social ills research paper

• Search Menu
• Advance Articles
• The Authors' Attic: Interviews with Authors
• High Impact Articles

Award-Winning Articles

Virtual issues.

• Author Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Open Access Options
• Why Submit?
• About Social Problems
• About the Society for the Study of Social Problems
• Editorial Board
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Journals Career Network
• Dispatch Dates
• Contact SSSP
• Contact Social Problems
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Annulla Linders

Earl Wright II

Derrick Brooms

About the journal

Social Problems is the official publication of The Society for the Study of Social Problems and has been has been an important forum for sociological thought for over six decades.

Latest articles

Latest posts on x, high-impact articles.

Access a selection of notable articles from Social Problems that offer a sample of the impressive body of research from the journal. The articles represent a selection of the most cited, most read, and most discussed articles from recent years.

Explore collection

Virtual issues from  Social Problems  are compiled by a special guest editor and include a selection of articles on a particular topic. Virtual issues typically are centered around timely events and significant trends.

Explore the virtual issues

Social Problems'  standing as a leading publication is reinforced by the articles published in its pages that go on to win a variety of awards and prizes. Articles that win awards are recognized on the Social Problems Awards page.

View awards

 The Sociology of W. E. B. Du Bois 

Explore this special issue from Social Problems,  which demonstrates the influence of Du Bois in the discipline and why the sociologist's work is still relevant today.  

Read the articles

Connect with Social Problems

Join the conversation! Never miss the latest news and updates from Social Problems by engaging with the journal on social media.

The Society for the Study of Social Problems

Social Problems is the official publication of the Society for the Study of Social Problems (SSSP). SSSP is an interdisciplinary community of scholars, practitioners, advocates, and students interested in the application of critical, scientific, and humanistic perspectives to the study of vital social problems.

Learn more about SSSP

Publish in Social Problems

Want to publish in Social Problems? The journal brings to the forefront influential sociological findings and theories that have the ability to help us both better understand and better deal with our complex social environment.

View submission instructions

Why submit?

"The Authors' Attic"

"The Authors' Attic" is a forum that provides authors an opportunity to discuss pressing and relevant social issues of our time.

View all videos

stef m. shuster and Laurel Westbrook are the authors of “ Reducing the Joy Deficit in Sociology: A Study of Transgender Joy ”

Scott Duxbury is the author of " The Boys in Blue Are Watching You: The Shifting Metropolitan Landscape and Big Data Police Surveillance in the United States. "

Sarah Larissa Combellick is the author of " “My Baby Went Straight to Heaven”: Morality Work in Abortion Storytelling "

Developing countries initiative

Your institution could be eligible to free or deeply discounted online access to Social Problems through the Oxford Developing Countries Initiative.

Find out more

Email alerts

Register to receive table of contents email alerts as soon as new issues of Social Problems are published online.

Promote your work on Social Media

OUP actively engages with social media across a range of platforms and channels. We have put together guidelines to help you  promote your article on social media.

Related Titles

• Recommend to Your Librarian

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 1533-8533
• Print ISSN 0037-7791
• Copyright © 2024 Society for the Study of Social Problems
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

• Browse All Articles
• Newsletter Sign-Up

SocialIssues →

No results found in working knowledge.

• Were any results found in one of the other content buckets on the left?
• Try removing some search filters.
• Use different search filters.

• Open access
• Published: 01 June 2023

The state of loneliness and social isolation research: current knowledge and future directions

• Harry Owen Taylor 1 ,
• Thomas K.M. Cudjoe 2 ,
• Feifei Bu 3 &
• Michelle H. Lim 4 , 5  

BMC Public Health volume  23 , Article number:  1049 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

10k Accesses

13 Citations

128 Altmetric

Metrics details

In this editorial, we consider the current state of loneliness and social isolation research around the world, including knowledge gaps in the empirical literature.

Peer Review reports

For centuries, scholars have examined how social conditions influence human relationships and how these relationships influence health—from cell to society [ 1 , 2 ]. Two important features of research on social relationships include loneliness and social isolation. Loneliness is defined as a perceived/subjective condition in which an individual is dissatisfied with the quality and/or quantity of their social relationships [ 3 ]. Social isolation is an objective condition characterized by a lack of contact with other people and being disengaged from groups and social activities [ 3 ]. Loneliness and social isolation are sometimes misconstrued as the same phenomena in public discourse and media; however, previous research has shown they are distinct psychosocial constructs that are weakly to moderately correlated with each other [ 3 ]. As a result, it is possible to be lonely and socially isolated, lonely but not isolated, and isolated but not lonely. Additionally, loneliness and social isolation are mechanistically associated with different health outcomes [ 4 ].

Findings from empirical studies indicate increases in loneliness and/or social isolation are independently associated with poorer health [ 5 ]. Loneliness and social isolation have a mortality risk similar to cigarette smoking, alcohol consumption, physical inactivity, and obesity. Other health outcomes associated with these pernicious conditions include cardiovascular disease, dementia and cognitive decline, and worsening anxiety and depressive symptoms to name a few [ 5 ]. Perhaps most notable about this research is the consistency of findings, especially given the multitude of methods in operationalizing loneliness and social isolation, and the diversity of populations and contexts/settings in which these issues are studied [ 5 ].

Rates of loneliness and social isolation vary around the world. A recent meta-analysis on country-level differences found loneliness in adolescents was lowest in Southeast Asian countries and highest in Eastern Mediterranean countries [ 6 ]. From within Europe, loneliness was highest in Eastern European countries and lowest in Northern European countries [ 6 ]. Lim and colleagues [ 7 ] found 34% of adults in Australia were lonely, with 21% having episodic loneliness and 13% having chronic loneliness. In the United States, 43% of adults felt they lack companionship, 43% felt that their relationships are not meaningful, 43% felt isolated from others, and 39% no longer feel close to anyone [ 8 ]. There are fewer studies of country-level differences in social isolation for the general population; however, in Australia, 17% of the general population were classified as socially isolated, with 13% having episodic and 4% having chronic isolation [ 7 ]. Moreover, studies focused on the prevalence of social isolation are often conducted among older adults. A recent Canadian survey, for example, found approximately one out of every four older adults were socially isolated [ 9 ]. The COVID-19 pandemic has also brought issues of loneliness and isolation to the fore, especially given the enforcement of social distancing policies from local and federal governments. Evidence on the prevalence rates of loneliness and isolation during the COVID-19 pandemic are mixed with some finding increased rates, and others finding no difference to before the pandemic [ 10 , 11 , 12 ].

Given the negative health outcomes and overall prevalence of loneliness and social isolation around the world, we contend these are global public health issues. In many countries, there is investment in policy to ameliorate loneliness and social isolation. Notable movements to address loneliness and isolation include the Campaign to End Loneliness in the United Kingdom, Ending Loneliness Together in Australia, the Foundation for Social Connection in the United States, the World Health Organization’s Social Isolation and Loneliness initiatives, and the Global Initiative on Loneliness and Connection [ 13 ]. Other countries [ 5 ] have commissioned a body of expert scientific knowledge and policy work to better understand these issues. But loneliness and social isolation are not issues constrained to developed countries. In prevalence studies, these issues occur all over the world [ 6 , 14 ]; hence global policy and advocacy is sorely needed.

Nevertheless, there are notable gaps in the loneliness and social isolation research literature. There is substantially less research on loneliness and isolation among certain racial/ethnic groups, immigrant communities, diverse gender identities and sexual orientations, disability and neurodivergent population, populations with severe mental illness, people living in poverty, and other social/cultural groups. This is important given those at the greatest social disadvantage and marginalization may have the highest rates of loneliness and social isolation, and may also have heightened risk for becoming lonely and/or isolated [ 15 ].

Measurement/operationalization of loneliness and social isolation is also a topic of debate. If loneliness and social isolation are multidomained, how many types of loneliness and isolation are there? What items are important to include to accurately prove the psychometric reliability and validity of loneliness and isolation measurement tools, and how do we ensure that these tools are invariant across age? How do we know if loneliness and social isolation are perceived similarly across cultures? What novel methods exist for measuring loneliness and isolation? How often should we collect data on loneliness and social isolation in longitudinal studies to adequately capture fluctuations and temporal changes? Additionally, there is limited conceptual and empirical work on understanding the interrelationship(s) between loneliness and isolation [ 3 ]. This work would be useful for determining the causal mechanisms in which some individuals become lonely and/or isolated, for further understanding how loneliness and isolation influence health and wellbeing, and for the development of evidence-based interventions to address these psychosocial issues.

Lastly, it is important to use this knowledge to inform policy and interventions. What type of interventions, from individual-focused to societal-level, are most impactful, sustainable and/or cost-efficient? Should we use different types of interventions for preventing the onset of loneliness and isolation (primary prevention) versus mitigating these conditions among those who are chronically lonely and isolated (tertiary prevention)? And how do we scale-up these interventions to inform applied clinical or community practice and change public opinion/perceptions on loneliness and social isolation?

The aim of the BMC Public Health collection on loneliness and social isolation is to further our understanding of these psychosocial issues. We hope to propagate this collection of articles to advance research, practice, advocacy, and policy efforts by researchers, scientists, clinicians, policy-makers, community-based and non-profit organizations, governments, and the lay public around the world to facilitate greater social connection for better health and wellbeing for all.

Data Availability

Berkman LF, Glass T, Brissette I, Seeman TE. From social integration to health: Durkheim in the new millennium ☆ . Soc Sci Med. 2000;51(6):843–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0277-9536(00)00065-4 .

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Cudjoe TKM, Selvakumar S, Chung SE, et al. Getting under the skin: social isolation and biological markers in the National Health and Aging Trends Study. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2022;70(2):408–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.17518 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Taylor HO. Social isolation’s influence on loneliness among older adults. Clin Soc Work J. 2020;48(1):140–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10615-019-00737-9 .

Holt-Lunstad J, Steptoe A. Social isolation: an underappreciated determinant of physical health. Curr Opin Psychol. 2022;43:232–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2021.07.012 .

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and, Medicine. Social isolation and loneliness in older adults: Opportunities for the Health Care System. National Academies Press; 2020.

Surkalim DL, Luo M, Eres R, et al. The prevalence of loneliness across 113 countries: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2022;376:e067068. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2021-067068 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Lim M, Manera K, Owen K, Phongsavan P, Smith B. Chronic and episodic loneliness and social isolation: prevalence and sociodemographic analyses from a longitudinal australian survey. Published online 2022. doi: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-1607036/v1 .

CIGNA. CIGNA U.S. Loneliness Index. ; 2018. https://www.cigna.com/static/www-cigna-com/docs/about-us/newsroom/studies-and-reports/combatting-loneliness/loneliness-survey-2018-full-report.pdf .

Gilmour H, Ramage-Morin PL. Social isolation and mortality among canadian seniors. Health Rep. 2020;31(3):27–38.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Su Y, Rao W, Li M, Caron G, D’Arcy C, Meng X. Prevalence of loneliness and social isolation among older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Psychogeriatr Published online 2022:1–13.

Bu F, Steptoe A, Fancourt D. Who is lonely in lockdown? Cross-cohort analyses of predictors of loneliness before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Public Health. 2020;186:31–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2020.06.036 .

Peng S, Roth AR. Social isolation and loneliness before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal study of US adults older than 50. J Gerontol Ser B. 2022;77(7):e185–90.

Article   Google Scholar  

Global Initiative on Loneliness and Connection. Position Statements on Addressing Social Isolation, Loneliness, and the Power of Human Connection. ; 2022. Accessed March 14, 2023. https://www.gilc.global/_files/ugd/410bdf_74fffc2d18984b0e8217288b1b12d199.pdf .

Teo RH, Cheng WH, Cheng LJ, Lau Y, Lau ST. Global prevalence of social isolation among community-dwelling older adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2023;107:104904. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.archger.2022.104904 .

Madani MT, Madani L, Ghogomu ET, et al. Is equity considered in systematic reviews of interventions for mitigating social isolation and loneliness in older adults? BMC Public Health. 2022;22(1):2241. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-14667-8 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

Funding to HOT: USA National Institute of Health, National Institute of Aging: P30 AG072959. Funding to TKMC: supported by the National Institute on Aging 1K23 AG075191, the Johns Hopkins University Center for Innovative Medicine Human Aging Project as a Caryl & George Bernstein Scholar, and the Robert and Jane Meyerhoff Endowed Professorship.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Factor-Inwentash Faculty of Social Work, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

Harry Owen Taylor

Division of Geriatric Medicine and Gerontology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, USA

Thomas K.M. Cudjoe

Research Department of Behavioural Science and Health, Insititute of Epidemiology & Health Care, University College London, London, England

Prevention Research Collaboration, Sydney School of Public Health, Charles Perkins Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Michelle H. Lim

Iverson Health Innovation Research Institute, Swinburne University of Technology, Victoria, Australia

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

HOT is the first author. He wrote the first draft of the editorial and helped manage feedback and edits to the editorial. TKMC, FB, and MHL each reviewed the editorial and provided critique and feedback to the editorial.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Harry Owen Taylor .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate, consent for publication, competing interests, authors’ information (optional), additional information, publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Taylor, H.O., Cudjoe, T.K., Bu, F. et al. The state of loneliness and social isolation research: current knowledge and future directions. BMC Public Health 23 , 1049 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-023-15967-3

Download citation

Received : 23 March 2023

Accepted : 24 May 2023

Published : 01 June 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-023-15967-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]
• General enquiries: [email protected]

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• My Account Login
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Open access
• Published: 27 January 2021

The effects of social isolation on well-being and life satisfaction during pandemic

• Ruta Clair   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9828-9911 1 ,
• Maya Gordon 1 ,
• Matthew Kroon 1 &
• Carolyn Reilly 1  

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume  8 , Article number:  28 ( 2021 ) Cite this article

98k Accesses

148 Citations

160 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Health humanities

The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic placed many locations under ‘stay at home” orders and adults simultaneously underwent a form of social isolation that is unprecedented in the modern world. Perceived social isolation can have a significant effect on health and well-being. Further, one can live with others and still experience perceived social isolation. However, there is limited research on psychological well-being during a pandemic. In addition, much of the research is limited to older adult samples. This study examined the effects of perceived social isolation in adults across the age span. Specifically, this study documented the prevalence of social isolation during the COVID-19 pandemic as well as the various factors that contribute to individuals of all ages feeling more or less isolated while they are required to maintain physical distancing for an extended period of time. Survey data was collected from 309 adults who ranged in age from 18 to 84. The measure consisted of a 42 item survey from the Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale, Measures of Social Isolation (Zavaleta et al., 2017 ), and items specifically about the pandemic and demographics. Items included both Likert scale items and open-ended questions. A “snowball” data collection process was used to build the sample. While the entire sample reported at least some perceived social isolation, young adults reported the highest levels of isolation, χ 2 (2) = 27.36, p  < 0.001. Perceived social isolation was associated with poor life satisfaction across all domains, as well as work-related stress, and lower trust of institutions. Higher levels of substance use as a coping strategy was also related to higher perceived social isolation. Respondents reporting higher levels of subjective personal risk for COVID-19 also reported higher perceived social isolation. The experience of perceived social isolation has significant negative consequences related to psychological well-being.

Similar content being viewed by others

Determinants of behaviour and their efficacy as targets of behavioural change interventions

Adults who microdose psychedelics report health related motivations and lower levels of anxiety and depression compared to non-microdosers

Mechanisms linking social media use to adolescent mental health vulnerability

Introduction.

In March 2020, the World Health Organization declared the COVID-19 outbreak a global pandemic, prompting most governors in the United States to issue stay-at-home orders in an effort to minimize the spread of COVID-19. This was after several months of similar quarantine orders in countries throughout Asia and Europe. As a result, a unique situation arose, in which most of the world’s population was confined to their homes, with only medical staff and other essential workers being allowed to leave their homes on a regular basis. Several studies of previous quarantine episodes have shown that psychological stress reactions may emerge from the experience of physical and social isolation (Brooks et al., 2020 ). In addition to the stress that might arise with social isolation or being restricted to your home, there is also the stress of worrying about contracting COVID-19 and losing loved ones to the disease (Brooks et al., 2020 ; Smith and Lim, 2020 ). For many families, this stress is compounded by the challenge of working from home while also caring for children whose schools had been closed in an effort to slow the spread of the disease. While the effects of social isolation has been reported in the literature, little is known about the effects of social isolation during a global pandemic (Galea et al., 2020 ; Smith and Lim, 2020 ; Usher et al., 2020 ).

Social isolation is a multi-dimensional construct that can be defined as the inadequate quantity and/or quality of interactions with other people, including those interactions that occur at the individual, group, and/or community level (Nicholson, 2012 ; Smith and Lim, 2020 ; Umberson and Karas Montez, 2010 ; Zavaleta et al., 2017 ). Some measures of social isolation focus on external isolation which refers to the frequency of contact or interactions with other people. Other measures focus on internal or perceived social isolation which refers to the person’s perceptions of loneliness, trust, and satisfaction with their relationships. This distinction is important because a person can have the subjective experience of being isolated even when they have frequent contact with other people and conversely they may not feel isolated even when their contact with others is limited (Hughes et al., 2004 ).

When considering the effects of social isolation, it is important to note that the majority of the existing research has focused on the elderly population (Nyqvist et al., 2016 ). This is likely because older adulthood is a time when external isolation is more likely due to various circumstances such as retirement, and limited physical mobility (Umberson and Karas Montez, 2010 ). During the COVID-19 pandemic the need for physical distancing due to virus mitigation efforts has exacerbated the isolation of many older adults (Berg-Weger and Morley, 2020 ; Smith et al., 2020 ) and has exposed younger adults to a similar experience (Brooks et al., 2020 ; Smith and Lim, 2020 ). Notably, a few studies have found that young adults report higher levels of loneliness (perceived social isolation) even though their social networks are larger (Child and Lawton, 2019 ; Nyqvist et al., 2016 ; Smith and Lim, 2020 ); thus indicating that age may be an important factor to consider in determining how long-term distancing due to COVID-19 will influence people’s perceptions of being socially isolated.

The general pattern in this research is that increased social isolation is associated with decreased life satisfaction, higher levels of depression, and lower levels of psychological well-being (Cacioppo and Cacioppo, 2014 ; Coutin and Knapp, 2017 ; Dahlberg and McKee, 2018 ; Harasemiw et al., 2018 ; Lee and Cagle, 2018 ; Usher et al., 2020 ). Individuals who experience high levels of social isolation may engage in self-protective thinking that can lead to a negative outlook impacting the way individuals interact with others (Cacioppo and Cacioppo, 2014 ). Further, restricting social networks and experiencing elevated levels of social isolation act as mediators that result in elevated negative mood and lower satisfaction with life factors (Harasemiw et al., 2018 ; Zheng et al., 2020 ). The relationship between well-being and feelings of control and satisfaction with one’s environment are related to psychological health (Zheng et al., 2020 ). Dissatisfaction with one’s home, resource scarcity such as food and self-care products, and job instability contribute to social isolation and poor well-being (Zavaleta et al., 2017 ).

Although there are fewer studies with young and middle aged adults, there is some evidence of a similar pattern of greater isolation being associated with negative psychological outcomes for this population (Bergin and Pakenham, 2015 ; Elphinstone, 2018 ; Liu et al., 2019 ; Nicholson, 2012 ; Smith and Lim, 2020 ; Usher et al., 2020 ). There is also considerable evidence that social isolation can have a detrimental impact on physical health (Holt-Lunstad et al., 2010 ; Steptoe et al., 2013 ). In a meta-analysis of 148 studies examining connections between social relationships and risk of mortality, Holt-Lunstad et al. ( 2010 ) concluded that the influence of social relationships on the risk for death is comparable to the risk caused by other factors like smoking and alcohol use, and greater than the risk associated with obesity and lack of exercise. Likewise, other researchers have highlighted the detrimental impact of social isolation and loneliness on various illnesses, including cardiovascular, inflammatory, neuroendocrine, and cognitive disorders (Bhatti and Haq, 2017 ; Xia and Li, 2018 ). Understanding behavioral factors related to positive and negative copings is essential in providing health guidance to adult populations.

Feelings of belonging and social connection are related to life satisfaction in older adults (Hawton et al., 2011 ; Mellor et al., 2008 ; Nicholson, 2012 ; Victor et al., 2000 ; Xia and Li, 2018 ). While physical distancing initiatives were implemented to save lives by reducing the spread of COVID-19, these results suggest that social isolation can have a negative impact on both mental and physical health that may linger beyond the mitigation orders (Berg-Weger and Morley, 2020 ; Brooks et al., 2020 ; Cava et al., 2005 ; Smith et al., 2020 ; Usher et al., 2020 ). It is therefore important that we document the prevalence of social isolation during the COVID-19 pandemic as well as the various factors that contribute to individuals of all ages feeling more or less isolated, while they are required to maintain physical distancing for an extended period of time. It was hypothesized that perceived social isolation would not be limited to an older adult population. Further, it was hypothesized that perceived social isolation would be related to individual’s coping with the pandemic. Finally, it was hypothesized that the experience of social isolation would act as a mediator to life satisfaction and basic trust in institutions for individuals across the adult lifespan. The current study was designed to examine the following research questions:

Are there age differences in participants’ perceived social isolation?

Do factors like time spent under required distancing and worry about personal risk for illness have an association with perceived social isolation?

Is perceived social isolation due to quarantine and pandemic mitigation efforts related to life satisfaction?

Is there an association between perceived social isolation and trust of institutions?

Is there a difference in basic stressors and coping during the pandemic for individuals experiencing varying levels of perceived social isolation?

Participants

Participants were adults age 18 years and above. Individuals younger than 18 years were not eligible to participate in the study. There were no limitations on occupation, education, or time under mandatory “stay at home” orders. The researchers sought a sample of adults that was diverse by age, occupation, and ethnicity. The researchers sought a broad sample that would allow researchers to conduct a descriptive quantitative survey study examining factors related to perceived social isolation during the first months of the COVID-19 mitigation efforts.

Participants were asked to complete a 42-item electronic survey that consisted of both Likert-type items and open-ended questions. There were 20 Likert scale items, 3 items on a 3-point scale (1 = Hardly ever to 3 = Often) and 17 items on a 5-point scale (1 = Not at all satisfied to 4 = very satisfied, 0 = I don’t know), 11 multiple choice items, one of which had an available short response answer, and 11 short answer items.

Items were selected from Measures of Social Isolation (Zavaleta et al., 2017 ) that included 27 items to measure feelings of social isolation through the proxy variables of stress, trust, and life satisfaction. Trust was measured for government, business, and media. Life satisfaction examined overall feelings of satisfaction as well as satisfaction with resources such as food, housing, work, and relationships. Three items related to social isolation were chosen from the Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale. Hughes et al. ( 2004 ) reported that these three items showed good psychometric validity and reliability for the construct of Loneliness.

There were a further 12 items from the authors specifically about circumstances regarding COVID-19 at the time of the survey. Participants answered questions about the length of time spent distancing from others, level of compliance with local regulations, primary news sources, whether physical distancing was voluntary or mandatory, how many people are in their household, work availability, methods of communication, feelings of personal risk of contracting COVID-19, possible changes in behavior, coping methods, stressors, and whether there are children over the age of 18 staying in the home.

This study was submitted to the Cabrini University Institutional Review Board and approval was obtained in March 2020. Researchers recruited a sample of people that varied by age, gender, and ethnicity by identifying potential participants across academic and non-academic settings using professional contact lists. A “snowball” approach to data gathering was used. The researchers sent the survey to a broad group of adults and requested that the participants send the survey to others they felt would be interested in taking part in research. Recipients received an email that contained a description of the purpose of the study and how the data would be used. Included at the end of the email was a link to the online survey that first presented the study’s consent form. Participants acknowledged informed consent and agreed to participate by opening and completing the survey.

At the end of the survey, participants were given the opportunity to supply an email to participate in a longitudinal study which consists of completing surveys at later dates. In addition, the sample was asked to forward the survey to their contacts who might be interested. Overall, the study took ~10 min to complete.

Demographics

Participants were 309 adults who ranged in age from 18 to 84 ( M  = 38.54, s  = 18.27). Data was collected beginning in 2020 from late March until early April. At the time of data collection distancing mandates were in place for 64.7% and voluntary for 34.6% of the sample, while 0.6% lived in places which had not yet outlined any pandemic mitigation policies. The average length of time distancing was slightly more than 2 weeks ( M  = 14.91 days, s  = 4.5) with 30 days as the longest reported time.

The sample identified mostly as female (80.3%), with males (17.8%) and those who preferred not to answer (1.9%) representing smaller numbers. The majority of the sample identified as Caucasian (71.5%). Other ethnic identities reported by participants included Hispanic/Latinx, African-American/Black, Asian/East Asian, Jewish/Jewish White-Passing, Multiracial/Multiethnic, and Country of Origin (Table 1 ). Individuals resided in the United States and Europe.

The majority of the sample lived in households with others (Fig. 1 ). More than one-third (36.7%) lived with one other person, 19.7% lived with two others, and 21% lived with three other people. People living alone comprised 12.1% of the sample. When asked about the presence of children under 18 years of age in the home, 20.5% answered yes.

Figure shows how many additional individuals live in the participant’s household in March 2020.

The highest level of education attained ranged from completion of lower secondary school (0.3%) to doctoral level (6.8%). Two thirds of the sample consisted of individuals with a Bachelor’s degree or above (Table 2 ).

Participants were asked to provide their occupation. The largest group identified themselves as professionals (26.5%), while 38.6% reported their field of work (Table 3 ). Students comprised 23.1% of the sample, while 11.1% reported that they were retired. Some of the occupations reported by the sample included nurses and physicians, lawyers, psychologists, teachers, mental health professionals, retail sales, government work, homemakers, artists across types of media, financial analysts, hairdresser, and veterinary support personnel. One person indicated that they were unemployed prior to the pandemic.

Social isolation and demographics

Spearman’s rank-order correlations were used to examine relationships between the three Likert scale items from the Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale that measure social isolation. Feeling isolated from others was significantly correlated with lacking companionship ( r s = 0.45, p  < 0.001) and feeling left out ( r s = 0.43, p  < 0.001). The items related to lacking companionship and feeling left out were also significantly correlated ( r s = 0.39, p  < 0.001).

Kruskal–Wallis tests were conducted to determine if the variables of time in required distancing and age were each related to the three levels of social isolation (hardly, sometimes, often). There were no significant findings between perceived social isolation and length of time in required distancing, χ 2 (2) = 0.024, p  = 0.98.

A significant relationship was found between perceived social isolation and age, χ 2 (2) = 27.36, p  < 0.001). Subsequently, pairwise comparisons were performed using Dunn’s procedure with a Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons. Adjusted p values are presented. Post hoc analysis revealed statistically significant differences in age between those with high levels of social isolation (Mdn = 25) and some social isolation (Mdn = 31) ( p  = <0.001) and low isolation (Mdn = 46) ( p  = 0.002). Higher levels of social isolation were associated with younger age.

Age was then grouped (18–29, 30–49, 50–69, 70+) and a significant relationship was found between social isolation and age, χ 2 (3) = 13.78, p  = 0.003). Post hoc analysis revealed statistically significant differences in perceived social isolation across age groups. The youngest adults (age 18–29) reported significantly higher social isolation (Mdn = 2.4) than the two oldest groups (50–69 year olds: Mdn = 1.6, p  = 004); age 70 and above: Mdn = 1.57), p  = 0.01). The difference between the youngest adults and the next youngest (30–49) was not significant ( p  = 0.09).

When asked if participants feel personally at risk for contracting SARS-CoV-2 61.2% reported that they feel at risk. A Mann–Whitney U test was conducted to compare social isolation experienced by those who reported feeling at risk and those who did not feel at risk. Individuals who feel at risk for infection reported more social isolation (Mdn = 2.0) than those that do not feel at risk (Mdn = 1.75), U  = 9377, z  = −2.43, p  = 0.015.

Social isolation and life satisfaction

The relationship between level of social isolation and overall life satisfaction were examined using Kruskal–Wallis tests as the measure consisted of Likert-type items (Table 4 ).

Overall life satisfaction was significantly lower for those who reported greater social isolation ( χ 2 (2) = 50.56, p  < 0.001). Post hoc analysis revealed statistically significant differences in life satisfaction scores between those with high levels of social isolation (Mdn = 2.82) and some social isolation (Mdn = 3.04) ( p  ≤ 0.001) and between high and low isolation (Mdn = 3.47) ( p  ≤ 0.001), but not between high levels of social isolation and some social isolation ( p  = 0.09).

The pandemic added concern about access to resources such as food and 68% of the sample reported stress related to availability of resources. A significant relationship was found between social isolation and satisfaction with access to food, χ 2 (2) = 21.92, p  < 0.001). Individuals reporting high levels of social isolation were the least satisfied with their food situation. Statistical difference were evident between high social isolation (Mdn = 3.28) and some social isolation (Mdn = 3.46) ( p  = 0.003) and between high and low isolation (Mdn = 3.69) ( p  < 0.001). Reporting higher levels of social isolation is associated with lower satisfaction with food.

As a result of stay at home orders, many participants were spending more time in their residences than prior to the pandemic. A significant relationship was found between social isolation and housing satisfaction, χ 2 (2) = 10.33, p  = 0.006). Post hoc analysis revealed statistically a significant difference in housing satisfaction between those with high levels of social isolation (Mdn = 3.49) and low social isolation (Mdn = 3.75) ( p  = 0.006). Higher levels of social isolation is associated with lower levels of satisfaction with housing.

Work life changed for many participants and 22% of participants reported job loss as a result of the pandemic. A significant relationship was found between social isolation and work satisfaction, χ 2 (2) = 21.40, p  < 0.001). Post hoc analysis revealed individuals reporting high social isolation reported much lower satisfaction with work (Mdn = 2.53) than did those reporting low social isolation (Mdn = 3.27) ( p  < 0.001) and moderate social isolation (Mdn = 3.03) ( p  = 0.003).

Social isolation and trust of institutions

The relationship between social isolation and connection to community was measured using a Kruskal–Wallis test. A significant relationship was found between feelings of social isolation and connection to community ( χ 2 (2) = 13.97, p  = 0.001. Post hoc analysis revealed a statistically significant difference in connection to community such that the group reporting higher social isolation (Mdn = 2.27, p  = 0.001) reports less connection to their community than the group reporting low social isolation (Mdn = 2.93).

A significant relationship was found between social isolation and trust of central government institutions, χ 2 (2) = 10.46, p  = 0.005). Post hoc analysis revealed a statistically significant difference in trust of central government between individuals reporting low social isolation (Mdn = 2.91) and those reporting high social isolation (Mdn = 2.32) ( p  = 0.008) and moderate social isolation (Mdn = 2.48) ( p  = 0.03). There was less trust of central government for the group reporting high social isolation. However, distrust of central government did not extend to local government institutions. There was no significant difference in trust of local government for low, moderate, and high social isolation groups, χ 2 (2) = 5.92, p  = 0.052.

Trust levels of business was significantly different between groups that differed in feelings of social isolation, χ 2 (2) = 9.58, p  = 0.008). Post hoc analysis revealed more trust of business institutions for the low social isolation group (Mdn = 3.10) compared to the group reporting high social isolation (Mdn = 2.62) ( p  = 0.007).

Sixty-seven participants reported loss of a job as a result of COVID-19. A Mann–Whitney U test was conducted to compare social isolation experienced by those who had lost their job to those who had not. Individuals who experienced job loss reported more social isolation (Mdn = 2.26) than those that did not lose their job (Mdn = 1.80), U  = 5819.5, z  = −3.66 , p  < 0.001.

Stress related to caring for an elderly family member was identified by 12% of the sample. A Mann–Whitney U test was conducted to compare social isolation experienced by those who reported that caring for an elderly family member is a stressor to those who had not. There was no significant finding, U  = 4483, z  = −1.28, p  = 0.20. Similarly, there was no significant effect for caring for a child, U  = 3568.5, z  = −0.48, p  = 0.63.

Coping strategies

Participants were asked to check off whether they were using virtual communication, exercise, going outdoors, and/or substances in order to cope with the challenges of distancing during pandemic. A Mann–Whitney U test was conducted to compare social isolation experienced by those who used substances as a coping strategy and those that did not. Individuals who reported substance use reported more social isolation (Mdn = 2.12) than those that did not (Mdn = 1.80), U  = 6724, z  = −2.01, p  = 0.04.

There was no significant difference on Mann–Whitney U test for social isolation between those individuals who went outdoors to cope with pandemic versus those that did not, U  = 5416, z  = −0.72, p  = 0.47. Similarly, there was no difference in social isolation between those individuals who used exercise as a coping tool and those that did not. Finally, there was no difference in social isolation between those that used virtual communication tools and those that did not, U  = 7839.5, z  = −0.56, p  = 0.58. The only coping strategy which was significantly associated with social isolation was substance use.

While research has explored the subjective experience of social isolation, the novel experience of mass physical distancing as a result of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic suggests that social isolation is a significant factor in the public health crisis. The experience of social isolation has been examined in older populations but less often in middle-age and younger adults (Brooks et al., 2020 ; Smith and Lim, 2020 ). Perceived social isolation is related to numerous negative outcomes related to both physical and mental health (Bhatti and Haq, 2017 ; Holt-Lunstad et al., 2010 , Victor et al., 2000 ; Xia and Li, 2018 ). Our findings indicate that younger adults in their 20s reported more social isolation than did those individuals aged 50 and older during physical distancing. This supports the findings of Nyqvist et al. ( 2016 ) that found teenagers and young adults in Finland reported greater loneliness than did older adults.

The experience of social isolation is related to a reduction in life satisfaction. Previous research has shown that feelings of social connection are related to general life satisfaction in older adults (Hawton et al., 2011 , Hughes et al., 2004 , Mellor et al., 2008 ; Victor et al., 2000 , Xia and Li, 2018 ). These findings indicate that perceived social isolation can be a significant mediator in life satisfaction and well-being across the adult lifespan during a global health crisis. Individuals reporting higher levels of social isolation experience less satisfaction with the conditions in their home.

During mandated “stay-at-home” conditions, the experience of work changed for many people. For many adults work is an essential aspect of identity and life satisfaction. The experience of individuals reporting elevated social isolation was also related to lower satisfaction with work. This study included a wide span of occupations involving both individuals required to work from home and essential workers continuing to work outside the home. Further, ~22% of the sample ( n  = 67) reported job loss as a stressor related to the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and reported elevated social isolation. As institutions and businesses consider whether remote work is an economically viable alternative to face-to-face offices once physical distancing mandates are ended, the needs of workers for social interaction should be considered.

