Journal of Adolescence 2002, 25, 327339

doi:10.1006/yjado.475, available online at http://www.idealibrary.com on

Personality, peer relations, and self-confidence as

predictors of happiness and loneliness
HELEN CHENG

AND

ADRIAN FURNHAM

This study is set out to examine to what extent peer relations, self-confidence, and
school performance correlated with self-rated happiness (OHI) and loneliness (UCLA
LS) in adolescents. Personality traits (EPQ), self-confidence (PEI), friendship and
school grades were all significantly oppositely correlated with happiness and loneliness.
Regressional analysis revealed that extraversion and neuroticism were direct predictors
of happiness and self-confidence, while psychoticism and extraversion were direct
predictors of loneliness. The effect of sex on happiness and loneliness was moderated
by friendship and neuroticism, and by neuroticism and psychoticism, respectively.
Extraversion was also a significant predictor of general confidence and social
interactions which directly influenced loneliness whilst psychoticism was a direct
predictor of loneliness. Self-rated school performance was the only direct predictor of
happiness whereas general confidence and social interactions were related to
adolescents self-reported loneliness.
r 2002 The Association for Professionals in Services for Adolescents.
Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved

Introduction
Although loneliness has not been as extensively researched as depression over the past 30
years, it has consistently attracted researchers interests, particularly those concerned with
young people. As such, a number of studies have appeared which looked at the relationships
between loneliness and personality traits (Stokes, 1985; Saklofske and Yackulic, 1989);
loneliness and locus of control (Solano, 1978); loneliness and social skills, social support
(Ponzetti and Cate, 1988; Riggio et al., 1993); loneliness and interpersonal trust (Rotenberg,
1994); gender differences in loneliness and depression (Upmanyu et al., 1992; Koenig et al.,
1994; Wiseman et al., 1995); loneliness and self-esteem (Haines et al., 1993; McWhirter,
1997); loneliness and self-criticism (Wiseman, 1997); loneliness and social strategies (Nurmi
et al., 1997); and loneliness and creativity (Mahon et al., 1999).
However, few studies have examined the relationship between happiness and loneliness
looking particularly at whether they have similar or different psychological correlates.

Loneliness, peer relations, and self-confidence

Loneliness has been linked to various maladjustments like alcoholism (Bell, 1956) and
suicide (Wenz, 1977). Whilst loneliness and depression are both forms of sadness or
unhappiness, depression is seen as broader in scale and is roughly synonymous
with unhappiness. Moreover, loneliness is seen as mainly due to the deficiency in the
interpersonal realm whereas depression can be due to both interpersonal and other
factors both social and non-social (Shaver and Brennan, 1991). Weiss (1973, 1974)
hypothesized that two distinct types of loneliness exist: emotional loneliness which
results from the lack of close, intimate attachment to another specific person; and
Reprint requests and corresspondence should be addressed to Prof. A. Furnham, Department of Psychology,
University College London, 26 Bedford Way, London WC1 0AP, U.K. (E-mail: a.furnham@ucl.ac.uk).
0140-1971/02/$35
00+0
00

# 2002 The Association for Professionals in Services for Adolescents.

Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved

328

H. Cheng and A. Furnham

social loneliness which results from the lack of a network of social relationships in which
the person is part of a group of friends who share interests and activities. Russell et al.
(1978) developed a scale: UCLA Loneliness Scale (UCLA LS) which measures these
two distinct types of loneliness named intimate others and social others. This scale later
was revised by Russell et al. (1980) and has been widely used in the area (Shaver and
Brennan 1991).
In recent years, various studies have looked at correlates of loneliness among adolescents.
Saklofske and Yackulic (1989) explored the relationship of Eysencks major personality
dimensions with measures of general, social, and emotional loneliness as well as coping
strategies in a group of young people. General and social loneliness were inversely related to
extraversion, but positively to neuroticism (along with emotional loneliness). The three
variables explained 45% and 37% of the UCLA Loneliness Scale (UCLA LS) scores for males
and females, respectively, which suggests personality variables are major predictors of
loneliness.
Stokes (1985) examined the role of social networks in loneliness and found that both
social network variables and individual differences measures (EPQ) were predictive of selfreported loneliness. The density of the network showed the strongest and most consistent
relation to loneliness, with a denser network being associated with less loneliness. Both
extraversion and neuroticism were significantly correlated with loneliness. The relation of
extraversion and loneliness was mediated largely by social network variables. Partialing out
variance attributable to the social network variables reduced the relation of extraversion and
loneliness, but the relation of neuroticism and loneliness was not mediated by social network
variables.
There is also a literature looking at the relationship between social skills, social
support and loneliness which suggests that socially inadequate and unskilled people
attract less social support and are hence more lonely. Previous studies indicated that
there appeared to have a link between social skills and social support (Sarason et al., 1985;
Argyle, 1992) in which people who had higher social skills tended to receive greater social
support than people who had lower social skills. Riggio et al. (1993) examined social skills,
social support, and psychological adjustment. They found that improved social skills
combined with perceived social support predicted adjustment and reduced perceptions of
loneliness.
A number of studies examined gender differences in loneliness and depression. Upmanyu
et al. (1992), Koenig et al. (1994), and Wiseman et al. (1995) demonstrated that although
loneliness and depression were highly or moderately correlated, there was a gender difference
in which males reported significantly higher loneliness whilst females reported significantly
higher depression.
Various studies examined the link between problem relations during adolescence
and maladaptive behaviour. Wadell (1984) found that adolescents experiencing
little contact with their friends would have low self-confidence and feelings of
inadequacy. In another study, using multiple regression analyses, Claes (1992) found
that the quality of attachment maintained with friends and the absence of conflict
experiences in friendship accounted for a low but significant proportion of the score
variance obtained from the personal adjustment scale. Previous studies also revealed a
gender differences in that at all ages girls expect more from their friends than boys and
appear to experience greater levels of intimacy and self-disclosure than boys do (Argyle,
1987; Claes, 1992).

