This study assessed the dimensional structure of the UCLA Loneliness Scale ([UCLA-LS], UCLA-3). Data from the Northern Ireland Young Life and Times Survey (2011), a survey of 1,434 16-year-olds, was used to examine the underlying factor structure of the scale. Confirmatory factor analysis was employed to compare alternative factor analytical models that can inform the scoring of the measure and determine the degree to which different factors provided unique predictive utility. Fit statistics indicated that the best fitting model comprised three correlated factors: Isolation, Related Connectedness, and Collective Connectedness. These findings were consistent with previous findings that identified the multidimensional nature of the UCLA-LS. The study also found evidence that the subscales were differentially associated with psychiatric morbidity as measured by the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12) and provides a more reliable and comprehensive framework to assess the clinical significance of loneliness.
BeauducelA.HerzbergP. Y. (2006). On the performance of maximum likelihood versus means and variance adjusted weighted least squares estimation in CFA. Structural Equation Modeling, 13, 186-203.
2.
BentlerP. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238-246.
3.
BrownT. A. (2006). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
4.
DurakM.Senol-DurakE. (2010). Psychometric qualities of the UCLA Loneliness Scale-Version 3 as applied in a Turkish culture. Educational Gerontology, 36, 988-1007.
5.
DussaultM.FernetC.AustinS.LerouxM. (2009). Revisiting the factorial validity of the Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale: A test of competing models in a sample of teachers. Psychological Reports, 105, 849-856.
6.
FloraD. B.CurranP. J. (2004). An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychological Methods, 9, 466-491.
7.
GoldbergD. P.GaterR.SartoriusN.UstunT. B.PiccinelliM.GurejeO.RutterC. (1997). The validity of two versions of the GHQ in the WHO study of mental illness in general health care. Psychological Medicine, 27, 191-197.
8.
GoldbergD. P.WilliamsP. (1998). A user’s guide to the General Health Questionnaire. Windsor, England: NFER-Nelson.
9.
HartshorneT. S. (1993). Psychometric properties and confirmatory factor analysis of the UCLA Loneliness Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 61, 182-195.
10.
HawkleyL. C.BrowneM. W.CacioppoJ. T. (2005). How can I connect with thee? Let me count the ways. Psychological Science, 16, 798-804.
11.
HawkleyL. C.GuY. Y.LuoY. J.CacioppoJ. T. (2012). The mental representation of social connections: Generalizability extended to Beijing adults. PLoS One, 7(9), e44065.
12.
HaysR. D.DiMatteoM. R. (1987). A short-form measure of loneliness. Journal of Personality Assessment, 51, 69-81.
13.
HojatM. (1982). Psychometric characteristics of the UCLA Loneliness Scale: A study with Iranian college students. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 42, 917-925.
14.
HuL. T.BentlerP. M. (1999). Cut-off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6, 1-55.
15.
JacksonD. L.GillaspyJ. A.Jr.Purc-StephensonR. (2009). Reporting practices in confirmatory factor analysis: An overview and some recommendations. Psychological Methods, 14, 6-23.
16.
JoinerT. E.CatanzaroS. J.RuddM. D.RajabM. H. (1999). The case for a hierarchical, oblique, and bidimensional structure of loneliness. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 18, 47-75.
17.
JoinerT. E.LewinsohnP. M.SeeleyJ. R. (2002). The core of loneliness: Lack of pleasurable engagement—more so than painful disconnection—predicts social impairment, depression onset, and recovery from depressive disorders among adolescents. Journal of Personality Assessment, 79, 472-491.
18.
JöreskogK. G.SörbomD. (1993). LISREL 8: Structural equation modeling with the SIMPLIS command language. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software.
19.
KnightR. G.ChisholmB. J.MarshN. V.GodfreyH. P. (1988). Some normative, reliability, and factor analytic data for the revised UCLA Loneliness Scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 44, 203-206.
20.
LarsonR. W. (1999). The uses of loneliness in adolescence. In RotenbergK. J.HymelS. (Eds.), Loneliness in childhood and adolescence (pp. 244-262). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
21.
LasgaardM. (2007). Reliability and validity of the Danish version of the UCLA Loneliness Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 1359-1366.
22.
LópezM. P. S.DreschV. (2008). The 12-Item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12): Reliability, external validity and factor structure in the Spanish population. Psicothema, 20, 839-843.
23.
McWhirterB. T. (1990). Factor analysis of the revised UCLA Loneliness Scale. Current Psychology: Research and Reviews, 9, 56-68.
24.
MorrowD. (2008). Shared or scared? Attitudes to community relations among young people 2003-2007. In DevineP.SchubotzD. (Eds.), Young people in post-conflict Northern Ireland. The past cannot be changed but the future can be developed (pp. 1-16). West Dorset, England: Russell House.
25.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (2010). Mplus: Statistical analysis with latent variables: User’s guide (4th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
26.
PeplauL. A.PerlmanD. (1982). Perspectives on loneliness. In PeplauL. A.PerlmanD. (Eds.), Loneliness: A sourcebook of current theory, research and therapy (pp. 1-18). New York, NY: John Wiley.
27.
PolitiP. L.PiccinelliM.WilkinsonG. (1994). Reliability, validity and factor structure of the 12-item General Health Questionnaire among young males in Italy. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 90, 432-437.
28.
RhemtullaM.Brosseau-LiardP. É.SavaleiV. (2012). When can categorical variables be treated as continuous? A comparison of robust continuous and categorical SEM estimation methods under suboptimal conditions. Psychological Methods, 17, 354-373.
29.
RussellD. (1996). UCLA Loneliness Scale: Reliability, validity, and factor structure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 66, 20-40.
30.
RussellD.PeplauL. A.CutronaC. E. (1980). The revised UCLA loneliness scale: Concurrent and discriminant validity evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 472-480.
31.
SteigerJ. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modication: an interval estimation approach. Multivariate Behavioural Research, 25, 173-180.
32.
ShevlinM.AdamsonG. (2005). Alternative factor models and factorial invariance of the GHQ-12: A large sample analysis using confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Assessment, 17, 231-236.
33.
ShevlinM.MurphyS.MallettJ.StringerM.MurphyJ. (2013). Adolescent loneliness and psychiatric morbidity in Northern Ireland. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 52, 230-234.
34.
TanakaJ. S. (1987). How big is big enough? Sample size and goodness of fit in structural equation models with latent variables. Child Development, 58, 134-146.
35.
TuckerL. R.LewisC. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. Psychometrika, 38, 1–10.
36.
VassarM.CrosbyJ. W. (2008). A reliability generalization study of coefficient alpha for the UCLA Loneliness Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 90, 601-607.
37.
WeissR. S. (1973). Loneliness: The experience of emotional and social isolation. Cambridge: MIT Press.
38.
WilsonD.CuttsJ.LeesI.MapungwanaS.MaunganidzeL. (1992). Psychometric properties of the revised UCLA Loneliness Scale and two short-form measures of loneliness in Zimbabwe. Journal of Personality Assessment, 59, 72-81.
