This is an English assignment about topic research. The files that I included contain the instruction of the assignment + a strong student sample. Also, I’ve included the articles that you should work on.

People Like You More Than You Think; A
behavioral economist answers questions on
making friends, sliding-scale pricing and buying
a new car
Ariely, Dan . Wall Street Journal (Online) ; New York, N.Y. [New York, N.Y]05 Sep 2019.

ProQuest document link

FULL TEXT
PHOTO: Ruth Gwily

Hi, Dan.

I started college a couple of weeks ago, and I find myself very preoccupied about whether the people I’m meeting

like me. Do you have any advice about how I can relax around people? —Bronwyn

You will be relieved to know that most of us tend to underestimate how much people enjoy our company. In 2018,

Erica J. Boothby and colleagues published a paper about the “liking gap”—the difference between how much we

think other people like us and how much they actually like us. In one of their studies, they asked first-year college

students to rate how much they liked a given roommate and how much they believed their roommates liked them,

starting in September and continuing throughout the school year.

They found that participants systematically underestimated how much they were liked. In fact, it wasn’t until May,

after living together for eight months, that people accurately perceived how much they were liked. So try to focus

your social energy on spending quality time with friends and don’t worry too much about the outcome.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

What are your tips for making friends in a new environment? Join the conversation below.

Dear Dan,

I work for a nonprofit organization that offers mindfulness retreats for teens. Our tuition model is that we request

1% of a family’s income, up to $2,000, for a week-long retreat. We feel that this model is fair, but some higher-

income families object to paying more than others for the same service. Why do they feel this way, when the cost

is such a small share of their income? —Tom

Our perception of what is fair depends to a large degree on what we’re being asked to give up to achieve a fair

outcome. In your arrangement, people with more money are being asked to pay more, so they are likely to see a

fixed price for tuition as being more fair than a sliding scale—and vice versa for families with less money.

One way to try to overcome this bias is what the political philosopher John Rawls called the “veil of ignorance.” In

this approach, people are asked to design an imaginary society they will have to live in, without knowing whether

they are going to be rich or poor. This means that they have to decide what is fair before they know how much they

will personally stand to gain or lose from any given arrangement—for instance, the tax rate. Maybe you can try an

exercise of this sort related to tuition as part of your mindfulness teaching.

Hi, Dan.

I have an aging but perfectly fine car and waste a lot of time pining for something more modern and comfortable.

But I haven’t found a new model I love, and with technological improvements happening so fast, cars are getting

better every year. Should I wait for the perfect car to come along or should I compromise and buy something now?

—Alex

My sense is that if you don’t like any of the available options, it means you’re not yet ready to make a change.

https://ezproxy2.library.colostate.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/newspapers/people-like-you-more-than-think-behavioral/docview/2284732411/se-

2?accountid=10223

https://ezproxy2.library.colostate.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/newspapers/people-like-you-more-than-think-behavioral/docview/2284732411/se-2?accountid=10223

Happiness isn’t just about what we have and don’t have; it’s also about not constantly looking for something

better. Why don’t you decide that you won’t look at new cars for a certain period—say, two years—and then give

yourself a three-month window to research a purchase. At the end of that time, you will pick the best option

available. This way, you won’t waste time and energy on an open-ended search.

Credit: By Dan Ariely

DETAILS

LINKS

People: Ariely, Dan Rawls, John

Publication title: Wall Street Journal (Online); New York, N.Y.

Publication year: 2019

Publication date: Sep 5, 2019

column: Ask Ariely

Section: Life

Publisher: Dow Jones &Company Inc

Place of publication: New York, N.Y.

Country of publication: United States, New York, N.Y.

Publication subject: Business And Economics

e-ISSN: 25749579

Source type: Newspapers

Language of publication: English

Document type: News

ProQuest document ID: 2284732411

Document URL: https://ezproxy2.library.colostate.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/newspa

pers/people-like-you-more-than-think-behavioral/docview/2284732411/se-

2?accountid=10223

Copyright: Copyright 2019 Dow Jones &Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Last updated: 2019-09-07

Database: U.S. Major Dailies

https://ezproxy2.library.colostate.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/newspapers/people-like-you-more-than-think-behavioral/docview/2284732411/se-2?accountid=10223

https://ezproxy2.library.colostate.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/newspapers/people-like-you-more-than-think-behavioral/docview/2284732411/se-2?accountid=10223

https://ezproxy2.library.colostate.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/newspapers/people-like-you-more-than-think-behavioral/docview/2284732411/se-2?accountid=10223

