- Email: [email protected]
Social connectedness, extraversion, and subjective well-being: Testing a mediation model
Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 414–419
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Personality and Individual Differences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid
Social connectedness, extraversion, and subjective well-being: Testing a mediation model Richard M. Lee *, Brooke L. Dean, Kyoung-Rae Jung Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities Campus, N218 Elliott Hall, 75 East River Road, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 21 November 2007 Received in revised form 9 May 2008 Accepted 21 May 2008 Available online 2 July 2008 Keywords: Social connectedness Mediation Extraversion Subjective well-being
a b s t r a c t This investigation examined social connectedness as distinct from extraversion and as a mediation variable in the relationship between extraversion and subjective well-being. A college student sample (N = 295) and a sample of individuals who identify as lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB; N = 148) completed measures of extraversion, social connectedness, life satisfaction, and positive and negative affect. Factor analytic results suggest social connectedness is a unique construct from extraversion. Moreover, the relationship between extraversion and well-being was mediated by social connectedness. Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
In personality and well-being research, extraversion has received considerable attention because of its association with life satisfaction, positive affect, and psychological adjustment. However, the psychological mechanisms that underpin this relationship between extraversion and well-being are less understood. Building upon the idea that the self-system functions as a psychological mediator, we investigated social connectedness as distinct from extraversion and as a mediator of the relationship between extraversion and subjective well-being. Extraversion and well-being Extraversion is considered a core higher-order trait of most personality taxonomies (Costa & McCrae, 1992; Depue & Collins, 1999; Goldberg, 1999; Watson & Clark, 1997) that is consistently associated with subjective well-being, particularly positive affect and life satisfaction. DeNeve and Cooper (1998), for example, found in a meta-analysis that extraversion was the strongest predictor of positive affect and happiness when personality traits were grouped according to the Big Five higher-order traits. Lucas and Fugita (2000) similarly found a moderate correlation between extraversion and positive affect in a follow-up meta-analysis. What remains relatively unclear in psychological research is how extraversion is associated with subjective well-being.
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 612 625 6375; fax: +1 612 626 2079. E-mail address: [email protected] (R.M. Lee). 0191-8869/$ - see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.05.017
Most researchers have focused on instrumental-based and temperament-based explanations of the extraversion–well-being association. From an instrumental perspective, extraverts are more likely to socialize with other people, enjoy other people’s company, and subsequently experience greater positive affect. But research has disproved some aspects of this instrumental view of extraversion. Pavot, Diener, and Fujita (1990), for instance, found that extraverts are happier even when not in social situations. Researchers subsequently have examined a temperament-based explanation for the association. That is, extraverts may have a higher baseline of positive affect regardless of the social situation or may react more strongly to positive stimuli than introverts. Across six studies and a meta-analysis, Lucas and Baird (2004) found support for the baseline affect model and only mixed support for the affect reactivity model. They concluded, ‘‘It is possible (and even likely) that the association between extraversion and positive affect is multiply determined” (p. 482). That is, temperamental and instrumental processes may work independently and collectively, as well as through other psychological structures and processes. The self-system is a psychological structure and process that provides an alternative perspective on the extraversion–well-being association. DeNeve and colleagues (DeNeve, 1999; DeNeve & Cooper, 1998) suggested that well-being is sustained by the ways in which individuals organize and make sense of social experiences through attributions, appraisals, and self-regulation. These psychological mechanisms reflect aspects of the self-system. However, only a few studies have examined self-system variables in this way. Graziano, Jensen-Campbell, and Finch (1997) reported that
R.M. Lee et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 414–419
self-esteem mediated the relationship between personality and psychological adjustment in a study of college students. Other researchers have found emotion and self-regulation to mediate the relationship between personality and well-being (ChomorroPremuzic, Bennett, & Furnham, 2007; Erez, Johnson, & Judge, 1995; Harris & Lightsey, 2005; Lischetzke & Eid, 2006; Uziel, 2006). These studies provide an initial understanding of how self-related variables organize instrumental and temperamental processes, as well as operate independently, to mediate the association between personality and subjective well-being, but more research is necessary to elucidate the relationship, particularly as it relates to extraversion and well-being. Social connectedness as a mediator We examined social connectedness as another self-system explanation for the association between extraversion and wellbeing. Social connectedness refers to a person’s subjective awareness of being in close relationship with the social world in toto (Lee & Robbins, 1995). As people satisfy their need for belonging and connection, they develop a stable, secure sense of connectedness (Baumeister & Leary, 1995; Kohut, 1984). Social connectedness is related to but distinct from feelings of loneliness and isolation (Hawkley, Browne, & Cacioppo, 2005). In psychological studies, social connectedness has been found to be correlated with interpersonal trust, attachment security, social competence, fewer interpersonal problems, and identification with social groups (Banai, Mikulincer, & Shaver, 2005; Lee, Draper, & Lee, 2001; Moller, Fouladi, McCarthy, & Hatch, 2003; Williams & Galliher, 2006), as well as to affective balance, self-esteem, fewer anxiety and depressive symptoms, and less rejection sensitivity and social avoidance (Lee & Robbins, 1998; Lee et al., 2001; Mashek, Stuewig, Furukawa, & Tangney, 2006; Sheldon, Elliot, Kim, & Kasser, 2001; Williams & Galliher, 2006). It also has been associated with length of home residency, marital status, religious affiliation, social networks, frequent conversations, and cell phone usage (Hawkley et al., 2005; Lee & Robbins, 1998; Wei & Lo, 2006). A few studies even suggest connectedness is related to elevated testosterone levels and more rapid blood pressure recovery following negative emotional arousal (Edwards, Wetzel, & Wyner, 2006; Ong & Allaire, 2005). Social connectedness appears to be similar to extraversion as both constructs address the social experiences of the individual, but an examination of key features of each construct reveals conceptual differences. Extraversion taps primarily into sociability and agency or the motivation to form interpersonal bonds, to be warm and affectionate, and to seek excitement and attention. By contrast, social connectedness reflects a self-evaluation of the degree of closeness between the self and other people, the community, and society at large. It does not include motivations and agentic behaviors, as is the case with extraversion. Theoretically, extraversion likely precedes and even contributes to the emergence of social connectedness (Baumeister & Leary, 1995; Lounsbury & DeNeui, 1996). This distinction is evidenced in a study which found that extraverted people were more likely to take photographs that included themselves touching other people and with other people in the background (Dollinger & Clancy, 1993). These photographic self-representations reflected a general sense of connectedness experienced by extraverted individuals. Another set of studies found extraversion and a psychological sense of community, which is measured similarly to social connectedness, were only moderately correlated (r = .34–.44; Lounsbury & DeNeui, 1996; Lounsbury, Loveland, & Gibson, 2003). Although these studies suggest extraversion and connectedness are related but distinct, no known studies have directly examined the psychometric relationship between extraversion and social connectedness.
