https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6886-2745
Figures
Abstract
Aim
Our first aim was to present norm values for the Preference for Solitude Scale by sex, age, and other sociodemographic groups. Our second aim was to evaluate the correlates of preference for solitude.
Methods
Data were collected in August/September 2023 from a sample of individuals (N = 5000) living in Germany aged 18 to 74 years (ensuring representativeness in terms of sex, age group and federal state for the German general adult population). The established and valid Preference for Solitude Scale (range 0 to 12, with higher values reflecting a stronger preference for solitude) was used to quantify the preference for solitude. Norm values were provided by sex and age groups. Multiple linear regressions were used to examine the correlates of preference for solitude.
Results
Average preference for solitude score was 7.6 (SD = 3.0; 0 to 12). The average score was 7.3 (SD = 3.0) among males and 7.9 (SD = 2.9) among females. Regressions showed that a stronger preference for solitude was associated with being female (β = .51, p < .001), being older (e.g., being 40 to 49 years compared to 18 to 29 years, β = .85, p < .001), being single (e.g., divorced compared to being single, β = -.78, p < .01), higher level of education (secondary education compared to primary education, β = .43, p < .01), never been a smoker (e.g., daily smoker compared to never smokers, β = -.61, p < .001), absence of alcohol consumption (e.g., drinking once a week compared to never drinking, β = -1.09, p < .001), no sports activity (e.g., 2–4 hours per week compared to no sports activity, β = -.60, p < .001), poorer self-rated health (β = .28, p < .001) and more depressive symptoms (β = .05, p < .001). Sex-stratified regressions yielded similar results.
Conclusion
Norm values provided in this study can be used as a benchmark for comparison with other countries and can guide further research dealing with preferences for solitude. We demonstrated the importance of several sociodemographic factors (e.g., marital status), lifestyle-related factors (e.g., sports activity), and health-related factors (e.g., depressive symptoms) for the preference for solitude. Such knowledge about the correlates of preference for solitude may help to characterize them. This is essential to ensure a good balance between social interaction and being alone. This is important because preference for solitude is associated with poor self-rated health and depression, but also with healthy behaviors such as abstaining from smoking and drinking
Citation: Hajek A, Sutin AR, Luchetti M, Stephan Y, Peltzer K, Terracciano A, et al. (2024) German population norms of the preference to solitude scale and its correlates. PLoS ONE 19(5): e0303853. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0303853
Editor: Gabriel Gomes de Oliveira, University of Campinas - UNICAMP, BRAZIL
Received: March 15, 2024; Accepted: May 1, 2024; Published: May 21, 2024
Copyright: © 2024 Hajek et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Data Availability: Data are not publicly available but interested parties may contact the authors (and the Department for Health Economics and Health Services Research, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf: igv@uke.de) for more information. The data are not publicly available due to ethical restrictions.
Funding: We acknowledge financial support from the Open Access Publication Fund of UKE - Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf.
Competing interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
1 Introduction
A preference for solitude is defined as the tendency to spend and enjoy time alone [1]. Interest in this construct has gained attention in recent years, particularly since the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic [2,3] and the concerns related to loneliness and declining social connections [4]. Preference for solitude may result from intrinsic characteristics and life circumstances and can have both positive and negative correlates (e.g., mental health). Some people might find it easier to relax, concentrate, reflect on their life, connect with nature, or engage in creative activities when alone. A preference for solitude could also develop in reaction to stressful or unfulfilling social interactions. Such preference could differ for men and women, who are thought to have different affiliative traits [5], and evolve as people get older. For example, a recent study showed that extraverted narcissism is associated with aversion to solitude [6]. A trend to a stronger preference for solitude was recently observed among Chinese adolescents (particularly among urban adolescents) [7]. Another study showed the potential negative correlates of this preference, including harmful interpersonal consequences because individuals with a stronger preference for solitude had a higher likelihood of experiencing ostracism and belief that engaging with individuals who strongly preferred solitude would be unpleasant for both interaction partners [8]. A further study showed that a greater preference for solitude was associated with higher odds of suicidal ideation and self-harm among adolescents in Japan (city of Tsu and Kochi Prefecture) [9].