Linking Service

Database copyright  2021 ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved.
Terms and Conditions Contact ProQuest

https://colostate.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/openurl/01COLSU_INST/01COLSU_INST:01COLSU?url_ver=Z39.88-2004&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&genre=article&sid=ProQ:ProQ:wallstreetjournal&atitle=People%20Like%20You%20More%20Than%20You%20Think;%20A%20behavioral%20economist%20answers%20questions%20on%20making%20friends,%20sliding-scale%20pricing%20and%20buying%20a%20new%20car&title=Wall%20Street%20Journal%20(Online)&issn=&date=2019-09-05&volume=&issue=&spage=&au=Ariely,%20Dan&isbn=&jtitle=Wall%20Street%20Journal%20(Online)&btitle=&rft_id=info:eric/&rft_id=info:doi/

https://www.proquest.com/info/termsAndConditions

http://about.proquest.com/go/pqissupportcontact

• People Like You More Than You Think; A behavioral economist answers questions on making friends, sliding-scale pricing and buying a new car

T H E J O U R N A L O F C O L L E G E A N D U N I V E R S I T Y S T U D E N T H O U S I N G 46

Perceived Social
Support and Roommate
Status as Predictors of
College Student
Loneliness

ELAINE M. ESHBAUGH
Associate Professor, Gerontology
University of Northern Iowa

Elaine.Eshbaugh@uni.edu

WILLIAM R. HENNINGER IV
Assistant Professor, Family Services
University of Northern Iowa

William.Henninger@uni.edu

University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida

CHRISTOPHER MADIGAN
Undergraduate Student, Family Services
University of Northern Iowa

Madiganc@uni.edu

ANASTASIA OSBECK
Undergraduate Student, Family Services
University of Northern Iowa

Osbecka@uni.edu

V O L U M E 4 2 , N O. 2 • 2 0 1 6 47

LONELINESS IS AN ISSUE that is ubiquitous across college
and university campuses. Studies have shown that students
who utilize campus counseling services report loneliness
as one of the most common issues for which they seek
counseling. Although loneliness has been studied in the
social sciences, little attention has been paid to predictors
of loneliness on college and university campuses. This study
used the UCLA Loneliness Scale to investigate the role that
perceived social support, roommate status, gender, and year
in college play in self-reported loneliness. Results suggest
that students who reported greater social support from
their families were lonelier than students who reported less
family support. Conversely, students who reported greater
social support from friends and significant others were less
lonely than students who reported less support from friends
and significant others. In addition, males reported being
lonelier than their female counterparts. Finally, students
who did not have roommates reported being lonelier than
those who had roommates. Implications of this study for
residence halls and higher education are discussed.

Loneliness is

one of the most

prominent

concerns reported

by college students

and is one of the

most common

reasons for seeking

help at campus

counseling centers

. . . . if research

can identify early

predictors of

loneliness in college

students, programs

can be created

to address and

mitigate them.

Loneliness is experienced when a large difference exists between

the personal relationships one wishes to have and the personal

relationships that actually exist in one’s social network (Peplau &

Perlman, 1982; Rotenberg, 1999). Perhaps because this definition

relies on a person’s subjective appraisal of their social situation

and their perception that relationships are not adequate, variables

such as size of social network (Fischer & Phillips, 1982) and total

number of friends (Parker & Seal, 1996) are strong predictors of

loneliness. In addition, total amount of social contact may not vary

between people who identify themselves as lonely or non-lonely

people (Jones, 1982).

T H E J O U R N A L O F C O L L E G E A N D U N I V E R S I T Y S T U D E N T H O U S I N G 48

William R. Henninger IV • Anastasia Osbeck • Elaine M. Eshbaugh • Christopher Madigan

wadzki, Graham, & Gerin, 2013). However, if

research can identify early predictors of lone-

liness in college students, programs can be

created to address and mitigate them and may

limit many of the negative academic and social

effects of loneliness.

Students with more support

from friends and significant

others were less lonely.

Interestingly, more support

from family was significantly

related to more loneliness.

A majority of college students opt to, or

are required to, live in student housing their

first year of college (Stern, Powers, Dhaene,

Dix, & Shegog, 2007). Often first-year student

housing involves sharing a room with another

college student, and these first experiences

with sharing close quarters typically involve

close contact and attachment (Sandford &

Rowatt, 2004). Differences in desire for to-

getherness between roommates may develop,

where one roommate may desire more physi-

cal and emotional closeness than the other

(Erlandson, 2009). Research suggests that

similarities in communication strategies and

some personality traits, such as the ability to

cooperate and communicate, predict greater

roommate satisfaction (Erlandson, 2009). At-

tempts to match roommates based on similari-

ties are often made by colleges and universities

LONELINESS AMONG COLLEGE
AND UNIVERSITY STUDENTS
The loneliness accompanying the transition

