was included. It is plausible that individuals who have lower levels of social control believe they are less able to reduce their experiences of loneliness which contributes to depression. Existing research highlights the role of self-efficacy and depression, noting that those individuals who have lower levels of self-efficacy are more prone to experience depression (Maciejewski, Prigerson, & Mazure, 2000; Soysa & Wilcomb, 2015). It is equally possible that experiencing depression influences an individual’s ability to adapt and regulate their self-presentation as depressive symptoms reduce the ability to utilize social-cognitive skills; the current data is not sufficient to make that distinction.

Finally, the direct effects of social skills on loneliness observed in all of the mediation models offer an opportunity to further consider a means of reducing loneliness on college campuses. Colleges struggling with the mental health crisis may find that addressing students’ experiences of loneliness begins to lower rates of depression and anxiety. The specific types of programs that would be appropriate at a college campus are currently unclear. It may be possible to include greater social emotional learning in residential programming; however, that is likely only going to have an impact on the minority of students who live on college campuses and are exposed to those programming efforts. Further efforts to destigmatize the experiences of loneliness on college campuses, and provide interventions specifically aimed at helping students experiencing loneliness may be more efficacious and reach a larger proportion of students experiencing depression and anxiety. The data from this study begins to offer a path to reducing loneliness among college students by considering opportunities to enhance the development and use of students’ social skills.

Limitations

There are a number of limitations with the current study. The data for this article represents first wave cross-sectional data from a larger cross-sequential study of college student mental health. Thus, disentangling causal relations among our variables is not possible. The results of this study indicate it may be worth exploring longitudinally the directionality of these relationships. As a current controversy exists with the directionality of loneliness with depression and anxiety, it is also not clear at least in college age students whether social skills are causally involved as a protective or risk factor related to loneliness and depression and anxiety.

Conclusions

Preventative efforts are likely going to be needed to address the increasing mental health crisis on college campuses. The data from this study offer evidence that there is a strong social component to the mental health challenges students are experiencing. Our data supports the social skills deficit vulnerability model (Segrin et al., 2016) by demonstrating lower levels of social skills are associated with higher rates of loneliness and loneliness is positively correlated with depression and anxiety. Students coming to college arrive with a wide variety of social skills and therefore differ in their ability to adapt to the social demands in the college context. Experiences of loneliness in college are not uncommon (Asher & Weeks, 2013), however, for some students they lack the social skills to develop strong relationships and reduce experiences of loneliness. A more focused effort on developing social skills programs to reduce experiences of loneliness are warranted. The findings of this research lend support to the idea of reducing mental health burdens by focusing on reducing students’ experiences of loneliness. The findings from this study provide evidence of the link between social skills and loneliness, offering colleges an opportunity to consider developing and implementing programming that explicitly seeks to improve their students’ social skills.

Table 7.

Loneliness Mediates the Relationship Between Social Sensitivity and Depression

Regression path B t P LLCI ULCI
a path
(Social Sensitivity to Loneliness)		 0.57 8.34 < .001 0.43 0.70
b path
(Loneliness to Depression)		 0.48 32.92 < .001 0.45 0.51
c path
(total effect of Social Sensitivity on Depression)		 0.55 9.92 < .001 0.44 0.65
c′ path
(direct effect of Social Sensitivity on Depression)		 0.28 6.08 < .001 0.19 0.36
c - c′ path
(indirect effect of Social Sensitivity on Depression)		 0.27 0.20 0.34
Covariates
 Year in school
  First year Reference category
  Second year −0.39 −0.71 0.48 −1.48 0.69
  Third year −0.47 −0.80 0.42 −1.61 0.68
  Fourth year −0.80 −1.41 0.16 −1.90 0.31
 Gender
  Man Reference category
  Woman −0.30 −0.73 0.46 −1.12 0.51
  Other gender identity 8.54 6.1 < .001 5.80 11.29
 Race / ethnicity
  White Reference category
  Latinx 2.51 3.59 < .001 1.14 3.89
  Black 2.81 2.71 0.01 0.78 4.85
  Asian 0.98 1.37 0.17 −0.42 2.38
  More than one 1.72 1.28 0.20 −0.91 4.35
  Other racial identity 1.80 1.88 0.06 −0.08 3.68
Open in a new tab

Notes. Coefficients for covariates are from the Total Effects model. Total effects R2 = .40, F(12, 2019) = 110.12, p < .001

Table 8.

