What I’ve discovered is that there’s a strong awareness of loneliness as a problem, especially in the research community. There are countless studies, statistics, and even political measures addressing it, but what’s missing are concrete steps and ideas on how to tackle it.
There are some considerations, such as guidelines for urban planners and architects, that lay the groundwork. But direct, creative, and innovative approaches are harder to find. Most existing solutions focus on open spaces, but few actively invite specific forms of interaction. What’s needed is a deep understanding of both the structural aspects of loneliness and the personal experience of it. This means understanding what people need in order to change their behavior and the way they operate in the world we currently live in. Is it the online world and our phone addiction? The fast paced life style? The way and amount we work? The ways our offices, homes an cities are designed and built?
It might be helpful to focus on specific scenarios where loneliness occurs, as its causes and effects vary depending on the context. Loneliness looks different for an older person in a retirement home than it does for a young person who just moved to a new city. Patients in hospitals or reha centers face different challenges than single parents with little time for social interaction. Immigrants who have been separated from their families and cultures experience isolation differently than someone struggling with mental health issues. People who have been removed from or disconnected from their communities also face unique forms of loneliness.
So what can design do? There are different angles and scales from which to approach this issue. One possibility is rethinking urban planning to create spaces that naturally foster human interaction. Another is shifting public perception by raising awareness and reducing the stigma around loneliness, making it something we can talk about openly rather than something to be ashamed of. Smaller interventions can also play a role, like simple design elements that spark interaction and connection, allowing relationships to develop organically.
The next step is to explore possible directions. Should this take the form of a framework or set of guidelines for urban design? A workshop that actively engages communities? A game or interactive tool that initiates connection? A digital platform that helps people meet in meaningful ways? Maybe physical installations or experimental spaces designed to encourage spontaneous interactions. Or maybe artistic works that highlight and address loneliness could invite reflection and conversation.
To move forward, more research is needed and the questions that came up during research need to be answered. Interviews, testing, and case studies could provide valuable insights into what actually works. Understanding the real experiences of people struggling with loneliness and setting a direction for a project are key to designing solutions that go beyond theory and make a real impact.
Tag: Loneliness
A different approach – designing for loneliness
While traditional approaches to tackling loneliness often focus on creating opportunities for social interactions, there’s another, more surprising strategy gaining attention: designing public spaces that actively embrace and even encourage solitude. A paradoxical approach recognizes that many people experiencing loneliness don’t necessarily want to be surrounded by others but instead need environments that allow them to feel comfortable being alone. Being comfortable with being alone and even feeling lonely is important. Sometimes the feeling is inevitable and a vital part to identifying and overcoming loneliness is connecting with ones own emotional needs as it is connecting with others. Places that make this possible in a positive, comfortable and nonjudgmental way can therefore also play an important role in wellbeing, reflection and dealing with an at first uncomfortable feeling [3].
Often, urban spaces prioritize group interactions, leaving little room for those who prefer solitude. This can unintentionally send the message that being alone in public is unusual or even undesirable. However, small design tweaks can challenge that stigma. Take seating arrangements, for example. Public furniture designed for individuals – like single chairs rather than long communal benches – can make it feel normal and even inviting to spend time alone in public. The MuseumsQuartier in Vienna does this with its modular seating options that work just as well for one person as they do for a group, creating a more inclusive and flexible experience.
It’s not just about where you sit, it’s also about the atmosphere. Public spaces can be designed to provide opportunities for quiet moments, which are essential for helping people process their feelings of loneliness. Parks are a natural fit for this kind of design. Whether someone wants a solitary walk or a peaceful corner to sit and reflect, these kinds of environments offer options for both privacy and connection. Nature itself can also play a big role. Green spaces, dense vegetation, and the presence of birds or other wildlife add a sense of life and calm to a city. These features don’t just make urban spaces – they provide a way for people to connect with something larger than themselves. Studies have shown that access to green spaces is linked to lower feelings of loneliness, likely because they help clear the mind and create moments of quiet, personal connection with nature.
This idea of “paradoxical intervention” in design doesn’t just apply to solitude. It’s about embracing contradictions to create better experiences. By designing spaces that support both solitude and social interaction, we can serve different emotional and social needs in the same environment. It’s a shift away from rigid design concepts and toward more flexible, human-centered thinking.
Interaction design, too, has a critical role in this conversation. Thoughtfully designed technology can help foster meaningful connections in ways that feel organic and comfortable. For example, the concept of “cozy tech” has emerged as a way to create products that offer a sense of companionship. Devices designed with warmth and simplicity in mind, for instance, can provide emotional support in subtle ways. These tools aren’t about replacing human relationships but complementing them, making it easier for people to feel connected in their own way.
Ultimately, combating loneliness in cities requires a holistic approach – including rethinking public spaces, embracing solitude as a valid experience, and designing products that help people feel less alone. By integrating interventions and innovative interaction design into urban life, environments can be created that feel welcoming, inclusive, and human. And in doing so, we can take meaningful steps toward not just reducing loneliness, but reshaping how we think about connection and belonging in the first place [1,2].
Sources
- L. Heu and T. Brennecke, “Making Space For Loneliness In Our Cities,” Next City, Oct. 21, 2022. https://nextcity.org/urbanist-news/making-space-for-loneliness-in-our-cities-design-research
- L. C. Heu and T. Brennecke, “By yourself, yet not alone: Making space for loneliness,” Urban Studies, vol. 60, no. 16, pp. 3187–3197, May 2023, doi: 10.1177/00420980231169669.