415
We specifically propose that social connectedness mediates the association between extraversion and subjective well-being. That is, extraversion relates to subjective well-being, in part, because people have developed and subsequently have maintained a sense of connectedness in their lives. This viewpoint helps to explain the mixed, empirical support for both instrumental and temperamentbased explanations of the extraversion–well-being association. From an instrumental perspective, extraversion leads people to exhibit trust and affiliation tendencies which allow them to create and take advantage of social opportunities and develop more and better relationships. These relationships, in turn, likely satisfy the innate need for belonging and connection. From a temperamentbased perspective, an internalized sense of connectedness helps to explain why extraverted individuals are able to regulate their interpersonal and emotional needs and feel happy and satisfied with their lives. It enables people to feel positive and good about themselves even when alone, in non-social situations, or in novel social settings. In other words, the proposed mediation model organizes instrumental and temperament-level explanations of the extraversion–well-being link around social connectedness as a self-system. However, no known studies to date have examined the relationships between social connectedness, extraversion, and subjective well-being. Purpose of study We examined social connectedness as an aspect of the self-system that helps to explain the association between extraversion and subjective well-being. First, we examined social connectedness as distinct from facets of extraversion. We hypothesized that psychometric analysis would reveal two theoretically related but distinct constructs. We also hypothesized that the two constructs would be moderately correlated. Second, we hypothesized that social connectedness would mediate the association between extraversion and subjective well-being which we measured by life satisfaction and affective balance. Specifically, extraverted individuals develop a stable sense of connectedness in their lives which provides them with the relationship-enhancing skills and the ability to organize and make sense of social experiences. These experiences, in turn, contribute to subjective well-being. We tested these hypotheses in two disparate samples of undergraduate students and individuals who identified as lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB). Method Participants College sample The undergraduate sample consisted of 79 men and 216 women for a total sample of 295 participants whose ages ranged from 18 to 44 years (M = 19.85, SD = 3.01). Participants identified their race/ ethnicity as White/European American (n = 239, 81%), Asian/Asian American (n = 38, 13%), Black/African American (n = 11, 4%), Hispanic/Latino (n = 2, <1%), Native American (n = 1, <1%), and Biracial/Mixed (n = 2, <1%), with 2 omitted responses. LGB sample The LGB sample consisted of 76 men and 72 women for a total sample of 148 participants whose ages ranged from 18 to 56 years (M = 26.93, SD = 8.68). Participants identified their race/ethnicity as White/European American (n = 123, 83%), Asian/Asian American (n = 9, 6%), Hispanic/Latino (n = 6, 4%), and Native American/American Indian (n = 3, 2%), and Other (n = 4, 3%) with 4 omitted responses. The majority identified as gay (n = 71, 48%) or lesbian (n = 49, 33%) with 28 (19%) identifying as bisexual.
416
R.M. Lee et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 414–419
Measures Extraversion The 10-item Extraversion Scale (EXT) was drawn from the BigFive Factor Markers provided through the International Personality Item Pool ( Goldberg et al., 1999, 2006). EXT measures facets of extraversion, including sociability and agency, and uses a 5-point rating scale (1 = very inaccurate to 5 = very accurate). Social connectedness The 20-item Social Connectedness Scale-Revised (SCS; Lee, Draper, & Lee, 2001) measures a psychological sense of belonging, or how individuals cognitively construe interpersonal closeness with others in their social world. The SCS uses a 6-point rating scale (1 = strongly disagree to 6 = strongly agree). Subjective well-being We measured cognitive and affective aspects of subjective well-being. The 5-item Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS; Pavot & Diener, 1993) measures a person’s global life satisfaction using a 7-point rating scale (1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree). The 20-item Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988) contains 10 positive affect items and 10 negative affect items and uses a 5-point rating scale (1 = not at all and 5 = extremely). Similar to other studies (e.g., Sheldon et al., 2001), we computed an affective balance score by substracting the sum of negative affect scale from the sum of the positive affect scale. Affective balance, or a preponderance of positive affect over negative affect, is a common measure of happiness (Bradburn, 1969; Diener, 1984). Procedure College sample Participants were asked to complete the survey as an extra credit opportunity for undergraduate psychology courses at a large, Midwestern public university. Participants completed the survey at scheduled sessions in a classroom on campus throughout the week. Survey sessions typically ranged from 1 to 10 participants who attended to complete the survey. LGB sample Participants were drawn from another study on sexual orientation and mental health. They were recruited from a large metropolitan LGB pride festival (n = 81), as well as from a queer student organization (n = 64) and an undergraduate psychology course (n = 3) at a large, Midwestern public university. Participants from the festival and the student organization individually completed the survey at a booth or table located at each site. For each completed survey, a $5.00 donation was made to the queer student organization. Participants from the psychology course completed the survey in the classroom and received extra credit.
Results Exploratory factor analysis and intercorrelations To determine if social connectedness and extraversion are related but distinct psychological constructs, we conducted an exploratory factor analysis using principal axis method and direct oblimin rotation on the college sample. Four factors emerged with eigenvalues greater than 1.0 (11.59, 3.10, 1.47, 1.38) but the first two factors accounted for nearly 50% of the variance (39% and 10%) with the next two factors each accounting for only 5% of the variance. Both a scree test (Cattell, 1966) and parallel analysis
(O’Connor, 2000) suggested a two-factor solution. Only the eigenvalues from the first two factors were greater than the 95th percentile of eigenvalues (1.72 and 1.59) derived from the parallel analysis. We therefore repeated the exploratory factor analysis, specifying the extraction of only 2 factors (see Table 1). Based on the pattern matrix, Factor 1 contained eighteen of the twenty SCS items. Factor 2 contained all the EXT items and two SCS items. Three items from Factor 1 had either weak loadings (r < .33) or double loadings. We repeated the factor analytic procedure on the LGB community sample. Although the LGB sample size was smaller, the number of variables sampled, the method of analysis and the factor loading sizes offset this sampling concern (Velicer & Fava, 1998). The initial solution produced five factors with eigenvalues greater than 1.0 (11.80, 3.11, 1.52, 1.22, 1.04) with the first two factors accounting nearly 50% of the total variance (39% and 10%) and the remaining factors each accounting for less than 5% of the variance. Again, both a scree test and parallel analysis suggested a two-factor solution. Only the eigenvalues from the first two factors were greater than the 95th percentile of eigenvalues (2.11 and 1.89) derived from the parallel analysis. We repeated the exploratory factor analysis, specifying the extraction of only 2 factors (see Table 1). Based on the pattern matrix, the same five SCS items either loaded on the other factor or double loaded on both factors. We removed these five items and calculated a new 15-item Social Connectedness Scale (SC-15). We also retained the original 10-item Extraversion Scale. Overall, the factor analytic results support our hypothesis that social connectedness is psychometrically distinct from extraversion. Table 2 presents the mean scale item scores, the internal reliability estimates, and correlation matrix for all variables in the two samples. As hypothesized, extraversion and social connectedness were significantly correlated (r = .55–.58). Although this correlation range reflects a large effect size, the coefficients of determination are only 30% and 33%, suggesting they are not measuring the same underlying construct. Test of mediation We employed the bootstrap method, which is used to estimate indirect effects in simple mediation models (Preacher & Hayes, 2004), to test whether social connectedness mediated the relationship between extraversion and subjective well-being. The bootstrap method is considered a more powerful approach than the three-step multiple regression approach (Baron & Kenny, 1986) and the Sobel test (Sobel, 1982) for estimating mediation and indirect effects. For this study, we repeated the bootstrap process the recommended minimum of 1000 times. Table 3 presents results using multiple regression analysis and the bootstrap method on both the college and LGB samples. For the college sample, there were significant direct effects between extraversion and life satisfaction (B = 0.42, p < .001) and affective balance (B = 0.38, p < .001), prior to controlling for social connectedness. Controlling for social connectedness, the direct effects between extraversion and life satisfaction (B = 0.01, p = .93) and affective balance (B = 0.07, p = .34) were reduced to non-significance. However, there were significant indirect effects on life satisfaction (bootstrap mean = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.27–0.56) and affective balance (bootstrap mean = 0.31, 95% CI = 0.21–0.42) using the bootstrap method to detect mediated effects. As hypothesized, social connectedness fully mediated the association between extraversion and subjective well-being. For the LGB sample, there were significant direct effects between extraversion and life satisfaction (B = 0.77, p < .001) and affective balance (B = 0.57, p < .001), prior to controlling for social connectedness. Controlling for social connectedness, the direct
417
R.M. Lee et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 414–419 Table 1 Pattern matrices from the exploratory factor analyses Scale
Item
College sample
SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC EXT SC EXT EXT EXT EXT EXT EXT EXT EXT EXT SC
Distant from people Don’t participate with anyone or group Don’t feel I belong Don’t feel related to people Feel like an outsider Understood by people I know Disconnected from the world Losing a sense of connectedness See myself as a loner Little sense of togetherness Friends feel like family No sense of brother/sisterhood Close to people Relate to peers Connect with other peoplea Involved in people’s lives See people as friendlya In tune with the worlda Start conversations Comfortable in presence of strangersb Quiet around strangers Talk to different people Don’t talk a lot Keep in the background Have little to say Feel comfortable around people Don’t draw attention to myself Life of the party Don’t mind being center of attention Fit in well in new situationsb
.81 .76 .75 .74 .70 .69 .67 .66 .65 .64 .64 .63 .62 .61 .52 .48 .36 .32 .07 .09 .05 .02 .11 .11 .02 .16 .00 .10 .04 .16
Note.