Further, individuals reporting higher social isolation also indicated less connection to their community and lower satisfaction with environmental factors such as housing and food. Findings indicate that higher perceived social isolation is associated with broad dissatisfaction across social and life domains and perceptions of personal risk from COVID-19. This supports research that identified a relationship between social isolation and health-related quality of life outcomes (Hawton et al., 2011 , Victor et al., 2000 ). Perceptions of elevated social isolation are related to lower life satisfaction in functional and social domains.

Perceived social isolation is likewise related to trust of some institutions. While there was no effect for local government, individuals with higher perceived social isolation reported less trust of central government and of business. There is an association between higher levels of perceived social isolation and less connection to the community, lower life satisfaction, and less trust of large-scale institutions such as central government and businesses. As a result, the individuals who need the most support may be the most suspicious of the effectiveness of those institutions.

Coping strategies related to exercise, time spent outdoors, and virtual communication were not related to social isolation. However, individuals who reported using substances as a coping strategy reported significantly higher social isolation than did the group who did not indicate substance use as a coping strategy. Perceived social isolation was associated with negative coping rather than positive coping. This study shows that clinicians and health care providers should ask about coping strategies in order to provide effective supports for individuals.

There are several limitations that may limit the generalizability of the findings. The study is heavily female and this may have an effect on findings. In addition, the majority of the sample has a post-secondary degree and, as such, this study may not accurately reflect the broad experience of individuals during pandemic. Further, it cannot be ruled out that individuals reporting high levels of perceived social isolation may have experienced some social isolation prior to the pandemic.

Conclusions

In conclusion, this study suggests that perceived social isolation is a significant element of health-related quality of life during pandemic. Perceived social isolation is not just an issue for older adults. Indeed, young adults appear to be suffering greatly from the distancing required to reduce the spread of SARS-CoV-2. The experience of social isolation is associated with poor life satisfaction across domains, work-related stress, lower trust of institutions such as central government and business, perceived personal risk for COVID-19, and higher levels of use of substances as a coping strategy. Measuring the degree of perceived social isolation is an important addition to wellness assessments. Stress and social isolation can impact health and immune function and so reducing perceived social isolation is essential during a time when individuals require strong immune function to fight off a novel virus. Further, it is anticipated that these widespread effects may linger as the uncertainty of the virus continues. As a result, we plan to follow participants for at least a year to examine the impact of SARS-CoV-2 on the well-being of adults.

Data availability

The dataset generated during and analyzed during the current study is not publicly available due to ethical restrictions and privacy agreements between the authors and participants.

Berg-Weger M, Morley J (2020) Loneliness and social isolation in older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic: implications for gerontological social work. J Nutr Health Aging 24(5):456–458

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Bergin A, Pakenham K (2015) Law student stress: relationships between academic demands, social isolation, career pressure, study/life imbalance, and adjustment outcomes in law students. Psychiatry Psychol Law 22:388–406

Article   Google Scholar  

Bhatti A, Haq A (2017) The pathophysiology of perceived social isolation: effects on health and mortality. Cureus 9(1):e994. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.994

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Brooks S, Webster R, Smith L, Woodland L, Wesseley S, Greenberg N, Rubin G (2020) The psychological impact of quarantine and how to reduce it: rapid review of the evidence. Lancet 395:912–920

Cacioppo JT, Cacioppo S (2014) Social relationships and health: the toxic effects of perceived social isolation. Soc Personal Psychol Compass 8(2):58–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12087

Cava M, Fay K, Beanlands H, McCay E, Wignall R (2005) The experience of quarantine for individuals affected by SARS in Toronto. Public Health Nurs 22(5):398–406

Child ST, Lawton L (2019) Loneliness and social isolation among young and late middle age adults: associations with personal networks and social participation. Aging Mental Health 23:196–204

Coutin E, Knapp M (2017) Social isolation, loneliness, and health in old age. Health Soc Care Community 25:799–812

Dahlberg L, McKee KJ (2018) Social exclusion and well-being among older adults in rural and urban areas. Arch Gerontol Geriatrics 79:176–184

Elphinstone B (2018) Identification of a suitable short-form of the UCLA-Loneliness Scale. Austral Psychol 53:107–115

Galea S, Merchant R, Lurie N (2020) The mental health consequences of COVID-19 and physical distancing: the need for prevention and early intervention. JAMA Intern Med 180(6):817–818

Harasemiw O, Newall N, Mackenzie CS, Shooshtari S, Menec V (2018) Is the association between social network types, depressive symptoms and life satisfaction mediated by the perceived availability of social support? A cross-sectional analysis using the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging. Aging Mental Health 23:1413–1422

Hawton A, Green C, Dickens A, Richards C, Taylor R, Edwards R, Greaves C, Campbell J (2011) The impact of social isolation on the health status and health-related quality of life of older people. Qual Life Res 20:57–67

Holt-Lunstad J, Smith TB, Layton JB (2010) Social relationships and mortality risk: a meta-analytic review. PLoS Med 7:1–20

Hughes M, Waite L, Hawkley L, Cacioppo J (2004) A short scale of measuring loneliness in large surveys: results from two population-based studies. Res Aging 26(6):655–672

Lee J, Cagle JG (2018) Social exclusion factors influencing life satisfaction among older adults. J Poverty Soc Justice 26:35–50

Liu H, Zhang M, Yang Q, Yu B (2019) Gender differences in the influence of social isolation and loneliness on depressive symptoms in college students: a longitudinal study. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 55:251–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-019-01726-6

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Mellor D, Stokes M, Firth L, Hayashi Y, Cummins R (2008) Need for belonging, relationship satisfaction, loneliness, and life satisfaction. Personal Individ Differ 45(2008):213–218

Nicholson N (2012) A review of social isolation: an important but underassessed condition in older adults. J Prim Prev 33(2–3):137–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10935-012-0271-2

Nyqvist F, Victor C, Forsman A, Cattan M (2016) The association between social capital and loneliness in different age groups: a population-based study in Western Finland. BMC Public Health 16:542. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-3248-x

Smith B, Lim M (2020) How the COVID-19 pandemic is focusing attention on loneliness and social isolation. Public Health Res Pract 30(2):e3022008. https://doi.org/10.17061/phrp3022008

Smith M, Steinman L, Casey EA (2020). Combatting social isolation among older adults in the time of physical distancing: the COVID-19 social connectivity paradox. Front Public Health https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2020.00403

Steptoe A, Shankar A, Demakakos P, Wardle J (2013) Social isolation, loneliness, and all-cause mortality in older men and women. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 110(15):5797–5801. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1219686110

Article   ADS   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Umberson D, Karas Montez J (2010) Social relationships and health: a flashpoint for health policy. J Health Soc Behav 51:S54–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022146510383501

Usher K, Bhullar N, Jackson D (2020). Life in the pandemic: social isolation and mental health. J Clin Nurs https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15290

Victor C, Scambler S, Bond J, Bowling A (2000) Being alone in later life: loneliness, social isolation and living alone. Rev Clin Gerontol 10(4):407–417. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0959259800104101

Xia N, Li H (2018) Loneliness, social isolation, and cardiovascular health. Antioxid Redox Signal 28(9):837–851

Zavaleta D, Samuel K, Mills CT (2017) Measures of social isolation. Soc Indic Res 131(1):367–391

Zheng L, Miao M, Gan Y (2020). Perceived control buffers the effects of the covid-19 pandemic on general health and life satisfaction: the mediating role of psychological distance. Appl Psychol https://doi.org/10.1111/aphw.12232

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Cabrini University, Radnor, USA

Ruta Clair, Maya Gordon, Matthew Kroon & Carolyn Reilly

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors jointly supervised and contributed to this work.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ruta Clair .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Clair, R., Gordon, M., Kroon, M. et al. The effects of social isolation on well-being and life satisfaction during pandemic. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 8 , 28 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00710-3

Download citation

Received : 29 August 2020

Accepted : 07 January 2021

Published : 27 January 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-021-00710-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Assessing the impact of covid-19 on self-reported levels of depression during the pandemic relative to pre-pandemic among canadian adults.

• Rasha Elamoshy
• Marwa Farag

Archives of Public Health (2024)

Associations between social networks, cognitive function, and quality of life among older adults in long-term care

• Laura Dodds
• Carol Brayne
• Joyce Siette

BMC Geriatrics (2024)

Locked Down: The Gendered Impact of Social Support on Children’s Well-Being Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic

• Jasper Dhoore
• Bram Spruyt
• Jessy Siongers

Child Indicators Research (2024)

Life Satisfaction during the Second Lockdown of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Germany: The Effects of Local Restrictions and Respondents’ Perceptions about the Pandemic

• Lisa Schmid
• Pablo Christmann
• Carolin Thönnissen

Applied Research in Quality of Life (2024)

From the table to the sofa: The remote work revolution in a context of crises and its consequences on work attitudes and behaviors

• Humberto Batista Xavier
• Suzana Cândido de Barros Sampaio
• Kathryn Cormican

Education and Information Technologies (2024)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

• Open access
• Published: 22 August 2017

Social conditions of becoming homelessness: qualitative analysis of life stories of homeless peoples

• Mzwandile A. Mabhala   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-1350-7065 1 , 3 ,
• Asmait Yohannes 2 &
• Mariska Griffith 1  

International Journal for Equity in Health volume  16 , Article number:  150 ( 2017 ) Cite this article

66k Accesses

50 Citations

22 Altmetric

Metrics details

It is increasingly acknowledged that homelessness is a more complex social and public health phenomenon than the absence of a place to live. This view signifies a paradigm shift, from the definition of homelessness in terms of the absence of permanent accommodation, with its focus on pathways out of homelessness through the acquisition and maintenance of permanent housing, to understanding the social context of homelessness and social interventions to prevent it.

However, despite evidence of the association between homelessness and social factors, there is very little research that examines the wider social context within which homelessness occurs from the perspective of homeless people themselves. This study aims to examine the stories of homeless people to gain understanding of the social conditions under which homelessness occurs, in order to propose a theoretical explanation for it.

Twenty-six semi-structured interviews were conducted with homeless people in three centres for homeless people in Cheshire North West of England.

The analysis revealed that becoming homeless is a process characterised by a progressive waning of resilience capacity to cope with life challenges created by series of adverse incidents in one’s life. The data show that final stage in the process of becoming homeless is complete collapse of relationships with those close to them. Most prominent pattern of behaviours participants often describe as main causes of breakdown of their relationships are:

engaging in maladaptive behavioural lifestyle including taking drugs and/or excessive alcohol drinking

Being in trouble with people in authorities.

Homeless people describe the immediate behavioural causes of homelessness, however, the analysis revealed the social and economic conditions within which homelessness occurred. The participants’ descriptions of the social conditions in which were raised and their references to maladaptive behaviours which led to them becoming homeless, led us to conclude that they believe that their social condition affected their life chances: that these conditions were responsible for their low quality of social connections, poor educational attainment, insecure employment and other reduced life opportunities available to them.

It is increasingly acknowledged that homelessness is a more complex social and public health phenomenon than the absence of a place to live. This view signifies a paradigm shift, from the definition of homelessness in terms of the absence of permanent accommodation [ 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ], with its focus on pathways out of homelessness through the acquisition and maintenance of permanent housing [ 6 ], to understanding the social context of homelessness and social interventions to prevent it [ 6 ].

Several studies explain the link between social factors and homelessness [ 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 ]. The most common social explanations centre on seven distinct domains of deprivation: income; employment; health and disability; education, skills and training; crime; barriers to housing and social support services; and living environment [ 11 ]. Of all forms, income deprivation has been reported as having the highest risk factors associated with homelessness [ 7 , 12 , 13 , 14 ]: studies indicate that people from the most deprived backgrounds are disproportionately represented amongst the homeless [ 7 , 13 ]. This population group experiences clusters of multiple adverse health, economic and social conditions such as alcohol and drug misuse, lack of affordable housing and crime [ 10 , 12 , 15 ]. Studies consistently show an association between risk of homelessness and clusters of poverty, low levels of education, unemployment or poor employment, and lack of social and community support [ 7 , 10 , 13 , 16 ].

Studies in different countries throughout the world have found that while the visible form of homelessness becomes evident when people reach adulthood, a large proportion of homeless people have had extreme social disadvantage and traumatic experiences in childhood including poverty, shortage of social housing stocks, disrupted schooling, lack of social and psychological support, physical, sexual, and emotional abuse, neglect, dysfunctional family environments, and unstable family structures, all of which increase the likelihood of homelessness [ 10 , 13 , 14 ].

Furthermore, a large body of evidence suggests that people exposed to diverse social disadvantages at an early age are less likely to adapt successfully compared to people without such exposure [ 9 , 10 , 13 , 17 ], being more susceptible to adopting maladaptive coping behaviours such as theft, trading sex for money, and selling or using drugs and alcohol [ 7 , 9 , 18 , 19 ]. Studies show that these adverse childhood experiences tend to cluster together, and that the number of adverse experiences may be more predictive of negative adult outcomes than particular categories of events [ 17 , 20 ]. The evidence suggests that some clusters are more predictive of homelessness than others [ 7 , 12 ]: a cluster of childhood problems including mental health and behavioural disorders, poor school performance, a history of foster care, and disrupted family structure was most associated with adult criminal activities, adult substance use, unemployment and subsequent homelessness [ 12 , 17 , 21 ]. However, despite evidence of the association between homelessness and social factors, there is very little research that examines the wider social context within which homelessness occurs from the perspective of homeless people themselves.

This paper adopted Anderson and Christian’s [ 18 ] definition, which sees homelessness as a ‘function of gaining access to adequate, affordable housing, and any necessary social support needed to ensure the success of the tenancy’. Based on our synthesis of the evidence, this paper proposes that homelessness is a progressive process that begins at childhood and manifests itself at adulthood, one characterised by loss of the personal resources essential for successful adaptation. We adopted the definition of personal resources used by DeForge et al. ([ 7 ], p. 223), which is ‘those entities that either are centrally valued in their own right (e.g. self-esteem, close attachment, health and inner peace) or act as a means to obtain centrally valued ends (e.g. money, social support and credit)’. We propose that the new paradigm focusing on social explanations of homelessness has the potential to inform social interventions to reduce it.

In this study, we examine the stories of homeless people to gain understanding of the conditions under which homelessness occurs, in order to propose a theoretical explanation for it.

The design of this study was philosophically influenced by constructivist grounded theory (CGT). The aspect of CGT that made it appropriate for this study is its fundamental ontological belief in multiple realities constructed through the experience and understanding of different participants’ perspectives, and generated from their different demographic, social, cultural and political backgrounds [ 22 ]. The researchers’ resulting theoretical explanation constitutes their interpretation of the meanings that participants ascribe to their own situations and actions in their contexts [ 22 ].

The stages of data collection and analysis drew heavily on other variants of grounded theory, including those of Glaser [ 23 ] and Corbin and Strauss [ 24 ].

Setting and sampling strategy

The settings for this study were three centres for homeless people in two cities (Chester and Crewe) in Cheshire, UK. Two sampling strategies were used in this study: purposive and theoretical. The study started with purposive sampling and in-depth one-to-one semi-structured interviews with eight homeless people to generate themes for further exploration.

One of the main considerations for the recruitment strategy was to ensure that the process complies with the ethical principles of voluntary participation and equal opportunity to participate. To achieve this, an email was sent to all the known homeless centres in the Cheshire and Merseyside region, inviting them to participate. Three centres agreed to participate, all of them in Cheshire – two in Chester and one in Crewe.

Chester is the most affluent city in Cheshire and Merseyside, and therefore might not be expected to be considered for a homelessness project. The reasons for including it were: first, it was a natural choice, since the organisations that funded the project and the one that led the research project were based in Chester; second, despite its affluence, there is visible evidence of homelessness in the streets of Chester; and third, it has several local authority and charity-funded facilities for homeless people.

The principal investigator spent 1 day a week for 2 months in three participating centres, during that time oral presentation of study was given to all users of the centre and invited all the participants to participate and written participants information sheet was provided to those who wished to participate. During that time the principal investigator learned that the majority of homeless people that we were working with in Chester were not local. They told us that they came to Chester because there was no provision for homeless people in their former towns.

To help potential participants make a self-assessment of their suitability to participate without unfairly depriving others of the opportunity, participants information sheet outline criteria that potential participants had to meet: consistent with Economic and Social Research Council’s Research Ethics Guidebook [ 25 ], at the time of consenting to and commencing the interview, the participant must appear to be under no influence of alcohol or drugs, have a capacity to consent as stipulated in England and Wales Mental Capacity Act 2005 [ 26 ], be able to speak English, and be free from physical pain or discomfort.

As categories emerged from the data analysis, theoretical sampling was used to refine undeveloped categories in accordance with Strauss and Corbin’s [ 27 ] recommendations. In total 26 semi-structured interviews were carried out. Theoretical sampling involved review of memos or raw data, looking for data that might have been overlooked [ 27 , 28 ], and returning to key participants asking them to give more information on categories that seemed central to the emerging theory [ 27 , 28 ].

The sample comprised of 22 male and 4 female, the youndgest participant was 18 the eldest was 74 years, the mean age was 38.6 years. Table 1 illustrates participant’s education history, childhood living arrangements, brief participants family and social history, emotional and physical health, the onset of and trigger for homelessness.

Ethical approval

Ethical approval was obtained from the Research Ethics Committee of the University of Chester. The centre managers granted access once ethical approval had been obtained, and after their review of the study design and other research material, and of the participant information sheet which included a letter of invitation highlighting that participation was voluntary.

Data analysis

In this study data collection and analysis occurred simultaneously. Analysis drew on Glaser’s [ 23 ] grounded theory processes of open coding, use of the constant comparative method, and the iterative process of data collection and data analysis to develop theoretical explanation of homelessness.

The process began by reading the text line-by-line identifying and open coding the significant incidents in the data that required further investigation. The findings from the initial stage of analysis are published in Mabhala [ 29 ]. The the second stage the data were organised into three themes that were considered significant in becoming homeless (see Fig. 1 ):

Engaging in maladaptive behaviour

Being in trouble with the authorities.

Being in abusive environments.

Social explanation of becoming homeless. Legend: Fig. 1 illustrates the process of becoming homeless

The key questions that we asked as we continued to interrogate the data were: What category does this incident indicate? What is actually happening in the data? What is the main concern being faced by the participants? Interrogation of the data revealed that participants were describing the process of becoming homeless.

The comparative analysis involved three processes described by Glaser ([ 23 ], p. 58–60): each incident in the data was compared with incidents from both the same participant and other participants, looking for similarities and differences. Significant incidents were coded or given labels that represented what they stood for, and similarly coded or labeled when they were judged to be about the same topic, theme or concept.

After a period of interrogation of the data, it was decided that the two categories - destabilising behaviour, and waning ofcapacity for resilience were sufficiently conceptual to be used as theoretical categories around which subcategories could be grouped (Fig. 1 ).

Once the major categories had been developed, the next step consisted of a combination of theoretical comparison and theoretical sampling. The emerging categories were theoretically compared with the existing literature. Once this was achieved, the next step was filling in and refining the poorly defined categories. The process continued until theoretical sufficiency was achieved.

Figure 1 illustrates the process of becoming homeless. The analysis revealed that becoming homeless is a process characterised by a progressive waning of resilience created by a series of adverse incidents in one’s life. Amongst the frequently cited incidents were being in an abusive environment and losing a significant person in one’s life. However, being in an abusive environment emerged from this and previously published studies as a major theme; therefore, we decided to analyse it in more detail.

The data further show that the final stage in the process of becoming homeless is a complete collapse of relationships with those with whom they live. The most prominent behaviours described by the participants as being a main cause of breakdown are:

Engaging in maladaptive behaviour: substance misuse, alcoholism, self-harm and disruptive behaviours

Being in trouble with the authorities: theft, burglary, arson, criminal offenses and convictions

The interrogation of data in relation to the conditions within which these behaviours occurred revealed that participants believed that their social contexts influenced their life chance, their engagement with social institution such as education and social services and in turn their ability to acquire and maintain home. Our experiences have also shown that homeless people readily express the view that behavioural lifestyle factors such as substance misuse and engaging in criminal activities are the causes of becoming homeless. However, when we spent time talking about their lives within the context of their status as homeless people, we began to uncover incidents in their lives that appeared to have weakened their capacity to constructively engage in relationships, engage with social institutions to make use of social goods [ 29 , 30 , 31 ] and maturely deal with societal demands.

Being in abusive environments

Several participants explicitly stated that their childhood experiences and damage that occurred to them as children had major influences on their ability to negotiate their way through the education system, gain and sustain employment, make appropriate choices of social networks, and form and maintain healthy relationships as adults.

It appears that childhood experiences remain resonant in the minds of homeless participants, who perceive that these have had bearing on their homelessness. Their influence is best articulated in the extracts below. When participants were asked to tell their stories of what led to them becoming homeless, some of their opening lines were:

What basically happened, is that I had a childhood of so much persistent, consistent abuse from my mother and what was my stepfather. Literally consistent, we went around with my mother one Sunday where a friend had asked us to stay for dinner and mother took the invitation up because it saved her from getting off her ass basically and do anything. I came away from that dinner genuinely believing that the children in that house weren’t loved and cared for, because they were not being hit, there was no shouting, no door slamming. [Marco]

It appears that Marco internalised the incidents of abuse, characterised by shouting, door slamming and beating as normal behaviour. He goes on to intimate how the internalised abusive behaviour affected his interaction with his employers.

‘…but consistently being put down, consistently being told I was thick, I started taking jobs and having employers effing and blinding at me. One employer actually used a “c” word ending in “t” at me quite frequently and I thought it was acceptable, which obviously now I know it’s not. So I am taking on one job after another that, how can I put it? That no one else would do basically. I was so desperate to work and earn my own money. [Marco]

Similarly, David makes a connection between his childhood experience and his homelessness. When he was asked to tell his life story leading to becoming homeless, his opening line was:

I think it [homelessness] started off when I was a child. I was neglected by my mum. I was physically and mentally abused by my mum. I got put into foster care, when I left foster care I was put in the hostel, from there I turn into alcoholic. Then I was homeless all the time because I got kicked out of the hostels, because you are not allowed to drink in the hostel. [David]

David and Marco’s experiences are similar to those of many participants. The youngest participant in this study, Clarke, had fresh memories of his abusive environment under his stepdad:

I wouldn't want to go back home if I had a choice to, because before I got kicked out me stepdad was like hitting me. I wouldn't want to go back to put up with that again. [I didn't tell anyone] because I was scared of telling someone and that someone telling me stepdad that I've told other people. ‘[Be] cause he might have just started doing again because I told people. It might have gotten him into trouble. [Clarke]

In some cases, participants expressed the beliefs that their abusive experience not only deprived them life opportunities but also opportunities to have families of their own. As Tom and Marie explain:

We were getting done for child neglect because one of our child has a disorder that means she bruise very easily. They all our four kids into care, social workers said because we had a bad childhood ourselves because I was abused by my father as well, they felt that we will fail our children because we were failed by our parents. We weren’t given any chance [Tom and Marie]

Norma, described the removal of her child to care and her maladaptive behaviour of excessive alcohol use in the same context as her experience of sexual abuse by her father.

I had two little boys with me and got took off from me and put into care. I got sexually abused by my father when I was six. So we were put into care. He abused me when I was five and raped me when I was six. Then we went into care all of us I have four brothers and four sisters. My dad did eighteen months for sexually abusing me and my sister. I thought it was normal as well I thought that is what dads do [Norma]

The analysis of participants in this study appears to suggest that social condition one is raised influence the choice of social connections and life partner. Some participants who have had experience of abuse as children had partner who had similar experience as children Tom and Marie, Lee, David and his partners all had partners who experienced child abuse as children.

Tom and Marie is a couple we interviewed together. They met in hostel for homeless people they have got four children. All four children have been removed from them and placed into care. They sleep rough along the canal. They explained:

We have been together for seven years we had a house and children social services removed children from us, we fell within bedroom tax. …we received an eviction order …on the 26th and the eviction date was the 27th while we were in family court fighting for our children. …because of my mental health …they were refusing to help us.

Our children have been adopted now. The adoption was done without our permission we didn’t agree to it because we wanted our children home because we felt we were unfairly treated and I [Marie] was left out in all this and they pin it all on you [Tom] didn’t they yeah, my [Tom] history that I was in care didn’t help.

Tom went on to talk about the condition under which he was raised:

I was abandoned by my mother when I was 12 I was then put into care; I was placed with my dad when I was 13 who physically abused me then sent back to care. [Tom].

David’s story provides another example of how social condition one is raised influence the choice of social connections and life partner. David has two children from two different women, both women grew up in care. Lisa one of David’s child mother is a second generation of children in care, her mother was raised in care too.

I drink to deal with problems. As I say I’ve got two kids with my girlfriend Kyleigh, but I got another lad with Lisa, he was taken off me by social services and put on for adoption ten years ago and that really what started it; to deal with that. Basically, because I was young, and I had been in care and the way I had been treated by my mum. Basically laid on me in the same score as my mum and because his mum [Lisa] was in care as well. So they treated us like that, which was just wrong. [David]

In this study, most participants identified alcohol or drugs and crime as the cause of relationships breakdown. However, the language they used indicates that these were secondary reasons rather than primary reasons for their homelessness. The typical question that MA and MG asked the interview participants was “tell us how did you become homeless”? Typically, participants cited different maladaptive behaviours to explain how they became homeless.

Alvin’s story is typical of:

Basically I started off as a bricklayer, … when the recession hit, there was an abundance of bricklayers so the prices went down in the bricklaying so basically with me having two young children and the only breadwinner in the family... so I had to kinda look for factory work and so I managed to get a job… somewhere else…. It was shift work like four 12 hour days, four 12 hour nights and six [days] off and stuff like that, you know, real hard shifts. My shift was starting Friday night and I’ll do Friday night, Saturday night to Monday night and then I was off Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, but I’d treat that like me weekend you know because I’ve worked all weekend. Then… so I’d have a drink then and stuff like that, you know. 7 o’ clock on a Monday morning not really the time to be drinking, but I used to treat it like me weekend. So we argued, me and my ex-missus [wife], a little bit and in the end we split up so moved back to me mum's, but kept on with me job, I was at me mum’s for possibly about five years and but gradually the drinking got worse and worse, really bad. I was diagnosed with depression and anxiety. … I used to drink to get rid of the anxiety and also to numb the pain of the breakup of me marriage really, you know it wasn’t good, you know. One thing led to another and I just couldn’t stop me alcohol. I mean I’ve done drugs you know, I was into the rave scene and I’ve never done hard drugs like heroin or... I smoke cannabis and I use cocaine, and I used to go for a pint with me mates and that. It all came to a head about November/December time, you know it was like I either stop drinking or I had to move out of me mum's. I lost me job in the January through being over the limit in work from the night before uum so one thing led to another and I just had to leave. [Alvin]

Similarly, Gary identified alcohol as the main cause of his relationship breakdown. However, when one listens to the full story alcohol appears to be a manifestation of other issues, including financial insecurities and insecure attachment etc.

It [the process of becoming homeless] mainly started with the breakdown of the relationship with me partner. I was with her for 15 years and we always had somewhere to live but we didn't have kids till about 13 years into the relationship. The last two years when the kids come along, I had an injury to me ankle which stopped me from working. I was at home all day everyday. …I was drinking because I was bored. I started drinking a lot ‘cause I couldn't move bout the house. It was a really bad injury I had to me ankle. Um, and one day me and me partner were having this argument and I turned round and saw my little boy just stood there stiff as a board just staring, looking at us. And from that day on I just said to me partner that I'll move out, ‘cause I didn't want me little boy to be seeing this all the time. [Gary]

In both cases Gary and Alvin indicate that changes in their employment status created conditions that promoted alcohol dependency, though both explained that they drank alcohol before the changes in their employment status occurred and the breakdown of relationships. Both intimated that that their job commitment limited the amount of time available to drink alcohol. As Gary explained, it is the frequency and amount of alcohol drinking that changed as a result of change in their employment status:

I used to have a bit of a drink, but it wasn’t a problem because I used to get up in the morning and go out to work and enjoy a couple of beers every evening after a day’s work. Um, but then when I wasn't working I was drinking, and it just snowballed out, you know snowball effect, having four cans every evening and then it went from there. I was drinking more ‘cause I was depressed. I was very active before and then I became like non-active, not being able to do anything and in a lot of pain as well. [Gary]

Furthermore, although the participants claim that drinking alcohol was not a problem until their employment circumstances changed, one gets a sense that alcohol was partly responsible for creating conditions that resulted in the loss of their jobs. In Gary’s case, for example, alcohol increased his vulnerability to the assault and injuries that cost him his job:

I got assaulted, kicked down a flight of stairs. I landed on me back on the bottom of the stairs, but me heel hit the stairs as it was still going up if you know what I mean. Smashed me heel, fractured me heel… So, by the time I got to the hospital and they x-rayed it they wasn't even able to operate ‘cause it was in that many pieces, they weren't even able to pin it if you know what I mean. [Gary]

Alvin, of the other hand, explained that:

I lost my job in the January through being over the limit in work from the night before, uum so one thing led to another and I just had to leave. [Alvin]

In all cases participants appear to construct marriage breakdown as an exacerbating factor for their alcohol dependence. Danny, for example, constructed marriage breakdown as a condition that created his alcohol dependence and alcohol dependence as a cause of breakdown of his relationship with his parents. He explains:

I left school when I was 16. Straight away I got married, had children. I have three children and marriage was fine. Umm, I was married for 17 years. As the marriage broke up I turned to alcohol and it really, really got out of control. I moved in with my parents... It was unfair for them to put up with me; you know um in which I became... I ended up on the streets, this was about when I was 30, 31, something like that and ever since it's just been a real struggle to get some permanent accommodation. [Danny]

Danny goes on to explain:

Yes [I drank alcohol before marriage broke down but] not very heavily, just like a sociable drink after work. I'd call into like the local pub and have a few pints and it was controlled. My drinking habit was controlled then. I did go back to my parents after my marriage break up, yes. I was drinking quite heavily then. I suppose it was a form of release, you know, in terms of the alcohol which I wish I'd never had now. When I did start drinking heavy at me parents’ house, I was getting in trouble with the police being drunk and disorderly. That was unfair on them. [Danny]

The data in this study indicate that homelessness occurs when the relationships collapse, irrespective of the nature of the relationship. There were several cases where lifestyle behaviour led to a relationship collapse between child and parents or legal guardians.

In the next excerpt, Emily outlines the incidents: smoking weed, doing crack and heroin, and drinking alcohol. She also uses the words ‘because’, ‘when’ and ‘obviously’, which provide clues about the precipitating condition for her behaviours “spending long time with people who take drugs”.

I've got ADHD like, so obviously my mum kicked me out when I was 17 and then like I went to **Beswick** and stuff like that. My mum in the end just let me do what I wanted to do, ‘cause she couldn't cope anymore. …I mean I tried to run away from home before that, but she'd always like come after me in like her nightie and pyjamas and all that. But in the end she just washed her hands of me . [Emily]

Emily presented a complex factors that made it difficult for her mother to live with her. These included her mother struggle with raising four kids as a single parent, Emily’s mental health (ADHD], alcohol and drug use. She goes on to explain that:

Ummm, well the reason I got kicked out of my hostel was ‘cause of me drinking, so I'd get notice to quit every month, then I’d have a meeting with the main boss and then they'd overturn it and this went on every month for about six months. Also, it was me behaviour as well, but obviously drink makes you do stuff you don't normally do and all that shit. I lived here for six months, got kicked out because I jumped out the window and broke me foot. I was on the streets for six months and then they gave me a second chance and I've been here a year now. So that's it basically. [Emily]

There were several stories of being evicted from accommodation due to excessive use of alcohol. One of those is David:

I got put into foster care. When I left foster care I was put in the hostel, from there I turn into alcoholic. Then I was homeless all the time because I got kicked out of the hostels, because you are not allowed to drink in the hostel. It’s been going on now for about… I was thirty-one on Wednesday, so it’s been going on for about thirteen years, homeless on and off. Otherwise if not having shoplifted for food and then go to jail, and when I don’t drink I have lot of seizures and I end up in the hospital. Every time I end up on the street. I trained as a chef, I have not qualified yet, because of alcohol addiction, it didn’t go very well. I did couple of jobs in restaurants and diners, I got caught taking a drink. [David]

Contrary to the other incidents where alcohol was a factor that led to homelessness, Barry’s description of his story appears to suggest that the reason he had to leave his parents’ home was his parents’ perception that his sexuality brought shame to the family:

When I came out they I’m gay, my mum and dad said you can’t live here anymore. I lived in a wonderful place called Nordic... but fortunately, mum and dad ran a pub called […] [and] one of the next door neighbours lived in a mansion. His name was [….] [and] when I came out, he came out as in he said “I'm a gay guy”, but he took me into Liverpool and housed me because I had nowhere to live. My mum and dad said you can't live here anymore. And unfortunately, we get to the present day. I got attacked. I got mugged... only walked away with a £5 note, it’s all they could get off me. They nearly kicked me to death so I was in hospital for three weeks. By the time I came out, I got evicted from my flat. I was made homeless. [Barry]

We used the phrase “engaging in maladaptive behaviour” to conceptualise the behaviours that led to the loss of accommodation because our analysis appear to suggest that these behaviours were strategies to cope with the conditions they found themselves in. For example, all participants in this category explained that they drank alcohol to cope with multiple health (mental health) and social challenges.

In the UK adulthood homelessness is more visible than childhood homelessness. However, most participants in this research reveal that the process of becoming homeless begins at their childhood, but becomes visible after the legal age of consent (16). Participants described long history of trouble with people in authority including parents, legal guardians and teachers. However, at the age of 16 they gain legal powers to leave children homes, foster homes, parental homes and schools, and move outside some of the childhood legal protections. Their act of defiance becomes subject to interdiction by the criminal justice system. This is reflected in number of convictions for criminal offenses some of the participants in this study had.

