Do We Become More Lonely With Age? A Coordinated Data Analysis of Nine Longitudinal Studies.

Loneliness is a pervasive experience with adverse impacts on health and well-being. Despite its significance, notable gaps impede a full understanding of how loneliness changes across the adult life span and what factors influence these changes. To address this, we conducted a coordinated data analysis of nine longitudinal studies encompassing 128,118 participants ages 13 to 103 from over 20 countries. Using harmonized variables and models, we examined loneliness trajectories and predictors. Analyses revealed that loneliness follows a U-shaped curve, decreasing from young adulthood to midlife and increasing in older adulthood. These patterns were consistent across studies. Several baseline factors (i.e., sex, marital status, physical function, education) were linked to loneliness levels, but few moderated the loneliness trajectories. These findings highlight the dynamic nature of loneliness and underscore the need for targeted interventions to reduce social disparities throughout adulthood.

Engagement with nature and proinflammatory biology.

BACKGROUND: Prior evidence indicates that contact with nature improves physical health, but data explicitly linking engagement with nature to biological processes are limited. DESIGN: Leveraging survey and biomarker data from 1,244 adults (mean age = 54.50 years, range = 34-84 years) from the Midlife in the United States (MIDUS II) study, we examined associations between nature engagement, operationalized as the frequency of pleasant nature encounters, and systemic inflammation. Concentrations of interleukin-6 (IL-6), C-reactive protein (CRP), and fibrinogen were measured from fasting blood samples. Analyses adjusted for sociodemographic, health behavior, and psychological well-being covariates. RESULTS: More frequent positive nature contact was independently associated with lower circulating levels of inflammation. CONCLUSIONS: These findings add to a growing literature on the salubrious health effects of nature by demonstrating how such experiences are instantiated in downstream physiological systems, potentially informing future interventions and public health policies.

Trajectories of affective well-being and survival in middle-aged and older adults.

Affective experiences are key components of subjective well-being with important implications for health. However, little is known about heterogeneous longitudinal affect trajectories and their links to survival. This study identified joint trajectory subgroups based on 18-year changes in positive affect (PA) and negative affect (NA) and examined their differential associations with mortality risk. Participants were 3,250 adults (aged 39-93 years) from the Midlife in the U.S. study assessed over three waves (1995-2013). Parallel growth mixture modeling revealed three subgroups: (a) improving (increasing PA, decreasing NA), (b) deteriorating (decreasing PA, increasing NA), and (c) flourishing (high, stable PA, low, stable NA). Adjusting for baseline demographic and health covariates, Cox proportional-hazard results showed the improving group had the lowest mortality risk (HR = 0.82, 95% CI [0.35, 1.32]) and the deteriorating group had the highest mortality risk (HR = 1.86, 95% CI [1.34, 3.55]), relative to flourishing. These findings highlight the importance of modeling multidimensional trajectories of affective well-being and their heterogeneous links to survival. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Variety in Pleasant Activities is Associated with Improved Mental Health: Evidence from Two National Samples of U.S. Adults.

Engaging in a wide range of pleasant activities may provide mental health benefits, particularly for those genetically predisposed to depression. This study examined associations between pleasant activity variety, mental health, and genetic vulnerability in two U.S. cohort studies (N = 2,088). Participants reported depressive symptoms, mental healthcare visits, and engagement in pleasant activities over the past month. Greater variety of pleasant activities was associated with fewer depressive symptoms in both study samples. Individuals engaging in more diverse pleasant activities also had fewer mental health visits. Individuals with a higher genetic risk for depression experienced a stronger negative association between variety of pleasant activities and depressive symptoms compared to those with a lower genetic risk. These results highlight the potential of diverse pleasant activities as a means to enhance well-being, particularly among individuals genetically susceptible to depression. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42761-023-00225-x.

My partner really gets me: Affective reactivity to partner stress predicts greater relationship quality in new couples.

