Healthy Campus Initiative Resources

Contemporary models postulate the importance of psychological mechanisms linking perceived and received social support to physical health outcomes. In this review, we examine studies that directly tested the potential psychological mechanisms responsible for links between social support and health-relevant physiological processes (1980s to 2010). Inconsistent with existing theoretical models, no evidence was found that psychological mechanisms such as depression, perceived stress, and other affective processes are directly responsible for links between support and health. We discuss the importance of considering statistical/design issues, emerging conceptual perspectives, and limitations of our existing models for future research aimed at elucidating the psychological mechanisms responsible for links between social support and physical health outcomes.

The goal of this review paper is to identify conceptual and measurement issues in the study of social negativity and health in order to foster development of research on this important topic. We begin by discussing how the negative side of social ties has been conceptualized and by identifying features of the underlying construct. Next, we review selected evidence on the effects of social negativity on physiology, self-reported health, morbidity, and mortality. We end by highlighting unresolved questions and presenting recommendations for how the field should move forward.

Reviews the research on the relations between social support and morbidity and between social support and mortality. Conceptualizations of social support used in the existing literature are described, and alternative explanations of how each of these conceptualizations of the social environment could influence the etiology of physical disease are offered. The psychological mediators (e.g., health relevant cognitions, affect, health behaviors) as well as biologic links (e.g., neuroendocrine links to immune and cardiovascular function) are addressed.

There is an increased risk of death among persons with a low quantity, and sometimes low quality, of social relationships. Studies also show that social isolation is a major risk factor for mortality.

Objectives: Health psychology has contributed significantly to understanding the link between psychological factors and health and well-being, but it has not often incorporated advances in relationship science into hypothesis generation and study design. We present one example of a theoretical model, following from a major relationship theory (attachment theory) that integrates relationship constructs and processes with biopsychosocial processes and health outcomes. Method: We briefly describe attachment theory and present a general framework linking it to dyadic relationship processes (relationship behaviors, mediators, and outcomes) and health processes (physiology, affective states, health behavior, and health outcomes). We discuss the utility of the model for research in several health domains (e.g., self-regulation of health behavior, pain, chronic disease) and its implications for interventions and future research. Results: This framework revealed important gaps in knowledge about relationships and health. Future work in this area will benefit from taking into account individual differences in attachment, adopting a more explicit dyadic approach, examining more integrated models that test for mediating processes, and incorporating a broader range of relationship constructs that have implications for health. Conclusions: A theoretical framework for studying health that is based in relationship science can accelerate progress by generating new research directions designed to pinpoint the mechanisms through which close relationships promote or undermine health. Furthermore, this knowledge can be applied to develop more effective interventions to help individuals and their relationship partners with health-related challenges.

A robust body of scientific evidence has indicated that being embedded in high-quality close relationships and feeling socially connected to the people in one’s life is associated with decreased risk for all-cause mortality as well as a range of disease morbidities. Despite mounting evidence that the magnitude of these associations is comparable to that of many leading health determinants (that receive significant public health resources), government agencies, health care providers and associations, and public or private health care funders have been slow to recognize human social relationships as either a health determinant or health risk marker in a manner that is comparable to that of other public health priorities. This article evaluates current evidence (on social relationships and health) according to criteria commonly used in determining public health priorities. The article discusses challenges for reducing risk in this area and outlines an agenda for integrating social relationships into current public health priorities.

Social relationships — both quantity and quality — affect mental health, health behavior, physical health, and mortality risk. Sociologists have played a central role in establishing the link between social relationships and health outcomes, identifying explanations for this link, and discovering social variation (e.g., by gender and race) at the population level. Studies show that social relationships have short- and long-term effects on health, for better and for worse, and that these effects emerge in childhood and cascade throughout life to foster cumulative advantage or disadvantage in health. This article describes key research themes in the study of social relationships and health, and it highlights policy implications suggested by this research.