Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35165170›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience2022

Behavioral and Neural Dissociation of Social Anxiety and Loneliness.

Jana Lieberz, Simone G Shamay-Tsoory, Nira Saporta, Alisa Kanterman, Jessica Gorni, Timo Esser, Ekaterina Kuskova, Johannes Schultz, René Hurlemann, Dirk Scheele

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Loneliness in schizophrenia: Just loneliness.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2025
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Jana LieberzResearch Section Medical Psychology, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, 53127, Germany jana.lieberz@hotmail.de dirk-scheele@gmx.de.
Simone G Shamay-TsooryDepartment of Psychology, University of Haifa, Haifa, 3498838, Israel.
Nira SaportaDepartment of Psychology, University of Haifa, Haifa, 3498838, Israel.
Alisa KantermanDepartment of Psychology, University of Haifa, Haifa, 3498838, Israel.
Jessica GorniResearch Section Medical Psychology, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, 53127, Germany.
Timo EsserResearch Section Medical Psychology, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, 53127, Germany.
Ekaterina KuskovaResearch Section Medical Psychology, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, 53127, Germany.
Johannes SchultzCenter for Economics and Neuroscience, University of Bonn, Bonn, 53127, Germany.
René HurlemannDepartment of Psychiatry, School of Medicine & Health Sciences, University of Oldenburg, Oldenburg, 26129, Germany.
Dirk ScheeleResearch Section Medical Psychology, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, 53127, Germany jana.lieberz@hotmail.de dirk-scheele@gmx.de.
University Hospital Bonn · DEUniversity of Haifa · ILCarl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg · DEKlinikum Oldenburg · DEUniversity of Bonn · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Loneliness is a public health concern with detrimental effects on physical and mental well-being. Given phenotypical overlaps between loneliness and social anxiety (SA), cognitive-behavioral interventions targeting SA might be adopted to reduce loneliness. However, whether SA and loneliness share the same underlying neurocognitive mechanisms is still an elusive question. The current study aimed at investigating to what extent known behavioral and neural correlates of social avoidance in SA are evident in loneliness. We used a prestratified approach involving 42 (21 females) participants with high loneliness (HL) and 40 (20 females) participants with low loneliness (LL) scores. During fMRI, participants completed a social gambling task to measure the subjective value of engaging in social situations and responses to social feedback. Univariate and multivariate analyses of behavioral and neural data replicated known task effects. However, although HL participants showed increased SA, loneliness was associated with a response pattern clearly distinct from SA. Specifically, contrary to expectations based on SA differences, Bayesian analyses revealed moderate evidence for equal subjective values of engaging in social situations and comparable amygdala responses to social decision-making and striatal responses to positive social feedback in both groups. Moreover, while explorative analyses revealed reduced pleasantness ratings, increased striatal activity, and decreased striatal-hippocampal connectivity in response to negative computer feedback in HL participants, these effects were diminished for negative social feedback. Our findings suggest that, unlike SA, loneliness is not associated with withdrawal from social interactions. Thus, established interventions for SA should be adjusted when targeting loneliness.

Indexed as

EmotionsLonelinessAnxietyBayes TheoremFemaleHumansMaleSocial BehavioramygdalafMRIlonelinesssocial anxietystriatum

Identifiers

PMID35165170
PMCPMC8944238
OpenAlexW4220736046

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.