a
Item had a weak or double loading.
b
LGB sample .03 .13 .00 .07 .11 .17 .02 .04 .08 .02 .05 .06 .07 .00 .27 .20 .35 .15 .76 .75 .74 .74 .65 .64 .62 .60 .60 .60 .60 53
.76 .46 .83 .79 .79 .60 .68 .61 .54 .71 .52 .65 .69 .59 .38 .45 .23 .30 .02 .06 .06 .06 .06 .03 .12 .26 .05 .02 .14 .09
.03 .05 .17 .06 .01 .04 .01 .02 .20 .11 .02 .03 .06 .16 .41 .21 .52 .23 .70 .80 .72 .73 .68 .75 .52 .56 .65 .63 .78 .67
Item conceptually loaded on the other factor.
Table 2 Scale means, reliability coefficients, and intercorrelations Measure
1
1. Extraversion 2. Social connect (20-item scale) 3. Social connect (15-item scale) 4. Life satisfaction 5. Positive affect 6. Negative affect 7. Affective balance M SD
– .62
a
2
3 .65
–
.55
.98
.28 .31 .25 .35 3.39 0.75 0.89
.51 .43 .41 .54 4.68 0.72 0.93
M
SD
a
.50 .49
.47 .53
.27 .45
.46 .63
3.41 4.34
0.85 0.82
0.90 0.93
.45
.49
.45
.61
4.34
0.91
0.93
– .42 .35 .48 5.00 1.11 0.84
.49 – .24 .75 3.80 0.50 0.83
.61 .68 .84 – 1.60 0.86 n/a
4.68 3.79 2.42 1.37
1.29 0.56 0.76 1.02
0.87 0.83 0.90 n/a
4 .58 .98
– .50 .40 .41 .52 4.78 0.80 0.93
5
6
.46 .17* – .82 2.20 0.60 0.83
7
Note. The college sample is represented in the lower diagonal matrix (N = 281 with listwise deletion). The LGB sample is represented in the upper diagonal matrix (N = 137 with listwise deletion). * p < .05. All other correlations were significant at p < .01.
effects between extraversion and life satisfaction (B = 0.53, p < .0001) and affective balance (B = 0.20, p < .05) remained significant although the effects were reduced. There also were significant indirect effects on life satisfaction (bootstrap mean = 0.24, 95% CI = 0.08–0.44) and affective balance (bootstrap mean = 0.36, 95% CI = 0.23–0.52) using the bootstrap method to detect mediated effects. Contrary to hypothesis, there were significant direct effects between extraversion and subjective well-being, but social connectedness partially mediated the association. Discussion This investigation represents a first look at the associations among social connectedness, extraversion, and subjective wellbeing. Building upon research that suggests social connectedness is associated with the organization and regulation of social experiences and healthy interpersonal behaviors, we hypothesized that
social connectedness is distinct from extraversion and, importantly, mediates the relationship between extraversion and wellbeing. Across two separate samples of college students and LGB individuals, we found support for social connectedness as related to but distinct from extraversion and as a mediator of the association between extraversion and well-being. Theoretically, extraversion precedes and contributes to social connectedness (Baumeister & Leary, 1995). The factor analytic results from both our samples confirm that social connectedness, as measured in this study, is psychometrically related to but distinct from measured facets of extraversion. All but a few social connectedness items loaded onto a separate factor than extraversion items. Moderately strong correlations between the 10-item measure of extraversion and the 15-item revised measure of social connectedness confirm a close association between the two constructs (r’s = .55–.58). These correlations are larger in magnitude than past studies by Lounsbury and colleagues (Lounsbury & DeNeui, 1996;
418
R.M. Lee et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 414–419
Table 3 Regression and bootstrap results for social connectedness as a mediator Regression model
College sample Life satisfaction (N = 286) Step 1 Extraversion Step 2 Extraversion Social connectedness Affective balance (N = 282) Step 1 Extraversion Step 2 Extraversion Social connectedness LGB sample Life satisfaction (N = 142) Step 1 Extraversion Step 2 Extraversion Social connectedness Affective balance (N = 138) Step 1 Extraversion Step 2 Extraversion Social connectedness Note.
**
Regression
Bootstrap
B
SE B
.42**
.09
.01 .69**
.09 .09
.38**
.07
.07 .52**
.07 .07
.77**
.11
.53** .38**
.13 .12
.57**
.09
.20** .59**
.10 .09
R
2
2
4R
Indirect effect
SE
95% CI
.41
.08
.27–.56
.31
.05
.21–.42
.24 .24
.09
.08–.04
.36
.07
.23–.52
.08 .25
.17
.11 .27
.16
.25 .29
.05
.22 .39
.18
p < .01.
Lounsbury et al., 2003) who found associations between extraversion and a sense of community to be moderate (r’s = .34–.44), but connectedness was measured in terms of a sense of community to a specific environment (e.g., high school or college) in those studies. In this study, social connectedness was measured more globally similar to the way in which extraversion was measured. Prior to testing the mediation hypothesis, we found that extraversion had a significant direct effect on well-being. The correlations between extraversion and two measures of well-being were moderate in size for the college sample which is consistent with DeNeve & Cooper, 1998 meta-analysis findings. Interestingly, the correlations for the LGB sample were larger in magnitude, but within the range of values reported in the meta-analysis. The larger direct effect of extraversion may be related to the convenience sampling method of the LGB population. Additionally, socioeconomic status and other relevant demographic variables may inflate the association between extraversion and well-being. DeNeve and Cooper reported that convenience samples had larger effect sizes than representative samples and that socioeconomic status also correlated with well-being. We next tested the mediation hypothesis that extraverted individuals are more likely to have a stable, secure sense of connectedness in their lives which, in turn, contributes to their subjective well-being. Consistent with this hypothesis, we found social connectedness mediated the association between extraversion and cognitive and affective aspects of subjective well-being. Bootstrapping methods supported full mediation in the college sample and partial mediation in the LGB sample. Social connectedness as a mediator helps to explain the mixed findings from studies that have tested instrumental and temperament explanations of the extraversion–well-being link. From an instrumental perspective, it is likely that extraverted individuals take advantage of social opportunities and develop affirming relationships with other people, resulting in the satiation of the need for belonging and connection. From a temperament perspective, extraverted individuals may possess a higher baseline for not just positive affect, but also
for a sense of social connectedness. Social connectedness, then, allows extraverted individuals to maintain well-being across varying social situations. In other words, social connectedness as a part of one’s self-system may be one of many avenues which allow extraverted individuals to sustain subjective well-being. This view is in line with DeNeve’s (1999) contention that multiple psychological mechanisms help explain the extraversion–well-being link and complement other research studies that have found self-systems function as mediators. An unexpected finding was the full and partial mediation of social connectedness in the college and LGB samples, respectively. This difference in mediation effects may be related to the unique features of each sample, including the previously mentioned concerns about convenience sampling and socioeconomic status. The age range for each sample also differed with the LGB sample, on average, seven years older in age than the college sample. There is some emerging evidence that gene expression of phenotypes becomes stronger over the lifespan and environmental influences attenuate (Koenig, McGue, Krueger, & Bouchard, 2005). It is possible that there remains a direct effect between extraversion and subjective well-being in the LGB sample because the genetic expression of personality traits increases with age, whereas the influence of social connectedness which is more environmentally determined may begin to wane somewhat over time. To test this latter interpretation, we conducted post-hoc moderation analyses on both samples to determine if age moderated the association between extraversion and well-being. We found that age did not moderate the association for the college sample, but it did moderate the association in the expected direction for the LGB sample (Life satisfaction B = .02, p < .05; Affective Balance B = .03, p < .01). Specifically, simple slope analyses revealed that the correlation between extraversion and life satisfaction was stronger in magnitude for older-aged LGB participants. This post-hoc finding suggests the role of age and lifespan development should be further investigated in studies of extraversion and subjective wellbeing.