Even though there have been more studies on being alone since the beginning of the pandemic, the preference for solitude (e.g., in contrast to research on isolation and loneliness) has hardly been studied at all. The few existing studies are often restricted to selective and small samples–or focused on certain groups such as adolescents/young adults (e.g., [10,11]). Burger [1], for example, provided norms for undergraduate college students in the United States (n = 103): 5.37 (SD = 2.45) among male students and 4.52 (SD = 2.61) among female students (combined: 4.87, SD = 2.57). There is thus a need for larger and more diverse samples to provide both norms and identify correlates of preference for solitude among the general adult population. To that end, we use a large sample of German adults to provide norm values for the Preference for Solitude Scale by sex and age groups and other important sociodemographic groups. Moreover, we aim to investigate the correlates of preference for solitude among the general adult population in Germany. Such knowledge can enrich our understanding of individual differences in social behavior, which is important because a greater preference for solitude may have consequences for well-being (which can be either positive or negative, depending on the outcome [12]) and mental health outcomes [9].
2 Methods
2.1 Sample
We used data from a study of 5,000 individuals living in Germany, ranging in age from 18 to 74 years old. Data collection occurred during August and September 2023. Bilendi, a market research firm certified with ISO 26362, handled participant recruitment for this study. Selection was done from an online pool using quotas to achieve a balanced representation across age, sex, and federal states, which mirrors the corresponding demographics of the general adult population in Germany.
All participants gave written informed consent to participate in the study before the survey began (by agreeing to the online consent form before the survey began), which is a standard procedure for online surveys. Additionally, the study obtained approval from the Local Psychological Ethics Committee at the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf (LPEK-0629).
2.2 Preference for solitude
To quantify the preference for solitude, we used the German version [13] of the Preference for Solitude Scale [1]. For each pair of statements, participants were asked to select the statement that best described them. Whenever neither statement described them well, or both statements described them somewhat, they should choose the statement that applied to them more often (or better). One example pair is:
- 1a) I enjoy being around people.
- 1b) I enjoy being by myself.
Each pair of statements, the statement preferring others was coded as 0 (reflecting a weak preference for solitude; example statement 1a) and the statement preferring being alone was coded as 1 (reflecting a strong preference for solitude; example statement 1b). The final count score ranged from 0 to 12, with higher values indicating a stronger preference for solitude. The former study showed that the German version of the Preference for Solitude Scale is internally consistent (Cronbach’s alpha was .77) and valid [13]. A good test-retest reliability (.75) has also been demonstrated [13].
2.3 Correlates
Potential correlates of preference for solitude were selected based on former research (e.g., [14]). Sociodemographic correlates included sex (males; females; diverse), age group (18 to 29 years; 30 to 39 years; 40 to 49 years; 50 to 59 years; 60 to 74 years), marital status (single; divorced; widowed; living together: married or in partnership; living separately: married or in partnership), education (according to the CASMIN-classification [15]: primary education; secondary education; tertiary education), labor force participation (full-time employed; retired; other), region (West Germany; East Germany), and migration background (no; yes). Lifestyle-related correlates were considered: smoking behavior (yes, daily; yes, occasionally; no, not anymore; never been a smoker), alcohol consumption (daily; several times a week; once a week; one to three times a month; less often; never), and frequency of sports activities (no sports activity; less than one hour per week; 1 to 2 hours per week; 2 to 4 hours per week; more than 4 hours per week). Additionally, we considered health-related correlates: self-rated health (single-item, ranging from 1 = very good to 5 = very poor), count of chronic conditions (Sleep disorder; Thyroid disease; Diabetes; Asthma; Heart disease [also heart failure, cardiac insufficiency]; Cancer; Stroke; Migraine; High blood pressure; Dementia; Joint disease [also arthrosis, rheumatism]; Chronic back problems; Burnout; Other illness), and depressive symptoms. Depressive symptoms were assessed using the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire-9 (PHQ-9) [16]. A total score ranging from 0 to 27 was calculated, with higher scores indicating more depressive symptoms. In sensitivity analysis, depressive symptoms were replaced by anxiety symptoms (due to collinearity, they were not included in one model). Anxiety symptoms were measured using the 7-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder-7 (GAD-7) [17]. The total sum score ranged from 0 to 21, with higher scores indicating more anxiety symptoms.
