Table 1.
Findings of the systematic literature review regarding the associations between adult friendship and wellbeing.
| References | Study design | Sample (n, male %, Mage) | Independent variables | Dependent variables (PERMA variable) | Measures | Key statistical results |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Akin and Akin (2015) | CS | USA university students (271, 46%, N/A) | FQ, Subjective vitality | H (WB) | FQS, SHS, SVS | FQ positively correlates with H (r = 0.29). Subjective vitality partially mediates this relationship (β = 0.33). |
| 2. Almquist et al. (2014) | Q | Swedish adults born in 1990 (1.289, 50.19%, 19) | FQ, Trust, Self-disclosure | MWB (WB) | Interview via phone | Emotional SS, i.e., FQ (B = 3.59), trust (B = 2.62), and self–disclosure (B = 1.61), positively associate with MWB. |
| 3. Brannan et al. (2013) | CS | College students: Iran (151, 59%, 22), Jordan (161, 57%, 21), USA (234, 35%, 25) | SS-Fr | LS, PE (WB, PE) | PSS-Fr, SWLS, PANAS | In USA sample PSS–Fr associates with LS (β = 0.13) and PE (β = 0.26) levels, in the Jordanian sample PSS–Fr associates with PE (β = 0.21) but no significant relationships found in Iran sample. |
| 4. Cable et al. (2012) | L | Adults born in GB in 1958 (6.681, 47.43%, T1: 42, T2: 45, T3: 50) | SNS | PWB (WB) | SNS-SI, Warwicke-Edinburgh MWBS | Smaller friendship networks at age 45 predict lower levels of PWB 5 years later (B = −1.30 to −4.72 for less than five friends). |
| 5. Carmichael et al. (2015) | L | USA adults (133, 44.36%, T1: 20, T2: 30, T3: 50) | FQ | PWB (WB) | Social Network Index, FQ-SI, PWB | FQ at 20s predicts FQ at 30s (β = 0.29 to.33), while FQ at 30s predict PWB at 50s (β = 0.38). |
| 6. Carr and Wilder (2016) | CS | USA adults (224, 46%, 21.69) | Risks of seeking SS-Fr | FS, Relational closeness (R) | Risks of seeking social support (5-item scale), Relationship Assessment Scale-FR, Interpersonal Solidarity Scale | Individuals perceiving high risks in seeking social support from friends correlates to lower levels of interpersonal closeness (r = −0.38) and friendship satisfaction (r = −0.48). |
| 7. Chen et al. (2015) | EXP, CS | University students (study 1: 54 friendship pairs, 24%, 18.56; study 2: 131, 19.85%, 19; study 3: 332, 24.69%, 19) | FQ | SS (R) | Social Support scale, Relationship Quality Scale, Relationship Satisfaction Index | Perceived FQ predicts received support during adversity (β = 0.26) and emotional–focused support among European Americans (β = 0.37). Also, FQ more strongly associates with support provision among European Americans (β = 0.56) than Japanese (β = 0.24), while FQ associates with higher levels of attentiveness (β = 0.42) and companionship (β = 0.38) among Asian Americans than European Americans (β = 0.20 and 0.18, respectively). |
| 8. Cyranowski et al. (2013) | CS | USA adults (692, 43.4%, 43.97) | Companionship with friends | SS, Loneliness, Social distress (R) | UCLA-R, Interpersonal Support Evaluation List, Negative Interaction Scale | Companionship with friends correlates with higher levels of SS from others (r = 0.77) and lower levels of loneliness (r = −0.81) and social distress (−0.27). |
| 9. Demir and Davidson (2013) | CS | USA university students (4.283, 26.38%, 18.81) | PRCA, PM, NS | PE (PE) | PRCAS, MTOQ, PANAS, NS-FR | PM (r = 0.32), NS–FR (r = 0.33) and PRCA (r = 0.19) positively correlate with PE. NS–FR explains PE levels of men (β = 0.49), while PM (β = 0.09), NS–FR (β = 0.33) and PRCA (β = 0.08) explain PE levels of women. |
