Recently, the second article from the PROMISE project was published by Milynn Koene, Theo van Tilburg, Tineke Fokkema and Nina Conkova, entitled: “Underreporting loneliness among older adults: the role of gender, health, partner status and migration background”.
The study examined whether people differ in the extent to which they admit feeling lonely, depending on their gender, health, partner status, and migration background. Based on previous literature, it was assumed that people who belong to a social group that is typically less associated with loneliness would be less likely to admit feeling lonely. Therefore, it was expected that men, people in good health, people with a partner, and migrants would be less likely to report feeling lonely than, respectively, women, people in poor health, single people, and non-migrants.
Drawing upon data from Dutch, Moroccan and Turkish older adults between 55 and 66 years old, the findings largely confirmed this expectation. Men, people in good health, and people with a partner were less likely to report feeling lonely when asked directly, even when they were equally lonely according to the indirect measurement. Migrants were also less likely to directly report feeling lonely than non-migrants. However, this difference was only visible among migrants who were very lonely according to the indirect measurement. Migrants who were not or only moderately lonely according to the indirect measure were more likely to report feeling lonely than non-migrants with a similar level of loneliness. This may be because migrants primarily experience loneliness as missing a familiar culture or language, rather than missing social connections. This is also referred to as cultural loneliness.
The researchers therefore emphasize that professionals and volunteers should be aware of these social expectations. It is important not to rely solely on what someone says directly about loneliness, but also to consider possible indirect signs of loneliness. Methodologically, these findings suggest that researchers should exercise caution when using direct measurements of loneliness as they may not always fully capture loneliness.
The full article is available here: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10433-026-00941-w