Predictors of happiness and loneliness

329

Happiness
Through the past century, psychologists have mainly focused on human unhappiness
(such as anxiety and depression) and neglected the positive aspect of human potential.
Only until comparatively recently, especially after Bradburns (1969) discovery of the
independence of positive and negative affect, that psychologists have started to look at
the correlates, definitions and predictors of happiness (Argyle, 1987; Eysenck, 1990;
Myers, 1992; Seligman and Csikszentmihalyi, 2000). Argyle et al. (1989) defined
happiness as having three partly independent components: (1) the average level of
satisfaction over a specific time period; (2) the frequency and degree of positive affect;
and (3) the relative absence of negative affect. They, therefore, devised a measure of
happiness that has proved a robust and comprehensive measure of both reliability and
validity (Furnham and Brewin, 1990).
Personality traits (particularly extraversion and neuroticism) have been consistently found
to be the main causes of individuals general happiness accounting for up to half of the total
variance (Eysenck, 1990; Argyle and Lu, 1990; Furnham and Brewin, 1990; Headey and
Wearing, 1991; Myers and Diener, 1995; Brebner et al., 1995; Furnham and Cheng, 1997,
2000; Francis et al., 1998).
High self-esteem has been reported to be one of the strongest predictors of psychological well-being (Rosenberg, 1965; Campbell, 1981; Diener, 1984). Shrauger (1995)
developed a scale: the Personal Evaluation Inventory (PEI) which measures specific
self-esteem and self-confidence in different aspects (speaking in public; academic
performance; physical appearance; social interactions; athleticism; together with general
confidence and mood state subscales) of individuals life. The convergent validity was
reported by Shrauger (1995) that the total PEI correlated r=0?58 with the Rosenberg
Self-Esteem Scale which suggests it is a useful multi-dimensional measure of self-esteem
and which will be used in this study.
Friendship has been found to be one of the predictors of happiness (Argyle, 1987). There
is a significant evolution in the characteristics that define friendships from infancy to older
adolescence, evolving from common interest for games and activities, to the sharing of
feelings, emotions and self-disclosure (Berndt, 1982). Peer friendship has been found to play
an important role in adolescence, mainly in providing social support and shared interests and
joined activities (Argyle, 1987). It is, therefore, expected to be related to both happiness and
loneliness but in opposite directions.
This study set out to examine whether happiness and loneliness had similar but opposite
correlates particularly personality traits (extraversion, neuroticism, psychoticism), selfesteem (measured multi-dimensionally), and social support (friendship). It also set out to
examine demographic (particularly sex) differences in these two variables. Based on both the
happiness and loneliness literature, three specific hypotheses were tested:
1. extraversion would be significantly positively related to happiness but significantly
negatively related to loneliness while for neuroticism the opposite pattern would occur
(significant negative correlations with happiness but significant positive correlations with
loneliness);
2. self-esteem at both single-factor level and the total level would be significantly
negatively correlated with loneliness but positively correlated with happiness;
3. females would have higher friendship scores and consequently would be less lonely
than males.

330

H. Cheng and A. Furnham

Method
Participants
Ninety adolescents participated in this study (49 males and 41 females). They ranged in age
from 16 to 18 and the mean age was 17?23 (S.D.=0?65). They were senior pupils of three
schools in the U.K.