Participants Ruddle, David, Lee, Emily, Pat, Marco, Henry and many other participants in this study (see Table 1 ) clearly traced the beginning of their troubles with authority back at school. They all expressed the belief that had their schooling experience been more supportive, their lives would have been different. Lee explains that being in trouble with the authorities began while he was at school:

‘The school I came from a rough school, it was a main school, it consisted of A, B, C, D and The school I came from [was] a rough school, it was a main school, it consisted of A, B, C, D and E. I was in the lowest set, I was in E because of my English and maths. I was not interested, I was more interested in going outside with big lads smoking weed, bunking school. I used to bunk school inside school. I used to bunk where all cameras can catch me. They caught me and reported me back to my parents. My mum had a phone call from school asking where your son is. My mum grounded me. While my mum grounded me I had a drain pipe outside my house, I climbed down the drain pipe outside my bedroom window. I used to climb back inside. [Lee]

Lee’s stories constructed his poor education experiences as a prime mover towards the process of becoming homeless. It could be noted in Table 1 that most participants who described poor education experiences came from institutions such as foster care, children home and special school for maladjusted children. These participants made a clear connection between their experiences of poor education characterised by defiance of authorities and poor life outcomes as manifested through homelessness.

Patrick made a distinct link between his school experience and his homelessness, for example, when asked to tell his story leading up to becoming homeless, Patrick’s response was:

I did not go to school because I kept on bunking. When I was fifteen I left school because I was caught robbing. The police took me home and my mum told me you’re not going back to school again, you are now off for good. Because if you go back to school you keep on thieving, she said I keep away from them lads. I said fair enough. When I was seventeen I got run over by a car. [Patrick]

Henry traces the beginning of his troubles with authorities back at school:

[My schooling experience]… was good, I got good, well average grades, until I got myself into [a] few fights mainly for self-defence. In primary schools, I had a pretty... I had a good report card. In the start of high school, it was good and then when the fights started that gave me sort of like a... bad reputation. I remember my principal one time made me cry. Actually made me cry, but eh... I don't know how, but I remember sitting there in the office and I was crying. My sister also stuck up for me when she found out what had happened, she was on my side; but I can’t remember exactly what happened at that time. [Henry]

Emily’s story provides some clues about the series of incidents - including, delay in diagnosing her health condition, being labelled as a naughty child at school, being regularly suspended from school and consequently poor educational attainment.

Obviously, I wasn't diagnosed with ADHD till I was like 13, so like in school they used to say that's just a naughty child. … So it was like always getting suspended, excluded and all that sort of stuff. And in the end [I] went to college and the same happened there. [Emily]

The excerpt above provides intimations of what she considers to be the underlying cause of her behaviour towards the authorities. Emily suggests that had the authorities taken appropriate intervention to address her condition, her life outcomes would have been different.

Although the next participant did not construct school as being a prime mover of their trouble with authorities, their serious encounters with the criminal justice system occurred shortly after leaving school:

Well I did a bit of time at a very early age, I was only 16… I did some remand there, but then when I went to court ‘cause I'd done enough remand, I got let out and went to YMCA in Runcorn. Well, that was when I was a kid. When I was a bit older, ‘cause it was the years 2000 that I was in jail, I was just trying to get by really. I wasn’t with Karen at the time. I was living in Crewe and at the time I was taking a lot of amphetamines and was selling amphetamines as well, and I got caught and got a custodial sentence for it. But I've never been back to jail since. I came out in the year 2000 so it's like 16 years I've kept meself away from jail and I don't have any intentions of going back. [Gary]

The move from school and children social care system to criminal justice was a common pathways for many participants in this study. Some including Lee, Crewe, David, Patrick spent multiple prison sentences (see Table 1 ). Although Crewe did not make connection between his schooling experiences and his trouble with law, it could be noted that his serious encounter with criminal justice system started shortly after leaving foster care and schooling systems. As he explains:

I was put into prison at age of 17 for arson that was a cry for help to get away from the family, I came out after nine months. I have been in prison four times in my life, its not very nice, when I came out I made a promise to myself that I’m never going to go back to prison again. [Crewe]

Lee recalls his education experience. He explained:

I left school when I was fifteen… then I went off the rails. I got kidnapped for three and half months. When I came back I was just more interested in crime. When I left school I was supposed to go to college, but I went with travellers. I was just more interested in getting arrested every weekend, until my mum say right I have enough of you. I was only seventeen. I went through the hostels when I was seventeen. [Lee]

None describe the educational experience with a similar profundity to Marco:

On few occasions I came out on the corridors I would be getting battered on to my hands and knees and teachers walk pass me. There was quite often blood on the floor from my nose, would be punched on my face and be thrown on the floor. …. It was hard school, pernicious. I would go as far as saying I never felt welcome in that school, I felt like a fish out of the water, being persistently bullied did my head in. Eventually I started striking back, when I started striking back suddenly I was a bad one. My mother decided to put me in … school for maladjusted boys, everyone who been there including myself have spent time in prison. [Marco]

The trouble with authorities that was observes in participants stories in this category appear to be part of the wider adverse social challenges that the participants in this study were facing. Crewe’s description of arson as a cry for help appears to be an appropriate summation of all participants in this category.

The participants’ description of the social conditions in which were raised and their references to maladaptive behaviours which led to them becoming homeless, led us to conclude that they believe that their social condition affected their life chances: that these conditions were responsible for their low quality of social connections, poor educational attainment, insecure employment and other reduced life opportunities available to them.

The key feature that distinguish this study from comparable previous studies is that it openly acknowledges that data collection and analysis were influenced by the principles of social justice [ 28 , 30 , 31 ]. The resulting theoretical explanation therefore constitutes our interpretation of the meanings that participants ascribe to their own situations and actions in their contexts. In this study, defining homelessness within the wider socioeconomic context seemed to fit the data, and offered one interpretation of the process of becoming homeless.

While the participants’ experiences leading to becoming homeless may sound trite. What is pertinent in this study is understanding the conditions within which their behaviours occurred. The data were examined through the lens of social justice and socio-economic inequalities: we analysed the social context within which these behaviours occurred. We listened to accounts of their schooling experiences, how they were raised and their social network. The intention was not to propose a cause-and-effect association, but to suggest that interventions to mitigate homelessness should consider the social conditions within which it occurred.

Participants in this study identified substance misuse and alcohol dependency as a main cause of their homelessness. These findings are consistent with several epidemiological studies that reported a prevalence of substance misuse amongst the homeless people [ 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 ]. However, most these studies are epidemiological; and by nature epidemiological studies are the ‘gold standard’ in determining causes and effects, but do not always examine the context within which the cause and effect occur. One qualitative study that explored homelessness was a Canadian study by Watson, Crawley and Cane [ 37 ]. Participants in the Watson, et al. described ‘lack of quality social interactions and pain of addition. However, Watson et al. focus on the experiences of being homeless, rather than the life experiences leading to becoming homeless. To our knowledge the current study is one of very few that specifically examine the conditions within which homelessness occurs, looking beyond the behavioural factors. Based on the synthesis of data from previous studies, it makes sense that many interventions to mitigate homelessness focus more on tackling behavioural causes of homelessness rather than fundamental determinants of it [ 38 ]. From the public health intervention’ point of view, however, understanding the conditions within which homelessness occurs is essential, as it will encourage policymakers and providers of the services for homelessness people to devote equal attention to tackling the fundamental determinants of homelessness as is granted in dealing behavioural causes.

Participants in this study reported that they have been defiant toward people in positions of authority. For most of them this trouble began when they were at school, and came to the attention of the criminal justice system as soon as they left school at the age of 16. These findings are similar to these in the survey conducted by Williams, Poyser, and Hopkins [ 39 ] which was commissioned by the UK Ministry of Justice. This survey found that 15 % of prisoners in the sample reported being homeless before custody [ 39 ]; while three and a half percent of the general population reported having ever been homeless [ 39 ]. As the current study reveals there are three possible explanations for the increased population of homeless young people in the criminal justice system: first, at the age of 16 they gain legal powers to leave their foster homes, parents homes, and schools and move beyond some of the childhood legal protections; second, prior to the age of 16 their defiant behaviours were controlled and contained by schools and parents/legal guardians; and third, after the age of 16 their acts of defiant behaviour become subject to interdiction by the criminal justice system.

The conditions in which they were born and raised were described by some participants in this study as ‘chaotic’, abusive’, ‘neglect’, ‘pernicious’ ‘familial instability’, ‘foster care’, ‘care home’, etc. Taking these conditions, and the fact that all but one participants in this left school at or before the age of 16 signifies the importance of living conditions in educational achievement. It has been reported in previous studies that children growing up in such conditions struggle to adjust in school and present with behavioural problems, and thus, poor academic performance [ 40 ]. It has also been reported that despite these families often being known to social services, criminal justice systems and education providers, the interventions in place do little to prevent homelessness [ 40 ].

Analysis of the conditions within which participants’ homelessness occurred reveals the adverse social conditions within which they were born and raised. The conditions they described included being in an abusive environment, poor education, poor employment or unemployment, poor social connections and low social cohesion. These conditions are consistent with high index of poverty [ 37 , 41 , 42 ]. And several other studies found similar associations between poverty and homelessness [ 42 ]. For example, the study by Watson, Crowley et al. [ 37 ] found that there were extreme levels of poverty and social exclusion amongst homeless people. Contrary to previous studies that appear to construct homelessness as a major form of social exclusion, the analysis of participants’ stories in this current study revealed that the conditions they were raised under limited their capacity to engage in meaningful social interactions, thus creating social exclusion.

Homeless people describe the immediate behavioural causes of homelessness; however, this analysis revealed the social and economic conditions within which homelessness occurred. The participants’ descriptions of the social conditions in which were raised and their references to maladaptive behaviours which led to them becoming homeless, led us to conclude that they believe that their social condition affected their life chances: that these conditions were responsible for their low quality of social connections, poor educational attainment, insecure employment and other reduced life opportunities available to them.

Limitations

The conclusions drawn relate only to the social and economic context of the participants in this study, and therefore may not be generalised to the wider population; nor can they be immediately applied in a different context. It has to be acknowledged that the method of recruitment of the 26 participants generates a bias in favour of those willing to talk. The methodology used in this study (constructivist grounded theory) advocates mutual construction of knowledge, which means that the researchers’ understanding and interpretations may have had some influence on the research process as the researchers are an integral part of the data collection and analysis

Department for Communities and Local Government. Statutory homelessness: October to December quarter 2015, in 26 homelessness statistical release 2016. London: Stationery Office; 2015.

Google Scholar  

HM Government. Homelessness act 2002. London: UK Government; 2002.

HM Government. Homelessness reduction act 2017. London: UK government; 2017.

MH Government. Housing (Homeless Persons) act 1977. London: UK Government; 1977.

Department for Communities and Local Government. Statutory homelessness: October to December quarter 2015, in 26 homelessness statistical release 2016. London: Stationery Office; 2016.

Christian J, Abrams D, Clapham D, Nayyar D, Cotler J. Intentions to move from homelessness to social inclusion: the role of participation beliefs, attitudes and prior behaviour. Soc Incl. 2016;4643(4):16–27.

Article   Google Scholar  

Deforge BR, Belcher J, O’rourke M, Lindsey MA. Personal resources and homelessness in early life: predictors of depression in consumers of homeless multiservice centres. J Loss Trauma. 2008;13:222–42.

Barman-Adhikari A, Petering R, Lengnick-Hall R, Rice E, Rhoades H, McCune S. Social context of service use among homeless youth in Los Angeles, California. J Soc Serv Res. 2016;42(4):501–15.

Barman-Adhikari A, Bowen E, Bender K, Brown S, Rice E. A social capital approach to identifying correlates of perceived social support among homeless youth. Child Youth Care Forum. 2016;45(5):691–708.

Keane CA, Magee CA, Kelly PJ. Is there a complex trauma experience typology for Australians experiencing extreme social disadvantage and low housing stability? Child Abuse Negl. 2016;61:43–54.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Department for Communities and Local Government. The English indices of deprivation 2015. London: Stationery Office; 2016.

Patterson ML, Moniruzzaman A, Somers JM. History of foster care among homeless adults with mental illness in Vancouver, British Columbia: a precursor to trajectories of risk. BMC Psychiatry. 2015;15(1):32.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Fry C, Langley K, Shelton K. A systematic review of cognitive functioning among young people who have experienced homelessness, foster care and of poverty. Child Neuropsychol. 2016; doi.10.1080/09297049.2016.1207758 .

Reeve K. Welfare conditionality, benefit sanctions and homelessness in the UK: ending the ‘something for nothing culture’ or punishing the poor? J Poverty Soc Justice. 2017;25(1):65–78.

Somers J, Patterson M, Moniruzzaman A, Currie L, Rezansoff S, Palepu A. Vancouver at home: pragmatic randomized trials investigating housing first for homeless and mentally ill adults. Trials. 2013. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-14-365 .

Watson J, Crawley J, Kane D. Social exclusion, health and hidden homelessness. Public Health. 2016;139:96–102.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Roos LE, Distasio J, Bolton S-L, Katz LY, Afifi TO, Isaak C, Goering P, Bruce L, Sareen J. A history in-care predicts unique characteristics in a homeless population with mental illness. Child Abuse Negl. 2014;38(10):1618–27.

Anderson I, Christian J. Causes of homelessness in the UK: a dynamic analysis. J Community Appl Soc Psychol. 2003;13:105–18.

Anderson I. Synthesizing homelessness research: trends, lessons and prospects. J Community Appl Soc Psychol. 2003;13:197–205.

Tsai J, Edens EL, Rosenheck RA. A typology of childhood problems among chronically homeless adults and its association with housing and clinical outcomes. J Health Care Poor Underserved. 2011;22(3):853–70.

Haskett ME, Armstrong MJ, Tinsdale J. Developmental status and social-emotional functioning of young children experiencing homelessness. Early Childhood Educ J. 2016;44:119–25.

Charmaz K. Constructing grounded theory: a practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: SAGE Publications; 2006.

Glaser BG. Remodelling grounded theory. Hist Soc Res. 2007;Supplement 19:47–68.

Corbin J, Strauss A. Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Los Angeles: Sage Publications; 2008.

Book   Google Scholar  

Economic and Social Research Council: The research ethics guidebook a resource for social scientists. 2017. http://www.ethicsguidebook.ac.uk/ . Accessed 6 June 2017.

HM Government: Mental capacity act 2005.2005. http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2005/9/pdfs/ukpga_20050009_en.pdf . Accessed 5 June 2017.

Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. 2nd ed. London: Sage Publication; 1998.

Mabhala M. Public health nurse educators’ conceptualisation of public health as a strategy to reduce health inequalities: a qualitative study. Int J Equity Health. 2015;14:14.

Mabhala MA, Massey A, Ellahi B, Kingston P. Understanding the determinants of homelessness through examining the life stories of homeless people and those who work with them: a qualitative research protocol. Diversity Equality Health Care. 2016;13(4):284–9.

Mabhala M. Social justice and global perspectives on health improvement in health improvement and wellbeing strategies and actions. Maidenhead: McGrow Hill and Open University Press; 2014.

Mabhala MA. Health inequalities as a foundation for embodying knowledge within public health teaching: a qualitative study. Int J Equity Health. 2013;12:46.

North CS, Eyrich-Garg KM, Pollio DE, Thirthalli J. A prospective study of substance use and housing stability in a homeless population. Soc Psychiatric Epidemiol. 2010;45:1055–62.

Kushel M, Vittinghoff E, Haas J. Factors associated with the health care utilization of homeless persons. J Am Med Assoc. 2001;285:200–6.

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Orwin RG, Scott CK, Arieira C. Transitions through homelessness and factors that predict them: three-year treatment outcomes. J Subst Abus Treat. 2005;28:S23–39.

Grinman MN, Chiu S, Redelmeier DA, Levinson W, Kiss A, Tolomiczenko G, Cowan L, Hwang SW. Drug problems among homeless individuals in Toronto, Canada: prevalence, drugs of choice, and relation to health status. BMC Public Health. 2010;10:94.

Linton SL, Celentano DD, Kirk GD, Mehta SH. The longitudinal association between homelessness, injection drug use, and injection-related risk behaviour among persons with a history of injection drug use in Baltimore, MD. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2013;132:457–65.

Crawley J, Kane D, Atkinson-Plato L, Hamilton M, Dobson K, Watson J. Needs of the hidden homeless – no longer hidden: a pilot study. Public Health. 2013;27(7): 674–80.

Office of the Deputy Prime Minister: Housing, planning, and local government and the regions committee: homelessness: third report of session 2004–05. 2005. https://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200405/cmselect/cmodpm/61/61i.pdf . Accessed 24 Oct 2016.

Williams K, Poyser J, Hopkins K. Accommodation, homelessness and reoffending of prisoners: results from the surveying prisoner crime reduction (SPCR) survey. London: Ministry of Justice; 2012.

Kennedy S. It should not be a pit stop: voices and perspectives of homeless youth on labeling and placement in special education. J Ment Health Res Intellect Disabil. 2017;10:1–19.

Lugo MA. Oxford Poverty & Human Development Initiative (OPHI): employment, in Oxford Poverty & Human Development Initiative (OPHI). Oxford: Oxford University; 2007.

Shinn M. Homelessness, poverty and social exclusion in the United States and Europe. Eur J Homelessness. 2010;4:19–43.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank all participants in this study; without their contribution it would not have been possible to undertake the research. The authors acknowledge the contribution of Professor Paul Kingston and Professor Basma Ellahi at the proposal stage of this project. A very special thanks to Robert Whitehall, John and all the staff at the centres for homeless people for their help in creating a conducive environment for this study to take place; and to Roger Whiteley for editorial support. A very special gratitude goes to the reviewers of this paper, who will have expended considerable effort on our behalf. 

This research was funded by quality-related research (QR) funding allocation for the University of Chester.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are not publicly available due to ethical restriction and privacy of participant data but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Health and Social Care, Department of Public Health and Wellbeing, University of Chester, Riverside Campus, Chester, CH1 1SL, UK

Mzwandile A. Mabhala & Mariska Griffith

Mount Sinai, Department of Surgery, Ambulatory Surgery Centre, 5 East 98th Street, 14th Floor, Box 1259, New York, NY, 10029-6574, USA

Asmait Yohannes

Department of Public health and Wellbeing, University of Chester, Riverside Campus, Chester, CH1 1SF, UK

Mzwandile A. Mabhala

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

MM wrote the entire manuscript, designed the study, collected data, analysed and interpreted data, and presented the findings. AY contributed to transcribing data and manuscript editing. MG contributed to data collection, and transcribed the majority of data. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mzwandile A. Mabhala .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Ethical approval to conduct the study was provided by the Faculty of Health and Social Care Research Ethics Subcommittee of the University of Chester.

Consent for publication

All participants have given consent to publish.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Mabhala, M.A., Yohannes, A. & Griffith, M. Social conditions of becoming homelessness: qualitative analysis of life stories of homeless peoples. Int J Equity Health 16 , 150 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-017-0646-3

Download citation

Received : 24 March 2017

Accepted : 10 August 2017

Published : 22 August 2017

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-017-0646-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Homeless People
• Poor Educational Attainment
• Public Health Phenomenon
• Permanent Accommodation
• Behavioral Causes

International Journal for Equity in Health

ISSN: 1475-9276

• General enquiries: [email protected]

Social sciences in crisis: on the proposed elimination of the discussion section

• Original Research
• Open access
• Published: 09 August 2023
• Volume 202 , article number  54 , ( 2023 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Philipp Schoenegger   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9930-487X 1   na1 &
• Raimund Pils 2   na1  

4759 Accesses

48 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

The social sciences are facing numerous crises including those related to replication, theory, and applicability. We highlight that these crises imply epistemic malfunctions and affect science communication negatively. Several potential solutions have already been proposed, ranging from statistical improvements to changes in norms of scientific conduct. In this paper, we propose a structural solution: the elimination of the discussion section from social science research papers. We point out that discussion sections allow for an inappropriate narrativization of research that disguises actual results and enables the misstatement of true limitations. We go on to claim that removing this section and outsourcing it to other publications provides several epistemic advantages such as a division of academic labour, adversarial modes of progress, and a better alignment of the personal aims of scientists with the aims of science. After responding to several objections, we conclude that the potential benefits of moving away from the traditional model of academic papers outweigh the costs and have the potential to play a part in addressing the crises in the social sciences alongside other reforms. As such, we take our paper as proffering a further potential solution that should be applied complimentarily with other reform movements such as Open Science and hope that our paper can start a debate on this or similar proposals.

Similar content being viewed by others

Salami Slicing: clarifying common misconceptions for social science early-career researchers

Obeying authority: should we trust them or not.

Where Are the Social Sciences Going to? The Case of the EU-Funded SSH Research Projects

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

Social sciences are currently facing several interrelated crises, such as the replication crisis, the theory crisis, the applicability crisis, the generalizability crisis, and the validity crisis. These crises potentially threaten numerous aspects of the social scientific programme and the public perception of social science (Benessia et al., 2016 ; Hendriks et al., 2016 ). To this date, numerous potential solutions have already been proposed, ranging from changes in scientific norms to statistical training. Our focus is to present an additional, as-of-yet unrecognized potential solution, namely directly reworking the structure of academic papers. Specifically, we propose eliminating the discussion section from research papers. Our central claim is that eliminating discussion sections might improve the social science primarily because authors will have less opportunities for presenting their research in a biased way, leading to adverse downstream effects. We argue that removing the discussion section from papers and instead outsourcing it to independent discussion papers might eliminate many of the cognitive biases that make the discussion section problematic while not presenting substantial new costs. We further claim that this proposal can draw on several additional upsides, such as benefiting from the division of labour and from an adversarial mode of scientific progress. We see this proposal as working alongside, and not replacing, other reform efforts, and hope that the present paper kickstarts a debate on the merits and costs of the current structure of academic articles.

This paper is structured as follows. In Sect. 2 we briefly introduce the crises facing the social sciences and discuss current solutions. In Sect. 3 we show why these crises matter for social science and society more generally and how this points towards two distinct challenges. In Sect. 4 we develop our proposed solution of eliminating the discussion section and defend it against objections.

2 Social science in crisis

In this section we give a short upshot of the so-called ‘crises’ facing the social sciences. We focus on three central ones: the replication crisis, the theory crisis, and the applicability crisis; though what we say also applies to several others, such as the theory crisis and the validity crisis. Furthermore, our paper does not aim to address fraud per se, we are focused on less severe but still essential issues that arise in academic conduct.

Issues related to the replication crisis have been investigated thoroughly by social scientists, metascientists, and philosophers (e.g., Anvari and Lakens, 2018 ; Fletcher, 2021 ; Flis, 2019 ; Lilienfeld and Strother, 2020 ; Wiggins & Christopherson 2019 ). This debate was kickstarted in response to a replication failure of social priming findings (e.g., Bargh et al., 1996 ), which triggered several large-scale collaborative replication attempts. For example, the Many Labs Replication Project found only roughly 36% (Klein et al., 2014 ) and 54% (Klein et al., 2018 ) of studies to replicate respectively—leading to the proclamation of a ‘replication crisis’. Footnote 1

Another crisis that has been identified is the ‘theory crisis’, that various social sciences face a “lack of a cumulative theoretical framework” (Muthukrishna & Henrich, 2019 , p. 221) and that theories not just methods have shaky foundations leading to failure of generalisation and replicability more broadly (Eronen and Bringmann, 2021 ; Fiedler, 2017 ; cf. Fried, 2020 ; Maatman, 2021 , Others have proclaimed an ‘applicability crisis’, which is motivated by the claim that scientific findings are not as readily applicable as the scientific literature suggests. For example, when findings from the ‘nudge’ literature have been applied in large-scale contexts, they often failed to replicate or replicated only at a substantially reduced effect size (see e.g., Della Vigna & Linos, 2020 ). Based on these findings, some have argued that the social sciences as a whole are not (yet) in a position to give confident actionable advice and are thus in an applicability crisis. Footnote 2

Several underlying causes of and potential solutions to these crises have been identified. One such cause is publication bias (Renkewitz & Keiner, 2019 ), that statistically significant results are the deciding factor for publication (Franco, Malhotra, & Simonovits, 2014 ). A further cause is the prevalence of questionable research practices, or QRPs (Fiedler & Schwarz, 2016 ), which are scientifically misguided but socially acceptable practices that compromise the integrity of scientific conduct. Other causes are selective analysis of some variables, dropping of experimental conditions, additional data collection after data analysis, warped incentives, and bad statistical (Gigerenzer, 2018 ) or measurement training (Lilienfeld & Stroher 2020 ).

Several potential solutions have been proposed under the banner of ‘Open Science’. For instance, some have argued that preregistration can provide a strong counterbalancing force by making QRP’s harder to execute and thus forcing researchers to adhere to pre-stated statistical analyses (Nosek et al., 2018 ). Others have proposed a new submission format of ‘registered reports’, in which only the hypotheses and the design of the study are subjected to peer-review and, if accepted for publication, result in a guaranteed publication irrespective of the findings. This solution has already been adopted by several journals (e.g., Chambers, 2013 ; Eder & Frings, 2021 ; Hardwicke & Ioannidis, 2018 ; Keil et al.,  2020 ). Others have suggested better statistical education and reform in social science departments to remedy the statistical and methodological causes of the crises (e.g., Gigerenzer, 2018 ; Lakens, 2019 ).

In this paper, we want to draw attention to another potential partial cause of these interlinking crises and propose a solution to it that has not yet been picked up. Specifically, we argue that the structure of academic papers contributes significantly to the current situation of the social sciences, and that eliminating the discussion section promises to substantially contribute towards allaying at least some of these problems. Importantly, we see this solution as working in tandem with the other science reform efforts. Furthermore, we do not claim that our proposal is without drawbacks, and we offer a comparative argument by showing that its benefits outweigh its costs, and that it might meaningfully contribute to reforming social science. Before we move on to our discussion of this proposal in Sect. 4 , we want to state the importance of this project and focus on two central challenges facing social science research in Sect. 3 which then will be addressed by our suggested reform.

3 Why this crisis matters?

The first aim of this section is to outline the scientific and societal consequences of these crisis. Our ultimate aim is to set up two challenges for conducting social science research in the current social structure of publication and public communication. We divide this section into (Sect. 3.1 ) concerns about public communication and trust in science and (Sect. 3.2 ) concerns about achieving the epistemic aims of science, specifically concerning the incentive structure of social science research.

3.1 Science communication: trust in social sciences

In analysing why these crises matter, we are focusing first on effective science communication and public trust. Trust in science matters because, as Wilholt ( 2013 ) states, “[p]olicy-makers, legislators, investors, and activists, as well as ‘ordinary people’ in their capacities as citizens or consumers frequently rely on the results of science, trusting […] these will help them make well-informed decisions” (Wilholt, 2013 , p. 234). One should differentiate science-to-science communication from science communication to the general lay public. Footnote 3

We want to start with the latter. Especially the replication crisis has directly entered the public discourse, including ample media coverage Footnote 4 . As Fetterman and Sassenberg ( 2015 ) contend, the replication crisis is bound to have negative reputational effects on science. Recently Hendriks et al. ( 2020 ) showed that study credibility and researcher trustworthiness increase significantly if a study was successfully replicated and decreases otherwise (cf. also Mede et al., 2020 ). Wingen, Berkessel & Englich ( 2019 ) showed that low replicability specifically reduces trust in psychology. As such, the replication crisis already directly impacts science communication and consequently becomes important for scientific testimony (Gerken, 2015 , 2020 ). This is because, as Whyte and Crease ( 2010 ) argue, one important project for a philosophy of science is to “facilitate trust between scientific experts and ordinary citizens” (cf. also Irzik and Kurtulmus, 2019 ; Whyte & Crease, 2010 , p. 411) This project seems especially relevant against the background of wide-spread denial of various scientific findings. Footnote 5 However, the crises directly indicate that some of the present public distrust might be warranted, making public communication increasingly challenging by making differentiation of the levels of credibility of findings difficult. Thus, the crises impose a serious challenge to science communication as not to lose public trust in science overall, which would by itself lead to further negative outcomes such as a failure to comply with public health messaging.

Second, this problem of trust reaches beyond public science communication. It likewise concerns science-to-science communication, and as such directly impacts epistemic matters. As Romero ( 2019 ) argues, a social science in crisis can lead interdisciplinary research astray, which is especially troublesome for philosophy, since “empirically informed philosophers, and specifically moral psychologists, have relied heavily on findings from social psychology. They also need to clean up their act” (Romero, 2019 , p. 7).

A further area in which the crises discussed here impact science-to-science communication is within scientific collaborations. There are good reasons to think that in many scientific disciplines trust can be more epistemically basic than empirical evidence, indicating that decreasing trust could undermine scientific knowledge production, going against the very epistemic aims of science (cf. Hardwig, 1991 ). Specifically, in an age of ‘Team Science’ (Ledford, 2015 ), scientific research largely relies on collaborations, which in turn depend on trust in the scientific community. This is because individual researchers in a collaborative project often have only partial information and expertise in a specific area, making trust a crucial element for successful collaboration (Bird, 2010 ; Fricker, 2002 ; Gerken, 2015 ). As such, it has been argued (De Ridder, 2022 ) that the erosion of trust due to events such as the replication crisis and the discovery of a widespread use of questionable research practices, might cause an can impede effective collaborations within scientific teams, ultimately hindering the production of scientific knowledge.

3.2 Achieving the epistemic aims of science

The epistemic aims of science have been a topic of ongoing debate; the most prominent proposals include truth (Khalifa, 2022 ), knowledge (Williamson, 2002 ), and understanding (De Regt, 2017 ). Footnote 6 Some claim that the aim is objectivity or proclaim a value-free ideal of science. But even if such ideals are too ambitious, as Haack ( 2003 ) argues, explicitly and systematically aiming at reducing the biases of the individuals involved in knowledge producing processes is one of the main constitutive features of science. The consensus is that, at least in the long run, science should be error-correcting (cf. Laudan, 1981 ; Mayo, 2005 ; Peirce, 1958 ).

The aforementioned crises point towards a concerning epistemic defect in our scientific methodology and as such to an obstruction in achieving the epistemic goals of science. We argue that one major factor for at least partially improving the state of social sciences comes from resolving a specific tension between the epistemic aims of science and the non-epistemic goals of individual scientists. We ultimately argue that the current structure of academic research papers is such that those aims are misaligned and that such a misalignment contributes at least in part to the crises facing the social sciences. We go on to claim that our proposed solution can, in tandem with other reforms, contribute to solving this structural problem. In what follows, we present the problem of misalignment in order to properly set up the remainder of the paper.

Already in the 1960s, Polanyi ( 1962 ) argued that scientific cooperation emerges to a large extent as an unintended consequence of the social structure of science. This idea became especially prominent in the sociology of science (Barnes & Bloor, 1996 ), building on the thesis that the social features of science emerge from self-interested actions of individual scientists. This bottom-up process of explaining scientific norms was picked up by various philosophers of science, such as Kitcher ( 1990 ) and Strevens ( 2011 ) in what was termed the economics of science (cf. also Stephan, 2012 ). The central claim is that it is beneficial for promoting the aims of science if the aims of individual scientists align with the epistemic aims of science, while a misalignment can cause epistemic malfunctions of various types and severities.

The most straightforward way to achieve alignment is by having individual scientists engage in their research practices for reasons that align with the epistemic aims of science anyway—scientists might conduct research because they themselves want to get at the truth (i.e., the epistemic aim of science). However, scientists are also (and sometimes primarily) motivated by non-epistemic aims, such as advancing their career, getting recognition, or receiving grants. We can call such personal non-epistemic aims credit (Boettke & O’Donnell, 2016 , p. 11; Zollman, 2018 ).

In publishing, credit seems to be at least one primary aim. Today, high publishing frequency in high-ranking journals is the main currency of success on the academic job market and in the grant system across disciplines. Still, the same publishing practices that give scientists credit might after all align with the aims of science. For instance, if publishing credit is a reliable indicator for scientific performance and having higher performing scientists on higher positions is on average epistemically advantageous for the scientific enterprise, then the career goals of individual scientists and the aims of science align. That such an alignment is important for the emergence of successful scientific norms and is indeed very frequently in place, is one of the main arguments of both Kitcher ( 1990 ) and Strevens ( 2011 ).

However, there are numerous reasons to think that this alignment might not be as straightforward as sometimes assumed. We argue that the crises discussed above point towards a tension between the aims of science and the credit aim of scientists. Others, who recognize a similar conflict, such as Hackett ( 2005 ) and Sovacool ( 2008 ), argue that publishing practices overemphasize novelty. Heesen ( 2018 ) argues that the credit system in science publishing incentivises speed and impact at the cost of reproducibility, pointing directly to a connection with the replication crisis. Fidler and Wilcox ( 2018 , Sect. 4.5) suggest in accord with Vazire ( 2018 , p. 416) that the aim of protecting one’s own professional reputation often motivates resistance to the self-correcting nature of replication (cf. also Fetterman and Sassenberg, 2015 ). Plausibly, science has already developed strategies to align the non-epistemic aims of scientists with the epistemic aims of science. Footnote 7 This typical alignment strategy consists of [AM] an adversarial mode Footnote 8 of science research and [IS] linking it with the individual incentive structure.

We want to start by explaining AM . Scientists, like all humans, are plagued with blind spots, biases (Pashler & Wagenmakers, 2012 ), prejudices, fall prey to rationalization (Schwitzgebel & Ellis, 2017 ), are fooled by cognitive artefacts (Machery, 2017 ), or are faced with suboptimal incentives (Pashler & Wagenmakers, 2012 ). Thus, it is paramount to put scientific findings under a high level of scrutiny. The general idea is to balance the blind spots of one scientist with the knowledge of another, challenging the biases and prejudices of one scientist by others with different flaws. In general, this is done by scrutinizing the findings one scientist holds dear by others who have no incentives to prefer that particular method or theory. Footnote 9 In this paper, we essentially argue for an extension of the adversarial mode that is already deeply entrenched in science and scientific practice, and which also appears in various foundational theories of scientific methodology. For instance, it underlies very prominently the Popperian philosophy of science (Popper, 1934 Footnote 10 )—especially the idea that we want to try our best to falsify scientific hypothesis under very rigorous conditions. Footnote 11

A prime example for the adversarial mode of science is peer-review. Ideally, in peer-review, papers are put under high scrutiny by anonymous experts in the respective domain and only those papers who survive the most stringent of reviews will be accepted or invited for revision. However, the challenge for the adversarial mode in peer-review and elsewhere is this: Why would anyone ever want to put themselves under such scrutiny, especially if one’s career depends on it? We now want to introduce the second part of the alignment strategy, i.e., linking the adversarial mode with the incentive structure of individual scientists. Consider peer-review again. Today, it usually brings with it much higher reputation to publish peer-reviewed than non-peer reviewed articles (Csiszar, 2016 ), and it typically brings with it a substantially higher reputation to publish in journal with very stringent standards than with moderate standards. Footnote 12 This can be inferred from the fact that, nowadays, almost all current high-ranking journals list their (high) rejection-rate as a quality criterion which shows a perceived link between an adversarial mode and quality. On this basis, some countries have official rankings of journals which are drawn upon in hiring and promotion circumstances, as is the case in Finland where the Publication Forum classification system explicitly ranks journals. Footnote 13 As such, researchers who put their work under stronger adversarial scrutiny and succeed obtain more credit, and thus the self-interested scientists’ career-goal and the epistemic aims of science align (at least, if the system works as intended).

