There is broad recognition that social connection significantly impacts emotional well-

being; however, the public underestimates the impact of social connection on physical
health and longevity.1 Robust interdisciplinary scientific evidence links greater social
connectedness to reduced risk, while forms of lacking social connection (e.g., social
isolation, loneliness, social negativity) increase the risk for morbidity and mortality from a
variety of chronic and infectious diseases and conditions.2-5 While significant efforts have
been made with programs, campaigns, and initiatives to reduce and mitigate risks of
morbidity and mortality, there has been less emphasis on social connection as a
prevention strategy.

The leading causes of death in the United States and globally are related to modifiable
lifestyle factors. A healthy lifestyle is “a way of living that lowers the risk of being seriously
ill or dying early.”7 Considering what contributes to a healthy lifestyle, this usually includes
“activities and habits that encourage the development of total physical, mental, and
spiritual fitness, and which reduces the risk of major illness.” 9 Examples of a healthy
lifestyle include regular physical activity, a nutritionally balanced diet, getting enough sleep;
not smoking or taking recreational drugs; and limiting or abstaining from alcohol. Based on
the definition of a healthy lifestyle and the evidence of the health relevance of social
connection, it is clear that social connection is an essential lifestyle factor that is often
overlooked in prevention efforts.

Despite the benefits of social connection, many people lack social connection in one or
more ways, potentially contributing significantly to public health concerns. The global
Covid-19 pandemic brought these issues into the spotlight, with over $154 billion lost due
to loneliness-related absenteeism for businesses.10-12 However, isolation and loneliness were
already gaining attention globally even before the pandemic began. For example, U.S.
Surgeon General, Dr. Vivek Murthy, stated that loneliness was at epidemic levels in 2017
and reiterated this in 2023, publishing an official advisory in 2023 on the U.S. epidemic of
loneliness and isolation. Both the United Kingdom and Japan have appointed ministers to
address the issue of social isolation and loneliness including nationwide campaigns, a
helpline dedicated to combating loneliness, and allocated resources for research
endeavors.13, 14 Further attention and efforts can be seen in the establishment of loneliness
awareness campaigns in the United Kingdom and Australia, cash incentives in South Korea
to socialize, and EU-wide surveys conducted by the European Commission. Surveys in the
United States examining how Americans spend their time demonstrate trends of increasing
time spent socially isolated and decreasing time spent socially engaging with others (family,
friends, others, and companionship) over the last two decades.15 These data suggest these
trends have been building for decades and that a “return to normal” after the COVID-19
pandemic will be insufficient to resolve these troubling social isolation and loneliness rates
without additional efforts.

Although significant attention has been focused on the risks associated with social isolation
and loneliness, the protective influence of social connection as part of a healthy lifestyle is
often overlooked and may be an essential health promotion and disease prevention
strategy. Here we review how social isolation and loneliness fit within the larger framework
of social connection; the evidence of plausible mechanisms linking social connection and
health, including how each may be directly or indirectly related to other lifestyle-related
activities across the life course; the changing landscape of digital technology and the
impact this has on social lifestyles; and finally, how framing social connection as a lifestyle
factor may improve health promotion and disease prevention strategies.
1.1 Focusing on risk or protection?
Lifestyle factors are often conceptualized according to those associated with risk (increases the likelihood
of poorer health, e.g., physical inactivity) or with protection (lowers the probability of disease or poorer
health, e.g., exercise). Similarly, much of the scientific literature has often studied the risk of social
isolation and loneliness or the protective effects of various forms of being socially connected (e.g., social
networks, social support, social engagement) separately. Conceptualization and framing according to risk
versus protection may have important implications for prevention efforts.

Social isolation is defined by few social relationships, social roles, group memberships, and infrequent
social interaction,16, 17 whereas loneliness is defined as the subjective distressing feeling of isolation or
discrepancy between an individual's desired and actual level of social connection. 18 Strong evidence
suggests that social isolation and loneliness contribute significantly to health risks. 3 While studies
demonstrate that isolation and loneliness have been identified as risk factors for poorer health because
these primarily focus on social deficits, they do not capture social assets that could lower the risk.