Measures
1. Personal Evaluation Inventory (PEI) (Shrauger, 1990). This is a 54-item scale (with
four choices from strongly agree to strongly disagree) measuring self-confidence
defined as a persons sense of his or her own competence or skill and perceived
capability to deal effectively with various situations. It was designed to measure the
specific domains of self-confidence: academic performance; athletics; physical
appearance; romantic relationships; social interactions; and speaking with people.
In addition to the six subscales, there were also general confidence and mood state
factors thus forming eight subscales with seven items in each (except the subscale of
athletics, which had five items).
2. Love and Liking Scales (Rubin, 1970). The Love and Liking Scales each contains 13
items with nine choices from disagree completely to agree completely which measure
romantic love and interpersonal attraction. In this study, the internal consistency a for Love
Scale was 0?88 and that for Liking Scale was 0?87.
3. Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (Eysenck and Eysenck, 1975). This is a 90-item Yes
No questionnaire which measures extraversion, neuroticism, psychoticism, and lie. The
questionnaire has been noted for its impressive psychometrically assessed high reliability and
validity (Furnham and Brewin, 1990).
4. Affectometer 2. This is a 40-item self-report scale containing positive and
negative affects with five choices from not at all to all of the time. A coefficient a
of 0?95 is reported and it correlated 0?84 with the Beck Depression Inventory and
the negative items correlated more highly with the BDI than the positive items (Kammann
and Flett, 1983).
5. The Oxford Happiness Inventory (Argyle et al., 1989). This is a 29-item questionnaire, based on a seven point rating scale from (7) agree through to (1) disagree. It
has a testretest reliability of 0?78 and a Cronbach coefficient a of between 0?64 and
0?87 which seems adequate rather than high. It has a reported validity of 0?43 with
friends ratings of happiness on a 10-point scale. It correlates with all happiness components: positive affect, life satisfaction, and also negative affect, depression and distress at
r=0?40 to 0?60.
6. UCLA Loneliness Scale (Russell et al., 1980). This is a revised 20-item scale measuring
loneliness which contains two subscales named intimate others and social others. It had
a reported internal consistency coefficient a of 0?94. The scale correlated significantly with
measures of depression (r values of approximately 0?50) and anxiety (r values in the 0?30s)
(Russell et al., 1980).

Procedure
Participants were asked to fill out the questionnaire in the school environment. It took about
50 min to complete. The confidentiality was stressed and the response rate was above 95%.

Predictors of happiness and loneliness

331

Results
Sex differences
Table 1 shows the mean (and standard deviations) for both sexes. Six of the 27 ANOVAs were
significant which confirmed both past research and, in part, hypotheses in this study. As has
been found in many other studies females had significantly higher neuroticism, but lower
psychoticism scores than males. There was only one self-confidence factor difference: males
score higher on athletics than females. The overall PEI total was not significant despite
previous studies showing females with lower scores than males. Females also had significantly
Table 1 Means and S.D. of peer relations (RLLS), personal evaluation (PEI), school grades
(GCSE), personality (EPQ), affect (Affectometer), loneliness (UCLA LS), happiness (OHI),
and demographic variables by sex
Measures

Male (n=49)
X

Age
Mothers employment
Brother
Sister

S.D.

Female (n=41)
X

S.D.

16?27
0?81
1?02
0?71

0?57
0?68
0?72
0?68

16?20
0?73
0?88
0?73

0?75
0?87
0?64
0?87

F
0?25
0?02
0?96
0?02

Extraversion
Neuroticism
Psychoticism
Lie scale

0?84
0?84
0?73
0?72

14?73
12?35
8?05
6?19

4?37
4?92
3?84
3?64

15?36
16?12
4?68
6?09

4?81
4?28
3?34
3?42

0?35
12?26***
15?19***
0?01

PEI
PEI
PEI
PEI
PEI
PEI
PEI
PEI
PEI

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

0?72
0?69
0?84
0?79
0?79
0?73
0?77
0?67
0?89

18?51
18?60
18?96
19?98
19?43
20?75
14?80
17?37
147?94

3?63
3?77
3?84
3?36
3?54
3?15
3?66
5?44
19?20

17?73
18?35
17?90
19?08
17?77
21?50
12?07
17?77
143?50

3?30
3?42
5?45
4?44
4?35
3?93
2?94
4?50
19?81

1?10
0?10
1?12
1?08
3?79
0?94
14?50***
0?13
0?88

Friends (Liking Scale)

Romance (Love Scale)
School grades
UCLA Factor 1
UCLA Factor 2
UCLA total
Positive affect
Negative affect
Affectometer total
OHI

0?87
0?88

78?07
81?93
35?38
19?72
13?35
38?26
68?83
44?43
146?63
155?39

14?63
17?98
11?81
5?73
4?70
10?06
12?57
12?86
23?99
29?53

91?03
84?00
42?21
19?42
11?37
35?62
67?56
44?08
142?58
153?54

15?33
15?17
10?49
5?61
2?88
6?75
10?79
10?85
18?63
25?66

15?51***
0?29
7?74**
0?57
5?37*
1?90
0?25
0?02
0?72
0?09

Factor
Factor
Factor
Factor
Factor
Factor
Factor
Factor
Total

0?85
0?86
0?89
0?90
0?87
0?89
0?93

Note: *po0?05; **po0?01; ***po0?001. Employment coded as 1, unemployment as 0.