- “Knowledge on Loneliness — The Loneliness Lab | Loneliness in urban spaces,” The Loneliness Lab, Dec. 29, 2020. https://www.lonelinesslab.org/knowledge-hub
Designing for connection – Part 2
DESIGNING INTERACTION
In the previous post I have discussed what is important when designing the public space itself. Now it is also important to look at what aspects to consider and incorporate when designing interaction and human connection. To build successful products like installations or experiences that are meant to bring people together and create or nurture connection we must understand key elements that create connections between people.
Human connection comes from a mix of emotional, physical, and psychological factors, all of which can guide how we design interactions that bring people closer together. Physical touch is an important aspect – it releases hormones like oxytocin, reduces stress, and builds trust. Designs can for example use haptic feedback, like vibrations or warmth, to mimic touch or encourage real-life gestures and touch like handshakes or hugs [1]. Physical proximity also plays a big role – being near others naturally makes connection easier. Spaces that bring people closer, like small gathering spots can create more chances for spontaneous interaction. Similarly, eye contact creates intimacy and trust.
Shared experiences are also something that bring people together by creating a sense of belonging and togetherness. Things like group activities, team challenges, or even shared virtual spaces can help foster these bonds [2]. Another aspect that gives people a sense of identity and connection are rituals and traditions. This could mean designing recurring events or encourage and help the development of little rituals specific to an experience [3].
Active listening makes people feel heard and valued, and Emotional sharing deepens relationships when people feel safe enough to open up. Design ideas could include anonymous spaces for sharing or lighthearted prompts that encourage people to talk about their feelings [4].
WHAT DO WELL DESIGNED PLACES AND INTERACTIONS LOOK LIKE?
The Loneliness Lab is a „global collective of people and organizations on a mission to design connection in to the places where we live, work and play.“ They for example made a toolkit for tackling loneliness in areas for people involved in urban planning and helped create several projects and concepts addressing the issue.
Designing public spaces that are inclusive, welcoming, and engaging can significantly impact social interactions and well-being. Accessible wayfinding, paths, and facilities ensure these spaces are available to everyone, especially those with disabilities or those who may feel excluded. Community-generated art empowers locals to reclaim and transform neglected spaces into safer, more inviting areas. Features like lighting, street furniture, and creative installations bring life to underused spaces, as seen in Derry’s pop-up meeting pods paired with mental health training, fostering connection and well-being. Temporary or “meanwhile use” spaces, such as Story Garden in London, allow communities to actively shape their environment while policymakers learn about long-term needs. Programs like this build creative skills and tackle local issues through collaborative projects. Lighting also plays a crucial role, it can help create a feeling of safety and encourage positive behaviors, as seen in Phillips’ LED installations, which extended children’s outdoor playtime and reduced device usage. A sense of place and identity strengthens connections between residents, businesses, and organizations. For example, “Elephant Says Hi!” unites over 30 groups in Elephant and Castle to create a welcoming environment for all. Thoughtful design, such as flexible seating, human-scale areas and elements, and moveable furniture, enhances the comfort of large spaces for both individuals and groups. Long-term administration is vital for sustainability, as demonstrated by the Gillett Square Partnership, which fosters ongoing collaboration to transform a once-deprived area into a vibrant community hub [5].
Further approaches from these ideas could also go more in the direction of installations and artistic displays, that follow a specific goal or have a specific message, for example creating awareness about the topic or making a statement.
Source
- A. H. Tejada, R. I. M. Dunbar, and M. Montero, “Physical contact and loneliness: Being touched reduces perceptions of loneliness,” Adaptive Human Behavior and Physiology, vol. 6, no. 3, pp. 292–306, May 2020, doi: 10.1007/s40750-020-00138-0.
- V. Chung, R. Mennella, E. Pacherie, and J. Grezes, “Social bonding through shared experiences: the role of emotional intensity,” Royal Society Open Science, vol. 11, no. 10, Oct. 2024, doi: 10.1098/rsos.240048.
- D. Robson, “The secret to long-lasting connection? Shared rituals,” Dec. 30, 2024. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20241218-michael-nortons-rituals-key-to-connection-family
- S. Myers, “Empathic Listening: Reports on the Experience of being Heard,” Journal of Humanistic Psychology, vol. 40, no. 2, pp. 148–173, Apr. 2000, doi: 10.1177/0022167800402004.
- “Knowledge on Loneliness — The Loneliness Lab | Loneliness in urban spaces,” The Loneliness Lab, Dec. 29, 2020. https://www.lonelinesslab.org/knowledge-hub
What are Fourth Spaces?
After discussing the concept of third places (informal gathering spots like cafes, libraries, and parks) I would now like to shine light on a relatively new idea that has emerged in the recent years: fourth spaces. While third places serve as a “home away from home,” fourth spaces are (depending on the definition) a response to the increasing blurring of physical and digital boundaries in our lives. They go beyond the physicality of third places, incorporating hybrid, inclusive, and adaptive elements to address the evolving ways people connect and build community today. But what exactly are fourth spaces, and how can they shape a sense of belonging?
Definition
Like with loneliness and Third Places there isn’t one single definition for fourth spaces. Some interpretations focus on the physical world and informal interactions in places that are undefined, similar to third places, while others place more emphasis on the digital world [3] and how it interacts with physical spaces. Fourth spaces can be seen as in-between places, blending traditional environments with digital layers. Not all definitions consider the digital aspect in the same way, but all highlight the role of these spaces in fostering spontaneous, casual connections that contribute to shared public life. [1, 2]
Fouth Places as the “in-between” [3]
Fourth Spaces as the digital realm [5]
Fourth spaces can counteract the impersonal aspects of “non-places” by embracing in-betweenness and publicness in their design. These spaces often include open, diverse layouts that are intentionally flexible, allowing people to adapt them for various uses that encourage spontaneous interactions.
