Separation, social isolation, and loss in the context of COVID-19 and beyond

The COVID-19 pandemic has collectively challenged the world's population, perhaps like no other crisis in human history. Many of these challenges center around people's disconnection from close others in their broader social networks–disconnection that involves themes of separation, social isolation, and loss. Although these themes are central to the COVID-19 pandemic, they are not unique to COVID-19 per se. Over the course of human history, numerous health, economic, and social crises have plunged people into experiencing chronic forms of separation, social isolation, and loss. Thus, while the COVID-19 pandemic inspired this special issue of current opinion in psychology, our focus on separation, social isolation, and loss is situated within various contexts that extend beyond the pandemic. This explains why we adopted a broad approach to examining different contexts and aspects of separation, social isolation, and loss. In doing so, we have assembled some of the world's leading as well as emerging scholars who are investigating these themes across a wide variety of sub-disciplines within psychology.

Several articles as part of this special topic draw on integrative theoretical perspectives of relationship functioning and interpersonal processes. These theoretical perspectives are used to identify and understand some of the key factors that increase or decrease the psychological experience of loss in relationships. Pietromonaco and overall outline an adaptation of the vulnerability stress adaptation model (VSAM), originally developed by Karney and Bradbury [1], to explain couple functioning, stability, and change during the COVID-19 pandemic. Similarly, Karantzas et al. outline a different adaptation and extension of the VSAM to clarify how couples cope with loss when faced with different types of major crises and disasters. Drawing on a lifespan developmental perspective situated within Baltes' [2] model of positive aging and Bronfenbrenner's [3] bioecological model, Westrupp et al. focus on how complex interactions between biological and social factors both within and external to the family system affect the cognitive, socio-emotional, and physical losses (as well as gains) experienced by parents during stressful normative transitions (such entering parenthood) and non-normative events (such as the COVID-19 pandemic). Eckhardt et al. draw on the impelling-instigating-inhibiting (I-cubed) model of interpersonal aggression [4] to illustrate how the nexus between social isolation and exclusion in the context of romantic relationships during the COVID-19 pandemic, coupled with chronic alcohol use, can yield a perfect storm for the perpetration of intimate partner violence. Finally, Woodyatt et al. address how victims and offenders experience, and can recover from, loss following interpersonal transgressions. They do so by describing a multi-level, dynamic model of moral repair that entails dyadic, reciprocal, and interactionist processes.

Several articles in the special issue address separation, social isolation, and loss by focusing on the absence of, or reductions in, social contact with close partners within broader social networks, social groups, and communities. Gable and Bedrov note the vital role that social networks play in buffering against loneliness and mitigating negative physical and psychological difficulties, especially when networks are highly supportive during both negative and positive life events. Holt-Lunstad and Steptoe highlight the critical role of social isolation and its implications for physical health. They contend that social isolation should be considered a necessary component of multifactorial models to better understand physical, psychological, and social wellbeing. Haggerty et al. explore whether romantic couples who are socially isolated from their extended social networks are immune to the negative consequences of social isolation. In summarizing the evidence, they suggest that a complex interplay of factors is required to fully explain the relational outcomes of socially isolated couples. Knox et al. report on a rapid review of the literature into the mental health effects of government-mandated social restrictions during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. Their meta-analysis suggests that social restrictions appear to have a negative impact on mental health outcomes but also highlight the need for high quality research into the future. Drawing on social baseline theory [5], Beckes and Sbarra integrate Bayesian and ecological perspectives to provide new insights into how social proximity and physical touch can facilitate the regulation of emotions, which in turn may affect people's physical health and wellbeing. Slavich specifically focuses on physical wellbeing by drawing on social safety theory [6] to outline the important role that human connection and fostering a sense of social safety (vs. social threat) has for mitigating risk of viral infections and inflammatory diseases.

A. Haslam et al. outline how loneliness and disconnection can be addressed by enhancing social connection through strengthening people's social identities, which can have cascading effects on mental health and wellbeing. Rumikasoon focuses on the role of prosociality and the promise of interventions that emphasize prosocial behavior as a way to mitigate feelings of loss, improve the quality of life, and strengthen people's attachment to place along with their sense of community. Finally, Farrell et al. provide an overview of the literature on the quantity and quality of social network ties and their implications for physical health outcomes.