PEI=Personal Evaluation Inventory. Factor 1=General confidence; Factor 2=Mood state; Factor 3=Talking in
public; Factor 4=Academic performance; Factor 5=Physical appearance; Factor 6=Social participation; Factor
7=Athletics; Factor 8=Romantic relationships.
RLLS=Rubin Love and Liking Scale.
UCLA LS=Loneliness Scale. Factor 1=Intimate others; Factor 2=Social others. OHI=Oxford Happiness
Inventory.

332

H. Cheng and A. Furnham

lower loneliness (social others) scores and higher friendship scores than males as predicted.
Females in this sample tended to do better than males in schools, at least in terms of their
self-reported grade results. There were no significant differences in the social class of
participants (based on parental employment) or happiness level. Most of these significant sex
differences have been reported before in the literature.
Table 1 also shows the a reliability scores for the various measures. All were satisfactory,
possibly with the exception of PEI subscales mood state and romantic relationships which did
not reach the usually acceptable 0?70 cut-off score.

Intercorrelates
Table 2 shows the intercorrelation between the scores of eight PEI subscales and the other
measures (controlling for sex and age of participants).
PEI total scores were significantly correlated with affect, happiness, and loneliness in the
predicted direction. It seems that some of the PEI subscales were mainly associated with
positive affect but not with negative affect which indicated the partial independence
between positive and negative affect (in the present study, the correlation between positive
and negative affect was r= 0?57, po0?001 which is in accordance with previous findings
using the same affect measure). Factors 1, 2 and 6 were most highly and consistently related
to both loneliness (on both factors) and happiness (as measured by different measures).
Extraversion and neuroticism were significantly correlated with both positive and negative
affects, happiness and loneliness (both intimate and social aspects of loneliness for
extraversion and intimate aspect of loneliness for neuroticism) whereas psychoticism was
significantly correlated (positively) with negative affects and loneliness (both intimate and
social aspects). Friendship was positively correlated with positive affect, happiness, and
negatively correlated with loneliness (intimate aspect). Extraversion and neuroticism were
significantly correlated with both positive and negative affects and happiness. Psychoticism
was significantly correlated with loneliness (both intimate and social aspects). Whilst school
grades were significantly correlated with both positive and negative affects, happiness and
loneliness (social aspect) indicating that good quality of friendship (since the measure was
designed for assessing the best friend) and doing well in school would generate pupils
positive affect, general happiness, as well as reducing their intimate and social loneliness,
respectively.
Table 2 thus provides evidence for both hypotheses 1 and 2. The size of the correlations
indicates that extraversion is more powerfully related to both happiness and loneliness and
that it accounts for between 15% and 25% of the variance. Secondly self-esteem is
consistently related to both loneliness and happiness but more strongly the latter.

Predicting happiness and loneliness from self-confidence (PEI total scores),

friendship, personality and demographic variables
A series of hierarchical regressions were conducted to test to what extent the various
independent measures (demographic, self-esteem, personality traits) predicted the
dependent variables of happiness and loneliness. As an initial measure the five demographic
variables, and the four personality variables were regressed on to happiness (along with the
PEI total scores, friendship, and school grades) and then onto the PEI total scores, friendship
and romance and school grades, respectively. Thus, with the happiness score as the
dependent variable, first sex and age were entered, followed by the number of siblings and
parental employment, then personality variables and finally self-confidence, friendship and

Predictors of happiness and loneliness

333

Table 2 Partial correlations between personal evaluation (PEI), personality (EPQ), peer
relationships (RLLS), school grades (GCSE), affect (Affectometer), loneliness (UCLA LS),
happiness (OHI), and demographic variable controlling for age and sex
Measures

ME

LS-F1

LS-F2

A-PA

A-NA

OHI

Maternal employment
PEI Factor 1
PEI Factor 2
PEI Factor 3
PEI Factor 4
PEI Factor 5
PEI Factor 6
PEI Factor 7
PEI Factor 8
PEI total