| 10. Demir et al. (2007) | CS | USA university students (280, 31.43%, 22.56) | FQ | LS, PE, H (WB, PE) | Network of Relationships Inventory, SWLS, PANAS | The quality of best (r = 0.20) and first close friendships (r = 0.19) positively correlates with LS and H (r = 0.26 and 0.19, respectively), but not with experiencing of PE. Stimulating companionship in best (r = 0.29) and first close friendship (r = 0.22) associates with H. |
| 11. Demir et al. (2017) | CS | USA university students (2,997, 30%, 19.15) | FQ, PRCA, PNS | H (WB) | MFQ-FF, PRCAS, NSS, SHS, SWLS, PANAS | PRCA and FQ positively correlate to H (r = 0.19 to.27 and r = 0.26 to.31, respectively). FQ mediates the relationship of PRCA with H in best friendships (β = 0.29 for men and 0.53 for women) and, similarly, PNS in same–sex friendships (β = 0.65 among men and 0.52 amongst women). No differences of gender and same/different–sex friendships were found. |
| 12. Demir et al. (2019) | CS | USA university students (685, 33%, 18.73) | FM, PRCA | SWB, H (WB) | FMS, PRCAS, SWLS, SHS, PANAS | PRCA and FM positively correlates to SWB (r = 0.19 and 0.37) and H (r = 0.21 and 0.31). FM mediates the relationship of PRCA with SWB (β = 0.11 for men and 0.16 for women) and H (β = 0.08 for men and 0.14 for women). No gender differences found. |
| 13. Demir et al. (2013a) | CS | University students: Turkey (287, 46.69%, 22.22), USA (268, 41.42%, 21.37) | FQ, PRCA | H (WB) | MFQ-FF, PRCAS, SHS | Both in Turkish and Americans FQ and PRCA positively associate with H (r = 0.35 and 0.28; r = 0.18 and 0.16, respectively). FQ mediates the relationship of PRCA and H in both samples (β = 0.03 for Turkish and 0.04 for Americans). |
| 14. Demir et al. (2012a) | CS | University students: Malaysia (154, N/A, 22.10), USA (211, N/A, 21.95) | FQ | H, Social skills (WB, R) | MFQ-FF, Interpersonal Competence Questionnaire, SHS | FQ both among Americans and Malaysians associates with social skills (β = 0.24 and 0.20) and H (β = 0.33 and 0.38, respectively) and mediates the relationship between social skills and H (β = 0.11 for Americans and 0.15 for Malaysians). |
| 15. Demir and Özdemir (2010) | CS | USA university students (400, 29.25%, 22.39) | FQ, PNS | H (WB) | MFQ-FF, NSS, PANAS | FQ positively correlates with to PNS (r = 0.69) and H (r = 0.25). PNS mediates the relationship of FQ with H in the three closest friendships (β = 0.26). |
| 16. Demir et al. (2011a) | CS | USA university students (study 1: 256, 32.81%, 20.34; study 2: 498, 21.28%, 19.10; study 3: 299, 20.4%, 19.81, study 4: 175, 30.85%, 20.57) | FAS, FM | H, LS, PE (WB, PE) | FASQ, FMS, SHS, SWLS, PANAS | FAS (r = 0.21 to.24) and FM (r = 0.41 to.48) positively correlate with H, PE (r = 0.18 and 0.43, respectively), and LS (r = 0.27 and 0.35, respectively). FM fully mediates the relationship between FAS and H in close and best friendships (β = 0.51). |
| 17. Demir et al. (2011b) | CS | USA university students (study 1: 212, 32.07%, 23.99) | FQ, PM | H (WB) | MFQ-FF, MTOQ, PANAS | PM (r = 0.36) and FQ (r = 0.21) positively correlate with H. PM mediates the relationship between FQ and H regarding the three closest friendships (β = 0.16 to.21). |
| 18. Demir et al. (2012b) | CS | University students: Turkey (296, N/A, 21.14), USA (273, N/A, 21.80) | FQ, PM | H (WB) | MFQ-FF, MTOQ, PANAS | FQ and PM positively correlate to H among Turkish and Americans (r = 0.29 and 0.18; r = 0.21 and 0.33, respectively). Among Americans, PM mediates the relationship of FQ and H, whilst among Turkish FQ mediates the relationship of PM with H. |
| 19. Demir et al. (2013b) | CS | USA university students (2,429, 27%, 18.8) | FQ, Sense of uniqueness | H (WB) | MFQ-FF, PSU, PANAS, SWLS, SHS | FQ positively correlates with SoU (r = 0.34 to.38) and H (r = 0.29 to.32). SoU mediates the relationship between FQ and H (β = 0.38 to.41). |
| 20. Demir and Weitekamp (2007) | CS | USA university students (423, 29.07%, 22.53) | FQ | H, LS, PE (WB, PE) | MFQ-FF, SWLS, PANAS | FQ positively correlates with PE (r = 0.25), LS (r = 0.18), and H (r = 0.26). |
| 21. Derdikman-Eiron et al. (2013) | L | Norwegian adults (1,346, 38.41%, T1: 14.4, T2: 26.9) | Frequency of meeting friends | SS-Fr (R) | Frequency of meeting friends-SI, SS-Fr (2-item scale) | Frequency of meeting friends during adolescence predicts SS–Fr among young adults (OR = 1.33). |
| 22. Griffin et al. (2006) | CS | USA black and white women (290, 0%, 37.8) | SS-Fr satisfaction, Friend network size | LS (WB) | SS questionnaire, LS scale | SS–Fr satisfaction (β = 0.23) and friendship network (β = 0.22) positively associate with LS. No racial differences found. |
| 23. Heck and Fowler (2007) | L | USA secondary and high school students, who became adults seven years later (14.332, 50.9%, N/A) | NF | Participation in community activities (E) | Social network measure, Individual interview | NF of secondary and high school students predicts engagement levels in community activities during young adulthood (β = 0.05). |
| 24. Helliwell and Huang (2013) | CS | Canadian adults (5,025, 49%, 44.93) | NF | LS, H (WB) | NF-SI, Cantril's Self-Anchoring Ladder | NF positively associate with LS and H (β = 0.29 and 0.37, respectively), especially for single, divorced, separated, or widowed individuals. |
| 25. Huxhold et al. (2013) | L | German adults (2.830, 50.8%, 53.3) | SC-Fr | LS, PE (WB, PE) | SC-Fr scale, SWLS, PANAS | SC–Fr positively predicts LS and PE levels 6 years later (β = 0.08 and 0.08). |
| 26. Koestner et al. (2012) | L | 105 dyads of friends (210, 0%, 20.19) | FAS | SWB, FQ, Goal progress (WB, R, A) | FQ (5-item scale), SWLS, Goal descriptions and progress ratings | FAS positively correlates with FQ (r = 0.60), goal progress (r = 0.28), and SWB (r = 0.37). FQ positively correlates with SWB (r = 0.34). FAS predicts increases in FQ (β = 0.43), SWB (β = 0.21), and goal progress (β = 0.22) 3 months later. |
| 27. Lemay and Clark (2008) | CS | USA (study 1: 96 adults, 15.6%, 34.89; study 2: 86 university students, 38.37%, 21; study 3: 60 pairs of friends, 16.67%, 21; study 4: 96 couples, 50%, 26.5; study 5: 153 adults, 33.33%, 24.63) | Individual's communal responsiveness | SS-Fr, Self-disclosure, Friend's communal responsiveness (R) | Responsiveness (own and friend's), Inventory of Social Supportive Behaviors, SC-Fr-SI, Self-Disclosure Index | Adults' own felt communal responsiveness toward a friend appeared to bias their perceptions of the friend's communal responsiveness (r = 0.60), which in turn is associated to own and partner's self–disclosure (r = 0.47 and 0.49), evaluation of the friend (r = 0.27), and support provision (r = 0.40). |
| 28. Li and Kanazawa (2016) | CS | USA adults (15.197, N/A, 21.96) | SC-Fr | LS (WB) | SC-Fr-SI, LS-SI | Frequency of SC–Fr positively associates with LS (β = 0.03), when controlling for marital status. |
| 29. Miething et al. (2016) | L | Swedish adults (772, 50.90%, 23) | Friendship network quality (FNQ) | PWB, FNQ (WB, R) | FNQ-SI, PWB (6-item scale) | FNQ correlates with PWB of young adults both for males and females (r = 0.15 and 0.17). FNQ during late adolescence predicts FNQ (β = 0.37 for males and 0.30 for females) and PWB (β = 0.15 and 0.17, respectively) of young adults. |
| 30. Morelli et al. (2015) | Q | 49 dyads of same-sex friends (98, 51%, N/A) | Practical and emotional support | SWB (WB) | Personal diaries | Emotional support is associated to wellbeing levels of the actor during time. Practical support is associated to wellbeing of both friends only when the actor is emotionally engaged. |
| 31. Morry and Kito (2009) | CS | USA university students (253, 42.68%, 19.8) | FQ, FS | Relationship supportive behaviors, Relational self (R) | Relational-Interdependent Self-Construal Scale, MFQ-FF-RA, Self-disclosure (10-item scale), Trust (17-item scale), Relationship Assessment Scale, Liking and loving (26-item scale) | FQ and FS positively correlate with relationship supportive behaviors (r = 0.76 and 0.75) and the tendency to think oneself in terms of relationships with others (r = 0.31 and 0.37). |
| 32. Ratelle et al. (2013) | CS | USA university students (256, 25%, 23) | FAS | SWB (WB) | Learning Climate Questionnaire, SWLS, PANAS | FAS positively correlates with and SWB (r = 0.43, β = 0.35). |
| 33. Rubin et al. (2016) | L | AU university students (314, 35.67%, 23.4) | SC-Fr, PS | LS (WB) | SC-Fr-SI, DASS, SWLS | SC–Fr predicts LS 6 months later (β = 0.13). |
| 34. Sanchez et al. (2018) | CS | USA college students (study 1: 273, 30.40%, 19.13; study 2: 368, 32%, 18.90) | FM | H, Compassion (WB, R) | FMS, Compassion Scale, SHS, PANAS | FM correlates with compassion for others and H (r = 0.61 and 0.35, respectively) and mediates the relationship of compassion with H (β = 0.18 to.30 for men and 0.24 to 0.29 for women). |
| 35. Secor et al. (2017) | CS, EXP | USA adults (87, 18.39%, 36.87) | SS-Fr, Negative life events | Positive relationships, Life purpose (R, M) | PSSS-Fr, Impact of Event Scale-R, PWBS | SS–Fr positively associates with positive relationships with others and purpose in life after negative life events (r = 0.62 and 0.39, β = 0.52 and 0.35, respectively). |
| 36. Walen and Lachman (2000) | CS | USA adults (3.485, 55%, 49.4) | SS-Fr | LS, PE (WB, PE) | Phone interviews, SS-Fr (4-item scale), LS-SI, PE (6-item scale) | SS–Fr positively associate with LS and PE (r = 0.23 and 0.22, β = 0.08 and 0.14, respectively). |
| 37. Weiner and Hannum (2013) | CS | USA university students (142, 28.9%, 19.83) | Distance from friends | SS-Fr (R) | Distance status of friends, Inventory of Socially Supportive Behaviors-Modified | Among geographically closer friends received SS positively correlates with perceived emotional (r = 0.32), informational (r = 0.33) and instrumental support (r = 0.23). Closer best friends provide higher levels of perceived and received SS than long distance friends. Received instrumental SS is affected more by long distance from friends (d = 0.78). |
| 38. Weisz and Wood (2005) | L | USA university students (80, 50%, N/A) | Social identity support-Fr, Closeness-Fr | FQ (R) | Social Network, Social Support, Social Identity and Social Identity Support Questionnaires | Closeness with and social identity support by another student during the first year predicts best friendship 4 years later (OR = 1.95 and 3.41, respectively). |
CS, cross-sectional; EXP, experimental; L, longitudinal; Q, qualitative. T1, first measurement; T2, second measurement. SI, single item. OR, odds ratio. Friendship variables (measures): FAS, friendship autonomy support; FM, friendship maintenance; FQ, friendship quality (MFQ-FF, McGill Friendship Questionnaire-Friendship Functions); FS, friendship satisfaction; NF, number of friends; PM, perceived mattering (MTOQ, Mattering To Others Questionnaire); PNS, psychological needs satisfaction; PRCA, perceived responses to capitalization attempts; SNS, social network size; SC-Fr, social contact with friends; SS-Fr, social support from friends (PSSS-Fr, Perceived Social Support Scale from Friends). Wellbeing indices (measures): A, accomplishments; E, engagement; H, happiness (SHS, Subjective Happiness Scale); M, meaning in life; LS, life satisfaction (SWLS, Satisfaction With Life Scale); PE, positive emotions (PANAS, Positive and Negative Affect Schedule); PWB, psychological wellbeing; R, positive relationships; SWB, subjective wellbeing; WB, wellbeing.