MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416730770 · doi:10.1111/sode.70035

Exploring Definitions and Experiences of Loneliness: Insights From Interviews With Children and Early Adolescents in Italy

2025· article· en· W4416730770 on OpenAlexaff
Matilde Brunetti, Stefania Sette, Evangelia Galanaki, Lavinia De Marco, Fiorenzo Laghi, Emiddia Longobardi, Robert J. Coplan

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Development · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicResilience and Mental Health
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersSapienza Università di Roma
KeywordsLonelinessFeelingInterpersonal communicationCognitionInterpersonal relationshipAssociation (psychology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Loneliness represents a negative feeling that arises when individuals perceive a discrepancy between actual and desired social relationships. The present study explored the meanings and personal experiences of loneliness in children and early adolescents in Italy. Participants included 139 children and early adolescents aged 8–14 years ( M = 10.76 years, SD = 1.71; 80 girls, 57.6%) who completed a semi‐structured interview online. Different dimensions emerged from the coding process, providing evidence of the multidimensional nature of loneliness, defined and experienced through different dimensions (e.g., cognitive, emotional, and regarding interpersonal context). Results from descriptive analyses (i.e., frequencies and percentages) showed that most of the participants defined loneliness in terms of physical separation from others. Also, participants discussed loneliness in relation to both their family and peers. Some children and adolescents expressed experiencing loneliness voluntarily. Children and early adolescents reported to feel sadness, anger, and other emotions as boredom, happiness, and fear in association with loneliness. Finally, we examined gender and grade differences between the dimensions with a series of chi‐square tests and ANOVAs. Results revealed that primary school children and boys defined and experienced loneliness using the physical separation dimension. Middle‐school children defined loneliness using the cognitive dimension more frequently. Overall, the present study offers a richer understanding of the meanings and experiences of loneliness in youth and highlights the importance of considering developmental, gender, and cultural factors when studying loneliness.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.097
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial DevelopmentSame topicResilience and Mental HealthFrench-language works237,207