Study reveals no 'one-size-fits-all' balance between solitude and socializing for well-being

In a recent study published in the journal Scientific Reports, researchers collected and analyzed data to explore whether there is a balance between time spent in solitude and socializing that maximizes mental health and life satisfaction. Their findings indicate that time alone is associated with lower well-being on certain metrics, such as satisfaction, and higher well-being on others, like stress and autonomy.

Registered Report: Balance between solitude and socializing: everyday solitude time both benefits and harms well-being. Image Credit: fran_kie / ShutterstockRegistered Report: Balance between solitude and socializing: everyday solitude time both benefits and harms well-being. Image Credit: fran_kie / Shutterstock


Many researchers have explored the relationship between solitude and well-being with seemingly contradictory results, termed the 'paradox of solitude.' While some studies point to positive impacts, others conclude that spending time alone goes against our social nature and can adversely affect our quality of life.

In contrast to loneliness, which occurs when people have less social interaction and connection than desired, aloneliness has been described as the desire for more solitude. Research indicates that motivation drives the satisfaction derived from solitude and interaction. Both these aspects are important in our daily lives; what is unclear is if there is an 'optimal' balance between the two, which can maximize well-being.

"In short, the question of balance in solitude may be a simple one: What proportion of our time should be spent alone?"

About the study

In the present study, researchers assessed whether there is evidence for a tipping or inflection point beyond which the relationship between solitude and well-being shifts from positive to negative or vice versa. They hypothesized that below this threshold, more time spent in solitude would be associated with lower stress and aloneliness and higher satisfaction and autonomy. They also examined these relationships at the daily level and across time, as well as the role of motivation for solitude in mitigating negative feelings of isolation.

Participants in the study were at least 35 years old in order, were English speakers, resided in the UK or US, and received financial compensation for their contribution. Of the 178 individuals who participated, 79 identified as men, 95 identified as women, and the other four entered other gender categories; 175 people were included in the final analysis. The average age of the participants was 47 years, and the average number of completed study days was 16.7, resulting in 2,967 data points.

Researchers collected demographic information and provided an introduction to the study during an initiation session, after which participants were asked to fill out a 21-day diary every evening for three weeks. The survey was designed to elicit information on time allocated to socializing and solitude, as well as several well-being outcomes (aloneliness, loneliness, stress, and satisfaction) and motivation.

The methodology was chosen to minimize recall bias and allow the research team to model both between- and within-person effects. Researchers analyzed the data and tested their hypotheses using nested hierarchical linear modeling and mixed model analyses. They controlled for lagged effects to account for temporal autocorrelation.


Overall, satisfaction metrics (daily satisfaction and satisfaction with the need for autonomy) declined slightly over time, but there were no significant trends in aloneliness, loneliness, or stress. Intraclass correlations indicated that between 31% and 44% of the variance observed in the data could be attributed to differences within people rather than between individual variances.

Researchers found that as time spent in solitude increased, loneliness and autonomy need satisfaction increased, but aloneliness, stress, and day satisfaction decreased. However, a higher reported choice for solitude was associated with higher satisfaction and reduced stress and loneliness. For days when participants reported high motivation for solitude, there was no significant relationship between time spent alone and their satisfaction with their day.

"On days that were relatively high on choiceful motivation, the association between solitude time and day satisfaction was small and non-significant; on days low on choiceful motivation, increased solitude time was significantly associated with lower day satisfaction."

Interestingly, the relationships established by this study were linear, indicating that there may not be an average threshold value or 'tipping point' beyond which the relationship between well-being and time spent alone changes.


The findings of this study indicate that there is no 'right' amount of solitude in our daily lives. Spending time alone comes with certain opportunities, including having more control over how we would like to spend our time. Too little time spent alone can mean not having the opportunity to relax and reconnect with ourselves. On the other hand, too much time spent alone, especially if not by choice, can lead to isolation, loneliness, and various other adverse outcomes.

These findings imply that solitude's benefits come from being alone. They also indicate that people can desire more solitude or less based on various contextual factors and that their choices are highly variable. Individuals respond to day-specific occurrences by feeling the need to connect more or less.

Researchers hope these intriguing findings will lead to further research into how experiences with socializing and solitude influence well-being and quality of life. Future studies can focus separately on different periods of adulthood, as age can modify these relationships. They could also examine what activities are undertaken and with whom and use other study designs to allow for causal inference.

Such investigations can help us make the most of our time in solitude and realize when we could use some human interaction!

Journal reference:
Priyanjana Pramanik

Written by

Priyanjana Pramanik

Priyanjana Pramanik is a writer based in Kolkata, India, with an academic background in Wildlife Biology and economics. She has experience in teaching, science writing, and mangrove ecology. Priyanjana holds Masters in Wildlife Biology and Conservation (National Centre of Biological Sciences, 2022) and Economics (Tufts University, 2018). In between master's degrees, she was a researcher in the field of public health policy, focusing on improving maternal and child health outcomes in South Asia. She is passionate about science communication and enabling biodiversity to thrive alongside people. The fieldwork for her second master's was in the mangrove forests of Eastern India, where she studied the complex relationships between humans, mangrove fauna, and seedling growth.


Please use one of the following formats to cite this article in your essay, paper or report:

  • APA

    Pramanik, Priyanjana. (2023, December 06). Study reveals no 'one-size-fits-all' balance between solitude and socializing for well-being. News-Medical. Retrieved on February 21, 2024 from

  • MLA

    Pramanik, Priyanjana. "Study reveals no 'one-size-fits-all' balance between solitude and socializing for well-being". News-Medical. 21 February 2024. <>.

  • Chicago

    Pramanik, Priyanjana. "Study reveals no 'one-size-fits-all' balance between solitude and socializing for well-being". News-Medical. (accessed February 21, 2024).

  • Harvard

    Pramanik, Priyanjana. 2023. Study reveals no 'one-size-fits-all' balance between solitude and socializing for well-being. News-Medical, viewed 21 February 2024,


The opinions expressed here are the views of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of News Medical.
Post a new comment
You might also like...
Supportive parenting and screen time link maternal depression to child self-control, research finds