Social connection is an umbrella term proposed to integrate the diverse terms and approaches reflected in
the interdisciplinary scientific evidence regarding the health consequences of social relationships. These
diverse approaches include those centered on social assets and those focused on social deficits—with
many approaches utilizing a combination of items that assess both social assets and deficits to create a
total score that is analyzed continuously. Generally, high levels across these measurement approaches
have been associated with protection, while low levels are associated with risk. Thus, social isolation and
loneliness are examples of low social connection.

1.2 Elements of social connection

Despite converging evidence on the health outcomes associated with the various measurement approaches
to social connection, each is not highly correlated, which has led researchers to propose a multifactorial
approach to social connection. This approach includes three factors: structure, function, and quality of
connections4, 19-23; see Figure 1 for a visual depiction). These three aspects of social connection emerged
from measurement approaches across scientific disciplines that generally converge to tap into (a) the need
for humans to have regular contact with a variety of people in their lives (structural), (b) people they can
rely upon to meet various needs and goals (functional), and (c) relationships and interactions that are
positive (quality). Therefore, the multifaceted construct of social connection encompasses a range of
experiences from protective to those that entail more risk.

Perhaps the most intuitive pathway for social connection to influence health is through behavior. Social
connection may be conceptualized as influencing health through traditional lifestyle factors (sleep, diet,
exercise, substance misuse, etc.), or social connection may be conceptualized as a lifestyle factor itself. A
large body of literature documents how greater social connection is linked to health-promoting behaviors,
including more exercise, less smoking or alcohol consumption, better sleep quality, and better patient
cooperation with treatment regimens among chronic disease populations.25-33 Despite solid evidence of the
association of social connection with health-relevant behaviors, most epidemiological studies control for
lifestyle factors pointing to the independent associations between social connection and health.

While conceptualizations of lifestyle factors often focus on behaviors, social connection is conceptualized
as including but also going beyond social behaviors to include how we perceive our interactions and
relationships (relationship satisfaction, perceived support, loneliness). Social experiences and perceptions
of them can affect our health through central processing that ultimately influences our peripheral health-
relevant biology.34-36 Several reviews of this evidence demonstrate plausible biological mechanisms,
including cardiovascular, neuroendocrine, and immune dysregulation37-40 and gut–microbiome ecosystem
functioning.41-43 Biological dysregulation can occur when our social needs are unmet, emerging early and
continuing throughout life.

Among the biological pathways, chronic inflammation has received considerable attention as it increases
the risk for several health outcomes as individuals age40, 44, 45. Research has found that higher levels of
interleukin-6 (IL-6) and C-reactive protein (CRP) have been linked with a heightened risk of
cardiovascular events, a less favorable prognosis of chronic renal disease, reduced physical and cognitive
performance, and an elevated risk of all-cause mortality46, 47. In a recent study of 4648 Medicare
beneficiaries aged 65 and older from the National Health and Aging Trends Study (United States),
socially isolated older adults had higher levels of IL-6 and CRP than older adults who were not socially
isolated.48 Among those isolated, there was a dose–response relationship between the level of isolation and
objective biological markers. Similarly, a dose–response relationship was found between CRP and
various markers of social connection across each stage of life.49 Nonetheless, a systematic review and
meta-analysis of evidence on the association between social isolation and loneliness with inflammation
suggest the associations may be more complex with heterogeneity across indicators. For example,
loneliness is linked to IL-6 but not to other markers of inflammation while social isolation is linked to
CRP and fibrinogen but not IL-6.50