R.M. Lee et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 414–419
Another important study limitation is the use of brief self-report measures of social connectedness, extraversion, and subjective well-being. Extraversion is believed to be composed of many facets. Costa et al., 1992 identified six facets, including warmth, gregariousness, assertiveness, activity, excitement-seeking, positive emotion, whereas Depue and Collins (1999) narrowed these facets down to sociability and agency. The use of a 10-item measure of extraversion prevents the full assessment of all facets of extraversion. Similarly, social connectedness as measured relies upon one’s cognitive or subjective appraisal of interpersonal closeness. Social connectedness may still correspond with some of the social-oriented facets of extraversion, such as sociability and gregariousness. Research that further delineates the unique aspects of each construct and tests the concurrent validity of these measures on larger, diverse, and representative samples is warranted. In sum, this investigation adds to the literature that is elucidating the linkage between extraversion and subjective well-being, particularly from a self-systems perspective. Extraversion manifests itself in daily life in innumerable ways. Undoubtedly, extraverted people select their environments and organize their social experiences to support their view of themselves. Social connectedness appears to function as a mediator in how people organize and make sense of their social experiences and subsequently engage in relationship-enhancing behaviors, thereby contributing to greater subjective well-being. References Banai, E., Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2005). Self-object needs in Kohut’s self psychology: Links with attachment, self-cohesion, affect regulation, and adjustment. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 22, 224–260. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 461–484. Bradburn, N. M. (1969). The structure of psychological well-being. Chicago: Aldine. Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245–276. Chomorro-Premuzic, T., Bennett, E., & Furnham, A. (2007). The happy personality: Mediational role of trait emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 1633–1639. Costa, P. T., Jr., & R .R. McCrae. NEO PI-R professional manual . DeNeve, K. M. (1999). Happy as an extraverted clam? The role of personality for subjective well-being. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8, 141–144. DeNeve, K. M., & Cooper, H. (1998). The happy personality: A meta-analysis of 137 personality traits and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 197–229. Depue, R. A., & Collins, P. F. (1999). Neurobiology of the structure of personality: Dopamine, facilitation of incentive motivation, and extraversion. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 491–569. Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 542–575. Dollinger, S. J., & Clancy, S. M. (1993). Identity, self, and personality: II. Glimpses through the autophotographic eye. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 1064–1071. Edwards, D. A., Wetzel, K., & Wyner, D. R. (2006). Intercollegiate soccer: Saliva cortisol and testosterone are elevated during competition, and testosterone is related to status and social connectedness with teammates. Physiology & Behavior, 87, 135–143. Erez, A., Johnson, D. E., & Judge, T. A. (1995). Self-deception as a mediator of the relationship between dispositions and subjective well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 19, 597–612. Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public domain personality, inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. In I. Mervielde, I. Deary, F. De Fruyt, & F. Ostendorf (Eds.). Personality psychology in Europe (Vol. 7, pp. 7–28). Tilburg, The Netherlands: Tilburg University Press. Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., & Gough, H. G. (2006). The international personality item pool and the future of public-domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 84–96.
419
Graziano, W. G., Jensen-Campbell, L. A., & Finch, J. F. (1997). The self as a mediator between personality and adjustment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 392–404. Harris, P. R., & Lightsey, O. R. Jr., (2005). Constructive thinking as a mediator of the relationship between extraversion, neuroticism, and subjective well-being. European Journal of Personality, 19, 409–426. Hawkley, L. C., Browne, M. W., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2005). How can I connect with thee? Let me count the ways. Psychological Science, 16, 798–804. Koenig, L. B., McGue, M., Krueger, R. F., & Bouchard, T. J. Jr., (2005). Genetic and environmental influences on religiousness: Findings for retrospective and current religiousness ratings. Journal of Personality, 73, 471–488. Kohut, H. (1984). How does analysis cure? New York: International Universities Press. Lee, R. M., Draper, M., & Lee, S. (2001). Social connectedness, dysfunctional interpersonal behaviors, and psychological distress: Testing a mediator model. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 48, 310–318. Lee, R. M., & Robbins, S. B. (1995). Measuring belongingness: The social connectedness and the social assurance scales. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 42, 232–241. Lee, R. M., & Robbins, S. B. (1998). The relationship between social connectedness and anxiety, self-esteem, and social identity. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 45, 338–345. Lee, S. (2001). Social connectedness and self-evaluation motives among women (Doctoral dissertation, University of Texas at Austin, 2001). Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering. 62 (3-B), 1644. Lischetzke, T., & Eid, M. (2006). Why extraverts are happier than introverts: The role of mood regulation. Journal of Personality, 74, 1127–1161. Lounsbury, J. W., & DeNeui, D. (1996). Collegiate psychological sense of community in relation to size of college/university and extroversion. Journal of Community Psychology, 24, 381–394. Lounsbury, J. W., Loveland, J. M., & Gibson, L. W. (2003). An investigation of psychological sense of community in relation to big five personality traits. Journal of Community Psychology, 31, 531–541. Lucas, R. E., & Baird, B. M. (2004). Extraversion and emotional reactivity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 473–485. Lucas, R. E., & Fugita, F. (2000). Factors influencing the relation between extraversion and pleasant affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 1039–1056. Mashek, D., Stuewig, J., Furukawa, E., & Tangney, J. (2006). Psychological and behavioral implications of connectedness to communities with opposing values and beliefs. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 25, 404–428. Moller, N. P., Fouladi, R. T., McCarthy, C. J., & Hatch, K. D. (2003). Relationship of attachment and social support to college students’ adjustment following a relationship breakup. Journal of Counseling and Development, 81, 354–369. O’Connor, B. P. (2000). SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analysis and Velicer’s MAP test. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 32, 396–402. Ong, A. D., & Allaire, J. C. (2005). Cardiovascular intraindividual variability in later life: The influence of social connectedness and positive emotions. Psychology and Aging, 20, 476–485. Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the satisfaction with life scale. Psychological Assessment, 5, 164–172. Pavot, W., Diener, E., & Fujita, F. (1990). Extraversion and happiness. Personality and Individual Differences, 11, 1299–1306. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36(4), 717–731. Sheldon, K. M., Elliot, A. J., Kim, Y., & Kasser, T. (2001). What is satisfying about satisfying events? Testing 10 candidate psychological needs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 325–339. Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic intervals for indirect effects in structural equations models. In S. Leinhart (Ed.), Sociological methodology 1982 (pp. 290–312). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Uziel, L. (2006). The extraverted and the neurotic glasses are of different colors. Personality and Individual Differences, 41, 745–754. Velicer, W. F., & Fava, J. L. (1998). Effects of variable and subject sampling on factor pattern recovery. Psychological Methods, 3, 231–251. Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1997). Extraversion and its positive emotional core. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson, & S. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 767–793). San Diego: Academic Press. Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070. Wei, R., & Lo, V. (2006). Staying connected while on the move: Cell phone use and social connectedness. New Media and Society, 8, 53–72. Williams, K. L., & Galliher, R. V. (2006). Predicting depression and self-esteem from social connectedness, support, and competence. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 25, 855–874.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Personality and Individual Differences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid
Social connectedness, extraversion, and subjective well-being: Testing a mediation model Richard M. Lee *, Brooke L. Dean, Kyoung-Rae Jung Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota, Twin Cities Campus, N218 Elliott Hall, 75 East River Road, Minneapolis, MN 55455, USA
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 21 November 2007 Received in revised form 9 May 2008 Accepted 21 May 2008 Available online 2 July 2008 Keywords: Social connectedness Mediation Extraversion Subjective well-being
a b s t r a c t This investigation examined social connectedness as distinct from extraversion and as a mediation variable in the relationship between extraversion and subjective well-being. A college student sample (N = 295) and a sample of individuals who identify as lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB; N = 148) completed measures of extraversion, social connectedness, life satisfaction, and positive and negative affect. Factor analytic results suggest social connectedness is a unique construct from extraversion. Moreover, the relationship between extraversion and well-being was mediated by social connectedness. Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
In personality and well-being research, extraversion has received considerable attention because of its association with life satisfaction, positive affect, and psychological adjustment. However, the psychological mechanisms that underpin this relationship between extraversion and well-being are less understood. Building upon the idea that the self-system functions as a psychological mediator, we investigated social connectedness as distinct from extraversion and as a mediator of the relationship between extraversion and subjective well-being. Extraversion and well-being Extraversion is considered a core higher-order trait of most personality taxonomies (Costa & McCrae, 1992; Depue & Collins, 1999; Goldberg, 1999; Watson & Clark, 1997) that is consistently associated with subjective well-being, particularly positive affect and life satisfaction. DeNeve and Cooper (1998), for example, found in a meta-analysis that extraversion was the strongest predictor of positive affect and happiness when personality traits were grouped according to the Big Five higher-order traits. Lucas and Fugita (2000) similarly found a moderate correlation between extraversion and positive affect in a follow-up meta-analysis. What remains relatively unclear in psychological research is how extraversion is associated with subjective well-being.