This concludes our discussion of how the alignment strategy should work in practice. In this section, we argued that the epistemic aims of science rely on bias reduction and self-correction—features deeply associated with study replication. The sociological analysis of the incentive structure of science suggests that epistemic achievements of science can be diminished if the self-interested career-goal of scientists and the epistemic aims of science are misaligned. In this context, we presented a typical alignment strategy consisting in an adversarial mode of science research and linking it to the individual incentive structure. In the next section, we show how the current structure of scientific papers works against the presented alignment strategy, how this results in contributing to the crises of social science, and how this problem might be resolved in an as of yet unexplored way.

4 A further cause and a proposed solution: the elimination of the discussion section

In this section, we first (Sect. 4.1 ) identify an unexplored potential contributor to the interlocking crises facing social science: the structure of academic articles. We claim that the way researchers (are expected to) structure their research articles might set them up to engage in behaviours that feed into the crises and exacerbate other epistemic defects: Solving this necessitates structural changes. In Sect. 4.2 , we then go on to propose a potential structural solution to this cause and argue that research in the social sciences might benefit from an elimination of the discussion section in papers. Arguing based on the alignments strategy as discussed in Sect. 3 , we claim that this holds primarily because it reduces biases and possibilities to portray one’s own research in a favourable but incorrect light, and further sets up an incentive structure for researchers to critically examine research of others via the novel proposed vehicle of a discussion paper, both of which jointly promise to contribute towards addressing the state of crisis the social sciences find themselves in. In Sect. 4.3 , we discuss potential objections to this project and conclude with a summary of the costs and benefits of this approach.

4.1 The epistemic faults of a discussion section

Academic articles in the (social) sciences have roughly four main sections in addition to an abstract and a conclusion: (i) introduction and literature, (ii) methods, (iii) results, and (iv) discussion. The introduction sets up a problem, motivates the hypotheses, and contextualises the research. The methods section states the procedures, the sample selection process, and all further design implementation steps. The results section summarises all results and reports them in tables, graphs, and written form as well as though additional numerical in-text descriptions. In the discussion section, the results are put into context and conjectures as to the generalisability, limitations, and applicability of the findings are laid out (Bazerman, 2004 , pp. 207–208). Specifically, it is in the discussion section that researchers provide verbal interpretations of their data by summarising the main findings and drawing attention to what they take to be the central take-away. They then frequently state limitations of both statistical and methodological nature and provide caveats to both these limitations and the findings presented in the paper. Depending on the discipline, this is followed by a rough outline for the practical applications of these findings by individuals, governments, or institutions.

The focus of our proposal is the discussion section. Historically, the discussion section in this modern form has been a consistent and recognisable part of academic papers for around 100 years. Atkinson shows that while historically, experimental papers during the 17th and early 18th century were largely “unelaborated, miscellaneously organized, and relatively narrative in character” (Atkinson, 1998 , xxiv), by 1775, some predecessors to a discussion section were already present in recognisably similar form. By the 19th century, the rough structure of a theoretical part followed by the experiment followed by a discussion was relatively common, and by 1925 it had become “the standard” it is now (Atkinson 1998 , 70; cf. also Bazerman, 1985 ).

We claim that this structure of academic articles carries with it several epistemic flaws that have prohibited science from functioning as well as it otherwise might have. Further, we argue that this structure may also have directly and indirectly contributed to the set of crises. Specifically, we claim that discussion sections directly foster behaviours that rest upon epistemically dubious grounds, such as enabling researchers to set the narrative of their results, allowing them to put the focus on certain results, and enabling them to self-report the limitations they see in their own design. These behaviours all fall prey to cognitive biases such as the choice-supportive bias, post-hoc rationalization, ostrich effect, bias blind spot, or the hindsight bias. Additionally, this system is perhaps best characterised as consisting of several perverse incentive structures. As such, researchers are less likely to honestly report the data, their resultant true implications, and the applicable methodological drawbacks. This current situation runs contrary to the alignment strategy as presented in (II), since for these behaviours to be in accord with the epistemic aims of science, all researchers would have to be immune to these biases of various types and would further have to exhibit an unreasonably high degree of selflessness. This, we claim, is unlikely. Footnote 14

Let us discuss those shortcomings one by one. First, in the discussion section, researchers can put into focus easy-to-explain data that fit their narrative while dropping entirely the data that do not fit or that are even counter to the proposed narrative. This behaviour is often a clear ethical violation of research conduct (cf. Greenwald, 1975 ). However, it is yet incentivized by standard publishing practices that reward presenting to the editor and reviewers a paper with a clear narrative that neatly fits all the data rather than a paper where the overall story is less clean but closer to the actual results. Doing the latter reduces the prima facie chances of publication: This is why researchers often use the discussion section to draw attention to the data that do fit their narrative and the hypotheses reported, while sweeping those parts that would make the paper less convincing under the rug (or into the appendix, which is sometimes located online behind several steps to ensure that it cannot be easily accessed, if at all). This is a clear misalignment of individual self-interested incentives and the aims of science. It results in a net negative impacting on science as it is, through directly promoting selective reporting. It also negatively impacts science communication more generally as discussion sections fail to be accurate representations and explanations of the data collected.

One might object that this is only a minor problem since scientists are aware that the discussion section is bound to epistemic defects. It is probably true that an increasing number of scientists are becoming aware of the issue, however, not all readers in the academic sciences possess the requisite level of proficiency to assess the specialized data, and this is especially difficult for science reporters and in collaborative and interdisciplinary research. Generally, even for scientists who are well aware of the potential for bias in discussion sections, it can pose major difficulties to separate out the true findings from the noise, particularly if the discussion section is very persuasive or engaging. Therefore, switching to a less biased system is preferable to relying on the awareness of the readers.

Second, researchers are also asked to state the limitations of their research design in the discussion section. This, while on the face useful as the authors are plausibly best positioned to identify where the weaknesses of their research design are and which corners have been cut, is equally problematic because this again leaves it up to the discretion of the researchers themselves to point out limitations. One need not come up with far-fetched scenarios to imagine researchers downplaying the trade-offs that they had to take in their experimental design and the resultant limitations of the results. On top of that, these sections are also often accompanied by a short explanation for why these limitations do not fully apply to the design reported and why they ought not be taken as too impeding (to both the publishability of the research and the widespread adoption of the finding). Researchers may then be more likely to not honestly state the full extent of the limitations, either because they themselves are suffering from cognitive biases that make it hard to see their work in an objective light, or, more likely, because they have incentives not to do so as they seek publication as well as public praise and recognition. Though this practice can sometimes be rectified by the peer-review system through its adversarial element, we claim that often, researchers understate the limitations of their own research to the detriment of science and public trust more generally in a way that is hard to evaluate from a sporadic peer reviewer’s perspective. Moreover, this problem is made worse by university press offices, that often continually overstate the findings reported and discussed in discussion section to an even greater extent than the authors themselves, making the problem even worse by extending it directly into the science-to-public communication front.

To combat these shortcomings of the discussion section, there are guidelines from journals and professional societies that outline best practices for what goes into a discussion section and how to properly engage with one’s own data. The concern is, however, how to incentivize researchers to follow such guidelines and to effectively self-police. Both worries discussed above have in common that for science to function properly, researchers would have to act against their career-guiding publishing aims by honestly discussing non-conforming data and by openly stating the true limitations of the design, making it increasingly unlikely that this is indeed happening at a large scale. As such, it runs contrary to our proposed alignment strategy - missing the adversarial pillar. Changing dishonest or biased behaviour is unlikely to come about without addressing the underlying defective misalignments of individual self-interested aims and the aims of science and cannot as such be laid at the feet of individual researcher’s responsibility, but rather must be solved systemically and in tandem with existing reform efforts.

4.2 Removing the discussion section

These shortcomings have not gone undetected (e.g., Barbour, 2015 ; Edwards and Roy, 2017 ). However, we proffer a novel solution: the wholesale elimination of the discussion section from academic papers. This brings with it not only a (partial) redress of the original problems outlined in Sect. 4.1 , but might also lead to various additional theoretical and practical upsides that themselves impact the final cost-benefit analysis of this proposal. We see this structural change as working alongside other science reform efforts and not as a standalone solution; in fact, it may lack much of its potential benefits if other aspects of the scientific process are not improved upon. To begin with, let us consider how eliminating the discussion section might promise to address the outlined challenges.

First, removing the discussion section directly addresses the problems of researcher incentives in relation to the discussion of non-confirming data and serious limitations as there is simply no more discussion section to do this in. In our model, research articles introduce a problem, state their (preferably pre-registered) hypotheses clearly (Introduction), present the design (Methods), and report their (preferable analysis-plan based) findings (Results). In such a model, researchers are no longer able to selectively discuss their data or limitations in the discussion section, and it would be significantly more difficult to have these sentiments appear in other sections of the paper. Interacting with other approaches and solutions, such as pre-registration or analysis plans, researchers would be further incentivized to outline all their data as stated in the pre-registration/registered report. Without having a place in each research paper in which researchers are heavily incentivized to misrepresent their contributions, understate their limitations, and overplay their practical importance, there is significant reason to believe that the misalignment is, at least to a significant extent reduced. We argue that doing so will not only be better for science but might also be preferred by researchers as they are then able to conduct their scientific work more straightforwardly, with less of an incentive to oversell their results, thus reducing inner personal conflicts where present. Note that this move is more akin to reducing the opportunities to do harm and thus indirectly reducing the incentives.

That being said, any structural changes of this magnitude will have unforeseeable consequences. One risk might be that researchers, no longer being able to frame their results as they please in their discussion sections, will simply move to misstating their data. While we cannot rule this out, our argument for this proposal does state that it can only be expected to have substantial positive impacts if it is implemented in conjunction with other reforms like pre-registered analysis plans. Due to the fact that Open Science initiatives, such as pre-registered analysis, specifically target questionable research practices related to statistical analysis within the data section, it is a much more difficult task to shift bias towards this section than expressing the bias in the discussion section. While researchers may resort to extreme measures such as manipulating the data itself, if they are willing to go to such lengths, it is unlikely that they are not already doing so within the current system. As such, while there is a potential that researchers move their bias from the discussion section to the data section, we at least can be confident in the minimal claim that without the discussion section, the misalignment will be reduced (though is unlikely to be eliminated).

Additionally, we claim that most of the upside of our proposal will be cashed out by our second proposal of a novel type of academic article as a replacement of the discussion sections: a discussion paper. Footnote 15 Discussion papers are papers designed to discuss one or more original research articles (or the data presented within them). They are aimed at contextualising the findings, outline future research questions, and analyse limitations that allow careful interpretation of the results and appropriate practical guidance. Contrary to the current format, where only researchers themselves write the discussion section, discussion papers can be written by a different set of researchers (that may or may not include the authors of the paper reporting the data), thus directly drawing on the better epistemic ability of researchers to evaluate others’ work in an unbiased way. Specifically, having discussion papers written by somebody other than the researchers has the epistemic upsides of resulting in (i) personal bias reduction, (ii) a utilisation of the division of academic labour (potentially across disciplinary boundaries), (iii) an introduction of novel incentives in line with the adversarial mode of scientific research, and (iv) an improvement of science communication downstream. Footnote 16 Let us tackle those upsides in turn.

(i) Outsourcing the discussion section to papers not written by the authors of the original papers plausibly reduces personal biases across the board by using our proposed alignment strategy. This is because the authors of the discussion section do not share the same incentive structure and personal involvement with the original research. They are in a less biased position to evaluate how the data fit into the bigger picture and what the actual limitations are. Outsourcing the discussion section thus allays some of those worries and promises an incentive structure that is less likely to coincide with cognitive biases to produce subpar scientific results. In simple terms, it helps the scientists align their personal incentives with the goals of science. This is plausibly even the case when the authors of the discussion section are the authors of the original empirical work since the publication of their data no longer depends on their framing of them in the discussion section, at least partially reducing the personal biases in play.

There is a potential risk that separating the discussion section from the main article may amplify the problems associated with an integrated discussion section. It might be argued that authors now have more incentive to make the discussion paper attention-grabbing, leading to a misalignment of personal aims and the epistemic aims of science. However, we believe that the peer-review process can help mitigate this risk. In the current system, a biased discussion section may receive less scrutiny since the referees have to divide their focus and may prioritize getting research published simply because the data is important even if the quality of the discussion section is subpar. In contrast, in a system with a separate discussion paper, all scrutiny of the referees is focused on the quality of the discussion paper alone. Therefore, while we cannot completely rule out the possibility of a new set of bad incentives, we argue that the peer-review process is now in a better position to ensure the integrity of the discussion paper.(ii) Splitting off the discussion section from the primary data papers also allows academic research to directly harness the fruits of the division of labour in a majority of cases. Specifically, our proposal might result in an altered research landscape where those who are especially apt at designing and conducting studies do so, while those with a more generalist skill set synthesise several such results into discussion papers, perhaps along an experimentalist-theorist divide that is already seen in other disciplines. This advantage is especially striking against the backdrop of Cohen’s ( 1990 ) observation that in psychology, researchers frequently misinterpret p-values and Ziliak & McCloskey’s ( 2008 ) contention that empirical researchers generally too often draw wrong conclusions regarding the statistical significance of their results. Dividing the labour between scientists who are specialised in conducting studies and scientists who are specialized in interpretation and synthesis promises an improvement that might help address the crises facing the social sciences while also plausibly boosting scientific productivity. Additionally, this division of labour may even be beneficial across disciplines. For example, consider a philosopher writing up a discussion paper of research on moral judgements in addition to a similar paper being written by a psychologist. Both types of discussion papers would bring a different skill set to bear on the available data which may then allow readers to get a perspective on the data that would otherwise be inaccessible. Additionally, cross-disciplinary division of labour within discussion papers might be especially useful, where authors from different disciplinary backgrounds collaborate on a single discussion paper, drawing on research from several disciplines to allow for a more balanced and holistic picture of scientific research in a given area of study. This, so we argue, would greatly improve scientific progress within, but also between disciplines.

We take our proposal to improve upon the incentive structure to better align the credit incentives and the epistemic aims of science. This contrasts with the previous model in which authors were incentivised to portray their studies as without serious limitations and as providing actionable recommendations for policy makers. The revised model improves this by reducing perverse incentives, leaving authors with less reason and less opportunities to act contra the aims of science, at least concerning interpretation, limitations, and applications of the research. Further, having an adversarial relationship between those writing the discussion papers and those writing the data focused papers does not only eliminate or reduce the worry of bias and perverse incentives, it also independently improves the epistemic environment of researchers by removing epistemically unfavourable elements that make researchers prone to self-deception (cf. Heyman et al., 2020 ). This then directly interlinks our suggestion with previously proposed solutions to the crises facing the social sciences. Since the peer-review process will be focused entirely on the design and results for research papers and entirely on the merit of the discussion for discussion papers, this incentivises authors of experimental papers to pre-register their data and make their data sets open accessible, as these practices are now directly conducive to publication success, interlinking this proposal directly with other Open Science reform efforts. Further, the novel discussion papers themselves will have a distinct incentive landscape, in which authors might be more likely to discuss limitations and applications of research more honestly as portraying these data in a good light is at least not central to their success in publishing. 

Finally, this solution promises to improve public communication of scientific findings. Usually, public science reporting draws on the interpretations of scientific studies by making them easier digestible for a general audience. After all, page-long regression tables are often not what can be communicated to the public. However, since the incentive structure of the standard discussion section motivates overstatement and distortion of the empirical findings, these defects get passed on directly to the public. This not only leads to potential misinformation, but if some of those overstatements are recognized, it may also lead to an increase in general mistrust in scientific findings. Since our proposal reduces problematic incentives, and thus promises to decrease overstatement and distortion of findings, it promises to improve public communication of scientific findings as a consequence. Of course, it may be that science journalists will not engage with the discussion papers meaningfully; after all, they are already likely to skip the discussion section. We argue that while this is true, the mere existence of and potential institutional prestige of high-quality discussion papers may also make it more likely to journalists to pick them up and report on them. This may then take less the form of a sensationalist piece on a specific finding, but rather more general summaries of the state of the scientific field. Moreover, these discussion papers will still allow journalists to pick out specific findings that translate well into a headline, but the whole paper itself will arguably be more likely to contribute to a more balanced and nuanced depiction of the science.

Given these advantages of splitting research papers into two parts, this should give academic journals some incentive to switch to such a mode. As argued in (Sect. 3.2 ), an adversarial mode is already valued in current publishing to increase journal reputation. Thus, journal publishers could benefit from seriously considering our proposal to further increase their reputation, making this proposal also plausibly implementable in the short term. Here is what we specifically propose: Journals ought to disallow the use of a discussion section (and its contents) in their primary research articles which would only be consisting of an introduction, a methods section, a results section, and a conclusion. They would then also start to accept manuscripts of ‘discussion papers’. These discussion papers discuss the data of one or multiple primary research papers. Authors of these research papers would then be asked to critically discuss the data by pointing out limitations of the designs, highlighting potential applications, drawing out interesting follow-up opportunities, and synthesising the results in the wider literature. This is markedly different from the current system and a radical change, but one that promises to contribute to improving social science alongside other reform efforts.

4.3 Objections and concluding remarks

We close this section by considering several objections before giving a brief comparative argument of the benefits and costs of our proposal. First, one might argue that the discussion sections themselves are not the fundamental cause of any of these crises. This, so the objector, is because what is truly driving the challenge is the overall incentive structure of science, and as such, the overall incentive structure ought to be identified as the cause and be addressed directly. On this line of reasoning, proposing to eliminate the discussion section would be akin to merely treating a symptom and thus failing to actually address the root cause. While this assessment might be partly correct, its conclusion does not follow. From the claim that the problems with the discussion section ultimately stem from the overall incentive structure facing scientists it does not follow that eliminating the discussion section is misguided. Rather, addressing one aspect of this incentive structure related to the discussion section might go a long way towards affecting the overall structure in reverse.

As a second objection, one may object that the above approach relies on other solutions already being implemented successfully. Specifically, the proposal to publish research papers primarily consisting of methods and results might presuppose that data are being shared openly and freely according to Open Science best practices, as failing to disclose data open and freely merely shifts the problem of individual bias. We agree that eliminating the discussion section alone cannot solve the multitude of crises facing the social sciences and that it will most likely require a multiplicity of different reforms to have an effect. However, we do not see this as a problem as no single solution is capable of fixing the interlinking crises and argue that eliminating the discussion sections can play one part in addressing them.

Third, a downside of outsourcing the discussion section might be that some data of research papers might never be discussed. This can be frustrating for the researchers who published the research paper and want engagement with their findings. We reply that our model does not exclude the authors of the original research paper to also write a discussion paper on their data, though their discussions would then go through a separate peer-review process that would evaluate them solely on their contribution to the discussion (not the data collection). Furthermore, discussion papers are stand-alone publications and as such attach themselves to the already existing incentive structure for writing papers in general (i.e., credit). This encourages researchers to engage with data that is not theirs but it also allows engagement with one’s own data. It is, thus, plausible that we might even see more discussion of the data than we currently do. Moreover, authors of discussion sections have now an incentive to carefully study bulks of research papers, and editors and reviewers will additionally consider which one is worth discussing. This plausibly creates an environment that allocates the resources for discussion writing more efficiently than a system which rigidly limits itself to only one discussion of one research paper by the same researchers.

Fourth, one may object that the significant heterogeneity that is observed between disciplines with respect to replicability, questionable research practices, and the like may suggest that our framing (as well as our proposed solution) may not apply to all social sciences equally. In short, we think that this objection is roughly correct. It is the case that there are differences in replicability and publication of replications (e.g., Berry et al., 2017 ), which is something that forecasts continue to anticipate in the future (Gordon et al., 2020 ). As such, the elimination of discussion sections may have disparate effects across disciplines. However, we do not think that this is indeed an issue for our proposal as we do not think that discussion sections are the underlying cause of all the crises. Rather, as we have argued, we believe that removing discussion sections might have a net positive impact on some of the malaises facing some disciplines.

A fifth objection is that the proposed discussion papers create their own perverse incentives. It could be argued that the authors of the initial research paper would be very well positioned to immediately submit a discussion paper accompanying their first publication, effectively pre-empting further submission. This, so the objection, might lead to an unfair advantage on part of the original authors because they increase their likelihood at publishing more work in the limited journal space. We respond to this objection as follows: First, even if there is such an advantage for the original authors, in our proposed structure there is at least a reasonable chance for authors other than the original researchers to participate in a separate discussion of the data by publishing a discussion paper (perhaps by including additional data from other work). As such, our proposal might retain some perverse incentives, but they are arguably reduced. Second, if the previously sketched epistemic advantages of a division of labour hold, then at least some authors specializing in discussion papers will also have one advantage over the authors of the research papers who are not that specialized. As such, it is implausible that the authors of the original research papers will always be the ones who publish the discussion papers or will always end up the ones with the highest visibility, while it may also be the case that further, more expansive discussion papers discuss the data of any individual research paper, even if that paper’s authors have already published a standalone discussion paper.

A sixth objection is that even if our proposal was implemented, there might be a dearth of potential authors willing to write such a discussion paper. It is unclear, so the objection, what will motivate the work on discussion papers such that the academic credit system will incentivise authors to spend substantial effort towards writing these papers. We respond to this in two ways: First, as we have argued above, it is very likely that the majority of discussion papers will include authors that have authored (some) of the underlying experimental papers, thus providing intrinsic motivation to write them. Second, and more importantly, we think that in situations where authors do not write the discussion papers themselves, career incentives to publish in prestigious journals will most likely provide sufficient incentives for third-party writers to write these papers. We believe that such high-profile venues will exist just by the nature of there being venues that offer discussion papers, and some of these being ranked higher (on whatever metric). Polemically put, we have yet to see an academic system (be it universities, journals, etc.) that academics themselves have not turned into a prestige hierarchy, accompanied by a drive to be on top. We expect that this mechanism will extend to our proposal as well, incentivising the production of high-quality discussion papers. Furthermore, we add the following anecdote: The journal Data is a data-science journal that offers (among other options) two types of submissions: Data Descriptors and Reviews. The former outline and explain a data set, the latter “concise and precise updates on the latest progress made in a given area of research”. While this is not quite our proposal and it is not within the social sciences, we take this example of a proof of concept.

We have now outlined the benefits of our proposal and replied to objections. However, as most policy prescriptions, our proposal is not without potential drawbacks. After having spent significant effort above outlining the potential upsides of our proposal, there are several costs to consider. First, one central cost with our proposal is that we may lose the epistemic advantages of authors discussing their own data in some instances. Particularly, the authors of a study often have unique insights into their data that may not be immediately apparent to third-party researchers. This is especially true for studies that involve complex datasets. By outsourcing the discussion section to third-party authors, we may miss out on important nuances and insights that only the original authors can provide. Furthermore, the original authors may have access to additional data or information that is not included in the published study. This may include preliminary analyses, unpublished data, or insights gained through personal experience or interactions with study participants. Keep, however, in mind the, as we argued, significant epistemic cost associated with the traditional structure of academic papers. Therefore, it is important to weigh the potential costs and benefits of our proposal in a nuanced and comprehensive manner. Note further that this only partly applies since the original authors can still write discussion papers as well. It is expected, however, that on various occasions original authors will never write or be able to publish discussion papers relating to their research paper. In such cases, it is indeed a genuine cost of our proposal that stands in a trade-off with the epistemic advantages of our proposal, which we argue outweigh the costs substantially.

A second potential source of substantial cost that may be associated with our proposal is that implementing such a sweeping change is rife with uncertainties that are extremely difficult to resolve ex ante, and that this may lead to unintended consequences. However, this is a cost associated with most reform efforts, even though we cannot rule out backfire effects of one sort or another. Additionally, even if our proposal is met with acclaim, then it is to be expected that initially only a few journals will pick up on the idea, as has been the case with reforms such as registered reports (Chambers, 2013 ; Hardwicke & Ioannidis, 2018 ; Keil, Gatzke-Kopp, Horvath, Jennings, & Fabiani 2020 ). As such, the whole system is only reformed gradually and potential drawbacks, once properly identified, can be met along the way. Even if the trade-offs stay initially incommensurable, having a diversification of journals between those with our newly proposed structure and other which follow a more traditional publishing structure will over time get us a better outlook on the benefits and costs of our proposal and the current system.

Overall, do the benefits outweigh the costs? Throughout (Sect. 4 ), we have outlined several potential benefits as well as costs associated with our proposal. In short, our proposed structural reform might lead to substantial improvements in bias reduction efforts, better incentives, and scientific integrity overall. However, there are costs to this that have to be weighed against the benefits. such as we might lose the epistemic advantage of authors discussing their own data in some instance. A general risk of such a major reform is that it may lead to a new equilibrium of behaviours that end up having even worse incentive structures building on a whole new set of biases. As we have said before, we cannot be sure that this does not happen. However, we believe that, because we see our proposal as a proposal on top of already existing reform movements, and because any type of adaption will be gradual, that most of the costs may be manageable. Furthermore, if we consider such a maximally pessimistic forecast, we should also consider that the potential maximum value created by this proposal is extremely high, promising widespread improvements across the social sciences.

Lastly, let us return to the original question of the crises the social sciences are facing and the potential progress that elimination of discussion sections may make. We argue that eliminating the discussion section might contribute meaningfully to addressing these crises, though, as pointed out before, much of this has to happen alongside other reform efforts, and any such effort is not without costs. Having removed the discussion section from papers, research norms will have to shift regarding data presentation and availability, potentially in line with Open Science norms. Doing so might directly impact replicability concerns, as authors are now preparing their data sets for discussion papers (if they want their research to be included in future papers), thus aligning their incentives with those that would contribute to combating the replication crisis. Further, dedicated discussion papers would mean authors have no incentive to play up a study’s relation to theory. This will allow readers to be in an epistemically superior position to judge which empirical investigations ought to inform scientific theorising and which fail to meet these standards. This is again a marked improvement over the previous system that might contribute to addressing the theory crisis and by moving social science towards its goal of being a cumulative science in line with Muthukrishna and Henrich ( 2019 , p. 221) who argue that the theory crisis stems from a “lack of a cumulative theoretical framework”. Our proposal would make accumulating several empirical findings and investigating them at once holistically easier, making it more straightforward for further researchers to directly build upon it. Finally, removing the discussion section also removes most of the place in which authors can state the wide applicability of their research that, as argued above, is frequently overstated. Discussion paper authors would face a different set of incentives and would, as such, be more likely to accurately portray how some data could impact public policy or adaption in the private sector, and additionally would also be evaluated separately in peer-review, thus providing a plausible path to combating the applicability crisis. Finally, by combating overstatements of applicability and selective interpretations of findings, this will additionally lead to a more honest public communication of scientific findings, promising to reduce mistrust in science. As such, our proposal, in tandem with other reform efforts, promises to be one important contribution in addressing both concerns of the scientific crises and of science communication. We hope that our paper can start a debate on this (or similar) proposals.

Adjacent fields such as experimental philosophy fared better at around 70% (Cova et al., 2018 ), while an early replication project in economics replicated 61% of studies (Camerer et al., 2016 ). These failures to replicate have been detected in many other domains such as mortality salience (Klein et al., 2019 ), metaphorical priming (Shanks et al., 2013 ), or ego depletion (Hagger et al., 2016 ).

This applicability crisis has especially come to the fore during the COVID-19 pandemic. Social scientists argued that social science research ought to structure the policy response, e.g., concerning behavioural considerations of vaccine uptake (Kowal et al., 2020 ; van Bavel et al., 2020 , p. 460; WHO,  2020 ), while IJzerman concludes, however, that social science is not yet “mature enough” (IJzerman et al. 2020 , p. 1094) to offer advice to policy maker.

For further work on the applicability crisis, see Loyka et al. ( 2020 ) and Dennis ( 2013 ).

And potentially also separate it from science communication to public policy makers since they have their own political aims and frequently some level of expertise that is not expected of a lay audience.

These include: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/19/science/science-research-fraud-reproducibility.html , https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/11/psychologys-replication-crisis-real/576223/ . Veritasium published a YouTube video titled “Is Most Published Research Wrong?” that reached 2.7 million views: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42QuXLucH3Q.

For instance, polling of U.S. adults on climate change shows an outright denial or at least denial of its human cause from somewhere between 32% (Saad, 2017 ) to 52% (Funk & Kennedy, 2016 ) of the population.

Various others, frequently related epistemic aims of science have been proposed, such as explanatory coherence (Lycan, 1988 ), predictive success (Forster, 2002 ; Forster & Sober, 1994 ), rational acceptability (Putnam, 1981 ), agreement/consensus (Kuhn, 1962 ), social-epistemic value (Khalifa, 2010 ) and empirical adequacy (van Fraassen, 1980 ).

A similar idea is present in Strevens ( 2011 , p. 6) who views the alignment of norms and individual motivation as one of the three important dimensions of how the social norms of science and individual interests relate.

A different, complimentary, strategy which we will not address here is independent confirmation . As Hacking ( 1983 ) points out, independent confirmation is one of the main contributors in differentiating valid results from mere artefacts of the testing apparatus or testing methodology.

Some philosophers (cf. Moulton, 1993 ) argue that an adversarial discussion style might create a hostile environment. Note, however, that the focus of such arguments is usually on the discussion-style in research presentation and less on an adversarial approach to testing and reviewing. Also note that an adversarial mode does not have to be interpreted as mistrust, cf. also Nosek et al. ( 2012 , p. 626).

Importantly, they explicitly cite replication as a quality criterion of science.

As an example for how the adversarial approach is explicitly put into practice see, for instance, Fischer et al. ( 2020 ) in experimental philosophy, where the members of a joint project are chosen because of their disagreements on the philosophical views in question. See also Clark and Tetlock ( 2022 ) for a proposal of ‘adversarial collaborations’ in which authors of different ideological backgrounds collaborate. While this is not what we see as the main challenge for social science research, it provides an additional example of this type of solution.

For an analysis of the merit of peer review, see Heesen and Bright ( 2019 ) and Schroter et al. ( 2008 ).

https://julkaisufoorumi.fi/en/evaluations/classification-criteria .

For instance, the results presented by Anderson et al. ( 2010 ) suggest that current incentive structures of science are hard to overcome for individual scientists even if scientists have the epistemic aims of science in mind.

Though there may be other solutions that emerge from a removal of the discussion section, and we believe that eliminating the discussion section is potentially worth it irrespective of the structure that emerges as a result.

Some of these upsides would also be present if the discussion paper was indeed written by the same authors (perhaps because they know their complex data set very well): This may still reduce personal biases (i) as the publication success of the reported data does not depend on the discussion section at all, and further collaboration (be it adversarial or not, cf. Heyman et al., 2020 ) may also lead to some of the other advantages (ii)-(iv).

Anderson, M. S., Ronning, E. A., De Vries, R., & Martinson, B. C. (2010). Extending the mertonian norms: Scientists’ subion to norms of research. The Journal of Higher Education, 81 (3), 366–393.

Article   Google Scholar  

Anvari, F., & Lakens, D. (2018). The replicability crisis and public trust in psychological science. Comprehensive Results in Social Psychology , 3 (3), 266–286.

Atkinson, D. (1998). Scientific discourse in sociohistorical context: The philosophical transactions of the royal society of London (pp. 1675–1975). Routledge.

Book   Google Scholar  

Barbour, V. (2015). Perverse incentives and perverse publishing practices. Science Bulletin , 60 , 1225–1226.

Bargh, J. A., Chen, M., & Burrows, L. (1996). Automaticity of social behavior: Direct effects of trait construct and stereotype activation on action. Journal of personality and social psychology , 71 (2), 230.

Barnes, B. D., & Bloor, J. H. (1996). Scientific knowledge: A sociological analysis . University of Chicago Press.

Google Scholar  

Bazerman, C. (1985). Physicists reading physics: Schema-laden purposes and purpose-laden schema. Written communication , 2 (1), 3–23.

Bazerman, C. (2004). Communicating science: The scientific article from the seventeenth century to the present . Oxford University Press.

Benessia, A., Funtowicz, S., Giampietro, M., Pereira, Â. G., Ravetz, J. R., Saltelli, A., & van der Sluijs J. P. (2016).  Science on the Verge.  Consortium for Science, Policy & Outcomes. Tempe, AZ and Washington, DC

Berry, J., Coffman, L. C., Hanley, D., Gihleb, R., & Wilson, A. J. (2017). Assessing the rate of replication in economics. American Economic Review , 107 (5), 27–31.

Bird, A. (2010). Social knowing: The social sense of ‘scientific knowledge’. Philosophical Perspectives , 24 , 23–56.

Boettke, P. J., & O’Donnell, K. W. (2016). The social responsibility of economists. In G. DeMartino & D. McCloskey (Eds.), The oxford handbook of professional economic ethics (pp. 116–136). Oxford University Press.

Camerer, C. F., Dreber, A., Forsell, E., Ho, T. H., Huber, J., Johannesson, M., & Wu, H. (2016). Evaluating replicability of laboratory experiments in economics. Science , 351 (6280), 1433–1436.

Chambers, C. D. (2013). Registered reports: A new publishing initiative at cortex. Cortex; A Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System and Behavior, 49 (3), 609–610.

Clark, C. J., & Tetlock, P. E. (2022). Adversarial collaboration: The next science reform. In C. L. Frisby, R. E. Redding, W. T. O’Donohue, & S. O. Lilienfeld (Eds.), Political bias in psychology: Nature, Scope, and solutions. Springer.

Cohen, J. (1990). Things I have learned (so far). American Psychologist , 45 , 1304–1312.

Cova, F., Strickland, B., Abatista, A., Allard, A., Andow, J., Attie, M., & Cushman, F. (2018). Estimating the reproducibility of experimental philosophy. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 12 , 1–36.

Csiszar, A. (2016). Peer review: Troubled from the start. Nature , 532 (7599), 306–308.