The links between social connection and health outcomes may also result from concurrent behavioral,
psychological, and biological pathways potentially compounding their influence. 3, 36, 50, 51 For example,
socially isolated individuals may develop unhealthy habits, including poor dietary practices, excessive
drinking, and reduced physical activity, which can contribute to adverse health outcomes through
inflammatory processes.52 Social isolation may serve as an emotional or social stressor, which can trigger
systemic inflammation within the body.53 According to evolutionary theory, social isolation is linked to
the inflammatory response via a higher probability of socially isolated organisms being attacked or
injured which may explain the reason for elevated inflammatory molecules that facilitate a quicker and
more efficient biological response to such threats.54

The neurobiological mechanisms behind the link between social connection and health outcomes can also
be understood in the context of risk reduction and cognitive energy conservation. According to the social
baseline theory, social relationships can function as valuable resources that reduce risk and conserve
energy because areas of the brain associated with emotion regulation and threat assessment are less active
in a social environment.55 When these neural regions are more active due to social needs not being met,
dysregulation of multiple bodily systems may lead to poorer physical and mental health.56-58 Social
environments help regulate the neural regions associated with cognitively demanding processes like threat
assessment and emotional regulation because of risk distribution (social gathering reduces the risk of
predation and injury) and load sharing (task sharing that alleviates burdens, such as child rearing, on the
individual). Through risk distribution and load sharing, people can effectively accomplish more while
minimizing potential harm. Being alone objectively increases threat and represents a more significant
adaptive challenge for the “social brain.”55, 59 From this perspective, the primary human ecology is, at its
core, a social ecology. Thus, a healthy lifestyle is, at its core, a social lifestyle.

2 IMPORTANCE OF SOCIAL RELATIONSHIPS FOR

HEALTH OUTCOMES
There is considerable evidence demonstrating that social connection lowers the risk of being seriously ill
or dying early,2, 60 and isolation and loneliness should be considered medical issues.61 Further, the
magnitude of the detrimental effects of lacking social connection on mortality risk is comparable to
traditional risk factors such as smoking, obesity, and physical inactivity.22, 62, 63 The World Health
Organization,6 the (United States) National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and
Medicine,3 American Heart Association,64 and the Office of the U.S. Surgeon General4 have all published
reports or statements that social isolation and loneliness substantially increase the risk of many serious
medical conditions. This evidence supports the link between social connection and health conditions
among the leading causes of death.

2.1 Cardiovascular disease

There is significant evidence of the link between social connection and the reduced risk of cardiovascular
disease (CVD) or coronary heart disease (CHD). While numerous factors have been implicated in the
development and progression of CHD, including lifestyle choices, genetic predisposition, environmental,
and physiological factors, social factors are among them. Meta-analytic data have shed light on the
significant influence of social connection on an individual's risk of developing CHD.65 Poor social
relationships were associated with a 29% increase in the risk of incident CHD and a 32% increase in the
risk of stroke. In a published statement, the American Heart Association summarizes evidence concluding
a direct tie between social isolation, loneliness, and early mortality due to coronary heart disease and
stroke.64 Conversely, evidence also shows social support is associated with better cardiovascular health
outcomes.66, 67

Among indicators of social disconnection, social isolation, which is characterized by few relationships
and infrequent social interaction, has emerged as an independent risk factor for CHD. 68 Individuals who
experience social isolation are more likely to exhibit adverse cardiovascular outcomes, including
increased incidence of CHD,69 higher mortality rates,70, 71 and poorer prognosis after a cardiac event.64 Meta-
analytic data demonstrate that social isolation increases the risk of CVD mortality by 34% among initially
healthy patients and among individuals with existing CVD increases the risk by 28%. 72 In a secondary
analysis of 11,486 community-dwelling Australians who were aged 70 and above, individuals who had
poor scores on measures of social health were 42% more likely to develop CHD and twice as likely to die
from CHD, even when initially free of CHD.73 While these other lifestyle factors are more widely
recognized, the mounting evidence indicates the link between social isolation and CHD risk.