to college has been noted as a painful experi-

ence for young people, in part because they

have left behind the social support that was

prevalent in their relationships with friends

and family (Marshall, Liu, Wu, Berzonsky,

& Adams, 2010). This transition is also im-

portant because loneliness appears to be an

interaction of both personality traits and en-

vironmental effects (Hawkely & Cacioppo,

2010; Larose, Guay, & Boivin, 2002). Certain

personality traits—such as expectations for

poor social interactions and bias towards re-

membering poor social interactions—predict

less than satisfactory interactions, and certain

environments (unfamiliar settings, settings

with unfamiliar people) make the potential

for desired social connection overwhelming.

Though personality traits and environmen-

tal effects appear to be important predictors

of loneliness, previous research on loneli-

ness among college and university students

has focused on the organizational climate

of university life, but not on specific stu-

dents’ reports of relationships and loneliness

(Wiseman, Mayseless, & Sharabany, 2006).

Loneliness is one of the most prominent

concerns reported by college students and is

one of the most common reasons for seeking

help at campus counseling centers (Nicpon et

al., 2006). At an institutional level, loneliness

combined with additional student issues such

as depression or stress over academics has

been associated with increased dropout rates,

which may lead to loss of enrollment and a

lack of overall morale within residence halls

and on campus (Daugherty & Lane, 1999; Za-

V O L U M E 4 2 , N O. 2 • 2 0 1 6 49

Perceived Social Support and Roommate Status

on the basis of a housing questionnaire that ex-

plores preferences about such things as noise

levels or extracurricular activities (McEwan &

Soderberg, 2006). Pairing students as room-

mates can allow them a chance to immediately

expand their social network, but it is impor-

tant that care be taken when pairing these stu-

dents. Pairing them according to interests and

preferred noise level may not match them on

factors that actually predict roommate satisfac-

tion such as the ability to cooperate and com-

municate (Erlandson, 2009). Because these

early interactions are important in helping stu-

dents create a social network at college, room-

mates should be paired with care.

Gender and Loneliness

The relationship between gender and loneli-

ness has been studied extensively within the

social sciences (e.g., Blazina, Settle, & Eddins,

2008; Cramer & Neyedley, 1998), though it is

less researched in emerging adults. College-

age men report higher levels of loneliness

than do their female counterparts, which may

be due to the fact that culturally based gender

roles teach that young men should not reach

out to same-sex peers for social support (Knox,

Vail-Smith, & Zusman, 2007).

Though males in college tend towards

feeling more loneliness, they are more likely to

be satisfied with assigned roommates. Specifi-

cally, men are more likely to be satisfied with

their roommates and less bothered by their

roommate’s style of social interaction, types

of interests and values, and their hygiene than

women are (Benenson et al., 2009). Evidence

also suggests that, compared to women, men

cooperate better with individuals for lengthier

periods of time, such as living with a room-

mate or in a residence hall (Benenson et al.,

2009). Men have also been shown to cooperate

indiscriminately with other men in a commu-

nity setting (Benenson et al., 2009).

Perceived Social Support

Students who come from strong support

systems of family and friends are likely to ex-

perience lower levels of stress and depression

when compared with those who have weaker

social support systems (Ruthig, Haynes, Stu-

pinsky, & Perry, 2009). Many college students

need the assurance that others are willing to

talk and listen, so they seek support from their

social environment (Chao, 2012). Once they

have secured support in the college environ-

ment, they are better able to focus on their

Though RAs are not able to force

friendships, they can supply

numerous opportunities for

students to engage in social

events. RAs can also supply

them with resources for activities

on campus that may be in their

interest area.

studies and cope with academic demands

(Mattanah, Brooks, Brand, Quimby, & Ayers,

2012). Those who perceive that they have

higher levels of social support may be able to

enjoy greater academic adjustment because

they believe they have the professors, class-

T H E J O U R N A L O F C O L L E G E A N D U N I V E R S I T Y S T U D E N T H O U S I N G 50

mates, and other peers available to support

them in completing their academic tasks (Lidy

& Kahn, 2006).

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study was to determine the

relationship between college students’ loneli-

ness and students’ perceived level of support

as it is influenced by covariates (e.g., year in

college, roommate status) related to these vari-

ables. The relationship between roommate

status and gender was also investigated. An in-

teraction for gender and roommate status was

used to compare the association between room-

mate status and loneliness in men and women.