Loneliness Mediates the Relationship Between Social Control and Depression

Regression path B t P LLCI ULCI
a path
(Social Control to Loneliness)		 −0.78 −11.51 < .001 −0.92 −0.65
b path
(Loneliness to Depression)		 0.49 32.65 < .001 0.46 0.52
c path
(total effect of Social Control on Depression)		 −.50 −8.87 < .001 −0.61 −0.39
c′ path
(direct effect of Social Control on Depression)		 −0.12 −2.51 .01 −0.21 −0.03
c - c′ path
(indirect effect of Social Control on Depression)		 −0.38 −0.46 −0.31
Covariates
 Year in school
  First year Reference category
  Second year 0.03 0.05 0.96 −1.07 1.12
  Third year −0.27 −0.46 0.64 −1.42 0.88
  Fourth year −0.38 −0.66 0.51 −1.49 0.74
 Gender
  Man Reference category
  Woman 0.14 0.34 0.73 −0.67 0.96
  Other gender identity 8.33 5.92 < .001 5.57 11.09
 Race / ethnicity
  White Reference category
  Latinx 1.45 2.07 0.04 0.08 2.82
  Black 1.49 1.43 0.15 −0.55 3.53
  Asian 0.20 0.27 0.79 −1.22 1.61
  More than one 0.57 0.43 0.67 −2.07 3.22
  Other racial identity 1.33 1.38 0.17 −0.56 3.21
Open in a new tab

Notes. Coefficients for covariates are from the Total Effects model. Total effects R2 = .39, F(12, 2019) = 105.97, p < .001

Acknowledgements

Research reported in this article was supported by an Institutional Development Award (IDeA) from the National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIGMS) of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) under grant number P20GM103449. Its contents are solely the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official views of NIGMS or NIH. Additional research support was provided by the Middlebury College Research Leave Program.