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 612 625 6375; fax: +1 612 626 2079. E-mail address: [email protected] (R.M. Lee). 0191-8869/$ - see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.05.017
Most researchers have focused on instrumental-based and temperament-based explanations of the extraversion–well-being association. From an instrumental perspective, extraverts are more likely to socialize with other people, enjoy other people’s company, and subsequently experience greater positive affect. But research has disproved some aspects of this instrumental view of extraversion. Pavot, Diener, and Fujita (1990), for instance, found that extraverts are happier even when not in social situations. Researchers subsequently have examined a temperament-based explanation for the association. That is, extraverts may have a higher baseline of positive affect regardless of the social situation or may react more strongly to positive stimuli than introverts. Across six studies and a meta-analysis, Lucas and Baird (2004) found support for the baseline affect model and only mixed support for the affect reactivity model. They concluded, ‘‘It is possible (and even likely) that the association between extraversion and positive affect is multiply determined” (p. 482). That is, temperamental and instrumental processes may work independently and collectively, as well as through other psychological structures and processes. The self-system is a psychological structure and process that provides an alternative perspective on the extraversion–well-being association. DeNeve and colleagues (DeNeve, 1999; DeNeve & Cooper, 1998) suggested that well-being is sustained by the ways in which individuals organize and make sense of social experiences through attributions, appraisals, and self-regulation. These psychological mechanisms reflect aspects of the self-system. However, only a few studies have examined self-system variables in this way. Graziano, Jensen-Campbell, and Finch (1997) reported that
R.M. Lee et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 414–419
self-esteem mediated the relationship between personality and psychological adjustment in a study of college students. Other researchers have found emotion and self-regulation to mediate the relationship between personality and well-being (ChomorroPremuzic, Bennett, & Furnham, 2007; Erez, Johnson, & Judge, 1995; Harris & Lightsey, 2005; Lischetzke & Eid, 2006; Uziel, 2006). These studies provide an initial understanding of how self-related variables organize instrumental and temperamental processes, as well as operate independently, to mediate the association between personality and subjective well-being, but more research is necessary to elucidate the relationship, particularly as it relates to extraversion and well-being. Social connectedness as a mediator We examined social connectedness as another self-system explanation for the association between extraversion and wellbeing. Social connectedness refers to a person’s subjective awareness of being in close relationship with the social world in toto (Lee & Robbins, 1995). As people satisfy their need for belonging and connection, they develop a stable, secure sense of connectedness (Baumeister & Leary, 1995; Kohut, 1984). Social connectedness is related to but distinct from feelings of loneliness and isolation (Hawkley, Browne, & Cacioppo, 2005). In psychological studies, social connectedness has been found to be correlated with interpersonal trust, attachment security, social competence, fewer interpersonal problems, and identification with social groups (Banai, Mikulincer, & Shaver, 2005; Lee, Draper, & Lee, 2001; Moller, Fouladi, McCarthy, & Hatch, 2003; Williams & Galliher, 2006), as well as to affective balance, self-esteem, fewer anxiety and depressive symptoms, and less rejection sensitivity and social avoidance (Lee & Robbins, 1998; Lee et al., 2001; Mashek, Stuewig, Furukawa, & Tangney, 2006; Sheldon, Elliot, Kim, & Kasser, 2001; Williams & Galliher, 2006). It also has been associated with length of home residency, marital status, religious affiliation, social networks, frequent conversations, and cell phone usage (Hawkley et al., 2005; Lee & Robbins, 1998; Wei & Lo, 2006). A few studies even suggest connectedness is related to elevated testosterone levels and more rapid blood pressure recovery following negative emotional arousal (Edwards, Wetzel, & Wyner, 2006; Ong & Allaire, 2005). Social connectedness appears to be similar to extraversion as both constructs address the social experiences of the individual, but an examination of key features of each construct reveals conceptual differences. Extraversion taps primarily into sociability and agency or the motivation to form interpersonal bonds, to be warm and affectionate, and to seek excitement and attention. By contrast, social connectedness reflects a self-evaluation of the degree of closeness between the self and other people, the community, and society at large. It does not include motivations and agentic behaviors, as is the case with extraversion. Theoretically, extraversion likely precedes and even contributes to the emergence of social connectedness (Baumeister & Leary, 1995; Lounsbury & DeNeui, 1996). This distinction is evidenced in a study which found that extraverted people were more likely to take photographs that included themselves touching other people and with other people in the background (Dollinger & Clancy, 1993). These photographic self-representations reflected a general sense of connectedness experienced by extraverted individuals. Another set of studies found extraversion and a psychological sense of community, which is measured similarly to social connectedness, were only moderately correlated (r = .34–.44; Lounsbury & DeNeui, 1996; Lounsbury, Loveland, & Gibson, 2003). Although these studies suggest extraversion and connectedness are related but distinct, no known studies have directly examined the psychometric relationship between extraversion and social connectedness.