De Regt, H. W. (2017). Understanding Scientific understanding . OUP.

De Ridder, J. (2022). How to trust a scientist. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science , 93 , 11–20.

Della Vigna, S., & Linos, E. (2020). RCTs to scale: Comprehensive evidence from two nudge units . Wiley.

Dennis, B. (2013). Validity crisis’ in qualitative research. Qualitative research: A reader in philosophy, core concepts, and practice (pp. 3–37). Peter Lang.

Eder, A. B., & Frings, C. (2021). Registered report 2.0: The PCI RR initiative. Experimental Psychology . https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000512

Edwards, M. A., & Roy, S. (2017). Academic research in the 21st century: Maintaining scientific integrity in a climate of perverse incentives and hypercompetition. Environmental Engineering Science, 34 (1), 51–61.

Eronen, M. I., & Bringmann, L. F. (2021). The theory crisis in psychology: How to move forward. Perspectives on Psychological Science , 16 (4), 779–788.

Fetterman, A. K., & Sassenberg, K. (2015). The reputational consequences of failed replications and wrongness admission among scientists. Plos ONE . https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0143723

Fidler, F., & Wilcox, J. (2018). Reproducibility of scientific results. In N. Edward Zalta (Ed.), The stanford encyclopedia of philosophy&nbsp;(winter 2018 edition). Stanford University.

Fiedler, K. (2017). What constitutes strong psychological science? the (neglected) role of diagnosticity and a priori theorizing. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12 (1), 46–61.

Fiedler, K., & Schwarz, N. (2016). Questionable research practices revisited. Social Psychological and Personality Science , 7 (1), 45–52.

Fischer, E., Engelhardt, P., & Sytsma, J. (2020). Inappropriate stereotypical inferences? an adversarial collaboration in experimental ordinary language philosophy. Synthese . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-020-02708-x

Fletcher, S. C. (2021). The role of replication in psychological science. European Journal for Philosophy of Science , 11 (1), 1–19.

Flis, I. (2019). Psychologists psychologizing scientific psychology: An epistemological reading of the replication crisis. Theory & Psychology , 29 (2), 158–181.

Forster, M. R. (2002). Predictive accuracy as an achievable goal of science. Proceedings of the Philosophy of Science Association . https://doi.org/10.1086/341840

Forster, M. R., & Sober, E. (1994). How to tell when simpler, more unified, or less Ad Hoc theories will provide more accurate predictions. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 45 , 1–35.

Franco, A., Malhotra, N., & Simonovits, G. (2014). Publication bias in the social sciences: Unlocking the file drawer. Science , 345 (6203), 1502–1505.

Fricker, E. (2002). Trusting others in the sciences: A priori or empirical warrant? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A , 33 (2), 373–383.

Fried, E. I. (2020). Lack of theory building and testing impedes progress in the factor and network literature. Psychological Inquiry , 31 (4), 271–288.

Funk, C., & Kennedy, B. (2016). Public views on climate change and climate scientists. http://www.pewinternet.org/2016/10/04/public-views-on-climate-change-and-climate-scientists/

Gerken, M. (2015). The epistemic norms of intra-scientific testimony. Philosophy of the Social Sciences , 45 (6), 568–595.

Gerken, M. (2020). Public scientific testimony in the scientific image. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A , 80 , 90–101.

Gigerenzer, G. (2018). Statistical rituals: The replication delusion and how we got there. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science , 1 (2), 198–218.

Gordon, M., Viganola, D., Bishop, M., Chen, Y., Dreber, A., Goldfedder, B., & Pfeiffer, T. (2020). Are replication rates the same across academic fields? community forecasts from the DARPA SCORE programme . Royal Society Open Science.

Greenwald, A. G. (1975). Consequences of prejudice against the null hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 82 (1), 1.

Haack, S. (2003). Defending Science—within reason: Between scientism and cynicism . Prometheus Books.

Hackett, B. (2005). Essential tensions: Identity, control, and risk in research. Social Studies of Science , 35 (5), 787–826.

Hacking, I. (1983). Representing and intervening: Introductory topics in the philosophy of natural science . Cambridge University Press.

Hagger, M. S., Chatzisarantis, N. L., Alberts, H., Anggono, C. O., Batailler, C., Birt, A. R., & Zwienenberg, M. (2016). A multilab preregistered replication of the ego-depletion effect. Perspectives on Psychological Science , 11 (4), 546–573.

Hardwicke, T. E., & Ioannidis, J. P. (2018). Mapping the universe of registered reports. Nature Human Behaviour , 2 (11), 793–796.

Hardwig, J. (1991). The role of trust in knowledge. Journal of Philosophy , 88 (12), 693–708.

Heesen, R. (2018). Why the reward structure of Science makes reproducibility problems inevitable. Journal of Philosophy , 115 (12), 661–674.

Heesen, R., & Bright, L. K. (2019). Is peer review a good idea? The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science . https://doi.org/10.1093/bjps/axz029

Hendriks, F., Kienhues, D., & Bromme, R. (2016). Trust in science and the science of trust. Trust and communication in a digitized world (pp. 143–159). Springer.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Hendriks, F., Kienhues, D., & Bromme, R. (2020). Replication crisis = trust crisis? The effect of successful vs failed replications on laypeople’s trust in researchers and research. Public Understanding of Science , 29 (3), 270–288.

Heyman, T., Moors, P., & Rabagliati, H. (2020). The benefits of adversarial collaboration for commentaries. Nature Human Behaviour , 4 (12), 1217.

IJzerman, H., et al. (2020) Use caution when applying behavioural science to policy. Nature Human Behaviour, 4 , 1092–1094.

Irzik, G., & Kurtulmus, F. (2019). What is epistemic public trust in science? The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science , 70 (4), 1145–1166.

Keil, A., Gatzke-Kopp, L. M., Horváth, J., Jennings, J. R., & Fabiani, M. (2020). A registered report format for psychophysiology . Wiley.

Khalifa, K. (2010). Social constructivism and the aims of science. Social Epistemology, 24 (1), 45–61.

Khalifa, K. (2022). Understanding, truth, and epistemic goals. Philosophy of Science . https://doi.org/10.1086/710545

Kowal, M., Bialek, M., & Groyecka-Bernard, A. (2020, December 11). Behavioural science is not good enough for building ROckets, but still useful in crisis. Retrieved from: https://socialsciences.nature.com/posts/behavioural-science-is-not-good-enough-for-building-rockets-but-still-useful-in-crisis?badge_id=569-nature-human-behaviour

Kitcher, P. (1990). The division of cognitive labor. Journal of Philosophy , 87 , 5–21.

Klein, R., Ratliff, K., Vianello, M., Adams, R., Jr., Bahník, S., Bernstein, M., & Cemalcilar, Z. (2014). Data from investigating variation in replicability: A “many labs” replication project. Journal of Open Psychology Data . https://doi.org/10.5334/jopd.ad

Klein, R. A., Vianello, M., Hasselman, F., Adams, B. G., Adams, R. B. Jr., Alper, S., & Batra, R. (2018). Many labs 2: Investigating variation in replicability across samples and settings. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science , 1 (4), 443–490.

Klein, R. A., Cook, C. L., Ebersole, C. L., Vitiello, C., Nosek, B. A., Chartier, C. R., & Cromar, R. (2019). Many labs 4 Failure to replicate mortality salience effect with and without original author involvement . University of California Press.

Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions . University of Chicago Press.

Lakens, D. (2019). The practical alternative to the p-value is the correctly used p-value. Perspective on Psychological Science . https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691620958012

Laudan, L. (1981). Science and hypothesis: Historical essays on scientific methodology . Springer.

Ledford, H. (2015). Team science. Nature , 525 (7569), 308–311.

Lilienfeld, S. O., & Strother, A. N. (2020). Psychological measurement and the replication crisis: Four sacred cows. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie canadienne . https://doi.org/10.1037/cap0000236

Loyka, C. M., Ruscio, J., Edelblum, A. B., Hatch, L., Wetreich, B., & Zabel, A. (2020). Weighing people rather than food: A framework for examining external validity. Perspectives on Psychological Science , 15 (2), 483–496.

Lycan, W. G. (1988). Judgment and Justification . Cambridge University Press.

Maatman, F. O. (2021). Psychology’s theory crisis, and why. formal modelling cannot solve it.

Machery, E. (2017). Philosophy within its proper bounds . OUP.

Mayo, D. (2005). Peircean induction and the error-correcting thesis. Transactions of the Charles S Peirce Society, 41 , 299–319.

Mede, N. G., Schäfer, M. S., Ziegler, R., & Weißkopf, M. (2020). The “replication crisis” in the public eye: Germans’ awareness and perceptions of the (ir) reproducibility of scientific research. Public understanding of science

Moulton, J. (1993). A paradigm of philosophy: The adversary method. In Hintikka (Ed.), Discovering reality (pp. 149–164). D. Reidel.

Muller, D. (2016). Is most published research wrong? Veritasium , https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42QuXLucH3Q [05.03.2021].

Muthukrishna, M., & Henrich, J. (2019). A problem in theory. Nature Human Behaviour , 3 (3), 221–229.

Nosek, B. A., Spies, J. R., & Motyl, M. (2012). Scientific Utopia: II. Restructuring incentives and practices to promote truth over publishability. Perspectives on Psychological Science , 7 (6), 615–631.

Nosek, B. A., Ebersole, C. R., DeHaven, A. C., & Mellor, D. T. (2018). The preregistration revolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115 (11), 2600–2606.

Pashler, H., & Wagenmakers, E. (2012). Introduction to the special section on replicability in psychological science: A crisis of confidence? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7 (6), 528–530.

Peirce, C. S. (1958). The logic of drawing history from ancient documents. In A. W. Burks (Ed.), The collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce (Vol. IV, pp. 89–107). Belknap Press.

Polanyi, M. (1962). The republic of science. Minerva , 1 , 54–73.

Popper, K. (1934). The logic of scientific discovery . Routledge.

Putnam, H. (1981). Reason, truth and history . Cambridge University Press.

Renkewitz, F., & Keiner, M. (2019). How to detect publication bias in psychological research. Zeitschrift für Psychologie . https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000386

Romero, F. (2019). Philosophy of science and the replicability crisis. Philosophy Compass . https://doi.org/10.1111/phc3.12633

Saad, L. (2017). Global warming concern at three-decade high in US. Retrieved October 14, 2017, from http://news.gallup.com/poll/206030/global-warming-concern-three-decade-high.aspx

Schroter, S., Black, N., Evans, S., Godlee, F., Osorio, L., & Smith, R. (2008). What errors do peer reviewers detect, and does training improve their ability to detect them? Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine , 101 (10), 507–514.

Schwitzgebel, E., & Ellis, J. E. (2017). Rationalization in moral and philosophical thought. In J. F. Bonnefon & B. Tremoliere (Eds.), Moral inferences. Psychology Press.

Shanks, D. R., Newell, B. R., Lee, E. H., Balakrishnan, D., Ekelund, L., Cenac, Z., & Moore, C. (2013). Priming intelligent behavior: An elusive phenomenon. PLoS ONE, 8 (4), e56515.

Sovacool, B. K. (2008). Exploring scientific misconduct: Isolated individuals, impure institutions, or an inevitable idiom of modern science? Journal of Bioethical Inquiry , 5 , 271–282.

Stephan, P. E. (2012). How economics shapes science . Harvard University Press.

Strevens, M. (2011). Economic approaches to understanding scientific norms. Episteme , 8 (2), 184–200.

van Bavel et al. (2020). Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response. Nature Human Behaviour, 4 , 460–471.

Van Fraassen, B. C. (1980). The scientific image . Oxford University Press.

Vazire, S. (2018). Implications of the credibility revolution for productivity, creativity, and progress. Perspective on Psychological Science, 13 (4), 411–417.

Whyte, K. P., & Crease, R. P. (2010). Trust, expertise, and the philosophy of science. Synthese , 177 (3), 411–425.

World Health Organization. (2020, October 15). Behavioural considerations for acceptance and uptake of COVID-19 vaccines. Retrieved from  https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240016927

Wiggins, B. J., & Chrisopherson, C. D. (2019). The replication crisis in psychology: An overview for theoretical and philosophical psychology. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology , 39 (4), 202.

Wilholt, T. (2013). Epistemic trust in science. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science , 64 (2), 233–253.

Williamson, T. (2002). Knowledge and its limits . Oxford University Press.

Ziliak, S., & McCloskey, D. (2008). The cult of statistical significance: How the standard error costs us jobs, justice, and lives . University of Michigan Press.

Zollman, K. J. S. (2018). The credit economy and the economic rationality of science. Journal of Philosophy, 115 (1), 5–33.

Download references

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge helpful comments and suggestions from Cory Clark, Charlotte Werndl, and two anonymous reviewers of Synthese.

Author information

Philipp Schoenegger and Raimund Pils have contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

University of St Andrews, St Andrews, UK

Philipp Schoenegger

University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria

Raimund Pils

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Philipp Schoenegger .

Ethics declarations

Competing interest.

The authors report no competing interests regarding this work and its funding.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Schoenegger, P., Pils, R. Social sciences in crisis: on the proposed elimination of the discussion section. Synthese 202 , 54 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-023-04267-3

Download citation

Received : 09 January 2023

Accepted : 06 July 2023

Published : 09 August 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-023-04267-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Philosophy of the social sciences
• Science reform
• Open science
• Incentive structures
• Adversarial collaboration
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

300 Social Issues Research Topics to Impress Your Professor and Get A

Researching social issues holds immense importance in our quest for knowledge and progress. It allows us to delve deeper into the complexities of society, unraveling the underlying causes, impacts, and potential solutions. However, the significance of a good research topic must be considered, which sets the stage for a high-scoring and impactful research endeavor. If you have difficulty finding a good social issue research topic, check out these lists from the experts working with a professional  paper writing services  provider.

Table of Contents

Comprehensive list of Unique Social Issue Research Topics

Scroll down and go through our list of unique topics and pick one that sparks your interest. Here you go with the first one: 

Women’s Social Issues Research Topics 

It’s crucial to look into the various aspects of women’s social issues if we want to get a better understanding of gender inequality. Here are some ideas to help you dig deeper into this topic.

• Prejudice against women in corporate culture
• Problems of pregnant women working in the corporate
• Harassment in educational institutes against women
• What strategies can governments adopt to ensure equal rights for women?
• Raising awareness of the problems of pregnant women
• How to develop a respectful attitude towards women and gender minorities in companies?
• Ill-treatment of women in the government sector
• Writing on essay topics related to problems with Syrian female immigrants
• The Role of Women in economic life and the World of Work
• Women’s political and electoral training
• Women in old homes: Research and Interviews for Problems and Concerns
• Toxic Masculinity in the Workplace: what can women do?
• Developing a workplace culture for fair treatment of every gender
• Role of Government in solving problems related to Women
• The economy of the United States: Income inequality in the U.S.
• Building a world where women have equal opportunities and fair treatment
• Essay Topics Related to Problems of Women in New York
• Financial problems for single mothers
• Women dealing with social issues in New Mexico
• Condition of Mexican immigrant women in the United States
• Women’s health: Key performance indicators, problems and obstacles
• Securing Women’s Rights with the Help of international law
• Education of women: The rights and responsibilities
• Better living conditions for older women
• A research study of the problems of pregnant women in California
• Health and welfare of older people, especially women
• Improving the quality of life for single mothers with better opportunities

Children’s Social Issues Research Topics 

It’s important to tackle the social issues that affect kids to create a better, more nurturing future for the next generation. Here are some interesting topics on this subject to get started with  writing your research paper . 

• School Bullying and social networks
• Problems and issues with children with a single parent
• A research study on the problems of children in foster homes
• How can we make foster care better and safer for children?
• Delinquency trends in children among marginalized communities
• modernity and technology at the cost of the destruction of childhood
• Issues that children from Mexican households in America have to face
• What are the advantages of multiculturalism in kindergarten?
• Problems of Assault and Molestation of Children
• Why Are Young People Committing Crimes These Days?
• Cyberbullying and Toxicity on social media
• Violence among children and young people
• Rehabilitation of juvenile offenders and improving their lives
• Illness and disability among kids living in developing countries
• The lack of tolerance among the teenagers
• Child labor in developing countries
• Psychology of kindergarten education
• School is a chance for every kid to learn tolerance and harmony
• Children facing with lack of empathy and bullying on social media
• The use of new technologies in education and adaptability in children
• Problems of immigrant children
• Child development and behavior

Social Issues Research Topics About Labor Rights

It’s essential to look into the social issues surrounding workers’ rights and fight for their well-being. Labor rights are the foundation of having fair and decent working conditions. Here are some topics if you want to research such subjects.

• The legal responsibility of entrepreneurs
• Workplace accident management
• Increased flexibility via remote working options
• Mental health problems caused by workers after the COVID pandemic
• The principle of equality today is related to labor rights
• Change wages or salaries
• Labor problems caused by the Covid pandemic
• Employees having to deal with additional work pressures
• Role of labor unions in social justice for Laborers
• Mental health problems in the Workplace
• What can we do to offer ideas for improvements in labor laws
• The desire to maintain a healthy work-life balance
• Hate speech and domestic violence against marginalized groups in large companies
• Academic paper for immigration disruptions in Canada and USA
• The employer’s right to manage employees and the abuse of it
• Role of human resources in identifying and solving problems of labor
• The job of the government and schools is to offer their members better career prospects
• Problems and issues related to a minimum period of employment
• The technology skills gap leads to problems with the laborers
• Improving the well-being of the company for its members
• Change wages or salaries impact and consequences
• How the global pandemic and Working from home changed the World
• Recruiting methods from passive to active: how to prepare
• Global labor shortages: problems and consequences
• What are the reasons for the labor shortage?
• Writing assignment about laborers dealing with the effects of long Covid
• Why is it essential for companies to take a public stand for social issues
• Mental health problems for workers in the field
• Relevant examples of social issues related to labor and employment
• How to empower workers against social injustice?

Social Issues Research Topics for the Environment

It’s important to dig into how social issues and the environment are connected when we’re trying to handle big problems like climate change, running out of resources, etc. Here are some  research topics  to think about.

• Health risks associated with the general environment and their perception and representation
• Climate change knowledge and expertise on health risks
• Health inequalities resulting from environmental and social factors
• What Role can environmental law play in protecting the environment at sea?
• Deforestation and chronic pollution are destroying biodiversity
• Importance of green energy conversion
• The Law of the Environment and sustainable development
• The Management of Pollution in Environmental Law
• Toward a better understanding of atmospheric pollution
• Utilizing environmental technologies and learning about them
• Waste and material resources of the World
• The destruction of ozone affects the environment and health
• Nature’s resources are being destroyed. What can we do as researchers to prevent this?
• Is it still imperative to preserve the environment during wartime?
• Combating armed conflict while preserving the environment
• The tourism industry and pollution management
• Environmental factors that affect cancer risk
• Cost-benefit analysis of the action based on legal or socioeconomic criteria
• Analyzing how different environmental factors contribute to the risk
• Investigating a variety of environmental issues and sectors
• Regions and specific areas of environmental perception
• The effects of climate change and global warming
• Factors contributing to a healthy environment
• The relationship between human rights and environmental law
• In environmental law, pollution management is a constant
• Worldwide implementation of sustainable development
• How consumption trends and international news can help the environmental cause

Social Issues Research Topics Related to Covid Pandemic

The Covid-19 pandemic has changed how we live and has spotlighted all kinds of social issues that need to be looked into and solved. So, if you would like to research social issues related to the recent pandemic, check out this list for current social issues for research paper:

• Social panic caused after the COVID-19 breakdown
• Problems and social issues caused by the COVID-19 pandemic
• COVID-19 and financial problems on the rise
• Impact of COVID-19 on the people with middle class
• Police Procedure and criminal justice during the COVID-19
• The aftermath of COVID-19 has resulted in a social dilemma and economic disruption
• An influential aspect of the pandemic is mental health
• The Impact of social and territorial inequalities on health
• The ethical issues raised by the pandemic
• Writing research papers on social media’s Role during COVID-19
• Children and adolescents’ mental condition during the pandemic
• Problems in healthcare and Management of chronic diseases
• Disruption in modern society by the COVID-19
• How our social media accounts helped us during the darkest hours of covid
• Ensuring the delivery of criminal justice during covid
• Impact of COVID-19 on family life
• Role of the Pandemic in the Promotion of remote education
• Avoiding social media addiction during the quarantine

Social Issue Topics Related to American Society

Checking out the social problems in the U.S. gives us a great understanding of how complicated, varied and hard they can be for people and different communities. Here is another list of topics on social issues. 

• Environment perception in specific areas and regions
• Climate change and global warming effects
• The factors that contribute to a healthy environment
• Cancer risk factors in the environment
• Workplace toxic masculinity: what can women do?
• The global labor shortage: problems and consequences
• Why does the U.S. have a shortage of labor?
• Workers dealing with the effects of Covid
• Problems related to mental issues among field workers
• Law and human rights concerning the environment
• Management of pollution is a constant concern in environmental law
• Impacts and consequences of changes in wages or salaries
• How to prepare for passive to active recruitment
• The problem of child labor in developing countries
• Kindergarten Education and Psychology
• Tolerance and harmony can be learned in school by every child
• Lack of empathy and bullying on social media among children
• Technology in Education and Children’s Adaptability
• Legal or socioeconomic cost-benefit analysis of the action
• A major social issue in the modern age is poverty
• Government’s Role in solving social problems
• Sustainable Development of the World
• Trafficking in drugs and Mexican cartels
• A culture of fair treatment for all genders in the Workplace
• Nature’s resources are being depleted.
• Management of pollution in the tourism industry
• How can we use social media to improve society and resolve social problems?
• A lack of respect for marginalized communities in the professional environment can be seen in several ways.
• Understanding social issues and the problems associated with them
• Materials and waste from around the World and the Impact they have on the environment
• The depletion of ozone is detrimental to the environment and human health
• Insights into the political and electoral training of women
• Taking a closer look at Women’s Problems and Concerns in old homes: Research and Interviews
• Issues and problems related to the minimum period of employment and the minimum wage
• The technological skills gap is causing labor shortages shortly
• Enhancing the well-being of the members of the company as a whole

Interesting Social Injustice Topics for College Students

As college students, exploring and engaging with interesting social issues topics expands our intellectual horizons and empowers us to become agents of change in our communities and beyond. Particularly when you include social problems examples. Here is another list of interesting topics.

• Developing better relationships with public institutions to solve problems
• The Role of social work in the Management of health problems
• Corporations discriminate against marginalized communities in the U.S.
• Sociology of the popular classes
• The reasons for the low human development index in African countries
• Social issues caused by class differences
• Drugs and anarchist behaviors
• Religious Differences and biased approaches to employment strategies
• Mexican cartels and the problem of drug trafficking
• Poverty is one of the most significant social issues in the Modern World
• Role of the Government in solving social issues
• How can we use social media to improve society and solve social issues?
• Prejudice against marginalized communities in the professional environment
• Understanding the problems related to social issues
• Role of problem-solving and understanding the root cause of social issues
• Major social issues in developing countries
• Role of Education in ending violence in Society
• Class Differences and the Impact on the human development index
• Differences in health facilities for different classes
• Social Norms and the Role of the Community
• Causes and solutions to human trafficking on the Mexican borders
• Human development index in India
• How to solve the poverty problem?
• What is the problem of social media bullying, and how to avoid it?
• How does financial illiteracy lead to a lack of development in developing countries?
• Impact of Terrorism on Society
• How to solve the terrorism problem?
• Mafia problems in the USA and how to deal with them
• Biased treatment of marginalized communities in the government sector
• The increasing problem of drug addiction
• Ethics and Artificial Intelligence: Emerging social issues
• Role of social media in increasing social issues

Police and Social Justice Research Papers Topics

Let’s unveil a curated collection of current social issues for a research paper. Here’s the list:

• Children’s safety and protection: The security job is of the utmost importance
• School bullying is a serious issue that needs to be addressed
• A few heartrending social issues examples 
• Using the Internet to disseminate terrorist content: a serious issue related to Cybersecurity
• Digital Platform Security Certification – A Guide to Cybersecurity Certifications
• The protection of minors in alcohol-serving establishments
• Concerns regarding cyber security in the United States
• An analysis of the spatial pattern of terrorism in the USA over the past two decades
• New York crime analysis, a look at the crime situation in the City
• Security technologies face several obstacles when it comes to their implementation
• Having the versatility to specialize and the specialization to be versatile in security matters
• Investigative requisitions from the judicial police
• Relationships between the police and the public: The need for improvement
• Conflict Management and Prevention in Communities
• The principle of secularism in sports must be respected
• Stopping the illicit trade in tobacco products
• Towns with small populations and cybersecurity
• Taking care of historical monuments
• Providing support to victims of aggression
• An analysis of the roadside check system in developing countries
• The challenges of reception at a police station for public security
• A system for protecting housing from illegal encroachment
• Anti-abuse and anti-fraud measures
• A diversity of expectations and feedback from the inhabitants
• Taking public security work seriously in terms of its relational dimension
• The issue of external assistance in the area of internal security
• Putting social networks to the test in terms of police ethics

As you have reached the conclusion paragraph of the blog post, you must have picked a topic or two to work for your social issue research paper. Most of the lists have focused on social issues today as they could be very interesting for the readers. Plus, there are a plethora of good topics for you to count on. Just remember that a good research subject must be able to answer, what is a social problem, what is a social issue, and more. Still if you are struggling with picking up a good topic, feel free to count on the expertise of  our writers .

What is an interesting social issue research topic?

What is research about social issues, how do i choose a social research topic.

Order Original Papers & Essays

Your First Custom Paper Sample is on Us!

Timely Deliveries

No Plagiarism & AI

100% Refund

Try Our Free Paper Writing Service

Related blogs.

Connections with Writers and support

Privacy and Confidentiality Guarantee

Average Quality Score

We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you’re on board with our cookie policy

• A Research Guide
• Research Paper Topics

40 Social Issues Research Paper Topics

Useful information: Where can I pay someone to write my research paper ?

List of 40 Social Issues Topics for College Students

• Religious gatherings and rituals
• Country-wide strikes and protest
• LGBTQ+ prides
• Worldwide flashmobs
• Social stratification
• Gender discrimination and anti-harassment movements
• The issues of orphanage kids
• Pornography and AI sex dolls
• Sex work or paid rape?
• Virtual reality
• Information overload: the society is overstressed with the amount of data
• Demographic crisis
• Beauty standards
• Social isolation of people with HIV/AIDS
• The fight against animal testing
• Internet safety
• Humanitarian missions
• Fighting racism
• The rights of ethnic minorities and native people
• Internet safety and cybercrimes
• The necessity of the death penalty
• Fighting poverty in the world
• Access to the drinking water in third world countries
• Free education for everyone: shall it be implemented?
• National identity versus globalization
• Women rights and trans people rights
• Obesity as an obstacle in social life. Fatshaming
• Civil rights: shall they be expanded?
• Abuse and neglect in asylums, orphanages, and care homes
• Church and state: shall they remain separate?
• The problem of bigotry in modern society
• Immigration and resocialization of the immigrants
• Sustainable consumption on a worldwide scale
• School violence
• Legalizing drugs: basic rights to choose or a danger to society?
• Social isolation. The hikikomori phenomenon
• Bullying at schools and colleges
• Kids transitioning: shall it be allowed?
• Advertisements: are they becoming too powerful?
• The global impact of the third world countries

By clicking "Log In", you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We'll occasionally send you account related and promo emails.

Sign Up for your FREE account

Social Problems Research Paper

This sample social problems research paper features: 7000 words (approx. 23 pages), an outline, and a bibliography with 40 sources. Browse other research paper examples for more inspiration. If you need a thorough research paper written according to all the academic standards, you can always turn to our experienced writers for help. This is how your paper can get an A! Feel free to contact our writing service for professional assistance. We offer high-quality assignments for reasonable rates.

Introduction

Social problems of natural disasters and erosion of the earth, social problems of poverty, inequality, and racism, social problems related to the family, social problems related to crime.

• Bibliography

Social problems are relevant to all of us, and it is no coincidence that scholars from many different disciplines—including anthropology, sociology, psychology, and criminology—have systematically studied this area. Unlike natural scientists, social scientists often employ moral judgments during the course of their research. If, for example, an anthropologist wanted to study the effects of Hurricane Katrina, then he would face different obstacles than if a meteorologist were to study the same phenomenon. Most people would agree that it would be unethical for an anthropologist to passively sit by and take notes, rather than offer assistance to victims while conducting fieldwork in the aftermath of a devastating storm. A natural scientist, on the other hand, would probably not experience the moral dilemmas that would be faced by social scientists. Because anthropologists often are in the unique position of studying other human beings, the potential for bias is not surprising, and they may often face difficulties in remaining neutral and objective during the course of a particular study (Newman, 1999).

Academic Writing, Editing, Proofreading, And Problem Solving Services

Get 10% off with 24start discount code.

Because there is no broad consensus as to which type of social problems are the most worthy of our attention, social scientists may show their biases merely by the topics that they choose to study (Mooney, Knox, & Schacht, 2009). By choosing which issues are the most worthy of investigation, anthropologists are employing their own personal discretion. This makes the systematic study of social problems somewhat subjective. For example, one researcher may identify racism as the most important social problem plaguing society, whereas another researcher may avoid this issue altogether. Because anthropologists are humans studying other human beings, anthropology will never be as scientific as disciplines in the natural sciences. Nevertheless, in spite of this caveat, anthropologists can add much to the discussion of social problems. They employ a unique set of methodologies, such as ethnography, which provide valuable insights into various problems (Newman, 1999; Malinowski, 1941). Additionally, an anthropological perspective is important to our understanding of social problems because it examines factors, such as culture and power dynamics (Bodley, 2008). As it will later be shown, powerful institutions, including the media, have largely shaped and defined society’s conception of what is and is not a social problem.

There is no question that the 21st century has seen its share of natural disasters, especially when one considers that we have not been in this new millennium for even a decade. Perhaps, at least for Americans, the most recognizable instance of a recent natural disaster occurred in 2005 when Hurricane Katrina devastated the city of New Orleans. Hurricane Katrina is considered to be one of the deadliest and costliest natural disasters in American history. It may have been responsible for taking the lives of as many as 1,836 people and causing upwards of $81.2 billion worth of damage (Mooney et al., 2009). Hurricane Katrina shall be referred to periodically throughout this research paper because it represents numerous types of social problems in addition to being a problem associated with the environment. For example, Hurricane Katrina illustrates problems related to inequality, racism, and sexism. African Americans, Latinos, women, and children tended to be disproportionately affected by this natural disaster and were the most likely to be among the dead in the aftermath of the storm (Kornblum & Julian, 2009).

According to anthropologists, ethnocentrism is when an individual believes that her culture is superior to other cultures (Malinowski, 1941). When discussing these and other social problems, social scientists strive to adopt a global perspective, rather than to engage in ethnocentric thinking. It is particularly important, then, not to focus solely on natural disasters that have occurred in the United States. In addition to Hurricane Katrina, there have been other natural disasters that have occurred throughout other parts of the world during the 21st century. While there is no question that Hurricane Katrina may be one of the most frequently cited natural disasters, it pales in comparison with the destruction caused by the Asian tsunami of 2004. It is likely that this disaster claimed the lives of more than 150,000 people (Mooney et al., 2009). As in the case of Hurricane Katrina, most of the victims of the Asian tsunami were poor. These individuals had substandard homes that could not withstand any type of resistance force, and most did not have insurance policies or savings accounts to help them get on their feet in the aftermath of the disaster. It is safe to speculate that the poor are usually more vulnerable to natural disasters than other members of society.

It is a cruel irony that while the poorest segments of society often suffer the worst from natural disasters, in many ways it is wealthy and privileged individuals who bear the most responsibility in destroying the earth. Corporate greed and consumption have led to global warming and climate change, which may contribute to an increase in natural disasters of a magnitude similar to that of Hurricane Katrina and the Asian tsunami in the future. Relative to its population, the United States emits the highest amount of carbons. For example, in 2005, less than 5% of the world’s population lived in the United States, yet it still produced 21% of the world’s carbon emissions from burning fossil fuels (Energy Information Administration, 2007). These gas pollutants from automobiles and factories produce a “greenhouse effect,” which could have catastrophic consequences if this goes unchecked (Heiner, 2006). As the temperature increases, some areas of the world may experience heavier rains, and at the same time others may become drier (Bodley, 2008). A temperature increase of only a few degrees has the potential to drastically change life on this planet. In addition to emitting the highest carbons, citizens in the United States also generate a disproportionate amount of solid waste relative to other countries. For example, according to Cheeseman (2007), more than 380 billion plastic shopping bags are used in the United States every year. These bags are particularly bad for the environment and may take up to 1,000 years to decompose. Countries such as Taiwan, Singapore, South Africa, and Bangladesh have restricted or outright banned these harmful products, yet the United States refuses to follow this example (Cheeseman, 2007). In addition to this, a recent study conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency (2009) found that Americans dispose of approximately 4.54 pounds of garbage every day. Also, citizens in the United States and other industrialized countries are likely to dispose of large amounts of electronic equipment. This phenomenon, which has been referred to as “e-waste,” is very devastating to the environment (Mooney et al., 2009). When disposed of in a careless manner, electronic equipment has the potential to contaminate our water supply and soil.

Anthropologist Richard H. Robbins (1999) contends that capitalistic societies, such as the United States, are responsible for elevating human consumption levels which in turn leads to the depletion of natural resources and the destruction of the environment. He argues that our culture encourages laborers to accumulate wages, capitalists to accumulate profits, and consumers to hoard goods. Robbins also suggests that a handful of powerful elitists reap the benefits from being involved in a culture dedicated to consumption. In fact, these individuals often are responsible for using the media to create consumerism in order to advance their own interests. It is a well-known fact that capitalists in the United States rely heavily on advertising in order to sell commodities. Even when a commodity is frivolous, clever advertising often has the ability to present the product as a necessity and make consumers feel compelled to rush out to the stores. This has devastating consequences for the environment and often results in pollution, resource depletion, and waste.