Footnotes

Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

References

  1. Aldiabat KM, Matani NA, & Navenec C-LL (2014). Mental Health among Undergraduate University Students: A Background Paper for Administrators, Educators and Healthcare Providers. Universal Journal of Public Health, 2(8), 209–214. [Google Scholar]
  2. American College Health Association. American College Health Association-National College Health Assessment II: Reference Group Executive Summary Spring 2009. Linthicum, MD: American College Health Association; 2009. Retrieved August 2018 from https://www.acha.org/documents/ncha/ACHANCHA_Reference_Group_ExecutiveSummary_Spring2009.pdf [Google Scholar]
  3. American College Health Association. American College Health Association-National College Health Assessment II: Reference Group Undergraduate Executive Summary Spring 2017. Hanover, MD: American College Health Association; 2017. Retrieved December 2017 from http://www.acha-ncha.org/docs/NCHAII_SPRING_2017_UNDERGRADUATE_REFERENCE_GROUP_EXECUTIVE_SUMMARY.pdf [Google Scholar]
  4. Asher SR, & Weeks MS (2013). Loneliness and belongingness in the college years. The Handbook of Solitude: Psychological Perspectives on Social Isolation, Social Withdrawal, and Being Alone, 283–301. [Google Scholar]
  5. Beiter R, Nash R, McCrady M, Rhoades D, Linscomb M, Clarahan M, & Sammut S (2015). The prevalence and correlates of depression, anxiety, and stress in a sample of college students. Journal of Affective Disorders, 173, 90–96. 10.1016/j.jad.2014.10.054 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Bruffaerts R, Mortier P, Kiekens G, Auerbach RP, Cuijpers P, Demyttenaere K, … Kessler RC (2018). Mental health problems in college freshmen: Prevalence and academic functioning. Journal of Affective Disorders, 225(1), 97–103. 10.1016/j.jad.2017.07.044 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Buchanan JL (2012). Prevention of Depression in the College Student Population: A Review of the Literature. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 26(1), 21–42. 10.1016/j.apnu.2011.03.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Caballo VE, Salazar IC, Irurtia MJ, Olivares P, & Olivares J (2014). The relationship between social skills and social anxiety and personality styles/disorders. Behavioral Psychology/Psicología Conductual, 22(3), 401–422. [Google Scholar]
  9. Cacioppo JT, & Hawkley LC (2009). Perceived social isolation and cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13(10), 447–454. 10.1016/j.tics.2009.06.005 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Cacioppo JT, Hughes ME, Waite LJ, Hawkley LC, & Thisted RA (2006). Loneliness as a specific risk factor for depressive symptoms: Cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses. Psychology and Aging, 21(1), 140–151. 10.1037/0882-7974.21.1.140 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Cacioppo S, Grippo AJ, London S, Goossens L, & Cacioppo JT (2015). Loneliness: Clinical Import and Interventions. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(2), 238–249. 10.1177/1745691615570616 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Chickering AW, & Reisser L (1993). Education and Identity. The Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series. ERIC. [Google Scholar]
  13. Choudhury S, Blakemore S-J, & Charman T (2006). Social cognitive development during adolescence. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 1(3), 165–174. 10.1093/scan/nsl024 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Conley CS, Shapiro JB, Kirsch AC, & Durlak JA (2017). A meta-analysis of indicated mental health prevention programs for at-risk higher education students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 64(2), 121–140. 10.1037/cou0000190 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Cotrena C, Branco LD, Shansis FM, & Fonseca RP (2016). Executive function impairments in depression and bipolar disorder: association with functional impairment and quality of life. Journal of Affective Disorders, 190, 744–753. 10.1016/j.jad.2015.11.007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Danneel S, Maes M, Vanhalst J, Bijttebier P, & Goossens L (2018). Developmental Change in Loneliness and Attitudes Toward Aloneness in Adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 47(1), 148–161. 10.1007/s10964-017-0685-5 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. de Lijster JM, Dieleman GC, Utens EMWJ, Dierckx B, Wierenga M, Verhulst FC, & Legerstee JS (2018). Social and academic functioning in adolescents with anxiety disorders: A systematic review. Journal of Affective Disorders, 230, 108–117. 10.1016/j.jad.2018.01.008 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Erikson EH (1968). ldentity: Youth and crisis. New York: WW Norton. Feiman-Nemser, S, 8, 239–256. [Google Scholar]
  19. Esen BK, Aktas E, & Tuncer I (2013). An Analysis of University Students’ Internet Use in Relation to Loneliness and Social Self-efficacy. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 84, 1504–1508. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.780 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  20. Hawkley LC, Burleson MH, Berntson GG, & Cacioppo JT (2003). Loneliness in everyday life: Cardiovascular activity, psychosocial context, and health behaviors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(1), 105–120. 10.1037/0022-3514.85.1.105 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Hayes AF (2017). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. Guilford Publications. [Google Scholar]