415
We specifically propose that social connectedness mediates the association between extraversion and subjective well-being. That is, extraversion relates to subjective well-being, in part, because people have developed and subsequently have maintained a sense of connectedness in their lives. This viewpoint helps to explain the mixed, empirical support for both instrumental and temperamentbased explanations of the extraversion–well-being association. From an instrumental perspective, extraversion leads people to exhibit trust and affiliation tendencies which allow them to create and take advantage of social opportunities and develop more and better relationships. These relationships, in turn, likely satisfy the innate need for belonging and connection. From a temperamentbased perspective, an internalized sense of connectedness helps to explain why extraverted individuals are able to regulate their interpersonal and emotional needs and feel happy and satisfied with their lives. It enables people to feel positive and good about themselves even when alone, in non-social situations, or in novel social settings. In other words, the proposed mediation model organizes instrumental and temperament-level explanations of the extraversion–well-being link around social connectedness as a self-system. However, no known studies to date have examined the relationships between social connectedness, extraversion, and subjective well-being. Purpose of study We examined social connectedness as an aspect of the self-system that helps to explain the association between extraversion and subjective well-being. First, we examined social connectedness as distinct from facets of extraversion. We hypothesized that psychometric analysis would reveal two theoretically related but distinct constructs. We also hypothesized that the two constructs would be moderately correlated. Second, we hypothesized that social connectedness would mediate the association between extraversion and subjective well-being which we measured by life satisfaction and affective balance. Specifically, extraverted individuals develop a stable sense of connectedness in their lives which provides them with the relationship-enhancing skills and the ability to organize and make sense of social experiences. These experiences, in turn, contribute to subjective well-being. We tested these hypotheses in two disparate samples of undergraduate students and individuals who identified as lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB). Method Participants College sample The undergraduate sample consisted of 79 men and 216 women for a total sample of 295 participants whose ages ranged from 18 to 44 years (M = 19.85, SD = 3.01). Participants identified their race/ ethnicity as White/European American (n = 239, 81%), Asian/Asian American (n = 38, 13%), Black/African American (n = 11, 4%), Hispanic/Latino (n = 2, <1%), Native American (n = 1, <1%), and Biracial/Mixed (n = 2, <1%), with 2 omitted responses. LGB sample The LGB sample consisted of 76 men and 72 women for a total sample of 148 participants whose ages ranged from 18 to 56 years (M = 26.93, SD = 8.68). Participants identified their race/ethnicity as White/European American (n = 123, 83%), Asian/Asian American (n = 9, 6%), Hispanic/Latino (n = 6, 4%), and Native American/American Indian (n = 3, 2%), and Other (n = 4, 3%) with 4 omitted responses. The majority identified as gay (n = 71, 48%) or lesbian (n = 49, 33%) with 28 (19%) identifying as bisexual.
416
R.M. Lee et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 414–419
Measures Extraversion The 10-item Extraversion Scale (EXT) was drawn from the BigFive Factor Markers provided through the International Personality Item Pool ( Goldberg et al., 1999, 2006). EXT measures facets of extraversion, including sociability and agency, and uses a 5-point rating scale (1 = very inaccurate to 5 = very accurate). Social connectedness The 20-item Social Connectedness Scale-Revised (SCS; Lee, Draper, & Lee, 2001) measures a psychological sense of belonging, or how individuals cognitively construe interpersonal closeness with others in their social world. The SCS uses a 6-point rating scale (1 = strongly disagree to 6 = strongly agree). Subjective well-being We measured cognitive and affective aspects of subjective well-being. The 5-item Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS; Pavot & Diener, 1993) measures a person’s global life satisfaction using a 7-point rating scale (1 = strongly disagree and 7 = strongly agree). The 20-item Positive and Negative Affect Schedule (PANAS; Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988) contains 10 positive affect items and 10 negative affect items and uses a 5-point rating scale (1 = not at all and 5 = extremely). Similar to other studies (e.g., Sheldon et al., 2001), we computed an affective balance score by substracting the sum of negative affect scale from the sum of the positive affect scale. Affective balance, or a preponderance of positive affect over negative affect, is a common measure of happiness (Bradburn, 1969; Diener, 1984). Procedure College sample Participants were asked to complete the survey as an extra credit opportunity for undergraduate psychology courses at a large, Midwestern public university. Participants completed the survey at scheduled sessions in a classroom on campus throughout the week. Survey sessions typically ranged from 1 to 10 participants who attended to complete the survey. LGB sample Participants were drawn from another study on sexual orientation and mental health. They were recruited from a large metropolitan LGB pride festival (n = 81), as well as from a queer student organization (n = 64) and an undergraduate psychology course (n = 3) at a large, Midwestern public university. Participants from the festival and the student organization individually completed the survey at a booth or table located at each site. For each completed survey, a $5.00 donation was made to the queer student organization. Participants from the psychology course completed the survey in the classroom and received extra credit.
Results Exploratory factor analysis and intercorrelations To determine if social connectedness and extraversion are related but distinct psychological constructs, we conducted an exploratory factor analysis using principal axis method and direct oblimin rotation on the college sample. Four factors emerged with eigenvalues greater than 1.0 (11.59, 3.10, 1.47, 1.38) but the first two factors accounted for nearly 50% of the variance (39% and 10%) with the next two factors each accounting for only 5% of the variance. Both a scree test (Cattell, 1966) and parallel analysis
(O’Connor, 2000) suggested a two-factor solution. Only the eigenvalues from the first two factors were greater than the 95th percentile of eigenvalues (1.72 and 1.59) derived from the parallel analysis. We therefore repeated the exploratory factor analysis, specifying the extraction of only 2 factors (see Table 1). Based on the pattern matrix, Factor 1 contained eighteen of the twenty SCS items. Factor 2 contained all the EXT items and two SCS items. Three items from Factor 1 had either weak loadings (r < .33) or double loadings. We repeated the factor analytic procedure on the LGB community sample. Although the LGB sample size was smaller, the number of variables sampled, the method of analysis and the factor loading sizes offset this sampling concern (Velicer & Fava, 1998). The initial solution produced five factors with eigenvalues greater than 1.0 (11.80, 3.11, 1.52, 1.22, 1.04) with the first two factors accounting nearly 50% of the total variance (39% and 10%) and the remaining factors each accounting for less than 5% of the variance. Again, both a scree test and parallel analysis suggested a two-factor solution. Only the eigenvalues from the first two factors were greater than the 95th percentile of eigenvalues (2.11 and 1.89) derived from the parallel analysis. We repeated the exploratory factor analysis, specifying the extraction of only 2 factors (see Table 1). Based on the pattern matrix, the same five SCS items either loaded on the other factor or double loaded on both factors. We removed these five items and calculated a new 15-item Social Connectedness Scale (SC-15). We also retained the original 10-item Extraversion Scale. Overall, the factor analytic results support our hypothesis that social connectedness is psychometrically distinct from extraversion. Table 2 presents the mean scale item scores, the internal reliability estimates, and correlation matrix for all variables in the two samples. As hypothesized, extraversion and social connectedness were significantly correlated (r = .55–.58). Although this correlation range reflects a large effect size, the coefficients of determination are only 30% and 33%, suggesting they are not measuring the same underlying construct. Test of mediation We employed the bootstrap method, which is used to estimate indirect effects in simple mediation models (Preacher & Hayes, 2004), to test whether social connectedness mediated the relationship between extraversion and subjective well-being. The bootstrap method is considered a more powerful approach than the three-step multiple regression approach (Baron & Kenny, 1986) and the Sobel test (Sobel, 1982) for estimating mediation and indirect effects. For this study, we repeated the bootstrap process the recommended minimum of 1000 times. Table 3 presents results using multiple regression analysis and the bootstrap method on both the college and LGB samples. For the college sample, there were significant direct effects between extraversion and life satisfaction (B = 0.42, p < .001) and affective balance (B = 0.38, p < .001), prior to controlling for social connectedness. Controlling for social connectedness, the direct effects between extraversion and life satisfaction (B = 0.01, p = .93) and affective balance (B = 0.07, p = .34) were reduced to non-significance. However, there were significant indirect effects on life satisfaction (bootstrap mean = 0.41, 95% CI = 0.27–0.56) and affective balance (bootstrap mean = 0.31, 95% CI = 0.21–0.42) using the bootstrap method to detect mediated effects. As hypothesized, social connectedness fully mediated the association between extraversion and subjective well-being. For the LGB sample, there were significant direct effects between extraversion and life satisfaction (B = 0.77, p < .001) and affective balance (B = 0.57, p < .001), prior to controlling for social connectedness. Controlling for social connectedness, the direct
417
R.M. Lee et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 414–419 Table 1 Pattern matrices from the exploratory factor analyses Scale
Item
College sample
SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC SC EXT SC EXT EXT EXT EXT EXT EXT EXT EXT EXT SC
Distant from people Don’t participate with anyone or group Don’t feel I belong Don’t feel related to people Feel like an outsider Understood by people I know Disconnected from the world Losing a sense of connectedness See myself as a loner Little sense of togetherness Friends feel like family No sense of brother/sisterhood Close to people Relate to peers Connect with other peoplea Involved in people’s lives See people as friendlya In tune with the worlda Start conversations Comfortable in presence of strangersb Quiet around strangers Talk to different people Don’t talk a lot Keep in the background Have little to say Feel comfortable around people Don’t draw attention to myself Life of the party Don’t mind being center of attention Fit in well in new situationsb
.81 .76 .75 .74 .70 .69 .67 .66 .65 .64 .64 .63 .62 .61 .52 .48 .36 .32 .07 .09 .05 .02 .11 .11 .02 .16 .00 .10 .04 .16
Note.