Generally speaking, capitalists and corporations have been highly resistant to the idea of allowing the government to regulate businesses in order to preserve the environment. In fact, beginning in the late 1970s, U.S. businesses began spending billions of dollars a year to convince the American public that there was too much environmental regulation (Beder, 1997). This intense lobbying proved to be very effective because many environmental regulations that were passed in the seventies were either repealed or simply unenforced during the 1980s (Bodley, 2008). The fact that corporations have been so resistant to environmental regulation illustrates how a small number of powerful people are benefiting from the destruction and pillaging of the earth’s resources. The forces of capitalism not only have depleted valuable natural resources but also have produced a highly stratified and nonequalitarian social system. Social problems related to poverty and inequality are of considerable concern to anthropologists and shall be discussed in the following section.

In addition to exemplifying a recent and horrific natural disaster, Hurricane Katrina also represents social problems related to poverty and inequality. It is very plausible, for example, that before the storm hit New Orleans, wealthy residents and visitors were given priority over poorer residents and bused out first. In fact, one account suggests that 700 guests and employees of a Hyatt Hotel were given the first opportunity to leave, while lower-class individuals were relegated to the end of the evacuation line (Dowd, 2005). It is true that low-income African Americans were the most likely to remain in the city during Hurricane Katrina (Dyson, 2006; Elliot & Pais, 2006). It also may come as no surprise that during the Asian tsunami of 2004, foreign tourists also received substantially more aid during the storm than the thousands of impoverished villagers who were more or less left to fend for themselves (Mooney et al., 2009).

Almost without exception, whenever a natural disaster strikes, those who are poor or are considered to be on the fringes of society tend to be victimized the most. It may be no coincidence that in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, women, children, and racial minorities were very likely to be among the dead that were found scattered throughout the streets of New Orleans. Dyson (2006) argues these groups were unable to evacuate the city prior to the storm due to financial constraints. Many low-income New Orleanians may have simply not had access to reliable transportation. Even if some of these individuals were fortunate enough to have personal vehicles, evacuating may have been seen as a considerable expense. Some residents may have opted instead to take their chances, only to realize later that they had made a monumental mistake.

While racial minorities were disproportionately the victims of Hurricane Katrina, the media also victimized them throughout this natural disaster (Brezina & Kaufman, 2008). During the storm, for example, there were media reports that grossly exaggerated the levels of violence among New Orleanians. According to Brezina (2008), many of these stories stereotyped the urban poor as prone to violence and extreme forms of criminal behavior. Other scholars suggest that a few of the media depictions were outright racist. For example, Tierney and colleagues (2006) contend that the news media coverage following Hurricane Katrina portrayed New Orleans as a “snake pit of anarchy, a violent place where armed gangs of black men took advantage of the disaster not only to loot but also to commit capital crimes” (p. 68). Stories were also published with alleged incidents of child rape and mass murder among evacuees who were in the New Orleans Superdome.

It is astonishing that major news outlets published the bogus stories described here without any meaningful attempt to check for accuracy. It is even more disconcerting that most of the general public seemed willing to accept these stories without question. Perhaps for a few individuals, these horrific tales even confirmed a few privately held beliefs regarding the poor and people of color. Even in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, some white Americans still regard racial minorities as being culturally or intellectually inferior to themselves. It does not help that the media often exacerbate these misperceptions by frequently publishing stories that depict racial minorities, particularly members of the African American community, in a negative light. One does not have to look very hard to find stories that portray African Americans as either welfare recipients or criminals.

Fortunately, many anthropologists have dedicated their careers to speaking out against racial stereotypes. One relatively recent example is illustrated in the work of the late Eugenia Shanklin. In perhaps her best-known work, Anthropology and Race, Shanklin (1993) advances the notion that race is socially constructed. She also argues against the notion that race is a valid scientific concept. In many respects, Shanklin’s argument builds upon the classic work of renowned anthropologist Franz Boas. Boas wrote extensively about race during the beginning of the 20th century, and he too concluded that this was a social, rather than a biological, concept (as cited in Williams, 1996). In retrospect, his writings against the evils of racism were quite ahead of their time. This is especially true when one considers that these were written during a period when social Darwinism and eugenics were at the height of their popularity (Williams, 1996).

In addition to writing about race, other scholars have also examined the processes by which members of racial minorities become disenfranchised. For example, in his classic article, “The Culture of Poverty,” anthropologist Oscar Lewis (1966) argues that for some people poverty is a way of life. Often this may be due largely to structural barriers, such as a lack of jobs and inadequate educational systems. Lewis contends that at an early age, children living in urban slums begin to subscribe to a set of values and beliefs that are conducive to poverty. It is not uncommon for many of these children to be racial minorities. Children who are assimilated into this culture have problems deferring gratification and avoid participating in society’s major institutions (Lewis, 1966). This culture is also characterized by a high concentration of single-parent households that are usually headed by females. Over time, children who are socialized in these environments begin to adopt self-defeating attitudes that can make them less competitive in the marketplace when they enter adulthood. Even today, more than 40 years since it was published, Lewis’s study still has relevance. African Americans and Hispanics are among the poorest people in the nation. In fact, year after year, the rates of poverty among these minority groups are 2 to 3 times higher than the poverty found among Caucasians. Sadly, many of those who are impoverished in this country are children. For example, Conley (1999) writes that “over half of African American children under the age of 6 are living in poverty” (p. 10).

It can often be very challenging for individuals who are raised in poverty to overcome obstacles in order to obtain even the most menial types of employment. According to Princeton anthropologist Katherine S. Newman (1999), even minimum-wage jobs at fast-food restaurants are extremely competitive, and there are usually more applications than there are positions. She contends that often African Americans are excluded from these jobs, even if the restaurant is in a predominantly African American neighborhood. Individuals who are fortunate enough to obtain jobs as “burger flippers” must still compete with other employees for hours and often suffer incivilities from supervisors and customers. During the course of her research, Newman (1999) conducted countless interviews with low-income fast-food workers and observed them in their natural environment. She argues that many of America’s poor are working in dead-end jobs, such as the fast-food industry, with little hope of advancement.

While the United States certainly has problems of inequality and poverty, it is currently the richest and most powerful nation and does not suffer from the same level of poverty as many third-world and developing countries. As mentioned previously, it is important for anthropologists to adopt a global perspective when studying various problems. Regardless of where someone lives, we are all members of the human race, and therefore a problem experienced by one culture inevitably affects us all. Consider that throughout the world more than one fourth of the earth’s population (roughly 2.5 billion people) subsist on less than $2 a day, and approximately 1 billion people (or 1 in 6 individuals) live on less than $1 a day (World Bank, 2007). The planet has more than enough resources, yet millions of people throughout the world currently lack access to food, durable shelter, and clean drinking water.

Anthropologists such as Bodley (2008) argue that these are the consequences of living in the contemporary commercial world. Unlike small tribal societies that were prevalent thousands of years ago, the contemporary commercial world prevents some individuals from obtaining basic necessities. Today, levels of global inequality are at an all-time high. As power elites race toward accumulating capital, this has produced enormous wealth and power differentials. Bodley (2008) writes:

The daily lives and future prospects of virtually all of the world’s 6 billion people are shaped by the political and economic decisions made by a relative handful of people who command trillions of dollars in financial capital and overwhelmingly powerful armed forces. (p. 17)

Given this statement, it may come as no surprise that currently the wealthiest 10% of adults own 85% of the world’s total wealth, while the poorest half of the adult global population holds slightly more than 1% of the world’s wealth (Davies, Sandstrom, Shorrocks, & Wolff, 2006).

Clearly inequality, poverty, and racism are problems not only in this country but also throughout the world. Bodley (2008) contends that many of these problems stem from global competition. In the name of competition, corporate executives in the United States hold back wages from their employees and deny benefits that are standard in other industrialized countries (Gray, 2000). There is no question that workers in European nations enjoy far more rights than workers in America. In Western European countries, for example, it is much more difficult to fire an employee, and it is virtually unheard of for companies to “downsize” merely to add to the overall profit margin. Also, workers in France enjoy a shorter workweek and more paid time off compared with their United States counterparts (Heiner, 2006).

While it seems as though European nations have the most humane system, there is at least some indication that a few of these countries are beginning to imitate the U.S. model in order to gain a competitive edge (Heiner, 2006). Currently, the United States is considered to be the most capitalistic society in the world because it has the least amount of governmental regulations. This lack of regulations has resulted in gross disparities and outright discrimination (Bodley, 2008; Kornblum & Julian, 2009; Mooney et al., 2009). Global competition has also led to the exploitation of third-world countries. According to Heiner (2006), this has been going on for several hundred years. He contends that there is a long history of powerful nations establishing colonies throughout the third world in order to plunder and export valuable natural resources such as gold, silver, silks, and other items. Also, even though some corporations have recently relocated from the first world to the third world, Heiner (2006) suggests that poverty has actually been on the rise in underdeveloped countries since the arrival of these new companies. Standards of living have also been on the decline in the third world and are likely to continue (Mooney et al., 2009). It seems that extreme forms of capitalism exacerbate inequalities in poor countries just as they do in wealthy ones, such as the United States.

While it may seem obvious to many of us that unbridled economic pursuits have created enormous inequalities throughout the world, the media have done much to shape the way we think about capitalism. By and large, in the United States, capitalism is held as one of the highest virtues. This is in great part due to the media-constructed image of the “American Dream,” where anyone can achieve wealth and success with enough hard work (Messner & Rosenfeld, 2007). Even though extreme forms of capitalism have resulted in gross inequalities, Americans are socialized to believe that it is the best system. Ironically, this also applies to poor people. Newman (1999) suggests that even the poor tend to embrace the notion of the American Dream, in the hope that they may one day achieve success and accumulate wealth.

The media, owned in the United States by the power elite, bears a large responsibility in generating the idea that anyone can be successful in a capitalistic society (Heiner, 2006). This has dire consequences. When individuals in the United States fail to move from rags to riches, they often blame themselves. In this country, perhaps more than anywhere else in the world, there is a tendency to blame the poor whenever they fail to be successful or provide for their families. It is no surprise that in this country, in order to be considered successful and good providers, many workers are spending more time at the office and less time with their families. While some individuals have been able to accumulate more possessions and increase their purchasing power by working longer hours, sadly this has come at a considerable expense to their families (Mooney et al., 2009). In fact, one of the greatest social problems facing Americans today involves problems related to the family. This deserves a considerable amount of attention and shall be discussed in depth in the following section.

In the United States and elsewhere throughout the world, there are many different varieties and types of families. The U.S. Census defines a family as a group of two or more people who are bonded by marriage, adoption, or blood. Mooney and colleagues (2009) contend that the above definition is somewhat restrictive because it does not take into account foster families and unmarried same-sex and opposite-sex couples. The official definition of a family also fails to consider those relationships that function and feel like a family. For example, college students living together and sharing expenses and household chores might be considered a family in the broadest sense of the word. As we begin to examine the various social problems that plague the family, it is necessary to understand that today’s family knows virtually no bounds. In fact, the traditional conception of the family, with a father who is the breadwinner and a mother who stays at home with the children, is probably one of the least typical types of families in the United States.

According to Skolnick (1991), throughout history people have warned that the family was on the verge of becoming extinct. During political campaigns, social conservatives tend to be the most vocal about the decay of the traditional family unit. For instance, it is not uncommon for conservative candidates to attack liberals for their tolerance of gay marriage and single parenthood (Kornblum & Julian, 2009). It is also not unusual for some traditionalists to blame problems of the family on working mothers. Many social conservatives argue that in order to solve many of society’s problems, families should return to the breadwinner-housewife model that was popular in the United States during the 1950s (Heiner, 2006; Hewlett & West, 1998). Some scholars claim, however, that these are merely tactics to divert attention from the low levels of government funding given to families that are struggling financially.

Conservatives, who ardently favor independence and self-sufficiency, often fail to remember that their idealized conception of the 1950s family was possible only because of unprecedented amounts of governmental assistance, such as low-interest housing loans and educational subsidies (Hewlett & West, 1998). During the 1950s, the federal government spent billions of dollars on public transportation, sewage systems, parks, and other projects designed to help families (Hewlett & West, 1998; Kornblum & Julian, 2009). From past experience, it would seem that a similar use of public subsidies would be an effective way to help facilitate families in the new millennium. It is ironic, however, that many traditionalists tend to be against this idea. Of all the industrialized countries in the world, the United States has the fewest governmental policies and programs designed to support the family. Given this, perhaps it should come as no surprise that the United States also has one of the highest divorce rates and is willing to tolerate levels of child poverty that would be unconscionable in other countries. These are current issues that plague the family and will be discussed later in more detail.

In his classic ethnographic study of familial relations among natives of the Trobriand Islands, anthropologist Bronislaw Malinowski (1941) argues that even in the most primitive societies, there is an expectation that “every family must have a father,” and “a woman must marry before she may have children” (p. 202). Currently, while it is true that premarital pregnancy in the United States is frowned upon, unmarried mothers are generally not as stigmatized as they have been in past history (Kornblum & Julian, 2009). In fact, today approximately one out of three children in the United States is born out of wedlock (Mooney et al., 2009). While this may seem high to some people, it is important to note that countries such as Norway, Sweden, Iceland, Denmark, the United Kingdom, and France have even higher rates of nonmarital births than the United States. In Iceland, as many as 2 out of 3 children are born out of wedlock, and in approximately half of the births in Norway and Sweden, the mother and father are not legally married (Money et al., 2009).

In addition to the above countries, there are also parts of West Africa where unmarried women may have children without being ostracized or punished. This is especially true if the mother is not considered to be promiscuous. According to Kornblum and Julian (2009), as long at the identity of the child’s father is known, an unwed mother will experience very little, if any, stigmatization. While some social conservatives have expressed moral outrage at the rise in the rate of nonmarital births, many children both in this country and in other cultures throughout the world have been able to find love and acceptance in family structures that may not be considered traditional by American standards. It is also important to mention that children who are raised in nontraditional families may be provided with a higher level of care and nurturing than those whose father is present but struggling with a problem such as substance abuse or unemployment (Kornblum & Julian, 2009).

The family is very important to our understanding of social problems because it is often identified as being either the solution to or the source of societal ills, such as alcoholism, crime, and poverty (Heiner, 2006). If children come from a “good” family, for example, then it is commonly believed that they will avoid engaging in deviant or pathological behavior. Most traditionalists assume that children who are adequately socialized will ultimately receive a good education, raise families of their own, pay taxes, and more or less be productive citizens. On the other hand, if a child is delinquent, turns to drugs, or has problems in school, the family is often singled out as being the source of the problem. Given the importance that we place on the family, it is no surprise that this has been an important research topic for many social scientists.

Recently, there have been numerous studies examining whether or not—and to what extent—financial problems plague the family. Most of the current literature indicates that a tough U.S. economy has led women to largely abandon the role of solely being a homemaker (Jacobs & Gerson, 2004). Today, approximately 71% of women with children under the age of 18 are employed outside the home (U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2007). Also, ever since the 1970s, both men and women have consistently been working longer hours. In the United States, it is not unusual for many individuals to work more than 50 hours a week (Jacobs & Gerson, 2004). In fact, a recent study conducted by the Economic Policy Institute (as cited in Bernstein, Mishel, & Schmitt, 2000) found that, on average, married working couples with children spent 256 more hours at their jobs in 1997 than they did in 1989. This is roughly the equivalent of an extra month and a half of time spent at the office rather than at home.

Not surprisingly, family members today are more stressed out than ever before as they try to juggle domestic and work responsibilities. Sadly, children often have the most difficulty in adjusting to the pressures of living in a dual-income family. Occasionally, some may even become “latchkey children,” who are largely responsible for their own care, since both of their parents are working. If this is true in two-parent households, then it is especially the case for children who live in families with only one parent. In this country, 49% of non-Hispanic white single-mother households are due to divorce, in contrast to 62% of African American single-mother families, where the mother never married (Fields, 2004).

Currently, the United States has the highest rate of divorce among Western nations. According to Kimmel (2004), 40% of marriages in this country end in divorce.

The rate of divorce rate is even higher when one looks at couples who have already been married at least once. Also, children are involved in 60% of divorce cases. In other words, when a marriage dissolves, more often than not, children will be affected by this decision.

Divorce represents perhaps one of the most serious problems plaguing the family because it has the potential to result in many devastating consequences. First, divorce is likely to create significant economic hardships for mothers and their children. Many women, who might have been unpaid homemakers or part-time employees during their marriage, are not fully prepared to enter the workplace in the aftermath of a divorce (Amato, 2003). Usually, following a divorce, they must go back to school and at the same time find a way to increase their income. Often, this entails getting a job (or a second job), putting in more overtime, and finding other means to make money. At the same time, they often have to take on new financial responsibilities, such as balancing the family budget. On top of this, women are disproportionately likely to assume many (if not all) of the child-rearing duties following a divorce (Amato, 2003). To make matters worse, it is not uncommon for fathers to offer little or no economic support.

In addition to the adverse economic impact that it has on families, divorce also places children at a higher risk of developing psychological and emotional problems. Some children with divorced parents may become extremely sensitive or overly aggressive and develop serious self-esteem issues. If this behavior goes unchecked, it can lower a child’s performance in school and have serious long-term effects on his or her future. Amato and Cheadle (2005) contend that the repercussions of divorce are so powerful that even future children, who have not even been born, have the potential to be affected. For example, a divorce that occurs in the first generation of a family may be associated with lower education, more divorce, and greater familial tensions in the second generation, which then may in turn contribute to similar problems in the third generation. While there are some situations where divorce may be the only option, there is no question that it can result in many negative consequences for a family’s well-being.

Finally, there is some relatively new literature indicating that natural disasters can affect a family’s well-being. While these events can result in the loss of lives and financial ruin, it appears that events such as floods, hurricanes, and tornados can also impact families. In one recent study, for example, it was estimated that approximately 1 in 4 (22%) of New Orleanians indicated that they had experienced marital discord as a result of Hurricane Katrina (Kaiser Family Foundation, 2007). In this study, 10% of the subjects even admitted to throwing things at their partner, yelling, and losing control. Other studies have confirmed the above finding that natural disasters, such as Katrina, can lead to domestic violence and various other forms of familial abuse (Brezina & Kaufman, 2008; Enarson, 1999). While domestic violence clearly is an issue that is related to the family, it is also one of many social problems that are related to crime. Problems related to crime shall be discussed in more detail in the following section.

Of all the various social problems, perhaps those related to crime tend to receive the most attention. According to Mooney and colleagues (2009), a crime is considered to be an act or omission of an act that is punishable by either federal, state, or local law. In other words, in order for there to be a crime, the state must be able to impose a punishment. Also, someone who commits a crime must be acting willfully and voluntarily. An action is also likely to be seen as a crime if there is no legitimate excuse as to why the actor engaged in a particular proscribed act (Mooney et al., 2009). Interestingly, in spite of clear-cut legal definitions of crime, the popular media have influenced our conception of crime and criminals. Television shows such as CSI, COPS, and Law & Order, for example, have provided distortions about the criminal justice system. The media, then, often take an active role in shaping and defining the types of acts that we as a society should consider to be crimes, as well as the types of people who are likely to be perceived as criminals.

In order to illustrate the above point, one only needs to tune in to an episode of COPS, a reality television show that enables viewers to follow police officers during the course of their 8-hour shifts. The viewer, from the comfort of home, sees life from the inside of a patrol car. One of the more controversial aspects of this program is that it features a distorted view of criminals. For example, usually, but not always, the perpetrator on the show is a minority male. The suspect is often intoxicated and portrayed as a burden to society. The officers, on the other hand, are seen as the heroes who quell the disturbance and dispense justice within the confines of the law. Almost always, the officers are depicted as being fair, calm, and highly professional. They are very seldom, if ever, shown to be aggressive, hostile, or downright abusive. While some television viewers may find crime shows such as COPS to be extremely entertaining, these programs nevertheless have the potential to be very misleading and can even generate negative stereotypes about racial minorities. As Heiner (2006) argues, much of the reality of crime is edited out of “reality-based” crime shows. In writing about these shows, he contends that they “depend upon the cooperation of the authorities, and their producers must keep in mind that if the police are not presented in a positive light, then they will not get their cooperation for future broadcasts” (Heiner, 2006, p. 115).

As a result of being exposed to a heavy regimen of cop and reality crime shows, some members of the public may be left with an impression that most racial minorities use drugs and are an overall menace to society (Heiner, 2006).

These shows rarely, if ever, portray offenses that are committed by law enforcement agents, though certainly these do exist. Also, they say very little about white-collar offenses, though these have the potential to be much more costly to society than traditional street crimes (Messner & Rosenfeld, 2007).

The images of crime that are perpetuated by the media also have a high likelihood to create a sense of fear and anxiety. Every year, Americans spend billions of dollars on safes and home-security devices. One can only wonder how many of these expenditures are related to the distorted images that are routinely shown on reality cop shows and the nightly news (Beirne & Messerschmidt, 2000). Many television programs are notorious for portraying criminals as disproportionately likely to be members of racial minorities who offend against Caucasians. Sadly, this does little to further race relations in this country.

Even though there is absolutely no evidence that members of racial minorities are more likely to be criminal by nature, African American and Hispanic males are disproportionately overrepresented at virtually every stage in the criminal justice system (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2006; Steffensmeier & Demuth, 2000). This may be due in large part to an institutional bias against minorities. Police officers, for example, may engage in racial profiling where they target suspects solely based on their race. This practice amounts to little more than outright discrimination and may be just one example of the racial bias that is inherent in the criminal justice system. African American males are particularly likely to be the recipients of institutional racism. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (2006), it is estimated that 12% of all African American males in their late 20s are in some type of correctional facility compared with only 1.7% of white males in this same age range. African American males are also more than 8 times as likely as Caucasians to be sent to prison for drug offenses (Mooney et al., 2009). In fact, 1 out of every 8 African American males can be found serving time in some type of correctional facility on any given day (Kornblum & Julian, 2009). It would be naive to think that members of racial minorities are not discriminated against at every checkpoint on the criminal justice assembly line.

Perhaps one of the greatest problems plaguing the criminal justice system today is the current incarceration binge in the United States. As of this writing, the United States has one of the highest rates of incarceration in the world, with approximately 702 out of every 100,000 of its citizens incarcerated (International Centre for Prison Studies, 2005). Also, Americans are more likely to be incarcerated than individuals living in less democratic countries, such as Russia or South Africa. The United States, without question, has the highest incarceration rate of all other industrialized democracies. Yet many Americans tend to believe that we are “soft” on crime (Mooney et al., 2009). This is in spite of the fact that between 1975 and 2002, the prison population increased from 204,593 to 2,033,331 (Heiner, 2006). In other words, in slightly over 25 years, it increased almost tenfold.

The costs of America’s obsession with punishment should be enough to scare any fiscal conservative, yet often these are the very individuals who are lobbying to build more prisons. Perhaps the most frightening fact of all is that this recent preoccupation with imprisonment has not corresponded with an increase in crime. In other words, even as the crime rate in the United States has decreased, the incarceration rate has nevertheless continued to increase (Kornblum & Julian, 2009). Again, it cannot be understated that the current incarceration binge is extremely expensive. Today, American taxpayers spend approximately $60 billion a year to maintain the prison system. This is quite astounding when one considers that the cost was $9 billion only two decades ago. Perhaps if the United States was not so preoccupied with punishment, this money could be utilized for education, health care, and public transportation. Society’s response to crime has in and of itself become an enormous social problem and is currently depleting valuable tax dollars.

One does not need to look very far to see that there are numerous social problems currently plaguing the world. Though this research paper has discussed a variety of different types of problems, this in no way implies that the list is exhaustive. In addition to the social problems mentioned in this paper, anthropologists also study problems related to health and the health care system, population and immigration, alcohol and drug use, gender and sexuality, mental illness, and terrorism. Unfortunately, there are a variety of problems that the world is currently facing. It would be beyond the scope of this research paper and quite impossible to discuss them all.

One major theme of this research paper is that the media play a vital role in defining and constructing various types of problems. Often, the information that the media present has the potential to be biased. Contrary to popular opinion, most news organizations are a far cry from being radical, left-wing institutions. Instead, many tend to be tainted by corporate influences and sponsors who buy advertisements (Heiner, 2006). This inevitably affects the way we as a society view social problems. To make matters worse, many citizens in the United States seldom go to the polls to cast their votes. If policymakers perceive the public as being largely apathetic and uninformed, then there is a high likelihood that little action will be taken to alleviate social problems. Therefore, it is crucial for Americans not only to vote but also to stay informed.

Admittedly, it can be difficult to keep abreast of the latest news, given that many media outlets have been co-opted by powerful corporations. Nevertheless, there are at least a few Web sites that provide insights into different social problems throughout the world. Heiner (2006), for example, points to the following sites: factcheck.org, truthout.org, alternet.org, corpwatch.org, and projectcensored.org (a site that is maintained by students). Perhaps through open communication and the dissemination of information, individuals can work together and begin to find ways to solve today’s problems. Anthropologists and other social scientists have a special responsibility to educate and empower the people of the world. Though there is undoubtedly a great deal of work to be done, this is not an undertaking that is altogether impossible. In order to be successful, everyone must do their part to make the world a better place. This can start on a small, individual level and can include activities such as volunteering and recycling. If everyone is willing to contribute, there is great hope.

Bibliography:

• Amato, P. R. (2003). Reconciling divergent perspectives: Judith Wallerstein, quantitative family research, and children of divorce. Family Relations, 52, 332–339.
• Amato, P. R., & Cheadle, J. (2005). The long reach of divorce: Divorce and child well-being across three generations. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 67, 191–206.
• Beder, S. (1997). Global spin: The corporate assault on environmentalism. White River Junction, VT: Chelsea Green.
• Beirne, P., & Messerschmidt, J. (2000). Criminology (3rd ed.). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
• Bernstein, J., Mishel, L., & Schmitt, J. (2000). State of working America 2000–2001. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.
• Bodley, J. H. (2008). Anthropology and contemporary human problems (5th ed.). Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press.
• Brezina, T. (2008). What went wrong in New Orleans? An examination of the welfare dependency explanation. Social Forces, 55, 23–42.
• Brezina, T., & Kaufman, J. M. (2008). What really happened in New Orleans? Estimating the threat of violence during the Hurricane Katrina disaster. Justice Quarterly, 25 (4), 701–722.
• Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2006). Prison and jail inmates at midyear 2005. Available at https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/pjim05.pdf
• Cheeseman, G. (2007, June 27). Plastic shopping bags being banned. Online Journal. Available at http://www.online journal.com
• Conley, D. (1999). Being black and living in the red: Race, wealth, and social policy in the United States. Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Davies, J. B., Sandstrom, S., Shorrocks, A., & Wolff, E. N. (2006). The world distribution of household wealth. United Nations University–World Institute for Development Economics Research. Available at http://www.iariw.org/papers/2006/davies.pdf
• Dowd, M. (2005, September 3). United States of shame. New York Times. Available at https://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/03/opinion/united-states-of-shame.html
• Dyson, M. E. (2006). Come hell or high water: Hurricane Katrina and the color of disaster. New York: Perseus.
• Elliot, J. R., & Pais, J. (2006). Race, class, and Hurricane Katrina: Social differences in human responses to the disaster. Social Science Research, 35, 295–321.
• Enarson, E. (1999). Violence against women in disasters. Violence Against Women, 5, 742–768.
• Energy Information Administration. (2007). International energy annual 2005. Washington, DC: Author.
• Environmental Protection Agency. (2009). Report on the environment: Quantity of municipal solid waste generated and managed. Washington, DC: Author.
• Fields, J. (2004). America’s families and living arrangements: 2003. Washington, DC: U.S. Census Bureau.
• Gray, J. (2000). False dawn: The delusions of global capitalism. New York: New York Press.
• Heiner, R. (2006). Social problems: An introduction to critical constructionism. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Hewlett, S. A., & West, C. (1998). The war against parents: What we can do for America’s beleaguered moms and dads. Boston: Mariner Books (Houghton Mifflin).
• International Centre for Prison Studies. (2005). World prison population list, 2005. Available at www.prisonstudies.org
• Jacobs, J. A., & Gerson, K. (2004). Time divide: Work, family, and gender inequality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Kaiser Family Foundation. (2007). Giving voice to the people of New Orleans: The Kaiser post-Katrina baseline survey. Menlo Park, CA: Author. Available at https://www.kff.org/medicaid/poll-finding/giving-voice-to-the-people-of-new/
• Kimmel, M. S. (2004). The gendered society (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
• Kornblum, W., & Julian, J. (2009). Social problems (13th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
• Lewis, O. (1966). The culture of poverty. Scientific American, 2 (5), 19–25.
• Malinowski, B. (1941). The sexual life of savages in northwestern Melanesia. New York: Halcyon House.
• Messner, S. F., & Rosenfeld, R. (2007). Crime and the American Dream (4th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
• Mooney, L. A., Knox, D., & Schacht, C. (2009). Understanding social problems (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
• Newman, K. S. (1999). No shame in my game: The working poor in the inner city. New York: Knopf.
• Robbins, R. H. (1999). Global problems and the culture of capitalism. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
• Shanklin, E. (1993). Anthropology and race: The explanation of differences. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
• Skolnick, A. (1991). Embattled paradise: The American family in an age of uncertainty. New York: Basic Books.
• Steffensmeier, D., & Demuth, S. (2000). Ethnicity and sentencing outcomes in U.S. federal courts: Who is punished more harshly? American Sociological Review, 65, 705–729.
• Tierney, K., & Bevc, C. (2007). Disaster as war: Militarism and social construction of disaster in New Orleans. In D. L. Brunsma, D. Overfelt, & J. S. Picou (Eds.), The sociology of Katrina: Perspectives on a modern catastrophe (pp. 35–49). New York: Rowman & Littlefield.
• S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2007). Occupational outlook handbook. Available at https://www.bls.gov/
• Williams, V. J., Jr. (1996). Rethinking race: Franz Boas and his contemporaries. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky.
• World Bank. (2007). Global monitoring report. Washington, DC: Author.

ORDER HIGH QUALITY CUSTOM PAPER

Along with Stanford news and stories, show me:

• Student information
• Faculty/Staff information

We want to provide announcements, events, leadership messages and resources that are relevant to you. Your selection is stored in a browser cookie which you can remove at any time using “Clear all personalization” below.

Stanford Impact Labs is applying insights gleaned from the social and data sciences to address real-world problems. (Image credit: Getty Images)

A carefully worded letter to help a youth reentering school from the justice system. A text message reminding a released defendant about an upcoming court appearance. A publicly available SMS course showing people how to spot misleading information online.

These are some of the promising interventions Stanford scholars, working in collaboration with local government agencies, nonprofit organizations, and community groups, are testing to address social problems such as recidivism, incarceration, and misinformation in new and innovative ways.

These projects – along with dozens of others – have been funded and supported by Stanford Impact Labs (SIL), an initiative that launched in the 2019-20 academic year as part of the university’s Long-range Vision to help researchers who want their scholarships to serve the public good by using data-driven, social science research to develop actionable ways to address pernicious and pervasive social problems.

“The mission of Stanford Impact Labs is to put social science to work for society through deep and engaged partnerships with leaders in government, nonprofits, and business,” said Jeremy Weinstein , SIL’s founder and faculty director.

Since launching, SIL has provided dozens of fellowships , hosted workshops and forums – including one with the White House – and co-launched a new major to prepare students with the technical skills and practical know-how to tackle these challenges. Another major component of SIL’s work has been investing in a wide range of collaborative research projects at key stages to develop evidence-based solutions that realize individual and social potential. Over four years, SIL has already allocated $20.2M to 32 impact labs working with partners at the local, state, national, and international levels.

“What SIL represents is an ecosystem that supports the path from science to impact beyond the university,” said Weinstein, a professor of political science in the School of Humanities and Sciences. “What we, and a set of our peer institutions, are trying to figure out is what it means to support innovations around social problems with the same intentionality we bring to R&D in life sciences and engineering.”

Working closely with the problem solvers

At the center of SIL’s mission is collaboration: Scholars work closely with practitioners from the public, private, or social sectors who deal with problems firsthand yet may lack the necessary time, resources, or research tools to generate evidence and insights that could help a potential solution gain traction.

SIL recognizes that tangible solutions to stubborn social problems require collaboration across sectors and thus commits to funding and supporting projects that bridge research and practice.

For example, one collaboration SIL first funded in 2020 was between the Computational Policy Lab (CPL) and the Santa Clara County Office of the Public Defender (SCCPDO). The SCCPDO connected with CPL after hearing Sharad Goel speak about how technology can be used to address social problems.

Goel, along with his colleagues at Stanford and the nonprofit group The Bail Project , were developing a tool the SCCPDO wanted to implement: a mobile app that could send reminder messages to public defender clients about their court hearing dates.

Missing a court hearing can come with devastating consequences for a defendant: In some cases, it can lead judges to issue a warrant for the defendant’s arrest, which can lead to added jail time.

If court appearances could be increased, would incarcerations decrease?

SCCPDO and researchers from Stanford and Harvard, where Goel is now a professor of public policy, put the question to the test in a randomized control trial. They discovered that a simple text reminder does make a difference: They were able to reduce arrest warrants for missed court dates by approximately 20% and incarceration resulting from missed hearings dropped from 6.2% in the control group to 4.8% in the treatment condition. Across the roughly 20,000 clients that SCCPDO serves every year, this would translate to several hundred fewer people in jail each year.

In addition, their intervention was a cost-effective way to prevent incarceration: Each text message they sent cost less than a penny; and across the many reminders and responses they received from clients, it cost about 60¢ per case to send reminders.

These findings, which have not yet been peer-reviewed, are detailed in a working paper available on the pre-publication print website, ArXiv .

By collaborating with scholars, the SCCPDO was able to rigorously test one way to lower incarceration rates, measuring impact in a way a technology vendor would likely not provide, said Alex Chohlas-Wood , PhD ’22, the executive director of CPL.

For Chohlas-Wood, whose own research focuses on using technology and data science to support criminal justice reform, working with SCCPDO is an opportunity to make tangible change.

“To be able to connect the dots between the work that we’re doing and seeing actual improvement in outcomes really matters to me,” Chohlas-Wood said.

Realities of implementation

Sometimes, the biggest challenges facing problem-solvers are practical ones. Elegantly designed solutions to a problem might exist but there are obstacles that make them difficult, if not near impossible, to implement.

Scalability is something Carey Courtney, the re-entry coordinator for Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS), carefully considers in her work helping students transition out of the juvenile justice system and to school.

Some interventions to help the students Courtney works with can take weeks, if not months, to complete. For example, the Dialectical Behavioral Therapy program that MPS offers to some students has around 30 sessions to it. While effective, solutions like these take a lot of time, as well as lengthy training, to implement.

Moreover, many of the children Courtney works with have lives that are sometimes unstable and often unpredictable, making it hard to deliver consistent care.