RESEARCH METHOD
Demographics

Students living in three randomly selected

residence halls at a comprehensive mid-sized

Midwestern university were mailed a packet of

questionnaires in the spring of 2007. Of the

495 questionnaires mailed, 316 (64%) were

returned. Students who completed the survey

were eligible to win small prizes from local

businesses. Females made up 74% percent (n =

234) of the participants. Students were catego-

rized by year as 37% (n = 117) freshmen, 37.3%

(n = 118) sophomores, 20.6% (n = 65) juniors,

and 5.1% (n = 16) seniors. The mean age for

participants was 19.42 (SD = 1.07). More than

98% of participants identified themselves as

White/European-American. Other ethnicities

represented were Black/African-American (n

= 1), Hispanic/Latino (n = 1), and “other” (n =

3). Twenty-five percent of participants identi-

fied themselves as education majors, and 18%

responded that they were majoring in an area

of business.

Measures

Outcomes variables: Loneliness. The
UCLA Loneliness Scale, a 20-item instrument,

was used to measure loneliness (Russell,

Peplau, & Cutrona, 1980). The scale assesses

general, or global, loneliness and is one of

the most widely used loneliness measures.

Participants were asked to respond to state-

ments such as “I feel left out; I feel completely

alone; and I lack companionship.” Participants

responded by selecting from a Likert scale of

choices ranging from “I often feel this way” to

“I never feel this way.” The statement “I often

feel this way” is assigned a score of 3, where

“I never feel this way” is assigned a score of

0. Total scores for this measure range from

0 to 60. Higher scores indicate higher levels

of loneliness. Cronbach’s alpha in the present

study was .92. (See Appendix A.)

Covariates: Social support. Participants
were asked to indicate their gender, year in

school, and whether they were currently living

with a roommate in their residence hall (room-

mate status). Participants completed the Multi-

dimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support

(Zimet, Dahlem, Zimet, & Farley, 1988) to

assess social support from friends, significant

others, and family. The 12-item scale uses a

7-point Likert-type response format (1 = very

strongly disagree; 7 = very strongly agree). Scores

on this measure ranged from 1 to 94. Each of

the three sources of support was assessed by

four items. Cronbach’s alphas for the subscales

ranged from .91 (family and friends) to .93

(significant other). (See Appendix B.)

William R. Henninger IV • Anastasia Osbeck • Elaine M. Eshbaugh • Christopher Madigan

V O L U M E 4 2 , N O. 2 • 2 0 1 6 51

In order to determine whether a student

having a roommate accounted for additional

variance in loneliness beyond the covariates,

a hierarchical linear regression was conducted

(Table 2). First, gender, year in school, and the

three social support variables were entered

into a regression model, F(7, 308) = 47.15, p <

.001, R2 = .52. In this first step, gender and all

three social support variables were significant-

ly related to loneliness. This model accounted

for more than half (52%) of the variance in

loneliness. Men were lonelier than women,

and students indicating they had a higher aca-

demic classification (e.g., senior) were lonelier.

Students with more support from friends and

significant others were less lonely. Interesting-

ly, more support from family was significantly

related to more loneliness.

RESULTS
Means and standard deviations, as well as

correlations, are displayed in Table 1. Several

variables were correlated with whether a par-

ticipant had a roommate. Students with room-

mates reported higher levels of social support

from family and friends but not from signifi-

cant others. Loneliness was also significantly

negatively correlated with having a roommate.

Higher levels of social support from all three

sources (family, friends, and significant others)

were negatively related to loneliness. In zero-

order correlations, gender was related to social

support. Women had higher levels of social

support than men had from family, friends,

and significant others. They were also less

lonely than men.

Perceived Social Support and Roommate Status

Table 1

1. Gender (0 = male, 1 = female) .74 .44 –

2. Sophomore .37 .48 .19** –

3. Junior .21 .41 -.02 -.39** –

4. Senior .05 .22 -.09 -.18** -.12* –

5. Social supp—family 23.91 4.10 .26** -.09 .07 -.28** –

6. Social supp—friend 23.39 3.15 .38** .02 -.03 -.15** .70** –

7. Social supp—sig other 24.19 3.71 .26** .08 -.19** -.12* .63** .57** –

8. If roommate .73 .44 -.11 .00 -.21** -.22** .19** .17** .06 –

Loneliness 38.00 10.14 -.33** -.12* .16** .21** -.45** -.63** -.59** -.23**

Note: (*p = .05) (**p < .01)

Means, Standard Deviations, and Zero-Order Correlations of Predictor, Covariate, and
Outcome Variables (N = 316)

M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

T H E J O U R N A L O F C O L L E G E A N D U N I V E R S I T Y S T U D E N T H O U S I N G 52

order to determine if there was a significant in-

teraction for roommate status and gender, this

interaction term was then added to the model.

However, this addition did not account for

significantly more variance than the previous

model, F(1, 309) = 1.84, p = .18.

DISCUSSION
Loneliness is experienced by many students

on college and university campuses through-

out the U.S. (Wiseman et al., 2006). The find-

ings in the present study begin to shed light

on the specific variables that contribute to

student loneliness and reveal that there are

several predictors. Social support from friends

and significant others was the largest predic-

tor of loneliness in this study; the more social

support a student reported from friends and

a significant other, the less likely they were

to be lonely. In addition, those who reported

having a roommate were less likely to report

loneliness when compared to those without a

roommate. Previous research has demonstrat-

ed that those college students who are socially

engaged are less likely to report being lonely

(Lucas, Knowles, Gardner, Molden, & Jefferis,

2010). Though these students may not rely on

their roommates for social support (we did not

ask this in the survey), they are likely socially

engaged with them. Causation cannot be in-

ferred from this analysis, but it is possible that

a roommate provides social engagement that

helps to mitigate loneliness.

The fact that males were more likely to be

lonely than their female counterparts was to be

expected, as previous research suggests that

men are less likely to engage in relationships

than their female counterparts. Interestingly,

only a “senior” classification was a significant

When roommate status was added, all of

the other variables, with the exception of clas-

sification, remained significant, F(8, 307) =

44.32, p < .001, R2 = .54. In addition, students

without roommates were significantly lonelier

than students with roommates. A significant

proportion of additional variance in loneliness

(2%) was accounted for with the addition of

roommate status, F(1, 310) = 11.91, p < .01. In

William R. Henninger IV • Anastasia Osbeck • Elaine M. Eshbaugh • Christopher Madigan

Table 2

Model 1

Gender (0 = male, 1 = female) -1.90 1.00 -.08*

Sophomore .11 .96 .01

Junior 1.83 1.12 .07

Senior 6.66 1.97 .15**

Social supp—family .50 .16 .20**

Social supp—friend -1.59 .20 -.50**

Social supp—sig other -1.02 .15 -.38**

Model 2

Gender (0 = male, 1 = female) -2.51 1.00 -.11*

Sophomore -.24 .94 -.01

Junior .589 1.16 .02

Senior 4.96 2.0 .10

Social supp—family .57 .16 .23**

Social supp—friend -1.51 .19 -.48**

Social supp—sig other -1.10 .15 -.41**

If roommate -3.46 .98 -.15**

Note: Model 1 R2 = .52
Model 2 R2 = .54; R2 = .02**
*p < .05 **p < .01

Regression of Loneliness on Covariates
and Predictor Variables (N = 316)

Variable B SE B

V O L U M E 4 2 , N O. 2 • 2 0 1 6 53

predictor of loneliness (seniors reported more

loneliness than first-year students) before

roommate status was added to the analyses.

After roommate status was added, classifica-

tion (e.g., junior, senior) was no longer a sig-

nificant predictor. A causal inference cannot

be implied from these findings, but it is pos-

sible that, regardless of year in college, it is im-

portant that students have contact with fellow

classmates to stave off loneliness.

Finally, the more social support that stu-

dents reported from families, the more likely

they were to be lonely. On the surface, this

finding seems counterintuitive, as one would

think that the more social support a student

receives, the less likely they are to be lonely.

However, it is possible that students who

receive large amounts of social support from

family members who live out of town feel

alone because they are not able to interact with

them face to face. It also may be likely that

these students go home during the weekends

to the place they receive social support and do

not build social connections with students on

campus. It should be noted that these findings

are specific to the study sample but may not

hold true for students from backgrounds dis-

similar to those of the sample population.

Limitations

Though we feel this study has valuable infor-

mation that can be utilized by those who work

with students living in campus housing, there

are some limitations. Specifically, this survey

was conducted on one campus in the Midwest.

As a result, it could be that the results are spe-

cific to this campus, though the sample is rep-

resentative of the larger campus population.

There were disproportionate numbers of

females and Caucasian students in this study.

The demographics of the population at the uni-

versity where the sample was taken are similar

to that of the sample from which this data was

taken. This should be taken into consideration

when interpreting these results for college

students around the U.S. Specifically, studies

focused more largely on males would be ben-

eficial, as the current sample population was

largely female (74%). It is possible that lone-

liness, social support, and roommate interac-

tions may exhibit differently in other cultures.

Implications

The major implication of this study is that

students who come to campus and make con-

nections are less lonely than students who do

not. It is probable that students initially lean

on their parents and family for social support

The major implication of this

study is that students who

come to campus and make

connections are less lonely

than students who do not. It is

probable that students initially

lean on their parents and

family for social support and

slowly transition to friends

and significant others as they

become part of the college

atmosphere.