Recognizing the profound impact of social connection on CHD risk, efforts to promote social integration
and support networks may be important factors to consider in preventive cardiology. Interventions that
target social isolation, enhance social support, and foster meaningful relationships could be promising in
reducing the risk of CHD and improving cardiovascular outcomes.20 This might include social
prescriptions of community-based programs, peer support groups, and educational initiatives that promote
social engagement and encourage healthier lifestyle choices. Integrating social connection into
comprehensive CHD prevention strategies may hold the potential to not only mitigate the risk of CHD but
also improve overall well-being and quality of life.72 As evidence and understanding of the intricate
relationship between social connection and CHD grows, it may be critical to integrate social factors into
comprehensive cardiovascular health initiatives to improve the outcomes of those at risk for CHD. 64

2.2 Diabetes
Over the last 25 years, research has shown that the social environment is critical in the development and
management of diabetes.74 In a study utilizing data from the Jackson Heart Study, Gebreab
et al.75 investigated social cohesion, which was gauged by factors such as trust in neighbors, shared values
with neighbors, willingness to assist neighbors, and the extent of amicability among neighbors. Their
findings revealed that greater social cohesion within a neighborhood was associated with a 22% decrease
in the incidence of type 2 diabetes.75 Conversely, a review of this evidence finds both the structural
network variable of “living alone” and the functional network variable of “lack of social support” have
been linked to an elevated risk of developing type 2 diabetes.76 However, this association may be mediated
by lifestyle factors like obesity, physical inactivity, and an unhealthy diet.

Both type 1 and type 2 diabetes come with unique challenges for daily living and disease management.
This management is undoubtedly impacted by social determinants of health, such as social integration,
perceived social support, and isolation. Studies examining the connection between social support and
diabetes have indicated that heightened social support is linked with better glycemic control as well as an
enhanced quality of life.77-81 Further, a systematic review of 18 observational studies involving adults with
type 2 diabetes found that increased levels of social support were linked to various outcomes, such as
improved glycemic control, greater knowledge, better treatment adherence, enhanced quality of life,
higher diagnosis awareness and acceptance, and reduced stress.82 Conversely, a smaller network size and
insufficient social support have been associated with increased mortality and diabetes-related
complications, particularly chronic kidney disease and CHD.77 Social support interventions to combat
these effects have shown a small yet favorable effect on short-term HbA1c values. 83 This evidence
suggests that social support can benefit diabetes self-management.

There appears to be a difference in social connection among those with type 1 versus type 2 diabetes. In a
study that conducted two cross-sectional surveys consisting of 1081 people with type 2 diabetes and 2419
people with type 1 diabetes, researchers found that individuals with type 2 diabetes had lower levels of
interaction with their social network, a reduced sense of assurance regarding support in the event of
severe illness, and fewer healthy behaviors when compared to those with type 1 diabetes. 84 Medical
treatment adherence rates for most patients are typically low but tend to increase when social support is
present.27 This suggests healthcare providers’ attention to patients’ social lifestyle may be especially
important among those with type 2 diabetes. Increasing social support for those with type 2 diabetes could
increase treatment adherence, in addition to improving overall health outcomes while living with this
disease.

2.3 Upper respiratory virus susceptibility

Social isolation and loneliness have been shown to increase susceptibility, while social connection
decreases susceptibility to viruses such as the common cold and flu.85-88 Among viral challenge studies
with the common cold, healthy participants are asked to report the extent of their participation in various
types of social connections, after which participants are exposed to nasal drops containing rhinovirus and
are monitored for the development of infection, illness symptoms, and diagnosis of clinical disease.
Studies show that individuals with more social roles were less susceptible to colds. 86 Specifically, those
with fewer social connections (one to three social roles) had a 4.2 times higher likelihood of developing a
cold than those more socially integrated (six or more social roles).85 While the impact of other factors on
immune functioning should also be considered such as aggression,89 sleep deprivation,90 and the
respiratory microbiome91 among other factors, the impact of social integration on developing infectious
diseases should not be overlooked.

3 SOCIAL CONNECTION ACROSS THE LIFE

Like other lifestyle factors, the influence of a social lifestyle occurs across every stage of life, with
exposure early in life and chronicity over time ultimately influencing longer-term health. Starting with
infancy, infant–caregiver relationships in the early stages of life are not only crucial for survival but they
are also considered the first social “safety net” and form the foundation for assessing relationships as
dependable sources of support and protection.92 Some of the earliest public health policies were based on
research that demonstrated the failure to thrive and, in some cases, the death of infants and young children
in custodial care who were deprived of human contact.93 Similarly, studies that have shown the positive
impact of early contact between mother and infant on subsequent health and developmental
outcomes94 have led to maternity care practices and policies that encourage skin-to-skin contact within the
first hour after birth.95

Social connectedness in early childhood is strongly associated with social connectedness in adulthood,
which has related health implications.96 Aspects of self-regulation, such as inhibitory control, may also
predict social connectedness or loneliness in childhood.97-99 Inhibitory control, a crucial element of effortful
control, can either reduce or amplify emotional reactivity's emergence, magnitude, and duration and
regulate behavioral reactions across different situational contexts, including social encounters. 99 For
example, inhibitory control at age four predicts lower behavioral problems at age seven, predicting better
friendship quality and lower levels of loneliness at age ten.100 These findings suggest fostering inhibitory
control in young children may have a ripple effect on behavioral and social outcomes in middle childhood
and even in adulthood.

Evidence also points to social connection impacting health-relevant biology across the lifespan, which is
critical for understanding when and how the well-documented effects on health emerge. For example,
harmonized data from four U.S. nationally representative studies across developmental stages
demonstrate the biological impacts of social connection patterns that emerge in adolescence and
subsequent stages to show the impact on objective biomarkers across the lifespan. Biomarkers of
inflammation (CRP), cardiovascular function (hypertension), and energy metabolism (overall obesity and
abdominal obesity) are all vital physiological mechanisms tied to age-related diseases and
longevity.49 Greater social connection was associated with better physical functioning and lower risks of
biological dysregulation in a dose–response manner early and later in life.49 In contrast, a lack of social
connections was associated with elevated risk in specific life stages. These findings suggest that
interventions to improve social connection and social integration starting as early as childhood can create
a cascading impact on socially mediated health outcomes later in life. 49, 100

The importance of social connection across the life course is also consistent with meta-analytic evidence
on the increased risk for premature mortality. The risk of isolation, loneliness, and living alone across
different age groups was significantly stronger among younger individuals compared to those over 65
years.101 Similarly, more recent evidence demonstrates loneliness significantly predicted earlier mortality
among young and middle-aged adults (18–59) but not among older adults (60+).102 Though young and
middle-aged adults seem to be at higher risk for isolation and loneliness and earlier mortality than older
adults, evidence still suggests the critical role that social connectedness plays in perceived health status
and quality of life in older adulthood.102

Like other lifestyle factors, social connection has positive implications for overall health and well-being
across the lifespan; whereas a lack of social connection is linked to elevated risks, particularly during
certain life stages. Prevention efforts and interventions to improve social deficits early in life may change
the course of early progression toward chronic diseases and shorten the period of life in which disease
creates a burden in middle and late adulthood and possibly as early as young adulthood.

4 INFLUENCE OF TECHNOLOGY USE ON SOCIALLY

CONNECTED HEALTHY LIFESTYLE
Decreases in social connection have been identified drawing upon data going back several decades, with
concerns that these shifts may be due in part to the changing landscape of digital technology for recent
generations.15, 103-105 These trends raise concerns that the changing digital landscape may catalyze lower in-
person social engagement—a new norm that fundamentally changes the population-level lifestyle to be
less socially connected. Although research is still evolving to elucidate how technology influences health,
compelling evidence indicates that technology habits meaningfully affect social connection and other
lifestyle factors that contribute to a healthy life for both good and bad.

Several reviews and meta-analyses that examine the body of evidence identify both benefits and harms
influence of technology on social connectedness.8, 106-115 For example, technology-mediated social support
(through online support groups, message boards, chat rooms, and other forums) has been found to
improve health for individuals living with numerous chronic conditions through improved illness
management, reduced stigma, and increased quality of life.116-118 Further, in a systematic review of the
relationship between social media and mental health among lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer
(LGBTQ) youths (aged 10−24), researchers found that social media enabled LGTBQ youth to access
social support, find community, and feel understood.119 However, digital media use may also monopolize
our attention, displace in-person socializing, reduce the quality of interactions, increase conflict and
reduce relationship satisfaction, and diminish self-esteem.120-123 Because technology is so varied and
evolving rapidly, each type of technology, the way it is used or applied, and the characteristics of the user,
should be considered separately in determining their influence on social connection.

While there is strong evidence of the benefits of social connection through more traditional means (e.g.,
in-person), digitally mediated or remote social engagement may not consistently confer the same benefits.
For example, one study found that during the COVID-19 pandemic, face-to-face interaction was
positively associated with well-being while contact via messaging apps was negatively associated with
well-being.124 While social media is often used with the intent of socially connecting, its use is also
associated with numerous unhealthy lifestyle behaviors, including shortened sleep and poorer sleep
quality among children and young adults, greater obesity, and less healthy diet.125-128 This and other
evidence suggest that connecting via social media may not be equivalent, nor have comparable influences
on other lifestyle factors, as other more traditional means of connecting socially.

Technologies do not appear to be entirely destructive or a panacea but have drastically changed
behavioral habits. Nearly all (96–99%) teenagers and adults under 65% and 75% of older adults aged 65
and above report using the Internet.129, 130 Additionally, the average American spends 6 h each day on
digital media, with one-third of adults in the United States aged 18 and above saying they are online
“almost constantly.”131 Despite many of these tools being explicitly designed to connect socially, and
population-level adoption, population-level improvements in social connection do not appear evident.
While more research is needed to understand the harms, the existing level of evidence was concerning
enough for the U.S. Surgeon General to release an advisory cautioning the nation on the effects of social
media on the mental health of children and adolescents.132 These findings suggest that technology use and
technology-mediated social engagement can be important links to engaging in a healthy lifestyle for
better or worse, depending on the context, how the technology is used, and by whom.

5 PROMOTING SOCIAL CONNECTION FOR HEALTH

The link between social connection and health is complex and nuanced, yet this is true of nearly all public
health concerns. Despite this complexity, public health leaders pursue solutions to major complex
problems. We should not let the complexity of social connection hold us back from acting. A recent
proposal of national health guidelines for social connection, similar to health guidelines for other lifestyle
factors such as diet, exercise, and sleep, could act as a template for expert advisory committees to come
up with evidence-based recommendations with periodic scientific updates as has been the pattern with
establishing other national health guidelines in the United States.133 National and global-level
measurement of social connection can inform future editions of the guidelines, identify high-risk
populations, and track the efforts and progress of global, national, and local prevention efforts.

Systemic change across sectors is needed to substantially prioritize social connection for health;
nonetheless, the health sector plays a key role3, 4 Healthcare settings are important settings for
disseminating health information—including the importance of social connection as part of a healthy
lifestyle.3, 61 These settings are also important for identifying, through assessments, those at varying levels
of risk.3, 61 Unfortunately, many healthcare settings are not appropriately resourced to adequately respond
to patients who are identified at risk. This can either be through integrating social connection into existing
treatment plans134, 135 or through referrals such as social prescribing.136-138

6 CONCLUSION
Long before the global pandemic, social engagement was trending downward as social isolation and
loneliness were trending upward.15, 103-105 Social lifestyles have changed over time with potential
implications for population health and well-being. Healthcare providers, business leaders, urban
architects, artists, and other community leaders and influencers shape lifestyle behaviors through various
means, including messages, policies, or structures, that value, ignore, relegate, or impede a social
lifestyle. Strong and compelling evidence shows that social connection is a significant protective factor,
and social disconnection is a risk factor for morbidity and mortality. This article reviewed existing
evidence on why a social lifestyle is essentially a healthy lifestyle, the possible mechanisms establishing
the link between social connection and health outcomes across the lifespan, the changing landscape of
digital technology and the impact this has had on social lifestyles, and, finally, briefly proposing solutions
to improve social connection as a healthy lifestyle factor.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/lim2.91 1

When people think of health, they often think of physical health or

symptoms: a bad cough, back pain, or a sprained ankle. They might also
think of mental health, something top-of-mind for many today.

But health has other dimensions. They’re less visible but influence your
overall health and how you feel about your life. One of these is social health.

Think about how good you feel after spending time with friends or how a
chance conversation with a stranger in line brightens your morning. Perhaps
you feel sad when you’re away from family or restless and out-of-sorts when
you can’t be out in your community.

People — relationships —are the medicine for our social health. They can
distract us, change our perspective, and lighten the moment by making us
laugh or sharing the load.
Our social health depends on connection to others. And social health
supports health.

If you’re feeling down in the dumps or unmotivated, it might be because you

need more social connection and support. As much as you need to pay
attention to your physical health, it’s important to take steps to address poor
social health.

But what is social health, and how can you manage it?

What is social health, and why is it important?

Psychologists talk about social health in terms of child development. It is a
child’s ability to form secure relationships with others and develop trust so
that they can feel safe to explore and learn. This ability is closely connected
to their emotional regulation skills.

For adults, social health also includes the networks and social support
structures we have around us. Social health boils down to two main factors:

 Your ability to build healthy relationships. This includes platonic

friends, romantic partners, family members, and professional
relationships.
 The quality of those relationships. as measured by their duration
and your ability to connect meaningfully with other people.

Our social relationships contribute to our overall health and quality of life.
Having strong interpersonal relationships and a strong support system
indicate good social health. Good social health supports better mental and
physical health.

Research also shows that the ongoing loneliness and chronic stress of poor
social health is linked to many physical health problems. Research shows
that strong social connections are linked to longer life, reduced stress, and
improved heart health .

In fact, cultivating human connections is just as important as eating healthy

food or physical activity. Poor social skills harm our health . Low social
health puts us at risk of social isolation , low self-esteem, anxiety,
depression, and other mental health disorders.

What social health is not

While marriage and family have been the most studied forms of close
relationships, social health doesn’t depend on family status. If you don’t
have a partner and your family relationships fall short (or are far away), you
can still build your social health.
It also isn’t about changing your personality or forcing yourself to “get out
there” at a party. Interestingly, according to Dr. Emma Seppala at the Center
for Compassion and Altruism Research at Stanford, social connection is
about how connected you feel — not about the absolute number of friends
or relationships you have.

An introvert with one or two satisfying friendships can feel as socially

connected as a social butterfly.

You also shouldn’t confuse “social health” with “social determinants of

health.” Both relate to your environment and how it affects your social well-
being, but they focus on different things.

What are social determinants of health?

Social determinant is a public health term for the systemic factors that
affect well-being. It includes things like financial wellness and neighborhood
quality, as well access to community , education and healthcare. It’s useful
for you to know, especially when considering a move to a new city or even a
new neighborhood because these social determinants can affect your well-
being and health.

Social determinants are more often something considered by policy experts

and health officials.

Social health focuses on you and your relationships. It’s something you can
work on right away by improving your social skills and connecting with
others.