  22. Henry JD, & Crawford JR (2005). The short-form version of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS-21): Construct validity and normative data in a large non-clinical sample. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 44(2), 227–239. 10.1348/014466505X29657 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Henry JD, von Hippel W, Molenberghs P, Lee T, & Sachdev PS (2016). Clinical assessment of social cognitive function in neurological disorders. Nature Reviews Neurology, 12(1), 28–39. 10.1038/nrneurol.2015.229 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Ibrahim AK, Kelly SJ, Adams CE, & Glazebrook C (2013). A systematic review of studies of depression prevalence in university students. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 47(3), 391–400. 10.1016/j.jpsychires.2012.11.015 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Jones RM, Vaterlaus JM, Jackson MA, & Morrill TB (2014). Friendship characteristics, psychosocial development, and adolescent identity formation. Personal Relationships, 21(1), 51–67. [Google Scholar]
  26. Jones SR (2013). Identity development of college students: Advancing frameworks for multiple dimensions of identity. John Wiley & Sons. [Google Scholar]
  27. Knowles ML, Lucas GM, Baumeister RF, & Gardner WL (2015). Choking under social pressure: Social monitoring among the lonely. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(6), 805–821. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Kruisselbrink-Flatt A (2013). A Suffering Generation: Six Factors Contributing to the Mental Health Crisis in North American Higher Education. College Quarterly, 16(1), n1. [Google Scholar]
  29. Laursen B, & Hartl AC (2013). Understanding loneliness during adolescence: Developmental changes that increase the risk of perceived social isolation. Journal of Adolescence, 36(6), 1261–1268. 10.1016/j.adolescence.2013.06.003 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Lerner RM, & Steinberg L (2004). The scientific study of adolescent development. Handbook of Adolescent Psychology, 2, 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  31. Levin ME, Hayes SC, Pistorello J, & Seeley JR (2016). Web-Based Self-Help for Preventing Mental Health Problems in Universities: Comparing Acceptance and Commitment Training to Mental Health Education: Preventing Mental Health Problems in Universities. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 72(3), 207–225. 10.1002/jclp.22254 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Lim MH, Rodebaugh TL, Zyphur MJ, & Gleeson JFM (2016). Loneliness over time: The crucial role of social anxiety. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 125(5), 620–630. 10.1037/abn0000162 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Lodder GM, Scholte RH, Goossens L, & Verhagen M (2017). Loneliness in early adolescence: Friendship quantity, friendship quality, and dyadic processes. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 46(5), 709–720. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Maciejewski PK, Prigerson HG, & Mazure CM (2000). Self-efficacy as a mediator between stressful life events and depressive symptoms. British Journal of Psychiatry, 176(04), 373–378. 10.1192/bjp.176.4.373 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Masi CM, Chen H-Y, Hawkley LC, & Cacioppo JT (2011). A Meta-Analysis of Interventions to Reduce Loneliness. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15(3), 219–266. 10.1177/1088868310377394 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Matthews T, Danese A, Wertz J, Odgers CL, Ambler A, Moffitt TE, & Arseneault L (2016). Social isolation, loneliness and depression in young adulthood: a behavioural genetic analysis. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 51(3), 339–348. 10.1007/s00127-016-1178-7 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Mortier P, Demyttenaere K, Auerbach RP, Cuijpers P, Green JG, Kiekens G, … Bruffaerts R (2017). First onset of suicidal thoughts and behaviours in college. Journal of Affective Disorders, 207, 291–299. 10.1016/j.jad.2016.09.033 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Nicolaisen M, & Thorsen K (2017). What Are Friends for? Friendships and Loneliness Over the Lifespan—From 18 to 79 Years. The International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 84(2), 126–158. 10.1177/0091415016655166 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Oldmeadow JA, Quinn S, & Kowert R (2013). Attachment style, social skills, and Facebook use amongst adults. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 1142–1149. 10.1016/j.chb.2012.10.006 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  40. Ozben S (2013). Social Skills, Life Satisfaction, and Loneliness in Turkish University Students. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 41(2), 203–213. 10.2224/sbp.2013.41.2.203 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  41. Panayiotou G, Panteli M, & Theodorou M (2016). Predictors of loneliness in a sample of college men and women in Cyprus: The role of anxiety and social skills. Psychology, Community & Health, 5(1), 16–30. 10.5964/pch.v5i1.142 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  42. Panchal S, & Joshi HL (2013). Happiness in relation to social skills and self-esteem among youths. Indian Journal of Health and Wellbeing, 4(1), 34–37. [Google Scholar]
  43. Pedrelli P, Nyer M, Yeung A, Zulauf C, & Wilens T (2015). College Students: Mental Health Problems and Treatment Considerations. Academic Psychiatry, 39(5), 503–511. 10.1007/s40596-014-0205-9 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Pereira-Lima K, & Loureiro SR (2015). Burnout, anxiety, depression, and social skills in medical residents. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 20(3), 353–362. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Price EL, McLeod PJ, Gleich SS, & Hand D (2006). One-year prevalence rates of major depressive disorder in first-year university students. Canadian Journal of Counselling and Psychotherapy/Revue Canadienne de Counseling et de Psychothérapie, 40(2), 68–81. [Google Scholar]
