Search

The present study examined patterns of stability and change in loneliness across adolescence. Data were drawn from the Environmental Risk (E-Risk) Longitudinal Twin Study, a UK population-representative cohort of 2,232 individuals born in 1994 and 1995. Loneliness was assessed when participants were aged 12 and 18. Loneliness showed modest stability across these ages (r =.25). Behavioral genetic modeling indicated that stability in loneliness was explained largely by genetic influences (66%), while change was explained by nonshared environmental effects (58%). Individuals who reported loneliness at both ages were broadly similar to individuals who only reported it at age 18, with both groups at elevated risk of mental health problems, physical health risk behaviors, and education and employment difficulties. Individuals who were lonely only at age 12 generally fared better; however, they were still more likely to finish school with lower qualifications. Positive family influences in childhood predicted reduced risk of loneliness at age 12, while negative peer experiences increased the risk. Together, the findings show that while early adolescent loneliness does not appear to exert a cumulative burden when it persists, it is nonetheless a risk for a range of concomitant impairments, some of which can endure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study used a longitudinal and discordant twin design to explore in depth the developmental associations between victimization and loneliness from mid-childhood to young adulthood. The data were drawn from the Environmental Risk (E-Risk) Longitudinal Twin Study, a birth cohort of 2,232 individuals born in England and Wales during 1994–1995. Diverse forms of victimization were considered, differing across context, perpetrator, and timing of exposure. The results indicated that exposure to different forms of victimization was associated with loneliness in a dose–response manner. In childhood, bullying victimization was uniquely associated with loneliness, over and above concurrent psychopathology, social isolation, and genetic risk. Moreover, childhood bullying victimization continued to predict loneliness in young adulthood, even in the absence of ongoing victimization. Within-twin pair analyses further indicated that this longitudinal association was explained by genetic confounds. In adolescence, varied forms of victimization were correlated with young adult loneliness, with maltreatment, neglect, and cybervictimization remaining robust to controls for genetic confounds. These findings indicate that vulnerability to loneliness in victimized young people varies according to the specific form of victimization in question, and also to the developmental period in which it was experienced. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the present study, we used separate measures of parental monitoring and parental knowledge and compared their associations with youths' antisocial behavior during preadolescence, between the ages of 10 and 12. Parental monitoring and knowledge were reported by mothers, fathers, and youths taking part in the Environmental Risk (E-Risk) Longitudinal Twin Study that follows 1,116 families with twins. Information on youths' antisocial behavior was obtained from mothers as well as teachers. We report two main findings. First, longitudinal cross-lagged models revealed that greater parental monitoring did not predict less antisocial behavior later, once family characteristics were taken into account. Second, greater youth antisocial behavior predicted less parental knowledge later. This effect of youths' behavior on parents' knowledge was consistent across mothers', fathers', youths', and teachers' reports, and robust to controls for family confounders. The association was partially genetically mediated according to a Cholesky decomposition twin model; youths' genetically influenced antisocial behavior led to a decrease in parents' knowledge of youths' activities. These two findings question the assumption that greater parental monitoring can reduce preadolescents' antisocial behavior. They also indicate that parents' knowledge of their children's activities is influenced by youths' behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]