0?15
0?08
0?08
0?11
0?03
0?03
0?04
0?20
0?12

0?18
0?47***
0?34**
0?19
0?27*
0?29**
0?53***
0?12
0?27*
0?53***

0?16
0?33**
0?35**
0?17
0?21
0?20
0?51***
0?21
0?35**
0?48***

0?17
0?60***
0?41***
0?36***
0?46***
0?30**
0?50***
0?30**
0?32**
0?58***

0?19
0?46***
0?36***
0?25*
0?33**
0?17
0?24*
0?03
0?11
0?46***

0?23*
0?45***
0?41***
0?24*
0?42***
0?33**
0?47***
0?07
0?37***
0?52***

Extraversion
Neuroticism
Psychoticism
Lie Scale

0?16
0?01
0?13
0?01

0?46***
0?28*
0?35**
0?04

0?51***
0?11
0?25*
0?22

0?45***
0?32**
0?18
0?04

0?31**
0?42***
0?39***
0?03

0?44***
0?33**
0?18
0?04

Romance (Love Scale)

Friends (Liking Scale)

0?11
0?18

0?00
0?24*

0?06
0?17

0?01
0?31**

0?19
0?07

0?14
0?33**

GCSE

0?26*

0?11

0?26*

0?29**

0?29**

0?25*

Note: *po0?05; **po0?01; ***po0?001.

EPQ=Eysenck Personality Questionnaire.
PEI=Personal Evaluation Inventory. Factor 1=General confidence; Factor 2=Mood state;
Factor 3=Talking in public; Factor 4=Academic performance; Factor 5=Physical appearance;
Factor 6=Social interactions; Factor 7=Athletics; Factor 8=Romantic relationships.
LS-F1=UCLA Loneliness Scale Factor 1=Intimate others;
LS-F2= UCLA Loneliness Scale Factor 2=Social others.
A-PA=Affectometer Positive Affect;
A-NA=Affectometer Negative Affect.
RLLS=Rubin Love and Liking Scales.
GCSE=School Grades.
OHI=Oxford Happiness Inventory.

romance and school grades. The rationale was that the more stable and earlier occurring
variables were entered first. Once this regression was completed the pattern was repeated
with self-confidence, friendship and romance and school grades as the dependent variables.
Figure 1 shows the results.
The initial regression was significant (F(14,75)=3?56, po0?001; R2=0?40) and showed
that friendship (b=0?23, t=2?07, po0?05), extraversion (b=0?27, t=2?38, po0?05), and
neuroticism (b= 0?23, t=2?03, po0?05) were significant predictors of happiness. With
friendship as dependent variable, sex was the only predictor (b=0?32, t=2?81, po0?01);
with self-confidence as dependent variable, extraversion was the only predictor (b=0?40,
t=3?62, po0?001); and with school grades as the dependent variable, psychoticism was the
only predictor (b= 0?36, t=3?32, po0?01). Romance was neither the predictor nor being
predicted by any other variables thus were omitted at this stage.
The same procedures were repeated with loneliness subfactors as the dependent variables.
Figure 2 shows the results. The two initial regressions were both significant (F(14,75)=3?23,

334

H. Cheng and A. Furnham

Figure 1. Regressional analysis. Happiness (OHI) from self-confidence (PEI), friendship, personality
(EPQ) and demographic variables.

po0?001; R2=0?38 and F(14,75)=3?47, po0?001; R2=0?39). With intimate others as

dependent variable, self-confidence and psychoticism were significant predictors (b= 0?33,
t=3?01; b=0?30, t=2?71; po0?01); and with social others as dependent variable, selfconfidence and extraversion were significant predictors (b= 0?28, t=2?52; b=0?27,
t=2?47; po0?05).

Predicting happiness and loneliness from PEI subscales, friendship,

personality and demographic variables
In order to ascertain the specific predictive power that PEI had on happiness and loneliness,
the PEI total scores were replaced by the PEI subscales in a series of hierarchical regressions
(friendship ceased to be predictors of happiness and was omitted together with romance and
school grades). Among all the PEI subscales academic performance was the only significant
direct predictor of happiness (b=0?32, t=2?59, po0?01). Psychoticism predicted happiness
mediating through self-rated academic performance (b= 0?23, t=1?99, po0?05).
The set of regressions were then repeated using two loneliness factors (intimate others and
social others) as the dependent variables. With intimate others as dependent variable,
general confidence (b=0?35, t=2?71, po0?01), social interactions (b= 0?34, t=2?66,
po0?01), and psychoticism (b=0?29, t=2?67, po0?01) were direct predictors. With social
others as dependent variable, social interactions (b= 0?31, t=2?41, po0?01) was the only
direct predictor. Neuroticism predicted intimate others mediating through general
confidence whereas extraversion predicted loneliness mediating through general confidence
and social interactions (for intimate others) and social interactions only (for social others).
Extraversion was also the significant predictor of other PEI subscales (talking in public,
physical appearance, and romantic relationships) which, although they had no predictive
power of happiness or loneliness, they did have significant correlations with positive affect
and happiness. Sex and number of brothers predicted neuroticism which had a predictive
power of general confidence meaning that in this sample girls had higher scores on
neuroticism than boys which reduced their general confidence and in turn, increased the
intimate aspect of their loneliness. However, sex was also a predictor of psychoticism which