Affective reactivity, defined as within-person increases in negative affect triggered by daily stressors, has well-established links to personal well-being. Prior work conceptualized affective reactivity as an intrapersonal phenomenon, reflecting reactions to one's own stressors. Here, we conceptualized reactivity interpersonally, examining one's responses to a romantic partner's daily stressors. Across four longitudinal dyadic studies, we investigated how reactivity to partner stress predicts relationship quality appraisals. In fledgling couples, reactivity to a partner's stressors, assessed via weekly (Study 1; N = 152) and daily (Study 2; N = 144) diaries, positively predicted partner relationship quality. In both studies, the associations were mediated by the partner's perceptions of responsiveness. Furthermore, reactivity to partner stress buffered against declines in partner relationship quality over 8 weeks in Study 1 and 13 months in Study 2. The relevance of reactivity to partner stress for relationship quality diminished in the later stages of relationships. Among samples of established couples (Studies 3 and 4, Ns = 164 and 208, respectively), reactivity to partner stress did not directly predict partner relationship quality or moderate its trajectory over time. Overall, the predominant pattern across four studies painted a portrait of relational well-being benefits specific to fledgling relationships. Through its novel framework of situating affective reactivity interpersonally between partners, the present research contributes to both affective science and relationship science. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Too little, too much, and "just right": Exploring the "goldilocks zone" of daily stress reactivity.

Hormetic models of stress resilience describe nonlinear relations for exposure to adversity and health outcomes, where exposure induces salutary changes up to a threshold, with changes becoming deleterious afterward. Here we apply a hormetic model of stress to reactivity to daily stressors, examining whether mental and physical health benefits arise from low-to-moderate reactivity but then decrease at higher levels. Data are from the second wave of the National Study of Daily Experiences (NSDE). Adults (N = 2,022; Mage = 58.61, SD = 12.12, age range: 35-86; 57% female) completed telephone interviews detailing their stressors and affect on eight consecutive evenings. A series of multilevel structural equation models estimated within-person associations between daily stressors and negative affect (i.e., stress reactivity), and between-person linear and quadratic effects of stress reactivity on mental and physical health outcomes (i.e., life satisfaction, psychological distress, and number of chronic conditions). Findings reveal a significant quadratic effect for each outcome, indicating a U-shaped pattern (inverse U for positively valenced life satisfaction), such that low and high levels of stress reactivity were associated with poorer health and well-being, whereas moderate levels of daily stress reactivity predicted better health outcomes. These findings suggest that individuals who display either very low- or very high-stress reactivity may benefit from interventions that target their emotion regulation skills and coping resources. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Mean Affect Moderates the Association between Affect Variability and Mental Health.

Increasing evidence suggests that within-person variation in affect is a dimension distinct from mean levels along which individuals can be characterized. This study investigated affect variability's association with concurrent and longitudinal mental health and how mean affect levels moderate these associations. The mental health outcomes of depression, panic disorder, self-rated mental health, and mental health professional visits from the second and third waves of the Midlife in the United States Study were used for cross-sectional (n = 1,676) and longitudinal outcomes (n = 1,271), respectively. These participants took part in the National Study of Daily Experiences (NSDE II), where they self-reported their affect once a day for 8 days, and this was used to compute affect mean and variability. Greater positive affect variability cross-sectionally predicted a higher likelihood of depression, panic disorder, mental health professional use, and poorer self-rated mental health. Greater negative affect variability predicted higher panic disorder probability. Longitudinally, elevated positive and negative affect variability predicted higher depression likelihood and worse self-rated mental health over time, while greater positive affect variability also predicted increased panic disorder probability. Additionally, mean affect moderated associations between variability and health such that variability-mental health associations primarily took place when mean positive affect was high (for concurrent mental health professional use and longitudinal depression) and when mean negative affect was low (for concurrent depression, panic disorder, self-rated mental health, and longitudinal self-rated mental health). Taken together, affect variability may have implications for both short- and long-term health and mean levels should be considered. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42761-024-00238-0.

Associations Between Generativity and Social Asymmetry Among Older Adults in Japan.

OBJECTIVES: Loneliness and social isolation are major public health concerns among older adults in Japan. Generativity, the concern for and commitment to future generations, may buffer older adults from loneliness. This study examined the cross-sectional and longitudinal associations between generativity and social asymmetry (the discrepancy between social isolation and loneliness) among older adults in Japan. METHODS: Data were from 2 waves (2008 and 2012) of the Midlife in Japan survey, a nationally representative longitudinal study of 645 adults aged 30-79 residing in the Tokyo metropolitan area. Generativity was measured using the 6-item Loyola Generativity Scale. Social asymmetry was computed as the residual score from regressing loneliness onto social isolation. RESULTS: Higher generativity levels were associated with lower social asymmetry scores (B=-0.21, SE=0.04), but generativity change across waves did not predict social asymmetry 4 years later (B=-0.04, SE=0.06). DISCUSSION: Generativity may play a protective role in buffering older adults from the adverse effects of social isolation on loneliness. Promoting generativity among older adults may be a potential intervention strategy to reduce loneliness and improve well-being in aging populations in Japan.