Having something widely accessible to implement appealed to Courtney, who was eager to work with Stanford psychologist Greg Walton and his team after learning about his Lifting the Bar (LTB) work through a colleague.

“Sometimes, when we get a new intervention, they are very time-consuming,” Courtney said. “Then we saw this, I thought, ‘Oh! We could actually do this.’”

Unlike some school programs which need to be administered by a licensed professional, the intervention developed by the LBT team requires no special training or skills to implement.

The premise is straightforward: Over one hour, reentering students read and answer questions about what it is like to transition from detention to school, sharing advice for future students. Then they identify a teacher who could be an important source of support for them, and what they would like that person to know about them, their values and goals and schools and challenges they face the teacher might help with. Their responses are then populated into a personalized letter that is sent to that teacher.

As the result of a Stage 2 SIL investment in the LTB team and their partnership with MPS, Courtney has been able to roll out the intervention in her school district. What also appealed to Courtney was how the intervention focuses on the student-teacher relationship.

“It sets up this relationship early on,” Courtney said. “When [a] student feels connected to school and safe adults, they’re less likely to make negative choices, which can lead them back into the juvenile justice system – or at a minimum, keep them out longer.”

Different approaches to have impact

Also central to SIL’s vision is cultivating a community for both scholars and problem solvers to share issues they encounter while implementing solutions-oriented research.

Having a purpose-driven mission towards research is what led Susan Athey , the Economics of Technology Professor at the Graduate Business School (GSB) and founder of the Golub Capital Social Impact Lab to want to become involved with SIL.

Athey recently received Stage 2 funding to build out a project her students helped get off the ground at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic to better understand the spread of health-related misinformation. Athey hopes her team’s findings can be expanded into a tool that can be used across different contexts and settings.

“There’s a lot of different ways to have an impact as an academic,” said Athey. “For me, one form of impact is to create case studies that establish the potential for a novel intervention to have meaningful effect.”

Athey has found that her colleagues involved at SIL also share an orientation towards developing research-informed tools that are both scalable and generalizable.

“SIL is a community of people who are really thinking about how to combine research with impact so that you get this multiple-level impact – not just the impact on the people you’re helping, but also the thought leadership and broader impact on how people are approaching these problems,” said Athey.

Small steps leading to big changes

While there have been major advancements across health, science, and policy that have made the world a better place, there are still many issues facing society. Solving social problems is undoubtedly complex, and scholars recognize there is no single, technical fix. Issues are multifaceted and different approaches are needed.

“We have to figure out how to take these complex problems and break them down into tractable pieces and figure out where and how we can make progress and help inspire people that progress is possible,” Weinstein said.

SIL continues to grow. A new set of Stage 2 labs has just been funded, and it is launching a fellowship this year for nonprofit leaders and for local policymakers to come to Stanford and learn new ways to gather data and insights that can be used to meet their social change goals.

Earlier this month, SIL announced the first of two Stage 3 investments it will make this year, the initiative’s biggest and boldest grants yet.

“Social problems exist for many different reasons, and often because there are powerful interests aligned behind the status quo. But I’m unwilling to accept, as are most of my colleagues, the status quo. We believe research can help us find actionable solutions,” Weinstein said.

Stanford Impact Labs is a university-wide initiative established in the School of Humanities and Sciences.

Cultural Relativity and Acceptance of Embryonic Stem Cell Research

Article sidebar.

Main Article Content

There is a debate about the ethical implications of using human embryos in stem cell research, which can be influenced by cultural, moral, and social values. This paper argues for an adaptable framework to accommodate diverse cultural and religious perspectives. By using an adaptive ethics model, research protections can reflect various populations and foster growth in stem cell research possibilities.

INTRODUCTION

Stem cell research combines biology, medicine, and technology, promising to alter health care and the understanding of human development. Yet, ethical contention exists because of individuals’ perceptions of using human embryos based on their various cultural, moral, and social values. While these disagreements concerning policy, use, and general acceptance have prompted the development of an international ethics policy, such a uniform approach can overlook the nuanced ethical landscapes between cultures. With diverse viewpoints in public health, a single global policy, especially one reflecting Western ethics or the ethics prevalent in high-income countries, is impractical. This paper argues for a culturally sensitive, adaptable framework for the use of embryonic stem cells. Stem cell policy should accommodate varying ethical viewpoints and promote an effective global dialogue. With an extension of an ethics model that can adapt to various cultures, we recommend localized guidelines that reflect the moral views of the people those guidelines serve.

Stem cells, characterized by their unique ability to differentiate into various cell types, enable the repair or replacement of damaged tissues. Two primary types of stem cells are somatic stem cells (adult stem cells) and embryonic stem cells. Adult stem cells exist in developed tissues and maintain the body’s repair processes. [1] Embryonic stem cells (ESC) are remarkably pluripotent or versatile, making them valuable in research. [2] However, the use of ESCs has sparked ethics debates. Considering the potential of embryonic stem cells, research guidelines are essential. The International Society for Stem Cell Research (ISSCR) provides international stem cell research guidelines. They call for “public conversations touching on the scientific significance as well as the societal and ethical issues raised by ESC research.” [3] The ISSCR also publishes updates about culturing human embryos 14 days post fertilization, suggesting local policies and regulations should continue to evolve as ESC research develops. [4]  Like the ISSCR, which calls for local law and policy to adapt to developing stem cell research given cultural acceptance, this paper highlights the importance of local social factors such as religion and culture.

I.     Global Cultural Perspective of Embryonic Stem Cells

Views on ESCs vary throughout the world. Some countries readily embrace stem cell research and therapies, while others have stricter regulations due to ethical concerns surrounding embryonic stem cells and when an embryo becomes entitled to moral consideration. The philosophical issue of when the “someone” begins to be a human after fertilization, in the morally relevant sense, [5] impacts when an embryo becomes not just worthy of protection but morally entitled to it. The process of creating embryonic stem cell lines involves the destruction of the embryos for research. [6] Consequently, global engagement in ESC research depends on social-cultural acceptability.

a.     US and Rights-Based Cultures

In the United States, attitudes toward stem cell therapies are diverse. The ethics and social approaches, which value individualism, [7] trigger debates regarding the destruction of human embryos, creating a complex regulatory environment. For example, the 1996 Dickey-Wicker Amendment prohibited federal funding for the creation of embryos for research and the destruction of embryos for “more than allowed for research on fetuses in utero.” [8] Following suit, in 2001, the Bush Administration heavily restricted stem cell lines for research. However, the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005 was proposed to help develop ESC research but was ultimately vetoed. [9] Under the Obama administration, in 2009, an executive order lifted restrictions allowing for more development in this field. [10] The flux of research capacity and funding parallels the different cultural perceptions of human dignity of the embryo and how it is socially presented within the country’s research culture. [11]

b.     Ubuntu and Collective Cultures

African bioethics differs from Western individualism because of the different traditions and values. African traditions, as described by individuals from South Africa and supported by some studies in other African countries, including Ghana and Kenya, follow the African moral philosophies of Ubuntu or Botho and Ukama , which “advocates for a form of wholeness that comes through one’s relationship and connectedness with other people in the society,” [12] making autonomy a socially collective concept. In this context, for the community to act autonomously, individuals would come together to decide what is best for the collective. Thus, stem cell research would require examining the value of the research to society as a whole and the use of the embryos as a collective societal resource. If society views the source as part of the collective whole, and opposes using stem cells, compromising the cultural values to pursue research may cause social detachment and stunt research growth. [13] Based on local culture and moral philosophy, the permissibility of stem cell research depends on how embryo, stem cell, and cell line therapies relate to the community as a whole. Ubuntu is the expression of humanness, with the person’s identity drawn from the “’I am because we are’” value. [14] The decision in a collectivistic culture becomes one born of cultural context, and individual decisions give deference to others in the society.

Consent differs in cultures where thought and moral philosophy are based on a collective paradigm. So, applying Western bioethical concepts is unrealistic. For one, Africa is a diverse continent with many countries with different belief systems, access to health care, and reliance on traditional or Western medicines. Where traditional medicine is the primary treatment, the “’restrictive focus on biomedically-related bioethics’” [is] problematic in African contexts because it neglects bioethical issues raised by traditional systems.” [15] No single approach applies in all areas or contexts. Rather than evaluating the permissibility of ESC research according to Western concepts such as the four principles approach, different ethics approaches should prevail.

Another consideration is the socio-economic standing of countries. In parts of South Africa, researchers have not focused heavily on contributing to the stem cell discourse, either because it is not considered health care or a health science priority or because resources are unavailable. [16] Each country’s priorities differ given different social, political, and economic factors. In South Africa, for instance, areas such as maternal mortality, non-communicable diseases, telemedicine, and the strength of health systems need improvement and require more focus. [17] Stem cell research could benefit the population, but it also could divert resources from basic medical care. Researchers in South Africa adhere to the National Health Act and Medicines Control Act in South Africa and international guidelines; however, the Act is not strictly enforced, and there is no clear legislation for research conduct or ethical guidelines. [18]

Some parts of Africa condemn stem cell research. For example, 98.2 percent of the Tunisian population is Muslim. [19] Tunisia does not permit stem cell research because of moral conflict with a Fatwa. Religion heavily saturates the regulation and direction of research. [20] Stem cell use became permissible for reproductive purposes only recently, with tight restrictions preventing cells from being used in any research other than procedures concerning ART/IVF.  Their use is conditioned on consent, and available only to married couples. [21] The community's receptiveness to stem cell research depends on including communitarian African ethics.

c.     Asia

Some Asian countries also have a collective model of ethics and decision making. [22] In China, the ethics model promotes a sincere respect for life or human dignity, [23] based on protective medicine. This model, influenced by Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), [24] recognizes Qi as the vital energy delivered via the meridians of the body; it connects illness to body systems, the body’s entire constitution, and the universe for a holistic bond of nature, health, and quality of life. [25] Following a protective ethics model, and traditional customs of wholeness, investment in stem cell research is heavily desired for its applications in regenerative therapies, disease modeling, and protective medicines. In a survey of medical students and healthcare practitioners, 30.8 percent considered stem cell research morally unacceptable while 63.5 percent accepted medical research using human embryonic stem cells. Of these individuals, 89.9 percent supported increased funding for stem cell research. [26] The scientific community might not reflect the overall population. From 1997 to 2019, China spent a total of $576 million (USD) on stem cell research at 8,050 stem cell programs, increased published presence from 0.6 percent to 14.01 percent of total global stem cell publications as of 2014, and made significant strides in cell-based therapies for various medical conditions. [27] However, while China has made substantial investments in stem cell research and achieved notable progress in clinical applications, concerns linger regarding ethical oversight and transparency. [28] For example, the China Biosecurity Law, promoted by the National Health Commission and China Hospital Association, attempted to mitigate risks by introducing an institutional review board (IRB) in the regulatory bodies. 5800 IRBs registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry since 2021. [29] However, issues still need to be addressed in implementing effective IRB review and approval procedures.

The substantial government funding and focus on scientific advancement have sometimes overshadowed considerations of regional cultures, ethnic minorities, and individual perspectives, particularly evident during the one-child policy era. As government policy adapts to promote public stability, such as the change from the one-child to the two-child policy, [30] research ethics should also adapt to ensure respect for the values of its represented peoples.

Japan is also relatively supportive of stem cell research and therapies. Japan has a more transparent regulatory framework, allowing for faster approval of regenerative medicine products, which has led to several advanced clinical trials and therapies. [31] South Korea is also actively engaged in stem cell research and has a history of breakthroughs in cloning and embryonic stem cells. [32] However, the field is controversial, and there are issues of scientific integrity. For example, the Korean FDA fast-tracked products for approval, [33] and in another instance, the oocyte source was unclear and possibly violated ethical standards. [34] Trust is important in research, as it builds collaborative foundations between colleagues, trial participant comfort, open-mindedness for complicated and sensitive discussions, and supports regulatory procedures for stakeholders. There is a need to respect the culture’s interest, engagement, and for research and clinical trials to be transparent and have ethical oversight to promote global research discourse and trust.

d.     Middle East

Countries in the Middle East have varying degrees of acceptance of or restrictions to policies related to using embryonic stem cells due to cultural and religious influences. Saudi Arabia has made significant contributions to stem cell research, and conducts research based on international guidelines for ethical conduct and under strict adherence to guidelines in accordance with Islamic principles. Specifically, the Saudi government and people require ESC research to adhere to Sharia law. In addition to umbilical and placental stem cells, [35] Saudi Arabia permits the use of embryonic stem cells as long as they come from miscarriages, therapeutic abortions permissible by Sharia law, or are left over from in vitro fertilization and donated to research. [36] Laws and ethical guidelines for stem cell research allow the development of research institutions such as the King Abdullah International Medical Research Center, which has a cord blood bank and a stem cell registry with nearly 10,000 donors. [37] Such volume and acceptance are due to the ethical ‘permissibility’ of the donor sources, which do not conflict with religious pillars. However, some researchers err on the side of caution, choosing not to use embryos or fetal tissue as they feel it is unethical to do so. [38]

Jordan has a positive research ethics culture. [39] However, there is a significant issue of lack of trust in researchers, with 45.23 percent (38.66 percent agreeing and 6.57 percent strongly agreeing) of Jordanians holding a low level of trust in researchers, compared to 81.34 percent of Jordanians agreeing that they feel safe to participate in a research trial. [40] Safety testifies to the feeling of confidence that adequate measures are in place to protect participants from harm, whereas trust in researchers could represent the confidence in researchers to act in the participants’ best interests, adhere to ethical guidelines, provide accurate information, and respect participants’ rights and dignity. One method to improve trust would be to address communication issues relevant to ESC. Legislation surrounding stem cell research has adopted specific language, especially concerning clarification “between ‘stem cells’ and ‘embryonic stem cells’” in translation. [41] Furthermore, legislation “mandates the creation of a national committee… laying out specific regulations for stem-cell banking in accordance with international standards.” [42] This broad regulation opens the door for future global engagement and maintains transparency. However, these regulations may also constrain the influence of research direction, pace, and accessibility of research outcomes.

e.     Europe

In the European Union (EU), ethics is also principle-based, but the principles of autonomy, dignity, integrity, and vulnerability are interconnected. [43] As such, the opportunity for cohesion and concessions between individuals’ thoughts and ideals allows for a more adaptable ethics model due to the flexible principles that relate to the human experience The EU has put forth a framework in its Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being allowing member states to take different approaches. Each European state applies these principles to its specific conventions, leading to or reflecting different acceptance levels of stem cell research. [44]

For example, in Germany, Lebenzusammenhang , or the coherence of life, references integrity in the unity of human culture. Namely, the personal sphere “should not be subject to external intervention.” [45]  Stem cell interventions could affect this concept of bodily completeness, leading to heavy restrictions. Under the Grundgesetz, human dignity and the right to life with physical integrity are paramount. [46] The Embryo Protection Act of 1991 made producing cell lines illegal. Cell lines can be imported if approved by the Central Ethics Commission for Stem Cell Research only if they were derived before May 2007. [47] Stem cell research respects the integrity of life for the embryo with heavy specifications and intense oversight. This is vastly different in Finland, where the regulatory bodies find research more permissible in IVF excess, but only up to 14 days after fertilization. [48] Spain’s approach differs still, with a comprehensive regulatory framework. [49] Thus, research regulation can be culture-specific due to variations in applied principles. Diverse cultures call for various approaches to ethical permissibility. [50] Only an adaptive-deliberative model can address the cultural constructions of self and achieve positive, culturally sensitive stem cell research practices. [51]

II.     Religious Perspectives on ESC

Embryonic stem cell sources are the main consideration within religious contexts. While individuals may not regard their own religious texts as authoritative or factual, religion can shape their foundations or perspectives.

The Qur'an states:

“And indeed We created man from a quintessence of clay. Then We placed within him a small quantity of nutfa (sperm to fertilize) in a safe place. Then We have fashioned the nutfa into an ‘alaqa (clinging clot or cell cluster), then We developed the ‘alaqa into mudgha (a lump of flesh), and We made mudgha into bones, and clothed the bones with flesh, then We brought it into being as a new creation. So Blessed is Allah, the Best of Creators.” [52]

Many scholars of Islam estimate the time of soul installment, marked by the angel breathing in the soul to bring the individual into creation, as 120 days from conception. [53] Personhood begins at this point, and the value of life would prohibit research or experimentation that could harm the individual. If the fetus is more than 120 days old, the time ensoulment is interpreted to occur according to Islamic law, abortion is no longer permissible. [54] There are a few opposing opinions about early embryos in Islamic traditions. According to some Islamic theologians, there is no ensoulment of the early embryo, which is the source of stem cells for ESC research. [55]

In Buddhism, the stance on stem cell research is not settled. The main tenets, the prohibition against harming or destroying others (ahimsa) and the pursuit of knowledge (prajña) and compassion (karuna), leave Buddhist scholars and communities divided. [56] Some scholars argue stem cell research is in accordance with the Buddhist tenet of seeking knowledge and ending human suffering. Others feel it violates the principle of not harming others. Finding the balance between these two points relies on the karmic burden of Buddhist morality. In trying to prevent ahimsa towards the embryo, Buddhist scholars suggest that to comply with Buddhist tenets, research cannot be done as the embryo has personhood at the moment of conception and would reincarnate immediately, harming the individual's ability to build their karmic burden. [57] On the other hand, the Bodhisattvas, those considered to be on the path to enlightenment or Nirvana, have given organs and flesh to others to help alleviate grieving and to benefit all. [58] Acceptance varies on applied beliefs and interpretations.

Catholicism does not support embryonic stem cell research, as it entails creation or destruction of human embryos. This destruction conflicts with the belief in the sanctity of life. For example, in the Old Testament, Genesis describes humanity as being created in God’s image and multiplying on the Earth, referencing the sacred rights to human conception and the purpose of development and life. In the Ten Commandments, the tenet that one should not kill has numerous interpretations where killing could mean murder or shedding of the sanctity of life, demonstrating the high value of human personhood. In other books, the theological conception of when life begins is interpreted as in utero, [59] highlighting the inviolability of life and its formation in vivo to make a religious point for accepting such research as relatively limited, if at all. [60] The Vatican has released ethical directives to help apply a theological basis to modern-day conflicts. The Magisterium of the Church states that “unless there is a moral certainty of not causing harm,” experimentation on fetuses, fertilized cells, stem cells, or embryos constitutes a crime. [61] Such procedures would not respect the human person who exists at these stages, according to Catholicism. Damages to the embryo are considered gravely immoral and illicit. [62] Although the Catholic Church officially opposes abortion, surveys demonstrate that many Catholic people hold pro-choice views, whether due to the context of conception, stage of pregnancy, threat to the mother’s life, or for other reasons, demonstrating that practicing members can also accept some but not all tenets. [63]

Some major Jewish denominations, such as the Reform, Conservative, and Reconstructionist movements, are open to supporting ESC use or research as long as it is for saving a life. [64] Within Judaism, the Talmud, or study, gives personhood to the child at birth and emphasizes that life does not begin at conception: [65]

“If she is found pregnant, until the fortieth day it is mere fluid,” [66]

Whereas most religions prioritize the status of human embryos, the Halakah (Jewish religious law) states that to save one life, most other religious laws can be ignored because it is in pursuit of preservation. [67] Stem cell research is accepted due to application of these religious laws.

We recognize that all religions contain subsets and sects. The variety of environmental and cultural differences within religious groups requires further analysis to respect the flexibility of religious thoughts and practices. We make no presumptions that all cultures require notions of autonomy or morality as under the common morality theory , which asserts a set of universal moral norms that all individuals share provides moral reasoning and guides ethical decisions. [68] We only wish to show that the interaction with morality varies between cultures and countries.

III.     A Flexible Ethical Approach

The plurality of different moral approaches described above demonstrates that there can be no universally acceptable uniform law for ESC on a global scale. Instead of developing one standard, flexible ethical applications must be continued. We recommend local guidelines that incorporate important cultural and ethical priorities.

While the Declaration of Helsinki is more relevant to people in clinical trials receiving ESC products, in keeping with the tradition of protections for research subjects, consent of the donor is an ethical requirement for ESC donation in many jurisdictions including the US, Canada, and Europe. [69] The Declaration of Helsinki provides a reference point for regulatory standards and could potentially be used as a universal baseline for obtaining consent prior to gamete or embryo donation.

For instance, in Columbia University’s egg donor program for stem cell research, donors followed standard screening protocols and “underwent counseling sessions that included information as to the purpose of oocyte donation for research, what the oocytes would be used for, the risks and benefits of donation, and process of oocyte stimulation” to ensure transparency for consent. [70] The program helped advance stem cell research and provided clear and safe research methods with paid participants. Though paid participation or covering costs of incidental expenses may not be socially acceptable in every culture or context, [71] and creating embryos for ESC research is illegal in many jurisdictions, Columbia’s program was effective because of the clear and honest communications with donors, IRBs, and related stakeholders.  This example demonstrates that cultural acceptance of scientific research and of the idea that an egg or embryo does not have personhood is likely behind societal acceptance of donating eggs for ESC research. As noted, many countries do not permit the creation of embryos for research.

Proper communication and education regarding the process and purpose of stem cell research may bolster comprehension and garner more acceptance. “Given the sensitive subject material, a complete consent process can support voluntary participation through trust, understanding, and ethical norms from the cultures and morals participants value. This can be hard for researchers entering countries of different socioeconomic stability, with different languages and different societal values. [72]

An adequate moral foundation in medical ethics is derived from the cultural and religious basis that informs knowledge and actions. [73] Understanding local cultural and religious values and their impact on research could help researchers develop humility and promote inclusion.

IV.     Concerns

Some may argue that if researchers all adhere to one ethics standard, protection will be satisfied across all borders, and the global public will trust researchers. However, defining what needs to be protected and how to define such research standards is very specific to the people to which standards are applied. We suggest that applying one uniform guide cannot accurately protect each individual because we all possess our own perceptions and interpretations of social values. [74] Therefore, the issue of not adjusting to the moral pluralism between peoples in applying one standard of ethics can be resolved by building out ethics models that can be adapted to different cultures and religions.

Other concerns include medical tourism, which may promote health inequities. [75] Some countries may develop and approve products derived from ESC research before others, compromising research ethics or drug approval processes. There are also concerns about the sale of unauthorized stem cell treatments, for example, those without FDA approval in the United States. Countries with robust research infrastructures may be tempted to attract medical tourists, and some customers will have false hopes based on aggressive publicity of unproven treatments. [76]

For example, in China, stem cell clinics can market to foreign clients who are not protected under the regulatory regimes. Companies employ a marketing strategy of “ethically friendly” therapies. Specifically, in the case of Beike, China’s leading stem cell tourism company and sprouting network, ethical oversight of administrators or health bureaus at one site has “the unintended consequence of shifting questionable activities to another node in Beike's diffuse network.” [77] In contrast, Jordan is aware of stem cell research’s potential abuse and its own status as a “health-care hub.” Jordan’s expanded regulations include preserving the interests of individuals in clinical trials and banning private companies from ESC research to preserve transparency and the integrity of research practices. [78]

The social priorities of the community are also a concern. The ISSCR explicitly states that guidelines “should be periodically revised to accommodate scientific advances, new challenges, and evolving social priorities.” [79] The adaptable ethics model extends this consideration further by addressing whether research is warranted given the varying degrees of socioeconomic conditions, political stability, and healthcare accessibilities and limitations. An ethical approach would require discussion about resource allocation and appropriate distribution of funds. [80]

While some religions emphasize the sanctity of life from conception, which may lead to public opposition to ESC research, others encourage ESC research due to its potential for healing and alleviating human pain. Many countries have special regulations that balance local views on embryonic personhood, the benefits of research as individual or societal goods, and the protection of human research subjects. To foster understanding and constructive dialogue, global policy frameworks should prioritize the protection of universal human rights, transparency, and informed consent. In addition to these foundational global policies, we recommend tailoring local guidelines to reflect the diverse cultural and religious perspectives of the populations they govern. Ethics models should be adapted to local populations to effectively establish research protections, growth, and possibilities of stem cell research.

For example, in countries with strong beliefs in the moral sanctity of embryos or heavy religious restrictions, an adaptive model can allow for discussion instead of immediate rejection. In countries with limited individual rights and voice in science policy, an adaptive model ensures cultural, moral, and religious views are taken into consideration, thereby building social inclusion. While this ethical consideration by the government may not give a complete voice to every individual, it will help balance policies and maintain the diverse perspectives of those it affects. Embracing an adaptive ethics model of ESC research promotes open-minded dialogue and respect for the importance of human belief and tradition. By actively engaging with cultural and religious values, researchers can better handle disagreements and promote ethical research practices that benefit each society.

This brief exploration of the religious and cultural differences that impact ESC research reveals the nuances of relative ethics and highlights a need for local policymakers to apply a more intense adaptive model.

[1] Poliwoda, S., Noor, N., Downs, E., Schaaf, A., Cantwell, A., Ganti, L., Kaye, A. D., Mosel, L. I., Carroll, C. B., Viswanath, O., & Urits, I. (2022). Stem cells: a comprehensive review of origins and emerging clinical roles in medical practice.  Orthopedic reviews ,  14 (3), 37498. https://doi.org/10.52965/001c.37498

[2] Poliwoda, S., Noor, N., Downs, E., Schaaf, A., Cantwell, A., Ganti, L., Kaye, A. D., Mosel, L. I., Carroll, C. B., Viswanath, O., & Urits, I. (2022). Stem cells: a comprehensive review of origins and emerging clinical roles in medical practice.  Orthopedic reviews ,  14 (3), 37498. https://doi.org/10.52965/001c.37498

[3] International Society for Stem Cell Research. (2023). Laboratory-based human embryonic stem cell research, embryo research, and related research activities . International Society for Stem Cell Research. https://www.isscr.org/guidelines/blog-post-title-one-ed2td-6fcdk ; Kimmelman, J., Hyun, I., Benvenisty, N.  et al.  Policy: Global standards for stem-cell research.  Nature   533 , 311–313 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1038/533311a

[4] International Society for Stem Cell Research. (2023). Laboratory-based human embryonic stem cell research, embryo research, and related research activities . International Society for Stem Cell Research. https://www.isscr.org/guidelines/blog-post-title-one-ed2td-6fcdk

[5] Concerning the moral philosophies of stem cell research, our paper does not posit a personal moral stance nor delve into the “when” of human life begins. To read further about the philosophical debate, consider the following sources:

Sandel M. J. (2004). Embryo ethics--the moral logic of stem-cell research.  The New England journal of medicine ,  351 (3), 207–209. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp048145 ; George, R. P., & Lee, P. (2020, September 26). Acorns and Embryos . The New Atlantis. https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/acorns-and-embryos ; Sagan, A., & Singer, P. (2007). The moral status of stem cells. Metaphilosophy , 38 (2/3), 264–284. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24439776 ; McHugh P. R. (2004). Zygote and "clonote"--the ethical use of embryonic stem cells.  The New England journal of medicine ,  351 (3), 209–211. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp048147 ; Kurjak, A., & Tripalo, A. (2004). The facts and doubts about beginning of the human life and personality.  Bosnian journal of basic medical sciences ,  4 (1), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.17305/bjbms.2004.3453

[6] Vazin, T., & Freed, W. J. (2010). Human embryonic stem cells: derivation, culture, and differentiation: a review.  Restorative neurology and neuroscience ,  28 (4), 589–603. https://doi.org/10.3233/RNN-2010-0543

[7] Socially, at its core, the Western approach to ethics is widely principle-based, autonomy being one of the key factors to ensure a fundamental respect for persons within research. For information regarding autonomy in research, see: Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, & National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research (1978). The Belmont Report. Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research.; For a more in-depth review of autonomy within the US, see: Beauchamp, T. L., & Childress, J. F. (1994). Principles of Biomedical Ethics . Oxford University Press.

[8] Sherley v. Sebelius , 644 F.3d 388 (D.C. Cir. 2011), citing 45 C.F.R. 46.204(b) and [42 U.S.C. § 289g(b)]. https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/opinions.nsf/6c690438a9b43dd685257a64004ebf99/$file/11-5241-1391178.pdf

[9] Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2005, H. R. 810, 109 th Cong. (2001). https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/109/hr810/text ; Bush, G. W. (2006, July 19). Message to the House of Representatives . National Archives and Records Administration. https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2006/07/20060719-5.html

[10] National Archives and Records Administration. (2009, March 9). Executive order 13505 -- removing barriers to responsible scientific research involving human stem cells . National Archives and Records Administration. https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/removing-barriers-responsible-scientific-research-involving-human-stem-cells

[11] Hurlbut, W. B. (2006). Science, Religion, and the Politics of Stem Cells.  Social Research ,  73 (3), 819–834. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40971854

[12] Akpa-Inyang, Francis & Chima, Sylvester. (2021). South African traditional values and beliefs regarding informed consent and limitations of the principle of respect for autonomy in African communities: a cross-cultural qualitative study. BMC Medical Ethics . 22. 10.1186/s12910-021-00678-4.

[13] Source for further reading: Tangwa G. B. (2007). Moral status of embryonic stem cells: perspective of an African villager. Bioethics , 21(8), 449–457. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8519.2007.00582.x , see also Mnisi, F. M. (2020). An African analysis based on ethics of Ubuntu - are human embryonic stem cell patents morally justifiable? African Insight , 49 (4).

[14] Jecker, N. S., & Atuire, C. (2021). Bioethics in Africa: A contextually enlightened analysis of three cases. Developing World Bioethics , 22 (2), 112–122. https://doi.org/10.1111/dewb.12324

[15] Jecker, N. S., & Atuire, C. (2021). Bioethics in Africa: A contextually enlightened analysis of three cases. Developing World Bioethics, 22(2), 112–122. https://doi.org/10.1111/dewb.12324

[16] Jackson, C.S., Pepper, M.S. Opportunities and barriers to establishing a cell therapy programme in South Africa.  Stem Cell Res Ther   4 , 54 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1186/scrt204 ; Pew Research Center. (2014, May 1). Public health a major priority in African nations . Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project. https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2014/05/01/public-health-a-major-priority-in-african-nations/

[17] Department of Health Republic of South Africa. (2021). Health Research Priorities (revised) for South Africa 2021-2024 . National Health Research Strategy. https://www.health.gov.za/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/National-Health-Research-Priorities-2021-2024.pdf

[18] Oosthuizen, H. (2013). Legal and Ethical Issues in Stem Cell Research in South Africa. In: Beran, R. (eds) Legal and Forensic Medicine. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-32338-6_80 , see also: Gaobotse G (2018) Stem Cell Research in Africa: Legislation and Challenges. J Regen Med 7:1. doi: 10.4172/2325-9620.1000142

[19] United States Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration Services. (1998). Tunisia: Information on the status of Christian conversions in Tunisia . UNHCR Web Archive. https://webarchive.archive.unhcr.org/20230522142618/https://www.refworld.org/docid/3df0be9a2.html

[20] Gaobotse, G. (2018) Stem Cell Research in Africa: Legislation and Challenges. J Regen Med 7:1. doi: 10.4172/2325-9620.1000142

[21] Kooli, C. Review of assisted reproduction techniques, laws, and regulations in Muslim countries.  Middle East Fertil Soc J   24 , 8 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s43043-019-0011-0 ; Gaobotse, G. (2018) Stem Cell Research in Africa: Legislation and Challenges. J Regen Med 7:1. doi: 10.4172/2325-9620.1000142

[22] Pang M. C. (1999). Protective truthfulness: the Chinese way of safeguarding patients in informed treatment decisions. Journal of medical ethics , 25(3), 247–253. https://doi.org/10.1136/jme.25.3.247

[23] Wang, L., Wang, F., & Zhang, W. (2021). Bioethics in China’s biosecurity law: Forms, effects, and unsettled issues. Journal of law and the biosciences , 8(1).  https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsab019 https://academic.oup.com/jlb/article/8/1/lsab019/6299199

[24] Wang, Y., Xue, Y., & Guo, H. D. (2022). Intervention effects of traditional Chinese medicine on stem cell therapy of myocardial infarction.  Frontiers in pharmacology ,  13 , 1013740. https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2022.1013740

[25] Li, X.-T., & Zhao, J. (2012). Chapter 4: An Approach to the Nature of Qi in TCM- Qi and Bioenergy. In Recent Advances in Theories and Practice of Chinese Medicine (p. 79). InTech.

[26] Luo, D., Xu, Z., Wang, Z., & Ran, W. (2021). China's Stem Cell Research and Knowledge Levels of Medical Practitioners and Students.  Stem cells international ,  2021 , 6667743. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6667743

[27] Luo, D., Xu, Z., Wang, Z., & Ran, W. (2021). China's Stem Cell Research and Knowledge Levels of Medical Practitioners and Students.  Stem cells international ,  2021 , 6667743. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6667743

[28] Zhang, J. Y. (2017). Lost in translation? accountability and governance of Clinical Stem Cell Research in China. Regenerative Medicine , 12 (6), 647–656. https://doi.org/10.2217/rme-2017-0035

[29] Wang, L., Wang, F., & Zhang, W. (2021). Bioethics in China’s biosecurity law: Forms, effects, and unsettled issues. Journal of law and the biosciences , 8(1).  https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsab019 https://academic.oup.com/jlb/article/8/1/lsab019/6299199

[30] Chen, H., Wei, T., Wang, H.  et al.  Association of China’s two-child policy with changes in number of births and birth defects rate, 2008–2017.  BMC Public Health   22 , 434 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-12839-0

[31] Azuma, K. Regulatory Landscape of Regenerative Medicine in Japan.  Curr Stem Cell Rep   1 , 118–128 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40778-015-0012-6

[32] Harris, R. (2005, May 19). Researchers Report Advance in Stem Cell Production . NPR. https://www.npr.org/2005/05/19/4658967/researchers-report-advance-in-stem-cell-production

[33] Park, S. (2012). South Korea steps up stem-cell work.  Nature . https://doi.org/10.1038/nature.2012.10565

[34] Resnik, D. B., Shamoo, A. E., & Krimsky, S. (2006). Fraudulent human embryonic stem cell research in South Korea: lessons learned.  Accountability in research ,  13 (1), 101–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/08989620600634193 .