Novel typologies – new forms of spatial design
Fourth space frameworks blend elements from traditional public spaces with modern innovations, such as integrating green spaces into urban environments or combining digital and physical interactions. In the context of fourth spaces, typology focuses on creating new forms of environments that encourage interaction, creativity, and adaptability to meet modern societal needs. These strategies ensure inclusivity and dynamic social interactions, creating environments where diverse individuals can connect and feel a sense of shared experience. By doing so, fourth spaces move beyond sterile functionality, fostering creativity, community, and belonging. [3]
An example approach to actively creating a fourth space is a project called „The Commons“. It is described as: „A modern-day town square for communal meaning-making, personal discovery, and self-expression in the heart of San Francisco.“ This concept focuses mostly on creating a place that is versatile and open in its functionality and can become whatever it needs to be at any given time. So in reference to the earlier definition, this is less an approach of combining digital and real world places, and follows more the idea of in-between places and meaning-making. They themselves define Fourth spaces as follows: „A physical space that facilitates meaning-making through intentional programming and pluralistic discussion, where individuals explore questions of ultimate concern without seeking conclusive answers. It honors the authenticity and uniqueness of each person’s path while fostering deeper bonds through consistent encounters in a supportive holding environment.“ [4]
Designing Fourth spaces is not an easy task, since it is quite hard to grasp what exactly fourth places are and how they fit into our lives. In terms of digital Fourth spaces the concept is just now emerging and changing constantly. It is important to clearly define the Fourth space in order to utilize it for designing in the context of loneliness. Is a fourth space an in-between place with unlimited potential that needs to be programmed and directed? Or is it the digital world that has emerged in the past few years? And if so, do we integrate it into the real world and try to find ways to combine the two? Or is it maybe even those places where the two meet?
Sources
- P. S. Aelbrecht, “‘Fourth places’: the contemporary public settings for informal social interaction among strangers,” Journal of Urban Design, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 124–152, Jan. 2016, doi: 10.1080/13574809.2015.1106920.
- “The fourth place and re-imagining the city | Urbanarium.” https://urbanarium.org/journal/fourth-place-and-re-imagining-city
- D. Hardegger, “A First Holistic ‘4th Space’ Concept,” Mdpi, p. 72, Mar. 2022, doi: 10.3390/proceedings2022081072.
- “The Commons” https://www.thesfcommons.com/
- T. Masuku, “The fourth place,” Showit Blog, Jun. 15, 2024. https://ticamasuku.com/the-fourth-place/
Connection as the opposite of loneliness
Having explored loneliness in depth – what it is, how it’s defined, and how it manifests – I now want to approach the topic from a different angle. Rather than solely asking how we might design loneliness away, we should also consider its opposite: connection. I want to take a closer look at how we can foster connection and community. This perspective could serve as a powerful starting point for design. After all, connection is a basic human need. In one of the best known models of human needs (Maslow’s Pyramid) it is located on the second and third level: social security, love and belonging and sense of connection [1]. This is also backed by the self-determination theory of Deci and Ryan, who propose three basic human needs, one of them being relatedness (feeling socially connected to others) [6]. Just as loneliness can isolate and harm our well-being, connection has the potential to uplift and create belonging.
But what is connection? And what makes it meaningful instead of superficial? Many people nowadays consider themselves well connected. They largely attribute this to connections via technology based mediums like social media. But while this bridges distances, it undermines deep human connections due to digital distractions and overload and lack of crucial elements for meaningful and deep connection.
In a world dominated by digital distractions, fostering meaningful connections requires intentional effort. The ease of digital interaction often leads to diminished presence – multitasking during family time, taking calls on dates, or scrolling through social media instead of engaging with friends. These habits dilute the depth of our relationships. To counter this, we can focus on strategies like prioritizing thoughtful communication, using technology to enhance rather than replace connections, building emotional literacy, practicing presence, and stepping away from devices. By doing so, we can recenter on genuine human connections and enrich our relationships, seeking out quality interactions over digital convenience [3]. This can even mean just short exchanges with people we love to increase wellbeing and make us feel better [2].
„our relationships have broadened in scope yet diminished in depth. In our pursuit of speed and convenience, we’ve inadvertently sacrificed the intentionality and deliberate slowness that enrich connections.“ [3]
There are of course several definitions of connection, each with different focus and intention. I have chosen this one as it considers interaction and fits into the research conducted thus far:
„connection is the dynamic, living tissue that exists between two people when there is some contact between them involving mutual awareness and social interaction. The existence of some interaction means that individuals have affected one another in some way, giving connections a temporal as well as an emotional dimension.“ [7]
In reference to non-places I would like to add this quote:
„Technology makes it easier to connect but often replaces in-person contact with less meaningful interactions. Even the increase in self-service kiosks and checkouts at stores cuts down on small talk with strangers, which can help with feeling connected. The shift to remote work and Zoom calls means we might be seeing our colleagues less, leading to fewer opportunities for socializing.“ [2]
It is however worth mentioning that even small talk can enhance well-being, build relational diversity, and foster belonging. Research shows casual interactions improve mood, energy, and confidence, even for introverts. Overcoming the “liking gap” (underestimating others’ enjoyment of conversations) helps people feel more connected. Techniques include viewing small talk as a “treasure hunt,” using shared surroundings as conversation starters, and moving from surface topics to personal ones. Compliments on unique self-expression or avoiding sensitive topics can deepen interactions. Practicing small talk strengthens social confidence and thereby the feeling of belonging and capability of creating connection [4].