a
Item had a weak or double loading.
b
LGB sample .03 .13 .00 .07 .11 .17 .02 .04 .08 .02 .05 .06 .07 .00 .27 .20 .35 .15 .76 .75 .74 .74 .65 .64 .62 .60 .60 .60 .60 53
.76 .46 .83 .79 .79 .60 .68 .61 .54 .71 .52 .65 .69 .59 .38 .45 .23 .30 .02 .06 .06 .06 .06 .03 .12 .26 .05 .02 .14 .09
.03 .05 .17 .06 .01 .04 .01 .02 .20 .11 .02 .03 .06 .16 .41 .21 .52 .23 .70 .80 .72 .73 .68 .75 .52 .56 .65 .63 .78 .67
Item conceptually loaded on the other factor.
Table 2 Scale means, reliability coefficients, and intercorrelations Measure
1
1. Extraversion 2. Social connect (20-item scale) 3. Social connect (15-item scale) 4. Life satisfaction 5. Positive affect 6. Negative affect 7. Affective balance M SD
– .62
a
2
3 .65
–
.55
.98
.28 .31 .25 .35 3.39 0.75 0.89
.51 .43 .41 .54 4.68 0.72 0.93
M
SD
a
.50 .49
.47 .53
.27 .45
.46 .63
3.41 4.34
0.85 0.82
0.90 0.93
.45
.49
.45
.61
4.34
0.91
0.93
– .42 .35 .48 5.00 1.11 0.84
.49 – .24 .75 3.80 0.50 0.83
.61 .68 .84 – 1.60 0.86 n/a
4.68 3.79 2.42 1.37
1.29 0.56 0.76 1.02
0.87 0.83 0.90 n/a
4 .58 .98
– .50 .40 .41 .52 4.78 0.80 0.93
5
6
.46 .17* – .82 2.20 0.60 0.83
7
Note. The college sample is represented in the lower diagonal matrix (N = 281 with listwise deletion). The LGB sample is represented in the upper diagonal matrix (N = 137 with listwise deletion). * p < .05. All other correlations were significant at p < .01.
effects between extraversion and life satisfaction (B = 0.53, p < .0001) and affective balance (B = 0.20, p < .05) remained significant although the effects were reduced. There also were significant indirect effects on life satisfaction (bootstrap mean = 0.24, 95% CI = 0.08–0.44) and affective balance (bootstrap mean = 0.36, 95% CI = 0.23–0.52) using the bootstrap method to detect mediated effects. Contrary to hypothesis, there were significant direct effects between extraversion and subjective well-being, but social connectedness partially mediated the association. Discussion This investigation represents a first look at the associations among social connectedness, extraversion, and subjective wellbeing. Building upon research that suggests social connectedness is associated with the organization and regulation of social experiences and healthy interpersonal behaviors, we hypothesized that
social connectedness is distinct from extraversion and, importantly, mediates the relationship between extraversion and wellbeing. Across two separate samples of college students and LGB individuals, we found support for social connectedness as related to but distinct from extraversion and as a mediator of the association between extraversion and well-being. Theoretically, extraversion precedes and contributes to social connectedness (Baumeister & Leary, 1995). The factor analytic results from both our samples confirm that social connectedness, as measured in this study, is psychometrically related to but distinct from measured facets of extraversion. All but a few social connectedness items loaded onto a separate factor than extraversion items. Moderately strong correlations between the 10-item measure of extraversion and the 15-item revised measure of social connectedness confirm a close association between the two constructs (r’s = .55–.58). These correlations are larger in magnitude than past studies by Lounsbury and colleagues (Lounsbury & DeNeui, 1996;
418
R.M. Lee et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 414–419
Table 3 Regression and bootstrap results for social connectedness as a mediator Regression model
College sample Life satisfaction (N = 286) Step 1 Extraversion Step 2 Extraversion Social connectedness Affective balance (N = 282) Step 1 Extraversion Step 2 Extraversion Social connectedness LGB sample Life satisfaction (N = 142) Step 1 Extraversion Step 2 Extraversion Social connectedness Affective balance (N = 138) Step 1 Extraversion Step 2 Extraversion Social connectedness Note.
**
Regression
Bootstrap
B
SE B
.42**
.09
.01 .69**
.09 .09
.38**
.07
.07 .52**
.07 .07
.77**
.11
.53** .38**
.13 .12
.57**
.09
.20** .59**
.10 .09
R
2
2
4R
Indirect effect
SE
95% CI
.41
.08
.27–.56
.31
.05
.21–.42
.24 .24
.09
.08–.04
.36
.07
.23–.52
.08 .25
.17
.11 .27
.16
.25 .29
.05
.22 .39
.18
p < .01.
Lounsbury et al., 2003) who found associations between extraversion and a sense of community to be moderate (r’s = .34–.44), but connectedness was measured in terms of a sense of community to a specific environment (e.g., high school or college) in those studies. In this study, social connectedness was measured more globally similar to the way in which extraversion was measured. Prior to testing the mediation hypothesis, we found that extraversion had a significant direct effect on well-being. The correlations between extraversion and two measures of well-being were moderate in size for the college sample which is consistent with DeNeve & Cooper, 1998 meta-analysis findings. Interestingly, the correlations for the LGB sample were larger in magnitude, but within the range of values reported in the meta-analysis. The larger direct effect of extraversion may be related to the convenience sampling method of the LGB population. Additionally, socioeconomic status and other relevant demographic variables may inflate the association between extraversion and well-being. DeNeve and Cooper reported that convenience samples had larger effect sizes than representative samples and that socioeconomic status also correlated with well-being. We next tested the mediation hypothesis that extraverted individuals are more likely to have a stable, secure sense of connectedness in their lives which, in turn, contributes to their subjective well-being. Consistent with this hypothesis, we found social connectedness mediated the association between extraversion and cognitive and affective aspects of subjective well-being. Bootstrapping methods supported full mediation in the college sample and partial mediation in the LGB sample. Social connectedness as a mediator helps to explain the mixed findings from studies that have tested instrumental and temperament explanations of the extraversion–well-being link. From an instrumental perspective, it is likely that extraverted individuals take advantage of social opportunities and develop affirming relationships with other people, resulting in the satiation of the need for belonging and connection. From a temperament perspective, extraverted individuals may possess a higher baseline for not just positive affect, but also
for a sense of social connectedness. Social connectedness, then, allows extraverted individuals to maintain well-being across varying social situations. In other words, social connectedness as a part of one’s self-system may be one of many avenues which allow extraverted individuals to sustain subjective well-being. This view is in line with DeNeve’s (1999) contention that multiple psychological mechanisms help explain the extraversion–well-being link and complement other research studies that have found self-systems function as mediators. An unexpected finding was the full and partial mediation of social connectedness in the college and LGB samples, respectively. This difference in mediation effects may be related to the unique features of each sample, including the previously mentioned concerns about convenience sampling and socioeconomic status. The age range for each sample also differed with the LGB sample, on average, seven years older in age than the college sample. There is some emerging evidence that gene expression of phenotypes becomes stronger over the lifespan and environmental influences attenuate (Koenig, McGue, Krueger, & Bouchard, 2005). It is possible that there remains a direct effect between extraversion and subjective well-being in the LGB sample because the genetic expression of personality traits increases with age, whereas the influence of social connectedness which is more environmentally determined may begin to wane somewhat over time. To test this latter interpretation, we conducted post-hoc moderation analyses on both samples to determine if age moderated the association between extraversion and well-being. We found that age did not moderate the association for the college sample, but it did moderate the association in the expected direction for the LGB sample (Life satisfaction B = .02, p < .05; Affective Balance B = .03, p < .01). Specifically, simple slope analyses revealed that the correlation between extraversion and life satisfaction was stronger in magnitude for older-aged LGB participants. This post-hoc finding suggests the role of age and lifespan development should be further investigated in studies of extraversion and subjective wellbeing.