Predictors of happiness and loneliness

335

Figure 2. Regressional analysis. Predicting loneliness (UCLA LS) from self-confidence (PEI),
friendship, personality (EPQ) and demographic variables.

directly influenced intimate others meaning that girls had lower scores on psychoticism
which in turn, reduced the same aspect of their loneliness and as the result, there were no
significant differences between boys and girls on intimate aspect of loneliness scores. Among
other demographic variables, number of brothers was also a predictor of neuroticism meaning
that pupils with more brothers tended to have lower scores on neuroticism which in turn,
increased their general confidence and consequently reduced their loneliness (intimate
others).

Discussion
Extraversion was a significant, direct, predictor of happiness. It was also, as predicted a
significant direct and indirect predictor of loneliness (social others). Neuroticism was also
a significant, direct, negative predictor of happiness but predicted loneliness (the intimate
factor only) mediating through general confidence. Psychoticism was a significant direct
predictor (positively) of loneliness (intimate aspect) but only indirectly predicted happiness
mediating through academic performance.
Results also showed that friendship, self-confidence (specifically the factor academic
performance) were both direct and moderator variables for adolescents self-reported
happiness whereas self-confidence (both the PEI total scores and two PEI subscales: general
confidence and social interactions) was both a direct and a moderator variable for
adolescents self-reported loneliness.
Unlike the global self-esteem (measured by Rosonberg Self-Esteem Scale) which has been
found to be the most dominant and powerful predictor of happiness (Furnham and Cheng,
2000), only the specific domain (academic performance) of self-confidence (measured by the
Personal Evaluation Inventory used in the present study) but not the self-confidence total
scores did predict happiness. However, both self-confidence total scores and the scores of
specific domains (general confidence and social interactions) were significant predictors of

336

H. Cheng and A. Furnham

loneliness (both intimate others and social others). It seems that although happiness and
loneliness are negatively correlated psychological constructs (in the present study the
correlation was r= 0?54, po0?001) they are conceptually distinct and have different
associations with other variables. Friendship, extraversion and neuroticism were predictors of
happiness whilst self-confidence and psychoticism were predictors of loneliness. Thus the
absence of certain factors that predict happiness do not imply the likelihood of loneliness and
vice versa. This is an important finding.
Among the subscales of PEI, happiness was only predicted by academic performance
whereas loneliness was predicted by two self-esteem factors namely general confidence and
social interactions. It is interesting to note that it was the self-evaluated academic
performance but not the actual grade points (measured by GCSE results) that predicted
adolescents self-reported happiness, though these two variables were significantly positively
correlated (r=0?41, po0?001). It is possible that when IQ is equal, self-confidence in school
performance may play an important role not only in enhancing adolescents actual school
performance, but also increase their psychological well-being. Indeed, Boxtel and Monks
(1992) concluded as A positive self-concept in all areas seems to be the driving force for
achievements, which are in accordance with high potential intellectual aptitudes (p. 169).
Loneliness (both intimate and social aspects), on the other hand, was predicted by the
Personal Evaluation Inventory (PEI), mainly through the PEI subscales of general confidence
and social interactions. These were also the mediating variables through which the loneliness
subscales were predicted by neuroticism and extraversion. It seems that lack of general
confidence (such as low self-esteem and poor self-concept) was the main source of the
intimate aspect of loneliness whilst lack of the confidence in social interactions was the main
source of both intimate and social aspect of loneliness. Since social interactions are the
precondition of acquiring or forming social networks, and social networks (especially the
density of the network) were found to be the important predictor of loneliness (Stoke, 1985),
it is understandable that social interactions are particularly important in reducing
adolescents intimate and social loneliness.
There was a significant correlation between extraversion and social interactions (r=0?66,
po0?001), and extraversion was also a direct predictor of social aspect of loneliness (when
the PEI total scores were used) and indirect predictor of both intimate and social loneliness
(when the PEI subscales scores were used). This shows the sociability dimension of
extraversion and the higher social skills extraverts (comparing with introverts) exhibit
together with their sociability. Neuroticism predicted the intimate aspect of loneliness
mediating through general confidence suggesting that with higher anxiety, shyness or
depression, emotionally less stable individuals tended to suffer particularly from the intimate
aspect of loneliness (but not in the social aspect of loneliness) mainly due to that lack of
general self-confidence. It is possible that it requires more general confidence to prevent or
overcome intimate loneliness than social loneliness since the association between general
confidence and intimate loneliness was stronger (r= 0?47, po0?001) than between general
confidence and social loneliness (r= 0?33, po0?01). Moreover, in the present study,
psychoticism was found to be the direct predictor (regardless whether the PEI total scores or
subscale scores were used) of loneliness (intimate aspect) indicating that those who are
aggressive by nature, tough minded, low in agreeableness, and lacking in conscientiousness
tended to suffer especially in intimate relationships.
Peer friendship was found to be important in adolescents self-reported happiness (possibly
by generating positive affect since there was a significant correlation between these two