Perceived Social Support and Roommate Status

T H E J O U R N A L O F C O L L E G E A N D U N I V E R S I T Y S T U D E N T H O U S I N G 54

RAs are not able to force friendships, they can

supply numerous opportunities for students to

engage in social events. RAs can also supply

them with resources for activities on campus

that may be in their interest area. Students

new to campus are often overwhelmed with

the multitude of activities and quickly give

up sifting through the options. Also, linking

students up with others who might be part

of these activities could improve participation

and increase social connections with others.

Creating a culture where students are paired

with buddies could be carried out by nominat-

ing floor representatives in charge of identify-

ing potential groups and activities in which

students can participate. In addition, educat-

and slowly transition to friends and significant

others as they become part of the college at-

mosphere. Potentially, students who do not

have roommates have less of an opportunity

to make these connections. In addition, males

who tend to extend themselves less socially

than females (Knox et al., 2007) are potentially

lonely because of lack of support. However,

more research should be conducted to confirm

that lack of support is affecting males’ loneli-

ness. This being said, colleges and universities

that want to reduce loneliness among students

would be well served to create atmospheres

where students meet each other and create

connections based on mutual interests early in

their time in

university housing.

Those who do

not make initial connections may continue to

lean on parents for support and miss out on

becoming part of the campus experience. Spe-

cifically, universities and residence halls that

create programs on the weekends will give stu-

dents a reason to stay on campus and engage

with other students.

What Can Resident Assistants Do?

In the residence halls, resident assistants

(RAs) can help facilitate connections in two

ways. The most obvious way is to be persistent

about engaging students who have not found

social circles. Specifically, RAs should focus on

students who do not have roommates. Though

William R. Henninger IV • Anastasia Osbeck • Elaine M. Eshbaugh • Christopher Madigan

. . . colleges and universities that

want to reduce loneliness among

students would be well served

to create atmospheres where

students meet each other and

create connections based on mutual

interests early in their time in

university housing.

V O L U M E 4 2 , N O. 2 • 2 0 1 6 55

ing RAs about the predictors of student loneli-

ness would better help RAs identify students

who may benefit from the above-mentioned

initiatives.

What Can Housing Staff Do?

For staff in charge of creating a residential at-

mosphere that facilitates campus engagement,

academic success, and transitioning to adult-

hood, it may be useful to create weekend pro-

gramming that allows students to interact with

others in various areas of interest such as the

arts, sports, or live action role playing. Though

students cannot be forced to participate in on-

campus activities, it is possible that they will be

able to broaden their social network through

on-campus activities they enjoy and will poten-

tially become more engaged when they discov-

er niches in which they can participate.

A second way staff can help with loneli-

ness is by distributing information to parents

about how to supply appropriate levels of social

support to their students. It should be kept in

mind that the findings of this study are specific

to the population from which the sample was

drawn, and other cultures’ practices in sending

children to college may look vastly different. It

is possible that many parents are sending their

children to college for the first time and would

appreciate guidance on best practices for sup-

porting their child’s success in college. This in-

formation could easily be distributed through

pamphlets, emails, or websites. Specifically,

information could be sent to parents, staff, and

students as weekly newsletters. Topics could

touch on identifying the symptoms of loneli-

ness and ways to mitigate these symptoms.

Finally, this letter could link to resources for

students or their parents to utilize.

CONCLUSION
It is evident from the previous research that

loneliness is a campus issue worth mitigat-

ing (Wiseman et al., 2006). The present study

reveals that social interaction with peers, room-

mates, and significant others predicts a lower

rate of loneliness in students. In addition,

those who have been on campus longer are

not immune to feelings of loneliness. Having

housing officers and RAs who are knowledge-

able about these predictors can help identify

students who might benefit from programs

aimed at mitigating dropouts. Finally, housing

officers and RAs can help to bridge these social

gaps by facilitating interactions between and

among students.

Perceived Social Support and Roommate Status

T H E J O U R N A L O F C O L L E G E A N D U N I V E R S I T Y S T U D E N T H O U S I N G 56

REFERENCES

Benenson, J. F., Markovits, H., Fitzgerald, C., Geof-

froy, D., Flemming, J., Kahlenberg, S. M., &

Wrangham, R. W. (2009). Males’ greater toler-

ance of same-sex peers. Psychological Science,

20(2), 184–190.

Blazina, C., Settle, A. G., & Eddins., R. (2008).

Gender role conflict and separation-individua-

tion difficulties: Their impact on college men’s

loneliness. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 16(1),

69–81.

Chao, R. C. L. (2012). Managing perceived stress

among college students: The roles of social

support and dysfunctional coping. Journal of

College Counseling, 15, 5–21.