2.4 Statistics
To address the first aim of this study, the characteristics of the sample and population norms for the sociodemographic subgroups (i.e., sex, age group, marital status, education, migration background, employment status, region) were computed. To address the second aim of this study, the correlates of the preference for solitude were investigated using multiple linear regressions with robust standard errors. Using coefplot [18], the regression coefficients are also displayed. Depressive symptoms were replaced by anxiety symptoms in a sensitivity analysis because they could not be tested simultaneously due to collinearity issues. Additional analyses tested sex-stratified regressions (males; females). No missing values were present (due to the forced-choice format). Stata 18.0 (Stata Corp., College Station, Texas) was used in this present study. The statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.
3 Results
3.1 Sample characteristics and population norms
Characteristics of the sample are presented in Table 1. The average age was 46.9 years (SD = 15.3 years, range 18 to 74 years) and 50.8% female. Additional details are provided in Table 1.
The population norms for the Preference for Solitude Scale are shown in Table 2. The average preference for solitude score was 7.6 (SD = 3.0) on a scale from 0 to 12. The average score was 7.3 (SD = 3.0) among men and 7.9 (SD = 2.9) among women (Cohen’s d = |.20|). The average preference for solitude score varied between the age group (e.g., 8.1 (SD = 2.9) among individuals aged 50 to 59 years vs. 7.2 (SD = 2.8) among individuals aged 18 to 29 years, Cohen’s d = |.32|). Similarly, single participants had an average preference for solitude score of 8.1 (SD = 2.9), whereas individuals living together with their partner or spouse had an average score of 7.3 (SD = 3.0, Cohen’s d = |.27]). Individuals with a tertiary education had a comparatively lower average preference for solitude (7.2, SD = 3.0) compared to lower educated individuals. Full-time employed individuals had an average preference for solitude score of 7.3 (SD = 3.0), whereas retired individuals had an average score of 8.0 (SD = 3.0, Cohen’s d = |.23|). The average preference for solitude was particularly high among unemployed/job-seeking individuals (8.2, SD = 3.0; not shown in Table 2). No difference in the preference for solitude was found based on region or migration background.
3.2 Regression analysis
Results of the multiple linear regression with preference for solitude as the outcome are in Table 3 (the coefficients are also graphically displayed in Figs 1 and 2 to ease the readability). The regression showed that a stronger preference for solitude was associated with being female (β = .51, p < .001), being older (e.g., 50 to 59 years compared to 18 to 29 years, β = 1.12, p < .001), being single (e.g., divorced compared to being single, β = -.78, p < .01), secondary education (compared to primary education, β = .43, p < .01), never been a smoker (e.g., daily smoker compared to never smokers, β = -.61, p < .001), absence of alcohol consumption (e.g., drinking once a week compared to never drinking, β = -1.09, p < .001), no sports activity (e.g., 2–4 hours per week compared to no sports activity, β = -.60, p < .001), poorer self-rated health (β = .28, p < .001), and more depressive symptoms (β = .05, p < .001). The sensitivity analysis for anxiety symptoms indicated that a preference for solitude was associated with more anxiety symptoms (β = .04, p < .001, not shown in Table 3). The sex-stratified regressions mostly yielded similar results (S1 Appendix).
Findings based on multiple linear regressions.
4 Discussion
Our study aimed to provide German population norms for the preference for solitude. Furthermore, we explored factors associated with a preference for solitude. This study showed an association between sociodemographic (e.g., sex, age, marital status), lifestyle (e.g., sports activity), as well as health-related factors (e.g., depressive and anxiety symptoms) and the preference for solitude. Sex-stratified regressions produced comparable results. Our study builds on the previous literature that used smaller and selective samples generally focused on adolescents or young adults to provide a better understanding of preference for solitude across adulthood.
Our estimated norms for younger adults are much higher compared to the provided norms by Burger using data from a sample of US college students [1]. However, similar average values were observed in a previous thesis (7.12, SD = 3.16 among emerging adults; 9.02, SD = 2.93 among established adults; 8.72, SD = 3.01 among midlife adults) [19] using data from Amazon MTurk and an undergraduate class (data collection: October to December 2019).