Predictors of happiness and loneliness

337

variables with r=0?31, po0?01) which has been found in previous findings. The benefit
(through reciprocal rewards) of such a social network is fairly obvious, such as shared interest
and enjoyable activities, positive feedback, social support, etc. (Argyle, 1987). In the present
study, it was also a mediating variable that girls tended to have a better friendship and
consequently increased their scores on self-reported happiness.
In relation to gender differences, as found in the previous studies, girls in the present study
were also found slightly less lonely (social aspect) than boys. However, the more striking
differences between girls and boys was in the quality of friendship in which girls were
markedly doing better than boys (b=0?32, t=2?81, po0?01), possibly due to their higher
expectations from friendship as well as their higher friend-making skills, and this in turn, may
contribute to the lower scores they achieved on social loneliness.
As to the affect and trait happiness measures used in this study, positive and negative
affects were significantly negatively correlated (r=0?54, po0?001) though they associate
with other variables in somehow different ways. The main differences appeared to be that
some of the variables (such as self-confidence subscales of physical appearance, athletics and
romantic relationships) were significantly correlated with positive affect but not with
negative affect; among personality variables, psychoticism was significantly correlated with
negative affect but not with positive affect; and friendship was only significantly correlated
with positive affect. Since the association between positive affect and happiness were
stronger (r=0?70, po0?001) than the association between negative affect and happiness
(r= 0?36, po0?001), variables which were more strongly associated with positive affect
tended to be also more strongly associated with happiness. The relatively high
intercorrelation between affect total scores and happiness scores (r=0?62, po0?001)
indicated the convergent validity of these happiness measures.
This study demonstrated that the individual difference predictors of happiness are not
those that predict loneliness and further that the two dimensions of loneliness have different
correlates. Personality traits per se are both direct predictors of both happiness and loneliness
but are also mediated by self-esteem factors. More importantly, the absence of particular
factors that are correlated with happiness do not necessarily lead to an increase in either type
of loneliness.

References
Argyle, M. (1987). The Psychology of Happiness. London: Routledge.
Argyle, M. (1992). Benefits produced by supportive relationships. In The Meaning and Measurement of
Social Support: The Series in Clinical and Community Psychology, H. O. F. Veiel and U. Baumann,
et al. (Eds). New York, NY, U.S.A.: Hemisphere Publishing Corp., pp. 1332.
Argyle, M. and Lu, L. (1990). The happiness of extraverts. Personality and Individual Differences, 11,
10111017.
Argyle, M., Martin, M. and Crossland, J. (1989). Happiness as a function of personality and social
encounters. In Recent Advances in Social Psychology: An International Perspective, J. Forgas and
J. Innes (Eds). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Bell, R. G. (1956). Alcoholism and loneliness. Journal of Social Therapy, 2, 171181.
Berndt, T. J. (1982). The features and effects of friendships in early adolescence. Child Development, 53,
14471460.
Boxtel, H. W. and Monks, F. J. (1992). General, social, and academic self-concepts of gifted adolescents.
Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 21, 169186.
Bradburn, N. (1969). The Structure of Psychological Well-being. Chicago: Aldine.