R.M. Lee et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 45 (2008) 414–419
Another important study limitation is the use of brief self-report measures of social connectedness, extraversion, and subjective well-being. Extraversion is believed to be composed of many facets. Costa et al., 1992 identified six facets, including warmth, gregariousness, assertiveness, activity, excitement-seeking, positive emotion, whereas Depue and Collins (1999) narrowed these facets down to sociability and agency. The use of a 10-item measure of extraversion prevents the full assessment of all facets of extraversion. Similarly, social connectedness as measured relies upon one’s cognitive or subjective appraisal of interpersonal closeness. Social connectedness may still correspond with some of the social-oriented facets of extraversion, such as sociability and gregariousness. Research that further delineates the unique aspects of each construct and tests the concurrent validity of these measures on larger, diverse, and representative samples is warranted. In sum, this investigation adds to the literature that is elucidating the linkage between extraversion and subjective well-being, particularly from a self-systems perspective. Extraversion manifests itself in daily life in innumerable ways. Undoubtedly, extraverted people select their environments and organize their social experiences to support their view of themselves. Social connectedness appears to function as a mediator in how people organize and make sense of their social experiences and subsequently engage in relationship-enhancing behaviors, thereby contributing to greater subjective well-being. References Banai, E., Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2005). Self-object needs in Kohut’s self psychology: Links with attachment, self-cohesion, affect regulation, and adjustment. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 22, 224–260. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 461–484. Bradburn, N. M. (1969). The structure of psychological well-being. Chicago: Aldine. Cattell, R. B. (1966). The scree test for the number of factors. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 1, 245–276. Chomorro-Premuzic, T., Bennett, E., & Furnham, A. (2007). The happy personality: Mediational role of trait emotional intelligence. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 1633–1639. Costa, P. T., Jr., & R .R. McCrae. NEO PI-R professional manual . DeNeve, K. M. (1999). Happy as an extraverted clam? The role of personality for subjective well-being. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8, 141–144. DeNeve, K. M., & Cooper, H. (1998). The happy personality: A meta-analysis of 137 personality traits and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 197–229. Depue, R. A., & Collins, P. F. (1999). Neurobiology of the structure of personality: Dopamine, facilitation of incentive motivation, and extraversion. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 491–569. Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 542–575. Dollinger, S. J., & Clancy, S. M. (1993). Identity, self, and personality: II. Glimpses through the autophotographic eye. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 1064–1071. Edwards, D. A., Wetzel, K., & Wyner, D. R. (2006). Intercollegiate soccer: Saliva cortisol and testosterone are elevated during competition, and testosterone is related to status and social connectedness with teammates. Physiology & Behavior, 87, 135–143. Erez, A., Johnson, D. E., & Judge, T. A. (1995). Self-deception as a mediator of the relationship between dispositions and subjective well-being. Personality and Individual Differences, 19, 597–612. Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public domain personality, inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. In I. Mervielde, I. Deary, F. De Fruyt, & F. Ostendorf (Eds.). Personality psychology in Europe (Vol. 7, pp. 7–28). Tilburg, The Netherlands: Tilburg University Press. Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., & Gough, H. G. (2006). The international personality item pool and the future of public-domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 84–96.
419
Graziano, W. G., Jensen-Campbell, L. A., & Finch, J. F. (1997). The self as a mediator between personality and adjustment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 392–404. Harris, P. R., & Lightsey, O. R. Jr., (2005). Constructive thinking as a mediator of the relationship between extraversion, neuroticism, and subjective well-being. European Journal of Personality, 19, 409–426. Hawkley, L. C., Browne, M. W., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2005). How can I connect with thee? Let me count the ways. Psychological Science, 16, 798–804. Koenig, L. B., McGue, M., Krueger, R. F., & Bouchard, T. J. Jr., (2005). Genetic and environmental influences on religiousness: Findings for retrospective and current religiousness ratings. Journal of Personality, 73, 471–488. Kohut, H. (1984). How does analysis cure? New York: International Universities Press. Lee, R. M., Draper, M., & Lee, S. (2001). Social connectedness, dysfunctional interpersonal behaviors, and psychological distress: Testing a mediator model. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 48, 310–318. Lee, R. M., & Robbins, S. B. (1995). Measuring belongingness: The social connectedness and the social assurance scales. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 42, 232–241. Lee, R. M., & Robbins, S. B. (1998). The relationship between social connectedness and anxiety, self-esteem, and social identity. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 45, 338–345. Lee, S. (2001). Social connectedness and self-evaluation motives among women (Doctoral dissertation, University of Texas at Austin, 2001). Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering. 62 (3-B), 1644. Lischetzke, T., & Eid, M. (2006). Why extraverts are happier than introverts: The role of mood regulation. Journal of Personality, 74, 1127–1161. Lounsbury, J. W., & DeNeui, D. (1996). Collegiate psychological sense of community in relation to size of college/university and extroversion. Journal of Community Psychology, 24, 381–394. Lounsbury, J. W., Loveland, J. M., & Gibson, L. W. (2003). An investigation of psychological sense of community in relation to big five personality traits. Journal of Community Psychology, 31, 531–541. Lucas, R. E., & Baird, B. M. (2004). Extraversion and emotional reactivity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 473–485. Lucas, R. E., & Fugita, F. (2000). Factors influencing the relation between extraversion and pleasant affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 1039–1056. Mashek, D., Stuewig, J., Furukawa, E., & Tangney, J. (2006). Psychological and behavioral implications of connectedness to communities with opposing values and beliefs. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 25, 404–428. Moller, N. P., Fouladi, R. T., McCarthy, C. J., & Hatch, K. D. (2003). Relationship of attachment and social support to college students’ adjustment following a relationship breakup. Journal of Counseling and Development, 81, 354–369. O’Connor, B. P. (2000). SPSS and SAS programs for determining the number of components using parallel analysis and Velicer’s MAP test. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 32, 396–402. Ong, A. D., & Allaire, J. C. (2005). Cardiovascular intraindividual variability in later life: The influence of social connectedness and positive emotions. Psychology and Aging, 20, 476–485. Pavot, W., & Diener, E. (1993). Review of the satisfaction with life scale. Psychological Assessment, 5, 164–172. Pavot, W., Diener, E., & Fujita, F. (1990). Extraversion and happiness. Personality and Individual Differences, 11, 1299–1306. Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2004). SPSS and SAS procedures for estimating indirect effects in simple mediation models. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36(4), 717–731. Sheldon, K. M., Elliot, A. J., Kim, Y., & Kasser, T. (2001). What is satisfying about satisfying events? Testing 10 candidate psychological needs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 325–339. Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic intervals for indirect effects in structural equations models. In S. Leinhart (Ed.), Sociological methodology 1982 (pp. 290–312). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Uziel, L. (2006). The extraverted and the neurotic glasses are of different colors. Personality and Individual Differences, 41, 745–754. Velicer, W. F., & Fava, J. L. (1998). Effects of variable and subject sampling on factor pattern recovery. Psychological Methods, 3, 231–251. Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1997). Extraversion and its positive emotional core. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson, & S. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 767–793). San Diego: Academic Press. Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070. Wei, R., & Lo, V. (2006). Staying connected while on the move: Cell phone use and social connectedness. New Media and Society, 8, 53–72. Williams, K. L., & Galliher, R. V. (2006). Predicting depression and self-esteem from social connectedness, support, and competence. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 25, 855–874.