In our study, women had a stronger preference for solitude. In contrast, a former study [20] did not find an association between women and men regarding the preference for solitude among 287 undergraduate students aged 18 to 28 years. This difference might be explained by our focus on general adult population rather than younger adults [20]. The finding is somewhat surprising given that women tend to score higher on prosocial and interpersonal traits [21], and there are no significant sex differences in loneliness among adults [22]. Furthermore, women often have larger social networks than men [23]. However, it may be precisely these larger social networks that can also lead them to prefer opportunities for retreat and be alone. Moreover, women tend to have more family obligations in Germany (e.g., childcare and household work) [24]–factors that may also explain the stronger preference for solitude.
Furthermore, older age groups also had a stronger preference for solitude in our current study. Of interest, this pattern seems opposite to the one found for loneliness, which is lowest in middle-age and higher in the youngest and oldest [25,26]. This may, for example, be an expression of greater family obligations in middle adulthood (e.g., bringing up children, caring for parents) [27]—which at the same time can increase the desire for free time alone. It could also be the desire for autonomous leisure activities after a long working life once in retirement. Similar preferences for solitude depending on age have been found based on 465 young to middle-aged adults using MTurk and a psychology class of undergraduates [14].
Moreover, being single was associated with a stronger preference for solitude (e.g., compared to individuals living together with their spouse or partner). Being single could therefore symbolize the freedom to spend a certain amount of free time alone. This could indicate that being single is an expression of a very free life choice rather than an unsuccessful search for a partner in Germany (see also: [28]). In contrast, individuals who live with their partner or spouse may generally have a greater preference for togetherness (see: [29])—which is ultimately reflected in their living and family situation. In an earlier study, neither marital status nor education was associated with the preference for solitude in different age groups [14]–which may be partly explained by differences in the sample composition. For example, the former study mainly included White/European American adults (mean age of 30.3 years, 61.7% single, 49.7% of the respondents having a college or higher education). Additionally, in this present study, higher education was associated with a stronger preference for solitude, possibly because people with more education place a higher value on self-actualization (e.g., to pursue their own interests) [30]. Such individuals may also find satisfaction more often in activities that they do alone (e.g., reading, creative work) [31].
Not smoking, not drinking alcohol, and not performing sports activities were all associated with a stronger preference for solitude in this present study. It is highly likely that these lifestyle-factors could be perceived as acts of sociability in Germany [32,33]. For example, there are smoking areas in Germany, drinking alcohol is generally socially accepted in Germany (e.g., Oktoberfest), and there are many popular team sports (e.g., soccer, basketball, and handball). Even individual sports often have a social component (e.g., running groups). Dispositional traits are also likely to contribute to these associations: Extroverts, who dislike solitude, are more likely to drink or smoke [34].
Furthermore, adverse health-related factors (i.e., poorer self-rated health and more depressive symptoms) were associated with a stronger preference for solitude. Individuals reporting poor health may suffer pain and discomfort [35], hindering social interactions [36]. Moreover, individuals with perceived poor health may prefer being alone as they may struggle to participate in social activities. They may also favor being alone because they feel like a burden to their friends and relatives [37]. Symptoms of depression include low self-esteem, loss of interest in activities that were previously enjoyable, sleep disturbances leading to fatigue, difficulty concentrating, excessive rumination and negative thoughts, fear of rejection, shame about one’s condition, and a feeling of losing control in social situations. These symptoms may lead individuals with more depressive symptoms to withdraw from social interactions and avoid negative experiences. Ultimately, these factors may lead individuals with more depressive symptoms to have a stronger preference for solitude. Interestingly and of note, sex-stratified regressions showed generally, similar results.
Acknowledgment should be provided for specific strengths and weaknesses of our study. This study represents the first study on German populations for the preference for solitude. Valid tools were used in our study for both the outcome and the independent variables. A very large sample was used, determined by quotas to ensure representation in terms of age, sex, and geographical location. Our research encompassed individuals ranging from 18 to 74 years old. Thus, population norms for individuals ≥ 75 years should be provided in future studies. Moreover, the cross-sectional nature of our data makes it impossible to provide population norms for different periods (e.g., at the peak of the pandemic vs. later stages of the pandemic). Additionally, the possibility of reverse causality cannot be dismissed (e.g., the preference for solitude contributes to changes in lifestyle factors). Furthermore, personality characteristics (e.g., introversion) could not be added to our regression model due to reasons of data availability.