Cramer, K. M., & Neyedley, K. A. (1998). Sex differ-

ences in loneliness: The role of masculinity and

femininity. Sex Roles, 38(7), 645–653.

Daugherty, T. K., & Lane, E. J. (1999). A longitudinal

study of academic and social predictors of college

attrition. Social Behavior & Personality: An Inter-

national Journal, 27, 355–362.

Erlandson, K. (2009). Similarity of interpersonal

needs and roommate satisfaction. The Journal

of College and University Student Housing, 36(2),

10–23.

Fischer, C. S., & Phillips, S. L. (1982). Who is alone?

Social characteristics of people with small net-

works. In L. A. Peplau & D. Perlman (Eds.), Lone-

liness: A sourcebook of current theory research and

therapy (pp. 21–39). New York, NY: Wiley.

Hawkley, L. C., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2010). Loneliness

matters: A theoretical and empirical review of

consequences and mechanisms. Annals of Be-

havioral Medicine, 40(2), 218–227.

Jones, W. H. (1982). Loneliness and social behavior.

In L. A. Peplau & D. Perlman (Eds.), Loneliness:

A sourcebook of current theory research and therapy

(pp. 238–252). New York, NY: Wiley.

Knox, D., Vail-Smith, K., & Zusman, M. (2007). The

lonely college male. International Journal of Men’s

Health, 6, 273–279.

Larose, S., Guay, F., & Boivin, M. (2002). Attach-

ment, social support, and loneliness in young

adulthood: A test of two models. Personality and

Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(5), 684–693.

Lidy, K. M., & Kahn, J. H. (2006). Personality as a

predictor of first-semester adjustment to college:

The mediational role of perceived social support.

Journal of College Counseling, 9, 123–134.

Lucas, G. M., Knowles, M. L., Gardner, W. L.,

Molden, D. C., & Jefferis, V. E. (2010). Increas-

ing social engagement among lonely individuals:

The role of acceptance cues and promotion moti-

vations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,

36(10), 1346–1359.

Marshall, S. K., Liu, T., Wu, A., Berzonsky, M., &

Adams, G. R. (2010). Perceived mattering to

parents and friends for university students: A

longitudinal study. Journal of Adolescence 33,

367–375.

Mattanah, J. F., Brooks, L. J., Brand, B. L., Quimby

J. L., & Ayers, J. F. (2012). A social support in-

William R. Henninger IV • Anastasia Osbeck • Elaine M. Eshbaugh • Christopher Madigan

V O L U M E 4 2 , N O. 2 • 2 0 1 6 57

tervention and academic achievement in college:

Does perceived loneliness mediate the relation-

ship? Journal of College Counseling, 15, 22–36.

McEwan, P. J., & Soderberg, K. A. (2006). Room-

mate effects on grades: Evidence from first-year

housing assignments. Research in Higher Educa-

tion, 47, 347–370.

Nicpon, M. F., Huser, L., Blanks, E. H., Sollen-

berger, S., Befort, C., & Kurpius, S. E. R. (2006,

November). The relationship of loneliness and

social support with college freshmen’s academic

performance and persistence. Journal of College

Student Retention, 8, 345–358.

Parker, J. G., & Seal, J. (1996). Forming, losing, re-

newing, and replacing friendships: Applying

temporal parameters to the assessment of chil-

dren’s friendship experiences. Child Develop-

ment, 67, 2248–2268.

Peplau, L. A., & Perlman, D. (1982). Perspectives on

loneliness. In L. A. Peplau & D. Perlman (Eds.),

Loneliness: A sourcebook of current theory research

and therapy (pp. 1–18). New York, NY: Wiley.

Rotenberg, K. J. (1999). Parental antecedents of chil-

dren’s loneliness. In K. J. Rotenberg & S. Hymel

(Eds.), Loneliness in childhood and adolescence (pp.

176–200). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge Univer-

sity Press.

Russell, D., Peplau, L. A., & Cutrona, M. (1980). The

revised UCLA Loneliness Scale: Concurrent and

discriminant validity evidence. Journal of Person-

ality and Social Psychology, 39, 472–480.

Ruthig, J. C., Haynes, T. L., Stupinsky, R. H., & Perry,

R. P. (2009). Perceived academic control: Medi-

ating the effects of optimism and social support

on college students’ psychological health. Social

Psychology of Education: An International Journal,

12, 233–249.

Sandford, K., & Rowatt, W. C. (2004). When is nega-

tive emotion positive for relationships? An in-

vestigation of married couples and roommates.

College Student Journal, 11(3), 329–354.

Stern, L. A., Powers, J., Dhaene, K., Dix, A., & Shegog,

S. (2007). Liking, cooperation, and satisfaction

between roommates. The Journal of College and

University Student Housing, 34, 53–60.

Wiseman, H., Mayseless, O., & Sharabany, R.

(2006). Why are they lonely? Perceived quality

of early relationships with parents, attachment,

personality predispositions and loneliness in

first-year university students. Personality and In-

dividual Differences, 40, 237–248.

Zawadzki, M. J., Graham, J. E., & Gerin, W. (2013).

Rumination and anxiety mediate the effect of

loneliness on depressed mood and sleep quality

in college students. Health Psychology, 32(2),

212–222.

Zimet, G. D., Dahlem, N. W., Zimet, S. G., & Farley,

G. K. (1988). The Multidimensional Scale of Per-

ceived Social Support. Journal of Personality As-

sessment, 52, 30–41.

Perceived Social Support and Roommate Status

T H E J O U R N A L O F C O L L E G E A N D U N I V E R S I T Y S T U D E N T H O U S I N G 58

APPENDIX A
UCLA Loneliness Scale (Russell, Peplau, & Cutrona, 1980)

Please indicate how often each of the statements below is

descriptive of you.

1. I am unhappy doing so many things alone.

2. I have nobody to talk to.

3. I cannot tolerate being so alone.

4. I lack companionship.

5. I feel as if nobody really understands

me.

6. I find myself waiting for people to call or write.

7. There is no one I can turn to.

8. I am no longer close to anyone.

9. My interests and ideas are not shared by those around me.

10. I feel left out.

11. I feel completely alone.

12. I am unable to reach out and communicate with those around

me.

13. My social relationships are superficial.

14. I feel starved for company.

15. No one really knows me well.

16. I feel isolated from others.

17. I am unhappy being so withdrawn.

18. It is difficult for me to make friends.

19. I feel shut out and excluded by others.

20. People are around me but not with me.

Participant responses:

3 = O indicates “I often feel this way.”

2 = S indicates “I sometimes feel this way.”

1 = R indicates “I rarely feel this way.”

0 = N indicates “I never feel this way.”

William R. Henninger IV • Anastasia Osbeck • Elaine M. Eshbaugh • Christopher Madigan

APPENDIX B
Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support (Zimet,

Dahlem, Zimet, & Farley, 1998)

1. There is a special person who is around when I am in need.

2. There is a special person with whom I can share my joys and

sorrows.

3. My family really tries to help me.

4. I get the emotional help and support I need from my family.

5. I have a special person who is a real source of comfort to me.

6. My friends really try to help me.

7. I can count on my friends when things go wrong.

8. I can talk about my problems with my family.

9. I have friends with whom I can share my joys and sorrows.

10. There is a special person in my life who cares about my

feelings.

11. My family is willing to help me make decisions.

12. I can talk about my problems with my friends.

Participant responses:

1 –Very strongly disagree

2 – Strongly disagree

3 – Mildly disagree

4 – Neutral

5 – Mildly agree

6 – Strongly agree

7 – Very strongly agree

V O L U M E 4 2 , N O. 2 • 2 0 1 6 59

Perceived Social Support and Roommate Status

1. The data for this study were collected in 2007. How might the emergence of social media

since then impact this study if it were to be repeated today?

2. Does your housing/residential life program use a roommate matching tool? What is the

perceived or known effectiveness of this tool? What justification is given for using it in

making roommate assignments?

3. The results of this study strongly suggest that having a roommate is a positive condition for

students at all class levels. Yet students typically yearn for more privacy as they progress

through their collegiate experience. Brainstorm strategies that both afford this higher level

of privacy and encourage relationship-building in the student residential environment.

4. The roommate relationship has long been deemed beneficial to student development, and

this study suggests that it also helps to reduce loneliness. However, some students arrive

at college not accustomed to sharing personal space and sometimes find the roommate

relationship a source of stress. Develop four or five talking points for a conversation with

a parent advocating for their student to be assigned to a single room due to an unpleasant

roommate experience.

5. This particular study took place on a Midwestern campus with a relatively small and

homogeneous sample. If the same study was conducted on your campus, do you believe

the results would be similar? Why or why not?

6. Social support from friends was the largest predictor for countering loneliness in this study.

What can residence hall staff do to help students become socially engaged?

7. The study found that students with greater support from families were more likely

to be lonely. In the discussion section, the authors provided several reasons for this

counterintuitive finding. What ideas do you have that might explain this finding?

Discussion Questions

Copyright of Journal of College & University Student Housing is the property of Association
of College & University Housing and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple
sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder’s express written permission.
However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.