  46. Prince JP (2015). University student counseling and mental health in the United States: Trends and challenges. Mental Health & Prevention, 3(1–2), 5–10. 10.1016/j.mhp.2015.03.001 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  47. Qualter P, Vanhalst J, Harris R, Van Roekel E, Lodder G, Bangee M, … Verhagen M (2015). Loneliness Across the Life Span. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(2), 250–264. 10.1177/1745691615568999 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Ratelle CF, Simard K, & Guay F (2013). University Students’ Subjective Well-being: The Role of Autonomy Support from Parents, Friends, and the Romantic Partner. Journal of Happiness Studies, 14(3), 893–910. 10.1007/s10902-012-9360-4 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  49. Richardson T, Elliott P, & Roberts R (2017). Relationship between loneliness and mental health in students. Journal of Public Mental Health, 16(2), 48–54. 10.1108/JPMH-03-2016-0013 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  50. Riggio HR, & Kwong WY (2009). Social skills, paranoid thinking, and social outcomes among young adults. Personality and Individual Differences, 47(5), 492–497. 10.1016/j.paid.2009.04.026 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  51. Riggio RE (1986). Assessment of basic social skills. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(3), 649–660. 10.1037/0022-3514.51.3.649 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  52. Rokach A (2013). Loneliness updated: Recent research on loneliness and how it affects our lives. Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  53. Rokach A, & Brock H (1997). Loneliness and the Effects of Life Changes. The Journal of Psychology, 131(3), 284–298. 10.1080/00223989709603515 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Russell DW (1996). UCLA Loneliness Scale (Version 3): Reliability, Validity, and Factor Structure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 66(1), 20–40. 10.1207/s15327752jpa6601_2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Salovey P, Mayer JD, Goldman SL, Turvey C, & Palfai TP (1995). Emotional attention, clarity, and repair: Exploring emotional intelligence using the Trait Meta-Mood Scale In Pennebaker JW (Ed.), Emotion, disclosure, & health (pp. 125–154). Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association; 10.1037/10182-006 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  56. Segrin C, & Flora J (2000). Poor social skills are a vulnerability factor in the development of psychosocial problems. Human Communication Research, 26(3), 489–514. 10.1111/j.1468-2958.2000.tb00766.x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  57. Segrin Chris. (2000). Social skills deficits associated with depression. Clinical Psychology Review, 20(3), 379–403. 10.1016/S0272-7358(98)00104-4 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Segrin Chris, McNelis M, & Swiatkowski P (2016). Social Skills, Social Support, and Psychological Distress: A Test of the Social Skills Deficit Vulnerability Model: Social Skills Deficit Vulnerability Model. Human Communication Research, 42(1), 122–137. 10.1111/hcre.12070 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  59. Snyder HR (2013). Major depressive disorder is associated with broad impairments on neuropsychological measures of executive function: A meta-analysis and review. Psychological Bulletin, 139(1), 81–132. 10.1037/a0028727 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  60. Somerville LH (2013). The Teenage Brain: Sensitivity to Social Evaluation. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22(2), 121–127. 10.1177/0963721413476512 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  61. Soysa CK, & Wilcomb CJ (2015). Mindfulness, Self-compassion, Self-efficacy, and Gender as Predictors of Depression, Anxiety, Stress, and Well-being. Mindfulness, 6(2), 217–226. 10.1007/s12671-013-0247-1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  62. Strahan EY (2003). The effects of social anxiety and social skills on academic performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 34(2), 347–366. 10.1016/S0191-8869(02)00049-1 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  63. Vetter NC, Leipold K, Kliegel M, Phillips LH, & Altgassen M (2013). Ongoing development of social cognition in adolescence. Child Neuropsychology, 19(6), 615–629. 10.1080/09297049.2012.718324 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  64. Watkins E, & Brown RG (2002). Rumination and executive function in depression: an experimental study. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry, 72(3), 400–402. 10.1136/jnnp.72.3.400 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  65. Wei M, Russell DW, & Zakalik RA (2005). Adult Attachment, Social Self-Efficacy, Self-Disclosure, Loneliness, and Subsequent Depression for Freshman College Students: A Longitudinal Study. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52(4), 602–614. 10.1037/0022-0167.52.4.602 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  66. Wouters S, Duriez B, Luyckx K, Klimstra T, Colpin H, Soenens B, & Verschueren K (2013). Depressive symptoms in university freshmen: Longitudinal relations with contingent self-esteem and level of self-esteem. Journal of Research in Personality, 47(4), 356–363. 10.1016/j.jrp.2013.03.001 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  67. Xiao H, Carney DM, Youn SJ, Janis RA, Castonguay LG, Hayes JA, & Locke BD (2017). Are we in crisis? National mental health and treatment trends in college counseling centers. Psychological Services, 14(4), 407–415. 10.1037/ser0000130 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  68. Zawadzki MJ, Graham JE, & Gerin W (2013). Rumination and anxiety mediate the effect of loneliness on depressed mood and sleep quality in college students. Health Psychology, 32(2), 212–222. 10.1037/a0029007 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  69. Zivin K, Eisenberg D, Gollust SE, & Golberstein E (2009). Persistence of mental health problems and needs in a college student population. Journal of Affective Disorders, 117(3), 180–185. 10.1016/j.jad.2009.01.001 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES