Группа авторов

The Handbook of Solitude


Скачать книгу

and socio‐evaluative concerns (Coplan et al., 2004). In this regard, although shy individuals’ solitude may be self‐imposed, it is also predominantly unwelcome, and can lead to emotional distress, rumination, and anxiety (Nelson, 2013). Indeed, extreme shyness in children is now widely considered to be one of the most robust and consistent predictors of the development of clinical anxiety disorders (Clauss & Blackford, 2012).

      In yet other cases, although it is widely accepted that the simple act of engaging in social interactions makes us happier (Epley & Schroeder, 2014), some individuals are higher in social anhedonia, reflecting a reduced capacity to derive pleasure from social interactions (Blanchard et al., 2000). This can lead to increased solitude because of feelings of sadness and lethargy (Coplan et al., 2015), and ultimately more serious personality and depressive disorders (Brown et al., 2007). As an aside, it is also important to note that transactional processes are likely occurring in terms of the interplay between the external process of social isolation and the internal motivation to avoid others (as depicted in Figure 1.1 via a dotted line with arrows on both ends). For example, withdrawing from opportunities for social interaction may invite ostracism from others, which in turn may heighten the desire to subsequently avoid social interaction, and so on… (Ren et al., 2015; Rubin & Mills, 1988).

Schematic illustrationof the theoretical Model of the Causes and Consequences of solitude.

      Generally speaking, when solitude is chosen, spending time alone is viewed more positively and is associated with more positive outcomes, including self‐regulation, stress reduction, and restoration (Berman et al., 2008; Leung, 2015; Nguyen et al., 2018). It has also been argued that spending time alone can foster self‐growth (Long et al., 2003), spirituality (Hay & Morisey, 1978), and creativity (Csikszentmihalyi, 1996). However, it must also be noted that, regardless of the underlying reason, choosing to spend time alone can sometimes be viewed negatively by others and lead to rejection and ostracism (Coplan et al., 2013). Thus, even when affording benefits, spending time in solitude can sometimes also come at a cost.

      As we have described, the different causes of solitude have clear implications for the potential consequences of spending time alone. However, in recent years, it has become increasingly clear that the nature of these associations is even more complicated than we thought. This is because contextual effects (e.g., developmental period, culture, technology) can also alter the magnitude – and even the direction – of the links between solitude and indices of well‐being.

      Looking Forward: Solitude in Context

       Development.

      However, it has also long been argued that the costs of childhood solitude may accumulate over time and that solitude at any age can foster loneliness and psychological angst, particularly if it is externally imposed. As mentioned previously, social needs are thought to exist in individuals of all ages, with several theories suggesting that psychological well‐being is determined by whether social needs are satisfied. For example, Sullivan (1953) posited that all individuals have social needs, but that with development, the nature of the social needs change (e.g., during early adolescence, needs for intimacy emerge), as well as the type of relationship required to fulfill the needs (e.g., same‐sex chumships or best friendships might satisfy needs for intimacy that emerge in early adolescence). Regardless of the developmental changes, however, Sullivan argued that if social needs were not fulfilled, significant negative self‐system and psychological consequences would ensue. Consistent with these latter ideas are research findings that have identified loneliness, at any age, as one of the strongest risk factors for psychological ill‐being (Erzen & Cikrikci, 2018). That said, there is some indication that effects of loneliness on psychological and physical health and well‐being may be the greatest among the oldest adults, which again suggests that developmental period might matter.

      Clearly the debate as to “when” in development solitude might carry the greatest costs is yet to be resolved. Indeed, theoretical speculations in this area have outpaced the empirical work. However, it must also be acknowledged that the very nature of solitary experiences likely change with age. For example, young children may retreat to their rooms, engage in solitary play in the company of peers, or find themselves forced to the periphery of social groups. Although externally imposed solitude might manifest similarly at older ages (e.g., adolescents being forced to hang out alone after school; adults being left out of work luncheons and gatherings), adolescents and adults have greater control over and increased opportunities for self‐selected solitary experiences relative to children. For example, adolescents are sometimes left alone without parental supervision in their homes or are able to take themselves to places of their choosing. Adults can also choose to travel alone, engage in meditative and religious retreats, and can sometimes select relatively solitary occupations and ways to spend their free time. In contrast, there may come a time in the life of an older adult where they are significantly impeded in their ability to actively seek out social contacts. It remains to be seen how these potential differences in agency pertaining to solitude across the life span speak to the relation between solitude and well‐being. Taken together, though, a thorough examination of the positive and negative faces of solitude must be undertaken with a developmental lens.

       Culture.

      The more that we learn about the complex nature of solitude, the more we also come to realize that the meaning and impact of spending time alone must be considered within a broader cultural context. There is considerable variation across cultures in attitudes and beliefs regarding aspects of solitude (Buttrick et al., 2019). It is tempting to apply the notion of goodness of fit (Thomas & Chess, 1977) as a simple way to explain differences in the meaning and implications of solitude across societies and cultures. That is, if solitude is generally