Based on general research and theories on connection, the following summarizes the key elements of genuine human connection:
Emotional Presence – Feeling seen, heard, and understood is critical for connection (active listening and empathy)
Shared Experiences – Shared activities and experiences foster a sense of belonging and mutual understanding
Trust and Vulnerability – Trust allows people to share their true selves, and vulnerability strengthens emotional bonds
Physical Proximity and Touch – Nonverbal communication, such as eye contact, hugs or other forms of physical contact create a sense of closeness (connection is a neuro-biological phenomenon)
Shared Values and Goals – Having common beliefs or working toward shared objectives builds connection
Reciprocity – Giving and receiving support and care create mutual feelings of appreciation and connection
Relevant paper and an extensive look at connection: “The connection prescription: Using the power of social interactions and the deep desire for connectedness to empower health and wellness”
Sources
- Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396.
https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054346 - D. Henley, “The secret to feeling less lonely in only 8 minutes,” Thrive Global, Apr. 05, 2024. https://community.thriveglobal.com/the-secret-to-feeling-less-lonely-in-only-8-minutes/
- C. Steinhorst, “The way people people has forever changed — focuswise,” Focuswise, Mar. 18, 2024. https://www.focuswise.com/blog/from-superficial-to-significant-transforming-how-people-connect-in-the-digital-age
- A. Haupt, “7 Ways to Get Better at Small Talk—And Why You Should,” TIME, Jun. 01, 2023. [Online]. Available: https://time.com/6280607/small-talk-tips-benefits/
- J. Martino, J. Pegg, and E. P. Frates, “The connection prescription: Using the power of social interactions and the deep desire for connectedness to empower health and wellness,” American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, vol. 11, no. 6, pp. 466–475, Oct. 2015, doi: 10.1177/1559827615608788.
- Deci E L, Ryan RM. Intrinsic Motivation and Self-Determination in Human Behavior. New York, NY: Plenum; 1985
- Dutton JE, Heaphy E. The power of high quality connections. In Cameron KS, Dutton JE, Quinn RE, eds. Positive Organizational Scholarship: Foundations of a New Discipline. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler; 2003:263-278 https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262725459_The_Power_of_High_Quality_Connections
Loneliness as a human experience
Having already defined and analyzed loneliness I will now take a phenomenological approach in order to gain a more rounded and holistic understanding of the concept. This means looking at the actual experience of what it means, feels and looks like for individuals to be lonely.
This can mean asking how loneliness is experienced physically, how it shapes our experience of time and sense of space, how it affects our relationships with others, our attitude towards other experiences or how loneliness is approached in general (negatively or positively).
Barbara Schellhammer initially sees loneliness as a structural problem and criticizes measures such as the ministry of loneliness as an approach against the loneliness epidemic. They simply treat a symptom, however the fundamental problem and one of the the origins of society’s increasing loneliness lies primarily in the fact that in recent years politicians have cut back on the funding of communal spaces that are essential for community and connection (more on this in Post 5 on Third Places). It raises the question of which loneliness should be addressed at all and clearly shows how loneliness can be a completely different experience for different people in different scenarios: From the lonely senior citizen who is only cared for by robots, to single households who almost exclusively virtually search the internet for a partner or the homeless, uprooted refugee separated from their family [1].
Nicht-Orte (Non-Places)
“Loneliness never exists in itself, but only for someone who experiences it in a very unique way. It results from a history that extends far beyond one’s own, it is rooted in lived time, in specific cultural structures and nests itself stubbornly in certain places” [1]
„[The] weakening of the identity of places to the point where they not only look alike but feel alike and offer the same bland possibilities for experience“ – Edward Relph
The phenomenon of non-places was first described by Marc Augé and describes places, especially in urban areas, that are used monofunctionally (train stations, airports, shopping centers), which is in stark contrast to traditional anthropological places that are full of culture, history, identity, communication and relation [see also: Heterotopia – places with predetermined experience that are restrictive in experience and access, such as retirement homes or hospitals]. These places are often characterized by a functionality that does not promote social contact or interpersonal interaction. They offer little space for the development of individual identity or for genuine connections between people. One reason why non-places are associated with loneliness lies in their temporary and functional nature. They are designed to be transit places where people generally only stay for a short time. This fast-paced, anonymous atmosphere can reinforce feelings of isolation [2]. As a counterpart to this, there is the idea of „in-between places“ (Zwischenorte) that promote community and open up spaces for encounters. The aim is to create spaces that promote openness, dialog and emotional contact, something that is often lost in everyday life [1,4].
Loneliness as a negative experience
Loneliness is often perceived as strange, wrong, shameful, or even taboo. Society frequently associates it with lower status or a personal deficit, creating pressure to avoid being alone. Many feel the need to justify their solitude with excuses like being unwell or having work, as if simply choosing to be alone is unacceptable. This societal stigma stems from deeply ingrained childhood experiences and cultural norms, making it difficult for some to embrace solitude. It’s not just being alone but feeling unwanted, forgotten, or unnecessary, especially by those you value most and often rooted in rejection, exclusion, or abandonment. This form of loneliness is defined by the loss of connections, a longing for companionship, and a sense of invisibility or lack of place. It can have an affect on both mind and body, leading to stress, discomfort, or unhealthy coping mechanisms.
When feeling unseen or misunderstood, loneliness can even occur when surrounded by other people.This can mean feeling isolated in social settings like parties due to superficial interactions or feeling lonely in a close relationship when feeling overlooked or unappreciated, leading to emotional invisibility. Also feeling isolated due to differences like disability, lifestyle, or personal choices can make a person feel lonely. In all cases, loneliness arises from a lack of emotional connection and the pain of feeling unseen or misunderstood, emphasizing the importance of being acknowledged and valued by others. [3]
However, loneliness does not have to be negative – it can even be appreciated or seen as positive when separated from these harmful views.
Loneliness as a positive experience
Loneliness, when chosen or voluntary, can be a source of rest, creativity, and serenity. Unlike painful loneliness, this form is experienced as harmonious, calming, and even empowering. It allows one to connect with oneself, recharge, and reflect. While virtual interactions can reduce feelings of isolation, they lack the embodied richness of real-life interactions. Occupations like reading, crafting, or listening to music can also transform loneliness into a meaningful experience. This positive form of loneliness requires personal strength and the ability to face oneself.
Over time, one can develop an appreciation for solitude, realizing it is not a sign of inadequacy but a way to connect more deeply with oneself and even enhance future social interactions, as long as you connect with something in some way. [3] The contrast and balance between solitude and connection enhance both: those who embrace solitude can connect openly with others, and healthy relationships enable solitude to become a source of strength and inspiration [1].
Sources
- B. Schnellhammer, “Eine phänomenologische Annäherung an die Erfahrung der Einsamkeit”, April 2020, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/340502352_Eine_phanomenologische_Annaherung_an_die_Erfahrung_der_Einsamkeit
- M. Augé “Orte und Nicht-Orte”, https://swiki.hfbk-hamburg.de/Medienoekologie/uploads/auge-ortenichtorte.pdf
- K. Dahlberg, “The enigmatic phenomenon of loneliness”, July 2009, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232058607_The_enigmatic_phenomenon_of_loneliness
- H. Rosa, “Resonanz”, https://books.google.at/books?hl=en&lr=&id=MUeWCwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PT3&dq=soziologie+der+weltbeziehung&ots=zNQRoPz929&sig=mbBXxjo9zRRTtzeJy4XLK5h8Ho0&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=soziologie%20der%20weltbeziehung&f=false
#04 Impact of Loneliness on Health
Social connection and satisfying relationships are fundamental for development, reproduction and survival. The impact of social influences on health and well-being has been extensively investigated through diverse scientific methodologies like epidemiological studies, network analyses, clinical trials and controlled experiments. Consistent evidence indicates that loneliness and social isolation negatively affect mental, physical, and cognitive health, with the most compelling findings linking these factors to an increased risk of premature mortality. 1 Several meta-analyses find that the risk of all-cause mortality is increased by 26 %. Moreover, these findings were consistent across various factors, including age, gender, cause of death, country of origin, and baseline health status 2
Existing research makes a difference in all-cause mortality and cause-specific mortality, particularly when talking about cardiovascular diseases or strokes. All-cause mortality refers to the collective risk of death from all conditions associated with loneliness, while cause-specific mortality focuses on the risk of dying from a specific condition closely linked to loneliness or social isolation.
Research has explored the individual and combined effects of loneliness and social isolation on mortality risk. While both factors independently correlate with higher mortality, studies suggest that social isolation is the stronger predictor when both are analyzed together. For example, some studies show that only social isolation remained significant after controlling for demographic, socio-economic, and health factors. 3 Beller and Wagner observed that loneliness and social isolation interact synergistically: greater social isolation amplifies the impact of loneliness on mortality, while higher loneliness intensifies the effect of social isolation. 4
The impact of social relationships on mortality risk can be compared to other well-established lifestyle risk factors like physical activity, alcohol consumption, smoking cigarettes, air pollution or obesity. 5
Physical health
In addition to their association with increased mortality risk, social isolation and loneliness are linked to various health issues, including cardiovascular diseases, stroke, functional decline, and, to some extent, reduced immune function and diabetes. 3
Cardiovascular diseases
Cardiovascular diseases include diseases affecting the heart or blood vessels like heart attacks or strokes. A meta-analysis which is based on 23 different studies shows that loneliness and social isolation are linked to a 29 % higher risk of coronary heart disease and a 32 % higher risk of stroke. These associations were observed in both genders and remained significant regardless of traditional heart disease risk factors. Studies show that loneliness is linked to an increased risk of high blood pressure, particularly among middle-aged and older adults, and inflammatory reactivity. 3
Functional and motor decline
Loneliness is linked to increased functional and motor decline, including greater difficulty with activities of daily living and reduced muscle strength, mobility, and motor performance. 6 It remains unclear whether loneliness contributes to functional decline directly or indirectly through processes like cardiovascular diseases or inflammation. 7
Diabetes and cholesterol
Few studies have linked loneliness to developing diabetes for men. A cross-sectional study in Switzerland shows that lonely people have a 40 % higher chance of developing diabetes and 31 % higher chance to have higher cholesterol levels. 8
Cognitive Health
Cognitive function encompasses a range of mental processes that enable an individual to acquire knowledge, reason, and carry out plans. These processes include perception, memory, learning, attention, decision-making, and language skills. 9
Cognitive decline
Several studies have explored the relationship between loneliness and/or social isolation, and cognitive decline, especially in older adults. Even though some studies show a link between loneliness and cognitive decline, they cannot agree on what part of the cognitive function is affected. 3
Alzheimer’s and Dementia
Most evidence suggests a correlation between loneliness and dementia, comparable to the other dementia risk factors like physical activity, low education and late-life-depression. 10 While a study from 2018 found no association between loneliness and dementia, there are other studies showing that there is a link between loneliness and developing dementia. To address the potential problem of reversed causality – where early-stage dementia leads to difficulties engaging in social interactions and therefore people feeling lonely – the study doesn’t include people in those early stages. 3
Mental health
A wide range of literature shows a significant relationship between loneliness and mental health issues like depression and anxiety as well as suicide and suicidal ideations. 3
Depression and Anxiety
Lonely individuals tend to experience more depressive symptoms and report being less happy, less satisfied, and more pessimistic. Additionally, loneliness and depression share common features, such as feelings of helplessness and emotional pain. 11 Another study also shows an association between poor social connection and social anxiety in both adolescents and adults. 1
Suicide and Suicidal Ideation
Studies indicate a connection between loneliness and suicide. A study of individuals who have attempted suicide found that loneliness is frequently cited as a contributing factor. 12
Taking loneliness seriously
Research shows that loneliness affects health, but the relationship is also bidirectional – some health conditions such as poor physical health, disabilities, or hearing loss, can also increase the likelihood of loneliness. The reported evidence highlights that loneliness should be taken more seriously as a risk factor for various health problems. 3
Sources
[1] J. Holt-Lunstad und Department of Psychology, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah, USA, „Social Connection as a Public Health Issue: The Evidence and a Systemic Framework for Prioritizing the “Social” in Social Determinants of Health“, 2022. [Online]. Verfügbar unter: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-052020-110732
[2] J. Holt-Lunstad, T. B. Smith, M. Baker, T. Harris, and D. Stephenson, “Loneliness and social isolation as risk factors for mortality: A meta-analytic review,” *Perspect. Psychol. Sci.*, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 227–237, Mar. 2015, doi: 10.1177/1745691614568352. PMID: 25910392.
[3] J. Baarck, M. Kovacic und Joint Research Centre (JRC), „The Relationship between Loneliness and Health“, Publications Office of the European Union, literature review, 2022. doi: 10.2760/90915.
[4] J. Beller and A. Wagner, “Loneliness, social isolation, their synergistic interaction, and mortality,” Health Psychol., vol. 37, no. 9, pp. 808–813, Sep. 2018, doi: 10.1037/hea0000605. PMID: 30138019.
[5] J. Holt-Lunstad, T. F. Robles und D. A. Sbarra, „Advancing social connection as a public health priority in the United States.“, American Psychologist, Bd. 72, Nr. 6, S. 517–530, Sep. 2017, doi: 10.1037/amp0000103.
[6] K. Beaton and K. Grimmer, “Tools that assess functional decline: systematic literature review update,” Clin. Interv. Aging, vol. 8, pp. 485–494, 2013. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S42528.
[7] A. S. Buchman et al., “Loneliness and the rate of motor decline in old age: the Rush Memory and Aging Project, a community-based cohort study,” BMC Geriatr., vol. 10, no. 1, p. 77, 2010. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2318-10-77.
[8] R. A. Richard, S. Rohrmann, C. L. Vandeleur, M. Schmid, J. Barth, and M. Eichholzer, “Loneliness is adversely associated with physical and mental health and lifestyle factors: Results from a Swiss national survey,” PLoS One, vol. 12, no. 7, p. e0181442, Jul. 2017, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0181442. PMID: 28715478; PMCID: PMC5513556.
[9] K. Kiely, “Cognitive function,” in Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research, A. C. Michalos, Ed., Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, 2014, pp. 483–484. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_2939.
[10] J. S. Kuiper, M. Zuidersma, R. C. Oude Voshaar, S. U. Zuidema, E. R. van den Heuvel, R. P. Stolk, and N. Smidt, “Social relationships and risk of dementia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal cohort studies,” Ageing Res. Rev., vol. 22, pp. 39–57, Jul. 2015, doi: 10.1016/j.arr.2015.04.006. PMID: 25956016.
[11] R. Mushtaq, S. Shoib, T. Shah und S. Mushtaq, „Relationship Between Loneliness, Psychiatric Disorders and Physical Health ? A Review on the Psychological Aspects of Loneliness“, JOURNAL OF CLINICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC RESEARCH, Jan. 2014, doi: 10.7860/jcdr/2014/10077.4828.
[12] L. M. Heinrich, E. Gullone und School of Psychology, Psychiatry, and Psychological Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Nursing, and Health Sciences, Monash University, VIC 3800, Australia, „The clinical significance of loneliness: A literature review“, 2006. [Online]. Verfügbar unter: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2006.04.002
Loneliness – a quick overview
„The loneliness epidemic“ – a buzzword that has been coming up more and more in recent years. It seems to be an increasingly relevant topic, which is quite interesting and somewhat paradox, considering the parallel increase of innovative technology for creating connections between millions of people, no matter the time of day or location on the planet. However, something seems to be wrong. Reports show that around a third of the population of industrialized countries are affected by loneliness [1]. The group most affected by loneliness are young adults between 16 and 24 [5] and what is even more concerning – this number has been rising over the past few years [6]. The WHO has even declared loneliness a global public health concern in 2023 and launched and international commission to study the problem [2]. How can loneliness be such a prominent topic and increasing issue, when we are more connected than ever? This makes for an interesting research topic in which I will be asking the question of how interaction design can combat loneliness.
First of all, to better understand the topic of loneliness, the term has to be defined and differentiated from similar ones such as aloneness, solitude and social isolation, as these mean slightly different things. Aloneness and social isolation describe qualitative, objective measures in which an individual has no one around them. More subjective measures include solitude and loneliness. While solitude describes a feeling of voluntary aloneness, which is mostly a positive experience, loneliness is the opposite and describes a negative experience of the state of being alone [3]. There is no one definition of what loneliness is exactly, generally it is agreed that it can be described as the subjective discrepancy between an individual’s existing versus desired social relationships [1]. When looked at more closely, loneliness can be further categorized into three types. Social loneliness means the feeling of isolation from a social network or community. Simply put: the missing sense of belonging. Emotional loneliness describes the sense of lacking close, intimate, emotional connections. Finally, existential loneliness refers to a deeper inner feeling of being fundamentally alone in life. Further categorizations include transient, situational and chronic loneliness [3].
Since loneliness is for the most part a subjective feeling, it can be quite tricky to measure it for studies and observation. One of the most prominent attempts to measure loneliness is the UCLA loneliness scale which has bee revised several times and works like a relatively simple questionnaire [4].
Loneliness has a significant impact on mental and physical health. It can contribute, as well as cause depression. This vicious cycle has a high risk of increasing early mortality. With depression being the most common mental health issue, loneliness is a topic that should not be overlooked, since they are often intertwined [7]. Loneliness can also harm the body physically. Diabetes, autoimmune disorders, cardiovascular diseases, obesity, physiological aging, cancer, poor hearing and overall poor health have been found to be caused by loneliness [1,7]. Addressing loneliness could be an important step in the battle against the mental health crisis and improvement of physical wellbeing.
Besides mental and physical health loneliness can even impact the economy. Poorer work performance and lower educational attainment have been associated with loneliness and its accompanying symptoms. This is estimated to cost employers millions per year due to employee sickness, caring activity, productivity, and voluntary staff turnover [8].
It is clear that we need to better understand the loneliness epidemic in order to work on solutions that bring us together.
Sources
- C. Park et al., „The Effect of Loneliness on Distinct Health Outcomes: A Comprehensive Review and Meta-Analysis“, December 2020, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113514
- „WHO Commission on Social Connection“, World Health Organization [Online], Available: https://www.who.int/groups/commission-on-social-connection, Accessed: December 2024
- „Definitions of lonely, isolated, alone, and solitude“, what works wellbeing, [Online], Available: https://whatworkswellbeing.org/resources/definitions-of-lonely-isolated-alone-and-solitude/, Accessed: December 2024
- D. Russell, UCL Loneliness Scale, Fetzer Institute, Available: https://fetzer.org/sites/default/files/images/stories/pdf/selfmeasures/Self_Measures_for_Loneliness_and_Interpersonal_Problems_UCLA_LONELINESS.pdf
- „16 to 24 year olds are the loneliest generation“, UKOnward, Available: https://www.ukonward.com/data/how-often-do-you-feel-lonely/, Accessed: January 2025
- „Community Life Survey 2023/24: Loneliness and support networks“, gov.uk, Available: https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/community-life-survey-202324-annual-publication/community-life-survey-202324-loneliness-and-support-networks–2, December 2024
- R. Mushtaq, „Relationship Between Loneliness, Psychiatric Disorders and Physical Health ? A Review on the Psychological Aspects of Loneliness“, September 2014, doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2014/10077.4828
- Campaign to End Loneliness, “Facts and Statistics – Campaign to end loneliness,” Campaign to End Loneliness, May 10, 2024. https://www.campaigntoendloneliness.org/facts-and-statistics/
Interaction Design, Loneliness and Public Spaces
In an increasingly urbanized and digital world, public spaces are no longer the main place for community and interaction they once were. However, while global connectedness has rapidly increased thanks to modern technology, smartphones and social media many people, despite being surrounded by others, feel disconnected, isolated and lonely. Public spaces, like parks, libraries, and cafés, have always served as places where people come together. But as our lives become more fast-paced and technology-driven, these spaces are not the first choice for seeking connection, with most digital online solutions being more convenient and accessible.
I find the paradox of a rapidly evolving world, where global connectedness and interaction are increasing, yet loneliness is at an all-time high, to be a fascinating premise. It is a topic that – at least to a certain degree – almost everyone is affected by, and understanding what differentiates different kinds of interaction and connection (e.g. online and face to face) will only become more important in the future, especially for interaction designers. I see designing connection and interaction as an important starting point to tackling many different societal issues, loneliness being only one of them.
Interaction design is the practice of designing the way people interact with technology, environments, and most importantly: each other. It therefore offers the potential to rethink how public spaces function. By creating interactive experiences, design can invite people to slow down, engage with their surroundings, and connect with others in creative and meaningful ways.
With the increasing issue of loneliness, the principles of interaction design and the potential of public spaces I want to ask and aim to answer the question how design can combat loneliness by reshaping the way we interact in public spaces.
When diving deeper into the topic of loneliness, several sub-questions arise for further exploration and understanding. To tackle loneliness at its core, it is important to understand what loneliness is exactly and what the root causes are. These foundational questions help define the phenomenon and uncover why it emerges in various contexts. The effects should also be looked at more closely, posing questions such as: What does loneliness do to us? – physically, emotionally, and socially. Especially when it comes to exploring and developing possible solutions exploring the flip side, will be important. Questions like What is connection? How do we connect? and examining the mechanisms of building (meaningful) bonds are important. Researching on a broader scale, learning about basic human needs and how communities are built is another important aspect that should be considered.
More specific topics for interaction design could include reimagining third spaces like parks or cafes to encourage interactions, designing interactive and participatory experiences, or developing digital platforms that prioritize meaningful engagement over superficial connections. Additionally, incorporating haptic and sensory elements, such as touch-based installations or shared experiences, can evoke a stronger feeling of presence and connection. It’s essential to ask whether the spaces we design truly foster connection, and whether technological connectedness actually equals connection – fulfilling our need to be understood and supported. Some interesting ideas for design spaces with connection and community in mind have already been implemented. In many cities, including Graz, places like „Repair Cafés“ [1] can be found. These are spaces where people can not only fix their broken items, but also socialize, connect and learn from each other. “Maggie Centers” [2] provide a place for people affected by cancer in which they can come together, talk, connect and bond over workshops and activities.
It is important to keep in mind that loneliness is a very large and hard to grasp topic. There is existing research, however the approaches and understanding of the topic still vary. Even a general consensus on how to define the term itself hasn’t been found. It can mean different things to different people and it can have various root causes, which means a solution could look very different for many people. An interesting approach could therefore be focusing on human needs in terms of social connection, belonging and purpose, which are things that directly contrast loneliness. When working on possible solutions it is important to keep in mind that there is no one cure, since loneliness as well as connection are complex and deeply personal.
In the upcoming blogposts, I will explore the broader topic of loneliness, connection, and community to gain a solid understanding and foundation of the topic. From there, I will investigate more specific elements of the research question by taking a look at spaces and environments that foster social interaction, such as third and fourth spaces, as well as principles of designing for connection and belonging. I will also look at case studies and examples of successful design interventions to draw inspiration. This journey will ideally give valuable insights and opportunities for addressing loneliness through thoughtful and intentional interaction design.
Repair Café: https://www.repaircafe-graz.at/
Maggie Centers: https://www.maggies.org/our-centres/
The UK has recently launched a campaign to end loneliness: https://www.campaigntoendloneliness.org/
The loneliness lab is a global collective of people and organizations on a mission to design connection: https://www.lonelinesslab.org/
#03 Are we living in an epidemic of loneliness?
The heightened risk of loneliness during the COVID-19 pandemic has brought increased attention to the issue, leading to loneliness and social isolation being recognized as serious public health concerns.1 A study conducted by the IFO Institute and the European Commission reveals that in 2016, 12 % of people in the European Union frequently experienced the feeling of loneliness. During the initial months of lockdown, this figure increased to 25%. 2
Some researchers even claim that we are living in an epidemic of loneliness right now. However, loneliness is not a modern-day phenomenon. A study by the American Psychological Association analyzed 345 studies comprising 437 independent samples, with a total of 124,855 young adults completing the UCLA Loneliness Scale between 1976 and 2019. Over these 43 years, the study revealed a gradual increase in loneliness. Even though there was constant increase in loneliness, talking about an epidemic of loneliness might be exaggerated. 3
Who is at highest risk for loneliness?
Age is a frequently studied aspect in connection with loneliness. For a long time, the focus was on older people, as they have a particularly high risk of being affected by loneliness. However more recent studied showed that there is a u-shaped relationship between age and loneliness, because also young people are highly affected by loneliness these days. 4
Examining socio-economic factors such as income, health, and living conditions, several studies indicate that individuals with lower income levels are more likely to experience loneliness. Similarly, those who report poor health tend to feel lonelier compared to individuals with good health. Furthermore, research shows that individuals living alone are more likely to experience loneliness. 2 5
Additionally, technology, particularly social media, has a significant impact on our relationships and social interactions. Even though we are more connected than ever, people tend to feel more lonely nowadays. Excessive social media use (in the study from the European commission excessive means two or more hours per day on social media) can contribute to feelings of loneliness, a fear of missing out, and a lack of meaningful social connection. 6 7
Since several studies show the negative impact of loneliness on health and its growing significance in public health, several governments and institutions — such as the government of United Kingdom and Japan, the Ministry of Health in the Netherlands, and the European Commission — are developing strategies to combat loneliness. 2
The next blog post explains which impact loneliness has on our health.
Sources
[1] JRC, „Loneliness and social connectedness: insights from a new EU-wide survey“, 2023.
[2] J. Baarck, B. D’Hombres und G. Tintori, „Loneliness in Europe before and during the COVID-19 pandemic“, Health Policy, Bd. 126, Nr. 11, S. 1124–1129, Sep. 2022, doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2022.09.002.
[3] S. Buecker u. a., „Is Loneliness in Emerging Adults Increasing Over Time? A Preregistered Cross-Temporal Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review“, journal-article, 2021. doi: 10.1037/bul0000332.
[4] S. V. Schnepf, B. D’Hombres und C. Mauri, Hrsg., Loneliness in Europe. 2024. doi: 10.1007/978-3-031-66582-0.
[5] NHS Digital, Health Survey for England 2021: Loneliness and Wellbeing. Available: https://digital.nhs.uk/data-and-information/publications/statistical/health-survey-for-england/2021-part-2/loneliness-and-wellbeing. Accessed: Jan. 7, 2025.
[6] B. Dhombres, M. Kovacic, S. V. Schnepf, and Z. Blaskó, Loneliness and social media use in the European Union, European Commission, 2024, JRC135806.
[7] V. H. Murthy, „Our Epidemic of Loneliness and Isolation: The U.S. Surgeon General’s Advisory on the Healing Effects of Social Connection and Community“, 2023. [Online]. Verfügbar unter: https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/surgeon-general-social-connection-advisory.pdf