[35] Alahmad, G., Aljohani, S., & Najjar, M. F. (2020). Ethical challenges regarding the use of stem cells: interviews with researchers from Saudi Arabia. BMC medical ethics, 21(1), 35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-020-00482-6

[36] Association for the Advancement of Blood and Biotherapies.  https://www.aabb.org/regulatory-and-advocacy/regulatory-affairs/regulatory-for-cellular-therapies/international-competent-authorities/saudi-arabia

[37] Alahmad, G., Aljohani, S., & Najjar, M. F. (2020). Ethical challenges regarding the use of stem cells: Interviews with researchers from Saudi Arabia.  BMC medical ethics ,  21 (1), 35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-020-00482-6

[38] Alahmad, G., Aljohani, S., & Najjar, M. F. (2020). Ethical challenges regarding the use of stem cells: Interviews with researchers from Saudi Arabia. BMC medical ethics , 21(1), 35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-020-00482-6

Culturally, autonomy practices follow a relational autonomy approach based on a paternalistic deontological health care model. The adherence to strict international research policies and religious pillars within the regulatory environment is a great foundation for research ethics. However, there is a need to develop locally targeted ethics approaches for research (as called for in Alahmad, G., Aljohani, S., & Najjar, M. F. (2020). Ethical challenges regarding the use of stem cells: interviews with researchers from Saudi Arabia. BMC medical ethics, 21(1), 35. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-020-00482-6), this decision-making approach may help advise a research decision model. For more on the clinical cultural autonomy approaches, see: Alabdullah, Y. Y., Alzaid, E., Alsaad, S., Alamri, T., Alolayan, S. W., Bah, S., & Aljoudi, A. S. (2022). Autonomy and paternalism in Shared decision‐making in a Saudi Arabian tertiary hospital: A cross‐sectional study. Developing World Bioethics , 23 (3), 260–268. https://doi.org/10.1111/dewb.12355 ; Bukhari, A. A. (2017). Universal Principles of Bioethics and Patient Rights in Saudi Arabia (Doctoral dissertation, Duquesne University). https://dsc.duq.edu/etd/124; Ladha, S., Nakshawani, S. A., Alzaidy, A., & Tarab, B. (2023, October 26). Islam and Bioethics: What We All Need to Know . Columbia University School of Professional Studies. https://sps.columbia.edu/events/islam-and-bioethics-what-we-all-need-know

[39] Ababneh, M. A., Al-Azzam, S. I., Alzoubi, K., Rababa’h, A., & Al Demour, S. (2021). Understanding and attitudes of the Jordanian public about clinical research ethics.  Research Ethics ,  17 (2), 228-241.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016120966779

[40] Ababneh, M. A., Al-Azzam, S. I., Alzoubi, K., Rababa’h, A., & Al Demour, S. (2021). Understanding and attitudes of the Jordanian public about clinical research ethics.  Research Ethics ,  17 (2), 228-241.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016120966779

[41] Dajani, R. (2014). Jordan’s stem-cell law can guide the Middle East.  Nature  510, 189. https://doi.org/10.1038/510189a

[42] Dajani, R. (2014). Jordan’s stem-cell law can guide the Middle East.  Nature  510, 189. https://doi.org/10.1038/510189a

[43] The EU’s definition of autonomy relates to the capacity for creating ideas, moral insight, decisions, and actions without constraint, personal responsibility, and informed consent. However, the EU views autonomy as not completely able to protect individuals and depends on other principles, such as dignity, which “expresses the intrinsic worth and fundamental equality of all human beings.” Rendtorff, J.D., Kemp, P. (2019). Four Ethical Principles in European Bioethics and Biolaw: Autonomy, Dignity, Integrity and Vulnerability. In: Valdés, E., Lecaros, J. (eds) Biolaw and Policy in the Twenty-First Century. International Library of Ethics, Law, and the New Medicine, vol 78. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05903-3_3

[44] Council of Europe. Convention for the protection of Human Rights and Dignity of the Human Being with regard to the Application of Biology and Medicine: Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine (ETS No. 164) https://www.coe.int/en/web/conventions/full-list?module=treaty-detail&treatynum=164 (forbidding the creation of embryos for research purposes only, and suggests embryos in vitro have protections.); Also see Drabiak-Syed B. K. (2013). New President, New Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research Policy: Comparative International Perspectives and Embryonic Stem Cell Research Laws in France.  Biotechnology Law Report ,  32 (6), 349–356. https://doi.org/10.1089/blr.2013.9865

[45] Rendtorff, J.D., Kemp, P. (2019). Four Ethical Principles in European Bioethics and Biolaw: Autonomy, Dignity, Integrity and Vulnerability. In: Valdés, E., Lecaros, J. (eds) Biolaw and Policy in the Twenty-First Century. International Library of Ethics, Law, and the New Medicine, vol 78. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-05903-3_3

[46] Tomuschat, C., Currie, D. P., Kommers, D. P., & Kerr, R. (Trans.). (1949, May 23). Basic law for the Federal Republic of Germany. https://www.btg-bestellservice.de/pdf/80201000.pdf

[47] Regulation of Stem Cell Research in Germany . Eurostemcell. (2017, April 26). https://www.eurostemcell.org/regulation-stem-cell-research-germany

[48] Regulation of Stem Cell Research in Finland . Eurostemcell. (2017, April 26). https://www.eurostemcell.org/regulation-stem-cell-research-finland

[49] Regulation of Stem Cell Research in Spain . Eurostemcell. (2017, April 26). https://www.eurostemcell.org/regulation-stem-cell-research-spain

[50] Some sources to consider regarding ethics models or regulatory oversights of other cultures not covered:

Kara MA. Applicability of the principle of respect for autonomy: the perspective of Turkey. J Med Ethics. 2007 Nov;33(11):627-30. doi: 10.1136/jme.2006.017400. PMID: 17971462; PMCID: PMC2598110.

Ugarte, O. N., & Acioly, M. A. (2014). The principle of autonomy in Brazil: one needs to discuss it ...  Revista do Colegio Brasileiro de Cirurgioes ,  41 (5), 374–377. https://doi.org/10.1590/0100-69912014005013

Bharadwaj, A., & Glasner, P. E. (2012). Local cells, global science: The rise of embryonic stem cell research in India . Routledge.

For further research on specific European countries regarding ethical and regulatory framework, we recommend this database: Regulation of Stem Cell Research in Europe . Eurostemcell. (2017, April 26). https://www.eurostemcell.org/regulation-stem-cell-research-europe   

[51] Klitzman, R. (2006). Complications of culture in obtaining informed consent. The American Journal of Bioethics, 6(1), 20–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/15265160500394671 see also: Ekmekci, P. E., & Arda, B. (2017). Interculturalism and Informed Consent: Respecting Cultural Differences without Breaching Human Rights.  Cultura (Iasi, Romania) ,  14 (2), 159–172.; For why trust is important in research, see also: Gray, B., Hilder, J., Macdonald, L., Tester, R., Dowell, A., & Stubbe, M. (2017). Are research ethics guidelines culturally competent?  Research Ethics ,  13 (1), 23-41.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016116650235

[52] The Qur'an  (M. Khattab, Trans.). (1965). Al-Mu’minun, 23: 12-14. https://quran.com/23

[53] Lenfest, Y. (2017, December 8). Islam and the beginning of human life . Bill of Health. https://blog.petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/2017/12/08/islam-and-the-beginning-of-human-life/

[54] Aksoy, S. (2005). Making regulations and drawing up legislation in Islamic countries under conditions of uncertainty, with special reference to embryonic stem cell research. Journal of Medical Ethics , 31: 399-403.; see also: Mahmoud, Azza. "Islamic Bioethics: National Regulations and Guidelines of Human Stem Cell Research in the Muslim World." Master's thesis, Chapman University, 2022. https://doi.org/10.36837/ chapman.000386

[55] Rashid, R. (2022). When does Ensoulment occur in the Human Foetus. Journal of the British Islamic Medical Association , 12 (4). ISSN 2634 8071. https://www.jbima.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/2-Ethics-3_-Ensoulment_Rafaqat.pdf.

[56] Sivaraman, M. & Noor, S. (2017). Ethics of embryonic stem cell research according to Buddhist, Hindu, Catholic, and Islamic religions: perspective from Malaysia. Asian Biomedicine,8(1) 43-52.  https://doi.org/10.5372/1905-7415.0801.260

[57] Jafari, M., Elahi, F., Ozyurt, S. & Wrigley, T. (2007). 4. Religious Perspectives on Embryonic Stem Cell Research. In K. Monroe, R. Miller & J. Tobis (Ed.),  Fundamentals of the Stem Cell Debate: The Scientific, Religious, Ethical, and Political Issues  (pp. 79-94). Berkeley: University of California Press.  https://escholarship.org/content/qt9rj0k7s3/qt9rj0k7s3_noSplash_f9aca2e02c3777c7fb76ea768ba458f0.pdf https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520940994-005

[58] Lecso, P. A. (1991). The Bodhisattva Ideal and Organ Transplantation.  Journal of Religion and Health ,  30 (1), 35–41. http://www.jstor.org/stable/27510629 ; Bodhisattva, S. (n.d.). The Key of Becoming a Bodhisattva . A Guide to the Bodhisattva Way of Life. http://www.buddhism.org/Sutras/2/BodhisattvaWay.htm

[59] There is no explicit religious reference to when life begins or how to conduct research that interacts with the concept of life. However, these are relevant verses pertaining to how the fetus is viewed. (( King James Bible . (1999). Oxford University Press. (original work published 1769))

Jerimiah 1: 5 “Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb I sanctified thee…”

In prophet Jerimiah’s insight, God set him apart as a person known before childbirth, a theme carried within the Psalm of David.

Psalm 139: 13-14 “…Thou hast covered me in my mother's womb. I will praise thee; for I am fearfully and wonderfully made…”

These verses demonstrate David’s respect for God as an entity that would know of all man’s thoughts and doings even before birth.

[60] It should be noted that abortion is not supported as well.

[61] The Vatican. (1987, February 22). Instruction on Respect for Human Life in Its Origin and on the Dignity of Procreation Replies to Certain Questions of the Day . Congregation For the Doctrine of the Faith. https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19870222_respect-for-human-life_en.html

[62] The Vatican. (2000, August 25). Declaration On the Production and the Scientific and Therapeutic Use of Human Embryonic Stem Cells . Pontifical Academy for Life. https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_academies/acdlife/documents/rc_pa_acdlife_doc_20000824_cellule-staminali_en.html ; Ohara, N. (2003). Ethical Consideration of Experimentation Using Living Human Embryos: The Catholic Church’s Position on Human Embryonic Stem Cell Research and Human Cloning. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology . Retrieved from https://article.imrpress.com/journal/CEOG/30/2-3/pii/2003018/77-81.pdf.

[63] Smith, G. A. (2022, May 23). Like Americans overall, Catholics vary in their abortion views, with regular mass attenders most opposed . Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2022/05/23/like-americans-overall-catholics-vary-in-their-abortion-views-with-regular-mass-attenders-most-opposed/

[64] Rosner, F., & Reichman, E. (2002). Embryonic stem cell research in Jewish law. Journal of halacha and contemporary society , (43), 49–68.; Jafari, M., Elahi, F., Ozyurt, S. & Wrigley, T. (2007). 4. Religious Perspectives on Embryonic Stem Cell Research. In K. Monroe, R. Miller & J. Tobis (Ed.),  Fundamentals of the Stem Cell Debate: The Scientific, Religious, Ethical, and Political Issues  (pp. 79-94). Berkeley: University of California Press.  https://escholarship.org/content/qt9rj0k7s3/qt9rj0k7s3_noSplash_f9aca2e02c3777c7fb76ea768ba458f0.pdf https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520940994-005

[65] Schenker J. G. (2008). The beginning of human life: status of embryo. Perspectives in Halakha (Jewish Religious Law).  Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics ,  25 (6), 271–276. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-008-9221-6

[66] Ruttenberg, D. (2020, May 5). The Torah of Abortion Justice (annotated source sheet) . Sefaria. https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/234926.7?lang=bi&with=all&lang2=en

[67] Jafari, M., Elahi, F., Ozyurt, S. & Wrigley, T. (2007). 4. Religious Perspectives on Embryonic Stem Cell Research. In K. Monroe, R. Miller & J. Tobis (Ed.),  Fundamentals of the Stem Cell Debate: The Scientific, Religious, Ethical, and Political Issues  (pp. 79-94). Berkeley: University of California Press.  https://escholarship.org/content/qt9rj0k7s3/qt9rj0k7s3_noSplash_f9aca2e02c3777c7fb76ea768ba458f0.pdf https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520940994-005

[68] Gert, B. (2007). Common morality: Deciding what to do . Oxford Univ. Press.

[69] World Medical Association (2013). World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA , 310(20), 2191–2194. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.281053 Declaration of Helsinki – WMA – The World Medical Association .; see also: National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. (1979).  The Belmont report: Ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human subjects of research . U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.  https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-report/read-the-belmont-report/index.html

[70] Zakarin Safier, L., Gumer, A., Kline, M., Egli, D., & Sauer, M. V. (2018). Compensating human subjects providing oocytes for stem cell research: 9-year experience and outcomes.  Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics ,  35 (7), 1219–1225. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-018-1171-z https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6063839/ see also: Riordan, N. H., & Paz Rodríguez, J. (2021). Addressing concerns regarding associated costs, transparency, and integrity of research in recent stem cell trial. Stem Cells Translational Medicine , 10 (12), 1715–1716. https://doi.org/10.1002/sctm.21-0234

[71] Klitzman, R., & Sauer, M. V. (2009). Payment of egg donors in stem cell research in the USA.  Reproductive biomedicine online ,  18 (5), 603–608. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1472-6483(10)60002-8

[72] Krosin, M. T., Klitzman, R., Levin, B., Cheng, J., & Ranney, M. L. (2006). Problems in comprehension of informed consent in rural and peri-urban Mali, West Africa.  Clinical trials (London, England) ,  3 (3), 306–313. https://doi.org/10.1191/1740774506cn150oa

[73] Veatch, Robert M.  Hippocratic, Religious, and Secular Medical Ethics: The Points of Conflict . Georgetown University Press, 2012.

[74] Msoroka, M. S., & Amundsen, D. (2018). One size fits not quite all: Universal research ethics with diversity.  Research Ethics ,  14 (3), 1-17.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016117739939

[75] Pirzada, N. (2022). The Expansion of Turkey’s Medical Tourism Industry.  Voices in Bioethics ,  8 . https://doi.org/10.52214/vib.v8i.9894

[76] Stem Cell Tourism: False Hope for Real Money . Harvard Stem Cell Institute (HSCI). (2023). https://hsci.harvard.edu/stem-cell-tourism , See also: Bissassar, M. (2017). Transnational Stem Cell Tourism: An ethical analysis.  Voices in Bioethics ,  3 . https://doi.org/10.7916/vib.v3i.6027

[77] Song, P. (2011) The proliferation of stem cell therapies in post-Mao China: problematizing ethical regulation,  New Genetics and Society , 30:2, 141-153, DOI:  10.1080/14636778.2011.574375

[78] Dajani, R. (2014). Jordan’s stem-cell law can guide the Middle East.  Nature  510, 189. https://doi.org/10.1038/510189a

[79] International Society for Stem Cell Research. (2024). Standards in stem cell research . International Society for Stem Cell Research. https://www.isscr.org/guidelines/5-standards-in-stem-cell-research

[80] Benjamin, R. (2013). People’s science bodies and rights on the Stem Cell Frontier . Stanford University Press.

Mifrah Hayath

SM Candidate Harvard Medical School, MS Biotechnology Johns Hopkins University

Olivia Bowers

MS Bioethics Columbia University (Disclosure: affiliated with Voices in Bioethics)

Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License .

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Int J Environ Res Public Health

The Relationship between Social Media and the Increase in Mental Health Problems

Associated data.

The data presented in this study are available on request from the corresponding author.

Social media has become an indispensable aspect of young people’s digital interactions, as they use it mostly for entertainment and communication purposes. Consequently, it has the potential to have both positive and negative effects on them. Deterioration in mental health is one of the side effects stemming from social media overuse. This study investigates the relationship between social media and the increase in mental health problems in Saudi Arabia. The population considered for analysis includes young people from Saudi Arabia, with a sample size of 385. A closed-ended survey questionnaire was used to collect data on different social media features and criteria. Using the Analytical Hierarchical Process (AHP), the researcher analyzed data to compare the effect of different social media features on mental health. The social media features included in this paper are private chats and calls, group chats and calls, browsing posts, games, media sharing, adverts, likes/comments/followers, and pages. The researcher adopted entertainment, information, social interaction, privacy, esteem, and communication as the criteria in the AHP process. Among these criteria, the study found that entertainment was the most significant, while privacy was the least significant. Findings suggested that likes, comments, and followers were the biggest contributors to poor mental health (total utility = 56.24). The least effective feature was ‘games’ (total utility = 2.56). The researcher recommends that social media users be cautious when interacting with social media features, especially likes, comments, followers, media, and posts, because of their significant effect on mental health.

1. Introduction

Mental health is a crucial aspect of human wellbeing, yet it is often overlooked and stigmatized. According to the World Health Organization, the prevalence of mental health problems is increasing at a rate of 13% per year [ 1 ]. Anxiety and depression are the most common mental health issues, affecting 264 million and 280 million people worldwide, respectively [ 2 , 3 ]. In addition, an estimated 269 million people were struggling with drug and substance abuse by the end of 2018 [ 4 ]. These numbers are likely to continue to rise due to a variety of factors. One factor that has been identified as contributing to the increase in mental health challenges is the use of technologies, including social media. Social media refers to applications that allow users to interact with each other through the creation and exchange of media, text, and calls within a network [ 5 ]. Some examples of social media platforms include Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and TikTok. Key social media features considered in this investigation are private chats, group chats, browsing posts, adverts, media sharing, calls, likes and comments, and pages. Social media has been linked to poor sleep patterns, depression, and anxiety [ 6 ]. In addition, ref. [ 7 ] warns of the negative impact that excessive social media use can have on the mental health of young people.

Saudi Arabia has a high level of social media usage, with 82.3% of the population (29.5 million people) using social media in 2022 [ 8 ]. Young people, who make up 36.74% of the population, are the biggest users of social media in Saudi Arabia, with 98.43% of young people using social networking sites [ 9 ]. The top three reasons given by Saudis for using social media are keeping in touch with friends and family, use of free time, and finding products to purchase [ 8 ]. The prevalence of mental health issues in the KSA is estimated to be around 20.2% [ 10 ]. Depression is the most common mental health condition, affecting 21% of the population, followed by anxiety (17.5%) and stress (12.6%) [ 11 ]. Research has shown that social media use in Saudi Arabia is correlated with increased mental health issues [ 12 ]. High social media exposure has also been found to be associated with a higher risk of depression and anxiety in the kingdom [ 12 ]. Studies have also shown a significant correlation between the use of social networking sites and the increase in depression-related conditions in Saudi Arabia [ 13 ].

The aim of this study is to examine the impact of social media on mental health in Saudi Arabia and to identify which social media features have the greatest impact on increasing mental health issues. The study uses an Analytical Hierarchical Process (AHP) to analyze several social media features and determine their impacts on mental health. By understanding the specific features that contribute to mental health problems, individuals and policymakers can take steps to alleviate mental health issues and reduce the negative effects of social media. The results of this study will provide valuable insights into the impact of social media on mental health in Saudi Arabia and can inform the development of strategies to mitigate these effects.

2. Literature Review

One of the primary features of social media is chatting. As a social network, chats are a powerful method of communication among social media users. They may take the form of group or private chats. According to [ 14 ], young people with psychological issues tend to worsen their conditions by participating in social media chatrooms. Private chats are not exempted, as ref. [ 15 ] found that constant chatting with other people without feeling their physical presence is one reason for the increase in mental health issues among social media users. The outcome is more loneliness, a common factor in psychological deterioration. While chatting may not directly cause depression and other mental health problems, it can exacerbate an individual’s symptoms if one engages in long chats [ 16 ]. The studies further caution that young people must be careful when chatting with their peers on social media.

Browsing posts and advertisements are equally part of social media. Social media posts often portray falsehoods by allowing one to elevate their good qualities and suppress their negative ones [ 17 ]. Young people may not understand this fact, and they are likely to think that something is wrong with themselves because they do not look as good as the posts made by their friends. The authors of [ 18 ] found that social media influencers significantly contribute to the poor mental health of social media users. Advertisements power most social networking platforms, and users have had to embrace the presence of ads alongside their digital social lives. Because of their wide viewership, ads shape the psychology and opinions of young people on these platforms [ 19 ]. An advertisement portraying a muscular individual may depress a social media user who does not have similar body features. Similarly, ads with tall girls may negatively impact young girls psychologically because of social projection.

Sharing media, playing games on digital social networks, and interacting on video conferencing channels may negatively impact an individual’s mental health. In some cases, ref. [ 14 ] found that the sharing of media and interactions on social media prompts users to think less of themselves. Some users may not have good enough videos because their equipment, such as cameras, is not as good as their friends’ devices. Moreover, watching videos on social media can be an addictive habit if left unchecked. The authors of [ 20 ] argue that the active watching of and commenting on YouTube videos makes the platform overly addictive compared to people who passively watch videos without associated interactions. The authors advise that people’s interactions on video-based social media platforms should be minimal. Regarding games, ref. [ 21 ] argues that high involvement in social media games can result in addiction. Such a condition may make an individual overly dependent on these games, which distorts their mental health.

An individual’s following and the intensity with which people react to their posts can impact their mental health. For example, ref. [ 22 ] reports that users who update more frequently on their social media pages tend to receive more feedback in the form of likes and comments. This feedback is important, as it enhances the self-esteem of post authors. Moreover, ref. [ 23 ] observes that people receiving negative feedback from their social media posts are more susceptible to emotional distress. The study affirms that technologies aiding young people in comparing social statuses present a risk to their mental wellbeing. Some turn to social media to increase followers and gain a sense of gratification to compensate for their emotional and psychological challenges [ 24 ]. This leads them further down the path of a graver depression.

3. Methodology

This section provides an explanation of the methodological processes that the researcher used in order to acquire data and analyze them. The research design of this study is described in Section 3.1 , which is then followed by the population, the sampling method, and the survey instrument. The phases of the Analytical Hierarchical Process (AHP) used in the research are explained in the following subsections.

3.1. Research Design

The specific approach taken by the researcher is the Analytical Hierarchical Process (AHP). It is a decision-making model that uses paired comparisons to determine the most significant factors that affect a decision [ 25 ]. In this case, the researcher wished to identify and rank social media factors impacting mental health. This ranking will help in prioritizing which aspects of social media use to manage at a personal level. The elements of social media in this study are private chats, group chats, browsing posts, adverts, media sharing, calls, likes and comments, and pages. The study undertakes a survey that asks respondents to indicate how useful these social media features are to them and how each element may lead to mental health problems.

3.2. Population, Sampling, and Survey Instrument

This study considered Saudi Arabia as the unit of study, while the study population was Saudi youth aged between 18 and 35. The United Nations defines youth as persons between 18 and 24. However, the researcher sought a more accommodating criterion regarding respondent ages. The selection of young people as the target population was motivated by the fact that 98.43% of them are on social media [ 9 ]. In addition, ref. [ 9 ] also reports that 7,623,336 young people belong to this demographic. The computed sample size from this population is 385 using Yamane’s formula [ 26 ]. Gender-wise, the researcher allowed respondents to indicate whether they were male, female, or non-binary. All respondents selected either the male or female category. Hence, the researcher analyzed the results in this fashion. The sample for this study was selected using simple random sampling on social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter. This sampling method involves selecting participants randomly from the target population, which in this case were young people in Saudi Arabia who use social media. This helped to ensure that the sample was representative of the target population and that the responses were accurate and reliable. To ensure the content validity of the questionnaire, a pre-test of the survey was performed, since it is in the researcher’s best interest to have expert evaluations and reviews of the comprehensibility and clarity of the used research instrument. Several questions were altered, reworded, or eliminated in response to positive comments and ideas for small modifications. The amended questionnaire was forwarded to the collaborating academics for review and evaluation to confirm the instrument’s face validity. This questionnaire’s question types were determined by their degree of relevance to each identified concept. The Content Validity Index (CVI) was calculated to be 1, indicating that all three questions were relevant and appropriate for the study. This suggests that the questionnaire was valid and that it measured the variables of interest in a reliable and accurate manner.

The researcher used social media platforms to reach a diverse and representative sample of young people in the country. The social media platforms used in communication with participants (personal and business) included Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and Snapchat. The researcher sent out a post including all the details about the research, and a link was included to direct the participants to the questionnaire page. The questionnaire was hosted on Google Forms to facilitate distribution, and it was left open for one month to allow respondents to respond at their convenience. The final questionnaire had a two-part structure, including demographic questions and three main questions with selective options for participants. Appendix A shows the list of questions asked to the respondents.

3.3. Analytical Hierarchical Process

The Analytical Hierarchical Process involves four primary steps, which are

• Identifying decisions, options, and criteria;
• Conducting pairwise comparisons;
• Computing weights for the criteria;
• Calculating utility values.

3.3.1. Identifying Decisions, Options, and Criteria

The decision is determining which social media features have the biggest effect on increasing mental health problems. The options were the eight social media features, namely private chats, group chats, browsing posts, adverts, media sharing, calls, likes and comments, and pages. The criteria for determining which features are the most influential were the importance of a feature to an individual, the time spent interacting with the feature, and the recency of interaction.

3.3.2. Pairwise Comparison

Pairwise comparisons involve comparing two criteria simultaneously to build a square n × n matrix, where n is the number of criteria. The comparison is structured in such a way that the value entered in a cell represents the number of times one criterion is more important relative to the other. Because the two criteria being compared are the same, the relative value of each criterion is equal to one when they are compared to each other [ 25 ]. The maximum possible score is n, and larger numbers indicate that a criterion is becoming essential. The pairwise comparison will compare time spent on a feature, recency in using the feature, and the overall importance of the feature to the respondents.

3.3.3. Importance Weights

After populating the matrix, it is used to compute the importance weights. They signal to an analyst the extent to which each criterion will affect their ultimate decision. The researcher gave the biggest weight to the item with the most significant importance. The study computed the geometric mean of the criteria to ensure objectivity in the computation in the first step, as suggested by [ 27 ]. In the second step, the relative composition of the criterion values was determined, which was used to determine their weights [ 28 ]. In order to complete the procedure, the computation of the ratio of the value of each criterion to the overall value is needed.

3.3.4. Calculating Utility Values

Computing the utility is the final step in the analytical hierarchal process. It involves establishing the ‘utiles’ associated and multiplying them by their corresponding importance scores [ 27 ]. The ‘utiles’ are obtained using respondents’ subjective evaluation of how each feature instigates mental health challenges. ‘Utility’ is a quantitative value that indicates how useful something is to an individual. This figure helps in selecting the most significant option. It is possible to represent utility as a percentage. It is argued that a criterion’s usefulness increases as its advantages or benefits increase. Depending on the criterion, it is conceivable that utility will be computed differently. The importance of the criteria selected for investigation and the utility attached to the criterion were multiplied to show the utility calculation for each criterion. The values for each criterion were added to determine the total utility of each social media feature.

4.1. Analysis of Demographic Characteristics

This section analyzes the age, gender, and occupations of the study participants. The findings reveal that the most populous age group was that of members aged between 18 and 25, as they constituted 60.3% (232) of the study population. Male respondents accounted for 55.3% (213) of the sampled participants. The most dominant group by occupation was students, as they accounted for 41.8% (161) of the sampled participants. Table 1 provides further details about the demographic characteristics of the respondents.

Respondents’ demographic characteristics.

4.2. Favorite Features of Respondents

The researcher first examined which of the selected social media features were favored by the respondents. The findings suggested that likes, comments, and followers were the most relevant aspects of social media that the respondents liked, obtaining a mean score of 7.29/8.00. The least favorite feature was gaming, scoring a mean of 2.05/8.00. Table 2 shows the performance of the different features.

Ranking the relevance of social media features to respondents.

4.3. Pairwise Comparison

The researcher established the criteria comparison matrix using the responses to questions that asked participants to rank the factors influencing their sentiments on social media features. The ranking was based on the mean score obtained from the 385 responses regarding their criteria ranking. In this case, the highest ranked criteria by the respondents scored higher values in Table 3 . Evidence suggests that people decided which social media feature they valued mostly based on its entertainment value (value = 6) and less so based on the feature’s privacy (value = 1).

Criteria importance.

The computation of matrix values in Table 4 was based on the values established in Table 3 above. The basis of the values is the mean ranks of the criteria, as expressed by the respondents. In this case, the matrix values indicated the number of times one criterion was more important than the corresponding criterion [ 28 ]. For example, the highlighted pair in Table 4 shows that esteem was two times more important that the corresponding information criterion.

Pairwise comparison matrix.

4.4. Importance Weights

The first step involves the computation of the criteria’s geometric mean [ 28 ] to determine their influence on the final decision. In this case, it is the sixth root of the product of the row elements in Table 4 . Below is the basic formula used in computing the weights of the criteria, assuming n criteria:

• V i : Geometric mean for criterion i ;
• X i 1 : Pairwise importance of criterion i relative to criterion 1;
• X i 2 : Pairwise importance of criterion i relative to criterion 2;
• X in : Pairwise importance of criterion i relative to criterion n ;
• n : Number of criteria.

The second step involves finding the proportionate composition of the criteria values, which will count as their weights [ 28 ]. The procedure requires the computation of the ratio of each criterion’s value against the total value:

• W i : Weights for criterion i .

4.5. Computing Utility Values

The researcher computed the feature utiles by first ranking their respective mean responses. The findings in Table 5 show that respondents thought that likes, comments, and followers on social media would often cause people’s mental health problems. Other similarly high-risk features are browsing posts and adverts.

Utility values.

4.6. Comparing Social Media’s Effects on Mental Health

This study computed the total utility as the product of the utiles (feature strengths), importance weights (criteria weights), and how favored the features were by the respondents (relevance). In Table 6 , each feature’s strength is multiplied by the criteria weights to obtain the cell values. The row values are then added and multiplied by a feature’s importance to determine the total utility. The total utility is obtained using the following formula:

• TU i : Total Utility for criterion i ;
• W i : Weights for criterion i ;
• UV j = Utility Value for feature j ;
• MR i : Mean Relevance for criterion i ;
• i from 1 to 8, j from 1 to 6.

Estimating the effect of social media features on mental health problems.

The findings suggest that the feature with the most significant negative effect on mental health is ‘likes, comments, and followers.’ This feature scored a total utility of 56.24. On the other hand, the feature with the least significant negative effect on mental health is ‘social media games’. This study found the feature to have a total utility of 2.56. While the respondents had opined in Table 3 that adverts substantially contribute to mental instability, the criteria weights for this feature were too low to significantly impact the feature’s total utility.

5. Discussion

In this study, the researcher found that social media has a significant negative impact on the mental health of Saudi Arabian youth. The feature that had the greatest impact was likes, comments, and followers, with a utility value of 56.24. This suggests that individuals who are seeking validation and social esteem through social media may be more prone to experiencing stress, depression, and anxiety. Browsing posts and media sharing were also identified as significant features that negatively impact mental health, with utility values of 45.03 and 25.40, respectively. These findings align with previous research that has identified the presence of influencers on social media as a potential source of stress and depression for regular users who may feel pressure to emulate these individuals [ 18 ]. Additionally, excessive exposure to social media videos has been linked to negative mental health outcomes [ 20 ].

On the other hand, this study found that social media games had the least impact on mental health, with a utility value of only 2.05. This finding differs from previous research that has identified games on social media as highly addictive and potentially harmful to mental health [ 21 ]. However, it is important to note that this study only compared the negative impact of different social media features on mental health, and it is possible that social media games may have a greater impact when studied in isolation. These findings highlight the need for caution in the use of social media, particularly among young people in Saudi Arabia. While social media can provide a sense of connection and support, it is important to be aware of its potential negative impacts on mental health. In light of these findings, it may be beneficial for individuals to set limits on their social media use and prioritize activities that promote mental wellbeing, such as physical exercise and social interaction with friends and family.

One potential implication of these findings is the need for greater education and awareness about the potential dangers of social media. This could involve educating people about the importance of finding validation from sources other than social media, as well as helping people to develop healthy habits when it comes to their social media use. This could involve setting limits on the amount of time spent on social media, being selective about the content that is consumed, and finding ways to disconnect from social media when necessary. Overall, these findings highlight the need for caution when using social media, particularly for youth in Saudi Arabia. While social media can be a useful tool for communication and connection, it is important to be mindful of the potential negative effects on mental health. It may be helpful for individuals to limit the attention they pay to certain features, such as likes, comments, and followers, and to engage in passive rather than active consumption of media. Further research is needed to understand the specific mechanisms by which social media impacts mental health and to identify effective interventions to mitigate negative effects.

There are several potential limitations to this study that should be considered when interpreting the results. First, the sample size of 385 participants may not be representative of the larger population of Saudi Arabian youth. Additionally, the self-reported nature of the data may be subject to bias, as individuals may not accurately recall or report their social media habits. Finally, the cross-sectional design of the study means that it is not possible to establish cause-and-effect relationships between social media use and mental health. Another limitation of this study is that the definition of “youth” is not explicitly stated. It is possible that the experiences and activities of respondents aged 18 and those aged 35 may differ significantly. Additionally, the study did not explicitly consider the potential impact of gender on the relationship between social media use and mental health. Future research should aim to further explore these demographic variables in order to better understand the specific effects of social media on mental health among different populations. Such investigations should consider using larger and more diverse samples, as well as more robust research designs to further explore the relationship between social media and mental health.

6. Conclusions

The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of social media on mental health among young people. Social media has become an integral part of modern society, with platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram offering a range of features including messaging, media sharing, and gaming. However, there is growing concern that the use of social media may have negative effects on mental health, particularly among young people who are more likely to use these platforms extensively. The study aimed to identify the specific features of social media that have the greatest impact on mental health and to examine the underlying reasons for these effects. To achieve these objectives, the study used AHP to assess the relevance and importance of eight social media features to 385 respondents aged between 18 and 35. The findings showed that likes, comments, and followers were the most relevant features to respondents, while gaming was the least favorite feature. In terms of the criteria influencing the respondents’ sentiments, entertainment was the most important factor, while privacy was the least important. The study concludes that social media can have both positive and negative effects on mental health, depending on how it is used and the specific features that are engaged with. It is therefore important for young people to be aware of the potential risks and to use social media in a balanced and responsible manner.

Appendix A. List of Questions Asked to the Respondents

Funding statement.

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Data availability statement, conflicts of interest.

The author declares no conflict of interest.

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.