338

H. Cheng and A. Furnham

Brebner, J., Donaldson, J., Kirby, N. and Ward, L. (1995). Relationships between personality and
happiness. Personality and Individual Differences, 19, 251258.
Claes, M. E. (1992). Friendship and personal adjustment during adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 15,
3955.
Campbell, A. (1981). The Sense of Well-being in America: Recent Patterns and Trends. New York:
McGraw-Hill.
Diener, E. (1984). Subjective Well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 542575.
Eysenck, H. J. (1967). The Biological Basis of Personality. Springfield, London: Thomas.
Eysenck, M. (1990). Happiness: Facts and Myths. London: LEA.
Eysenck, H. J. and Eysenck, S. B. G. (1975). Manual of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire. London:
Hodder & Stoughton.
Francis, L., Brown, L., Lester, D. and Philipchalk, R. (1998). Happiness is stable extraversion.
Personality and Individual Differences, 24, 167171.
Furnham, A. and Brewin, C. (1990). Personality and happiness. Personality and Individual Differences,
11, 10931096.
Furnham, A. and Cheng, H. (1997). Personality and happiness. Psychological Reports, 83, 761762.
Furnham, A. and Cheng, H. (1999). Personality as predictors of mental health and happiness in the
East and West. Personality and Individual Differences, 27, 395403.
Furnham, A. and Cheng, H. (2000). Perceived parental behaviour, self-esteem, and happiness. Social
Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 35, 463470.
Haines, D. A., Scalise, J. J. and Ginter, E. J. (1993). Relationship of loneliness and its affective elements
to self-esteem. Psychological Reports, 73, 476482.
Headey, B. and Wearing, A. (1990). A stock and flow model of subjective well-being. In Subjective Wellbeing, Strack, F., Argyle, M. and Schwartz, N. (Eds). Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Kammann, R. and Flett, R. (1983). Affectometer 2: a scale to measure current level of general
happiness. Australian Journal of Psychology, 35, 259265.
Koenig, L. J., Isaacs, A. M. and Schwartz, J. A. J. (1994). Sex differences in adolescen depression and
loneliness: why are boys lonelier if girls are more depressed? Journal of Research in Personality, 28,
2743.
Mahon, N., Yarcheski, A. and Yarcheski, T. (1999). Selected correlates of creativity in young adults.
Psychological Reports, 84, 12461250.
McWhirter, B. T. (1997). Loneliness, learned resourcefulness, and self-esteem in college students.
Journal of Counselling and Development, 75, 460469.
Myers, D. (1992). The Pursuit of Happiness. New York: Avon Books.
Myers, D. and Diener, E. (1995). Who is happy? Psychological Science, 6, 1019.
Nurmi, J. E., Toivonen, S., Salmela-Aro, K. and Eronen, S. (1997). Social strategies and loneliness.
Journal of Social Psychology, 137, 764777.
Ponzetti, J. J. and Cate, R. M. (1988). The relationship of personal attributes and friendship variables in
predicting loneliness. Journal of College Student Development, 29, 292298.
Riggio, R. E., Watring, K. P. and Throckmorton, B. (1993). Social skills, social support, and psycholocial
adjustment. Personality and Individual Differences, 15, 275280.
Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the Adolescent Self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Rotenberg, K. J. (1994). Loneliness and interpersonal trust. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 13,
152173.
Rubin, Z. (1970). Measurement of romantic love. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16,
265273.
Russell, D. W., Peplau, L. A. and Cutrona, C. E. (1980). The revised UCLA loneliness scale:
concurrent and discriminant validity evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39,
472480.
Russell, D. W., Peplau, L. A. and Ferguson, M. L. (1978). Developing a measure of loneliness. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 42, 290294.
Saklofske, D. H. and Yackulic, R. A. (1989). Personality predictors of loneliness. Personality and
Individual Differences, 10, 467472.
Sarason, B. R., Sarason, I. G., Hacker, T. A. and Basham, R. B. (1985). Concomitants of social
support: social skills, physical attractiveness, and gender. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
49, 469480.

Predictors of happiness and loneliness

339

Seligman, M. and Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology. American Psychologist, 55, 514.
Shaver, P. R. and Brennan, K. A. (1991). Measurement of loneliness and depression. In Measurement of
Personality and Social Psychological Attitudes, Vol. 1, J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver and L. S.
Wrightsman (Eds). New York: Academic Press, Inc., pp. 195289.
Shrauger, J. S. (1995). Self-confidence: Its conceptualisation, measurement, and behavioural
implications. Assessment, 2, 255278.
Solano, C. H. (1978). Loneliness and perceptions of control: general traits versus specific attributions.
Journal of Social Behaviour and Personality, 2, 201214.
Stokes, J. P. (1985). The relation of social network and individual difference variables to loneliness.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 981990.
Upmanyu, V. V., Upmanyu, S. and Dhingra, M. (1992). Gender differences in loneliness. Journal of
Personality and Clinical Studies, 8, 161166.
Wadell, J. W. (1984). The self concept and social adaptation of hyperactive children in adolescence.
Journal of Clinical Psychology, 13, 5055.
Weiss, R. S. (1973). Loneliness: The Experience of Emotional and Social Isolation. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Weiss, R. S. (1974). The provisions of social relationships. In Doing Unto Others, Z. Rubin (Ed.).
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, pp. 1726.
Wenz, F. V. (1977). Seasonal suicide attempts and forms of loneliness. Psychological Reports, 40,
807810.
Wiseman, H. (1997). Interpersonal relatedness and self-definition in the experience of loneliness during
the transition to university. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 4, 285299.
Wiseman, H., Guttfreund, D. G. and Lurie, I. (1995). Gender differences in loneliness and depression of
university students seeking counselling. British Journal of Guidance and Counselling, 23, 231243.