Other articles in the special issue examine the how experiencing social disconnection can have deleterious effects on people's personal and relational wellbeing more broadly. Drawing on both attachment theory [7, 8, 9] and emotionally focused couples therapy (EFCT; [10]), Feeney and Fitzgerald discuss how the social restrictions brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic challenge relationship partners' abilities to regulate needs for distance and closeness, including why this is especially challenging for insecurely attached people. N. Haslam provides an authoritative review of the dehumanization literature, articulating how and why dehumanization generates feelings of social exclusion and disconnection. Karantzas et al. then extend the concept of dehumanization to the context of intimate relationships. They propose a model that illustrates how different types of negative relationship behaviors can been organized within a dehumanization framework and discuss the personal and relational consequences of the loss of humanness. Williams and Nida review research on ostracism and its intersection with social disconnection, isolation, and loss, focusing on the primary factors associated with ostracism and interventions that may speed recovery from ostracism.

Numerous articles in the special issue focus on loss with an emphasis on understanding the nature and course of grief and bereavement. Mikulincer and Shaver discuss emotional reactions and adjustment to separation and loss within romantic relationships from an attachment theory perspective. Malgaroli et al. offer a computational modelling perspective of grief as a way to understand its heterogeneity, and they then advance an empirically-grounded theory of grief and loss. Vedder et al. conduct a systematic review of the literature on the extent to which bereaved individuals experience loneliness, the factors that may contribute to this association, and interventions that target loneliness post-bereavement. Robinaugh et al. discuss recent developments in the networks (causal systems) literature, which have the potential to inform future research into prolonged grief disorders. O'Connor and Seeley also address prolonged grief by outlining a new model that draws on the neuroscience of grief and attachment to understand the trajectory of grief as well as the factors that contribute to prolonged grief disorders. Maciejewski et al. propose a micro-sociological theory to advance our understanding of people's adjustment to loss. Harman et al. focus on grief and loss experienced by children instigated by experiences of parental alienation. Van Prooijen et al. examine loss at an institutional level by focusing on how distrust and conspiracy theories heighten suspicion and loss of confidence in institutions.

A number of articles in this special issue highlight relationship dissolution. Sbarra and Whisman focus on the health implications of relationship dissolution following divorce. They contend that negative health outcomes are the result of two causal pathways: (1) disruptions in health behaviors as a result of divorce, and (2) socioeconomic status (SES) disruptions following divorce. Whisman et al. present a conceptual model outlining the associations between relationship dissolution and psychopathology. Parker et al. draw on relationship science and evolutionary perspectives to offer insights into why women initiate divorce, citing a mismatch between evolved preferences and configurations of modern marriage as factors that contribute to relationship dissatisfaction and, ultimately, divorce. Vieth et al. provide a much-needed model to understand the process of friendship dissolution. Their model highlights the need to consider situational, personal, and interpersonal variables as critical factors in whether friendships are actively or passively dissolved.

Finally, the special issue includes a set of articles that address particular therapeutic approaches designed to deal with issues of separation, social isolation, and loss within romantic relationships. Greenman and Johnson draw on attachment theory and Emotionally Focused Couples Therapy to highlight the importance of fostering greater attachment security as a way to mitigate the psychological and physical ills brought on by feelings of social isolation and loneliness. Weber and Baucom address the loss of positive experiences and events in couple relationships and draw on Couple Cognitive Behavioral Therapy [11] to outline a series of behavioral intervention strategies designed to increase positive relationship behaviors. Hatch and Doss explain how digital technologies can also leverage interventions to overcome the accessibility challenges associated with face-to-face treatment. They offer the OurRelationship program as one example of an online program that has benefits for personal and relationship wellbeing as well as co-parenting and child adjustment outcomes.

In conclusion, the articles that comprise this special issue reflect the depth and breadth of research conducted across the themes of separation, social isolation, and loss. Collectively, these papers provide significant, cutting-edge insights that will inform future research and practice with respect to separation, social isolation, and loss. With the COVID-19 pandemic continuing to challenge people's abilities to maintain social ties and sense of social cohesion, now more than ever, sophisticated psychological perspectives on separation, social isolation, and loss are needed. We hope that this special topic will contribute to advancing the study of these critically important themes within the context of COVID-19 and beyond.

Conflict of interest statement

Nothing declared.

Biographies

Gery C. Karantzas is an Associate Professor in the School of Psychology at Deakin University in Melbourne, Australia. He was the former national convener of Australian Psychological Society Psychology of Relationships Interest Group. He has published numerous studies in the area of relationship science, and his research activities have been funded by the Australian Research Council and the National Health and Medical Research Council.

Jeffry A. Simpson is a professor in the Department of Psychology at the University of Minnesota. His research focuses on interpersonal relationships, evolution and social behavior, and how interpersonal experiences early in life affect life affect adult outcomes. He has served as editor of Personal Relationships (from 1998 to 2001) and the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology: Interpersonal Relations and Group Processes (from 2009 to 2014).

This review comes from a themed issue on Separation, Social Isolation, and Loss (2022)

Edited by Gery C. Karantzas and Jeffry A. Simpson