5 Conclusion and future research
Norm values provided in this study can be used as a benchmark for comparison with other groups and can guide further research dealing with preferences for solitude. Moreover, knowledge about the correlates of preference for solitude may help to characterize them. This is essential to ensure a good balance between social interaction and being alone.
Norm values in other countries are also highly desirable (e.g., cross-country comparisons). Furthermore, norm values for adolescents may be of interest. Upcoming studies could also explore the moderating and mediating factors. Future research could also explore the consequences of a preference for solitude (e.g., for well-being). To this end, they could explore the enjoyment of solitude and the (perceived) productivity during solitude. Moreover, research could explore the link between the preference for solitude and mental health outcomes in more detail (e.g., when there is an unmet need for the preference for solitude in the job). While we used common analytical approaches in our work, future research could also use more advanced approaches (e.g., machine learning approaches).
Supporting information
S1 Appendix. Correlates of preference for solitude stratified by sex (men; women).
Findings based on multiple linear regressions.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0303853.s001
(DOCX)
References
- 1. Burger JM (1995) Individual differences in preference for solitude. Journal of Research in Personality 29 (1):85–108.
- 2. Michinov E, Michinov N (2023) Stay at home! When personality profiles influence mental health and creativity during the COVID-19 lockdown. Curr Psychol 42 (7):5650–5661. pmid:34092985
- 3. Meier JV, Noel JA, Kaspar K (2021) Alone Together: Computer-Mediated Communication in Leisure Time During and After the COVID-19 Pandemic. Front Psychol 12:666655. pmid:34234714
- 4.
Hajek A, Riedel-Heller SG, König H-H (2023) Loneliness and Social Isolation in Old Age. Correlates and implications. Routledge London.
- 5. Noonan MC, Corcoran ME, Courant PN (2008) Is the partnership gap closing for women? Cohort differences in the sex gap in partnership chances. Social Science Research 37 (1):156–179.
- 6. Zeigler-Hill V, Vonk J, Fatfouta R (2023) Does narcissus prefer to be alone? Narcissistic personality features and the preference for solitude. J Pers. pmid:38014712
- 7. Chen X, Sun X, Wu X, Liu J, Li D, Chen X (2023) Growth of preference for solitude in urban and rural Chinese adolescents. Front Psychiatry 14:1151534. pmid:37484672
- 8. Ren D, Evans AM (2021) Leaving the Loners Alone: Dispositional Preference for Solitude Evokes Ostracism. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 47 (8):1294–1308. pmid:33135544
- 9. Endo K, Ando S, Shimodera S, Yamasaki S, Usami S, Okazaki Y, et al (2017) Preference for Solitude, Social Isolation, Suicidal Ideation, and Self-Harm in Adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Health 61 (2):187–191. pmid:28457686
- 10. Lu X, Liu T, Liu X, Yang H, Elhai JD (2022) Nomophobia and relationships with latent classes of solitude. Bull Menninger Clin 86 (1):1–19. pmid:35258346
- 11. Zheng K, Coplan RJ, Teng Z, Liang L, Chen X, Bian Y (2023) How does interparental conflict affect adolescent preference-for-solitude? Depressive symptoms as mediator at between- and within-person levels. J Fam Psychol 37 (2):173–182. pmid:36656728
- 12. Toyoshima A, Kusumi T (2021) Examining the Relationship Between Preference for Solitude and Subjective Well-Being Among Japanese Older Adults. Innovation in Aging 6 (1). pmid:35146129
- 13. Nestler S, Back MD, Egloff B (2011) Psychometrische Eigenschaften zweier Skalen zur Erfassung interindividueller Unterschiede in der Präferenz zum Alleinsein. Diagnostica 57 (2):57–67.
- 14. Yuan J, Grühn D (2023) Preference and motivations for solitude in established adulthood: antecedents, consequences, and adulthood phase differences. Journal of Adult Development 30 (1):64–77.