7 signs you are socially healthy

You may already be doing what’s necessary to maintain your social health.
Here are some signs you’re on the right track and examples of what social
health is:

1. You balance your alone and social time. Everyone needs a

different ratio of alone versus social time. Introverted people may
need more solitude, but extroverted people might need the reverse.
Either way, you know how to stay connected with your friends while
taking care of yourself. Finding and striking the right balance means
you’re socially healthy.
2. You’re assertive but not aggressive. You know how to
communicate your needs and set healthy boundaries , and you can do
it without experiencing negative emotions. That is, you don’t feel
angry or resentful when you state your needs. You also don’t feel
apologetic, fearful, or ashamed.
3. You can be yourself. Healthy connections should make you feel
comfortable in your skin, not the opposite. You feel a sense of
belonging, meaning that you’re seen for who you are, valued,
 appreciated, and accepted. Being yourself means not covering or
feeling ashamed or afraid of exclusion. Friends and family may
challenge us and pull us beyond our comfort zone, but you should
feel relaxed enough that not rising to the challenge doesn’t threaten
your sense of belonging.
4. You treat others with respect. If you’re respectful, it’s a sign that
you probably have your social needs met and you aren't feeling
threatened. You don’t have to bring others down to improve your self-
esteem.
5. You have fun. The pressures of life often get in the way of us having
fun. Regularly making time for playfulness, social interaction, and
activities with other people is a good sign that you prioritize
maintaining social health.
6. You participate in the community. Whether you volunteer at church
or a nonprofit, play community sports, or help out at your kid’s school,
volunteering and participating in your neighborhood are signs of
positive social health.
7. You have a strong social network. You need people to lean on
when times are tough. Sometimes we think great friends are the ones
who are the most fun or always ready to go out, but social health
depends on friends who are there in the small moments, when you
need them.

How to improve your social wellness

If you didn’t hit all the marks, that’s okay. There are things you can do right
now to improve your social health to improve your life :

1. Practice self-care . Make sure you’re sleeping enough, eating healthy,

exercising, and stopping any unhealthy coping mechanisms.
Meditation can also help you connect with yourself before connecting
with others.
2. Take things slowly. You don’t need to have deep, life-altering
conversations out of the gate to start forming deeper social
connections .
Don’t set the bar so high, especially after 2 years of lockdowns and
awkward restrictions. Start with small talk to practice socializing.
Ask thoughtful questions about their favorite TV series, hobbies, or
plans for the weekend. Look for common ground and go from there.
3. Make the first move. Your friends and casual contacts don’t know
you want to hang out, so try reaching out to them. You can plan
something special or grab a simple coffee. Seeing each other is what
matters.
4. Join a sport, class, or community group. Group activities are a
great way to meet people with shared interests. Even if you don’t talk
much, a simple “Hello” and “How are you?” can open you up to a
conversation. There are many online communities, too, if you’re
hoping to make some virtual friends.
 5. Improve your communication skills. Practice maintaining eye
contact, use active listening, and be mindful of your body
language when conversing with others.
6. Keep your commitments. Sometimes we don’t want to go out, and
that’s okay. But if you’re always canceling social plans, it’ll become a
problem.
7. Practice gratitude. Show appreciation to your loved ones through
thank you notes, cards, or even a simple text message. A little goes a
long way to helping others feel valued.
8. Focus on quality connections (and not quantity). Social media
makes it easy to make new friends on a whim. But perceived
popularity doesn’t mean you have a healthy social life. It’s better to
focus on forming a few strong relationships with whom you can feel
truly comfortable.

What does all of this mean for you?

The first step to improving your social health is finding some balance and
calm in your current situation. It’s hard enough when you are feeling isolated
and down.

If you also get too worried or anxious about needing to make friends for the
sake of your health, you might not have a lot of luck connecting with others.

Try journaling or meditating to figure out what you need. You might be
happy seeing loved ones once a month, once a week, or once a day. Pay
attention to your mental health to make sure you’re striking that right
balance.

Now that you know what social health is, you can improve it. And, when
you’re ready, BetterUp can help you improve your communication skills and
emotional regulation to build your mental fitness for a lifetime.

https://www.betterup.com/blog/what-is-social-health