Social networks and mental health: an egocentric perspective
| Published date | 12 September 2016 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/MHRJ-10-2015-0029 |
| Date | 12 September 2016 |
| Pages | 161-173 |
| Author | Andrew Levula,Michael Harré |
| Subject Matter | Health & social care,Mental health |
Social networks and mental health:
an egocentric perspective
Andrew Levula and Michael Harré
Andrew Levula is a PhD
Candidate at Faculty of
Engineering and IT, The
University of Sydney,
Sydney, Australia.
Michael Harré is a Lecturer
at the Complex Systems
Research Group,
The University of Sydney,
Sydney, Australia.
Abstract
Purpose –The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship between egocentric social networks and
mental health (MH) outcomes. The authors aim to develop a theoretical framework for understanding this
association and to test whether social network factors add any further explanatory power to MH outcomes.
Design/methodology/approach –Data for this study were drawn from the Household, Income and Labour
Dynamics in Australia survey (
n
¼14,756). The authors used hierarchical multiple regression technique to test
this hypothesis and using the Akaike information criterion (AIC) the authors identified the best fit model.
Findings –The results of this study shows that social network measures do add considerable explanatory
power to MH with social isolation (SI) having the highest influence (
β
¼−0.198,
p
o0.001) followed by
social connections (SCs) (
β
¼0.141,
p
o0.001) and then social trust (ST) (
β
¼0.071,
p
o0.001). The AIC
best fit model included all the social network predictors however it excluded physical functioning which
contributed very little.
Originality/value –This study shows that social network factors play a significant role in predicting MH
outcomes. In particular, SI was a more significant predictor of MH than SC. However, ST played a relatively
minor role in predicting MH scores. These findings have practical implications and applications for the design
of policy initiatives aimed at improving MH outcomes.
Keywords Mental health, Social trust, Egocentric social network, Emotional status, General health,
Social isolation
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
We live in a highly connected, socialized world and our behaviors, attitudes and beliefs are
continuously being shaped by the people we interact with. This can have a profound effect on
our health, and in recent years a growing body of research has looked at the individual’s social
network in relation to their health outcomes (Kawachi and Berkman, 2001; Smith and Christakis,
2008; Haas et al., 2010; Umberson et al., 2010). These networks are composed of individuals
linked by a variety of different social relationships all of which may influence an individual’s health
outcomes. For example, physical health can be improved by belonging to a sports club and the
support of family and friends can help mitigate the effects of poor mental health (MH) (Uchino,
2009; Garber et al., 2010; Thoits, 2011).
The importance of understanding the variety of mechanisms by which social network factors
influence health behavior has been highlighted in the US Government’sHealthy People 2010 report
(US Department of Health and Human Services, 2009) and by Thoits (2011). Both have concluded
that there is a need to consider the “how?”of this relationship: what specific mechanism(s)
mediate the relationship between a patient’s social context and their health outcomes? In
furthering our understanding of this mechanism researchers need to explore multiple different
social network factors in conjunction with previously studied factors such as general health (GH)
Received 15 October 2015
Revised 12 February 2016
Accepted 23 May 2016
This paper uses unit record data
from the Household, Income and
Labour Dynamics in Australia
(HILDA) Survey. The HILDA Project
was initiated and is funded by the
Australian Government Department
of Social Services (DSS) and is
managed by the Melbourne
Institute of Applied Economic and
Social Research (Melbourne
Institute). The findings and views
reported in this paper, however,
are those of the authors and
should not be attributed to either
DSS or the Melbourne Institute.
DOI 10.1108/MHRJ-10-2015-0029 VOL. 21 NO. 3 2016, pp. 161-173, © Emerald Group Publishing Limited, ISSN 1361-9322
j
MENTALHEALTH REVIEW JOURNAL
j
PAG E 16 1
To continue reading
Request your trial