- 15. Brauns H, Steinmann S (1999) Educational reform in France, West-Germany, the United Kingdom and Hungary: updating the CASMIN educational classification. ZUMA-Nachrichten 44 (23):7–44.
- 16. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB (2001) The PHQ‐9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Int Med 16 (9):606–613. pmid:11556941
- 17. Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JB, Löwe B (2006) A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7. Arch Int Med 166 (10):1092–1097. pmid:16717171
- 18. Jann B (2014) Plotting regression coefficients and other estimates. The Stata Journal 14 (4):708–737.
- 19.
Yuan J (2021) Preference and Motivation for Solitude in Adulthood: Antecedents, Consequences, and a Developmental Perspective. North Carolina State University.
- 20. Nguyen T-vT, Weinstein N, Ryan RM (2022) Who enjoys solitude? autonomous functioning (but not introversion) predicts self-determined motivation (but not preference) for solitude. Plos one 17 (5):e0267185. pmid:35613084
- 21. Costa PT Jr, Terracciano A, McCrae RR (2001) Gender differences in personality traits across cultures: robust and surprising findings. Journal of personality and social psychology 81 (2):322. pmid:11519935
- 22. Maes M, Qualter P, Vanhalst J, Van den Noortgate W, Goossens L (2019) Gender differences in loneliness across the lifespan: A meta–analysis. European Journal of Personality 33 (6):642–654.
- 23. Okamoto K, Tanaka Y (2004) Gender differences in the relationship between social support and subjective health among elderly persons in Japan. Preventive medicine 38 (3):318–322. pmid:14766114
- 24. Samtleben C (2019) Auch an erwerbsfreien Tagen erledigen Frauen einen Großteil der Hausarbeit und Kinderbetreuung. DIW Wochenbericht 86 (10):139–144.
- 25. Hawkley LC, Buecker S, Kaiser T, Luhmann M (2022) Loneliness from young adulthood to old age: Explaining age differences in loneliness. International journal of behavioral development 46 (1):39–49. pmid:35001993
- 26. Luhmann M, Hawkley LC (2016) Age differences in loneliness from late adolescence to oldest old age. Developmental psychology 52 (6):943. pmid:27148782
- 27. Hajek A, Lehnert T, Wegener A, Riedel-Heller SG, König H-H (2018) Potential for informal care of the elderly in Germany: results of a representative population-based survey. Zeitschrift für Gerontologie und Geriatrie 51:612–619.
- 28. Apostolou M (2017) Why people stay single: An evolutionary perspective. Personality and Individual Differences 111:263–271.
- 29. Machia LV, Ogolsky BG (2021) The reasons people think about staying and leaving their romantic relationships: A mixed-method analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 47 (8):1279–1293. pmid:33150849
- 30. Cangemi JP (1987) Education and self-actualization. Journal of Instructional Psychology 14 (4):164.
- 31. Grewenig E, Lergetporer P, Werner K, Woessmann L, Zierow L (2021) COVID-19 and educational inequality: How school closures affect low-and high-achieving students. European economic review 140:103920. pmid:34602646
- 32.
Ward ED (2009) Beyond the playing field: Linking team sports and relational skills. Fielding Graduate University.
- 33. Thurnell-Read T (2021) ‘If they weren’t in the pub, they probably wouldn’t even know each other’: Alcohol, sociability and pub based leisure. International Journal of the Sociology of Leisure 4 (1):61–78
- 34. Hakulinen C, Jokela M (2018) Personality as determinant of smoking, alcohol consumption, physical activity, and diet preferences. Personality and Disease:33–48.
- 35. Bokermann J, König H-H, Hajek A (2024) Pain: its prevalence and correlates among the oldest old. Aging Clinical and Experimental Research 36 (1):2. pmid:38252184
- 36. Herbert MS, Wooldridge JS, Paolillo EW, Depp CA, Moore RC (2022) Social contact frequency and pain among older adults with HIV: an ecological momentary assessment study. Annals of Behavioral Medicine 56 (2):168–175. pmid:34057465
- 37. Hajek A, König H-H (2017) The association of falls with loneliness and social exclusion: evidence from the DEAS German Ageing Survey. BMC geriatrics 17 (1):1–11.