Results and Discussion

The aim of the current study was to develop a scale to measure the effect of social
media usage on social and emotional loneliness in young adults. To achieve this,
the collected data was subjected to comprehensive analysis, which involved
applying both descriptive and inferential statistical methods. Additionally, graphical
representations were utilised to provide a clear and visual depiction of the findings.
Based on a broad review of both theoretical frameworks and empirical studies, it
became evident that despite the existence of various measurement scales, there is a
noticeable gap in the availability of suitable scales designed to evaluate the impact
of social media usage on the levels of social-emotional loneliness in young adults.
To address this gap, organised efforts were made to develop and standardised a
self-report inventory known as the “Social Media and Social-Emotional Loneliness
Scale”. The scale was specifically designed for the assessment of social media’s
influence on social-emotional loneliness among the young adult population.
To construct this assessment tool, initial pools of items were generated which were
analysed and evaluated, based on the recommendation by experts. This rigorous
process resulted in the development of a formal questionnaire consisting of 21
items which measures social-emotional loneliness and 19 items which measures
social media usage levels. Respondents were presented with a dichotomous scale, a
two-point response options of ‘Yes’ or ‘No’, to indicate the extent to which each
statement is aligned with their personal feelings.

Establishment of psychometric properties

An attempt was made to develop norms for the scale and assess its reliability,
aiming to establish it as a valuable assessment scale.

Reliability:
Reliability refers to the consistency of the scores or measurement which is reflected
in the reproducibility of the scores. The correlation coefficient indicating temporal
stability is known as the coefficient of stability and the correlation coefficient
indicating internal consistency is known as the coefficient of internal consistency or
the alpha coefficient . The temporal stability of a test can be measured through
Test-Retest reliability which is conducted over a same sample with the same test
over a period of time and the internal consistency of a test which indicates the
homogeneity of the test is usually measured through the generalised formula of
Cronbach’s Alpha.
The reliability of the following test was calculated using SPSS 26.0 to yield
Cronbach’s Alpha value.
Table 1: Reliability statistics for the scale of Social-Emotional Loneliness

Cronbach’s No. of Items

Alpha
.850 21

Table 1 provides an overview of the scale statistics, the 21 items scale indicated
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient value of 0.850.This high alpha coefficient score
signifies a strong level of internal consistency and reliability within the scale. The
scale can be considered as reliable and ensuring that data obtained from this scale
can be considered trustworthy. However, the scale can be further subjected to
refinement to attain a more precise and dependable assessment of Social-Emotional
Loneliness in Young Adults.
Table 2: showing the descriptive statistics of each item of Social-emotional
Loneliness
Item Mean Std.
Deviation
Q1 .10 .300
Q2 .30 .459
Q3 .43 .498
Q4 .16 .370
Q5 .36 .482
Q6 .25 .436
Q7 .22 .414
Q8 .36 .482
Q9 .18 .386
Q10 .36 .482
Q11 .34 .477
Q12 .46 .501
Q13 .45 .500
Q14 .50 .502
Q15 .42 .496
Q16 .50 .502
Q17 .42 .496
Q18 .35 .480
Q19 .42 .496
Q20 .57 .498
Q21 .50 .502

Discussion on descriptive statistics analysis

In item 1- I have friends and family with whom I spend quality time. The obtained
mean score is 0.10 with the standard deviation of 0.300, based on a dataset
comprising of 111 responses.
In item 2- I feel the ones I love reciprocate my feelings most of the times. The
obtained mean score is 0.30 with the standard deviation of 0.459, based on a dataset
comprising of 111 responses.
In item 3- I feel lonely even in the presence of friends and family. The obtained
mean score is 0.43 with the standard deviation of 0.498, based on a dataset
comprising of 111 responses.
In item 4- I receive empathy and support from my friends and family. The obtained
mean score is 0.16 with the standard deviation of 0.370, based on a dataset
comprising of 111 responses.
In item 5- I feel my absence would not be felt deeply by my friends and family. The
obtained mean score is 0.36 with the standard deviation of 0.482, based on a dataset
comprising of 111 responses.
In item 6- My close friends and family know and understand me well. The obtained
mean score is 0.25 with the standard deviation of 0.436, based on a dataset
comprising of 111 responses.
In item 7- I like building connections with people and often establish meaningful
relationships. The obtained mean score is 0.22 with the standard deviation of 0.414,
based on a dataset comprising of 111 responses.
In item 8- I feel my current relationships (family, friends, work etc.,) fulfil most of
my emotional needs. The obtained mean score is 0.36 with the standard deviation
of 0.482, based on a dataset comprising of 111 responses.
In item 9- After spending quality time with friends and family I feel emotionally
recharged. The obtained mean score is 0.18 with the standard deviation of 0.386,
based on a dataset comprising of 111 responses.
In item 10- I enjoy being in the company of people. The obtained mean score is
0.36 with the standard deviation of 0.482, based on a dataset comprising of 111
responses.
In item 11- I enjoy attending social events (wedding, birthday etc.,) with friends
and family. The obtained mean score is 0.34 with the standard deviation of 0.477,
based on a dataset comprising of 111 responses.
In item 12- It’s easy for me to become a part of a group. The obtained mean score is
0.46 with the standard deviation of 0.501, based on a dataset comprising of 111
responses.
In item 13- I feel low and restless when I have no one to talk to. The obtained mean
score is 0.45 with the standard deviation of 0.500, based on a dataset comprising of
111 responses.
In item 14- I have feelings of loneliness. The obtained mean score is 0.50 with the
standard deviation of 0.502, based on a dataset comprising of 111 responses.
In item 15- I find it difficult to maintain relationships and connections. The
obtained mean score is 0.42 with the standard deviation of 0.496, based on a dataset
comprising of 111 responses.
In item 16- I feel that I might not be a priority to most of my friends and family.
The obtained mean score is 0.50 with the standard deviation of 0.502, based on a
dataset comprising of 111 responses.
In item 17- I do not think I will ever find lasting companionship. The obtained
mean score is 0.42 with the standard deviation of 0.496, based on a dataset
comprising of 111 responses.
In item 18- I feel emotionally in tune with most people in my. The obtained mean
score is 0.35 with the standard deviation of 0.480, based on a dataset comprising of
111 responses.
In item 19- I have been experiencing feelings of loneliness from a very long time.
The obtained mean score is 0.42 with the standard deviation of 0.496, based on a
dataset comprising of 111 responses.
In item 20- I have cravings for physical warmth like hugs, warm clothing, warm
beverages etc.,. The obtained mean score is 0.57 with the standard deviation of
0.498, based on a dataset comprising of 111 responses.
In item 21- I have feelings of unwantedness, hopelessness, worthlessness. The
obtained mean score is 0.50 with the standard deviation of 0.502, based on a dataset
comprising of 111 responses.
Table 3: shows the correlational matrix for the Social-Emotional Loneliness
Scale

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7
Q1 1
Q2 .378* 1
*
Q3 .319* .228* 1
*
Q4 .263* .249** .159 1
*
Q5 .191* .128 .368* .281** 1
*
Q6 .363* .303** .372* .251** .212* 1
* *
Q7 .119 .041 .072 .125 .107 .098 1
Q8 .379* .456** .330* .179 .218* .471** .198*
* *
Q9 .315* .157 .301* .239* .283* .375** .209*
* * *
Q10 .128 .045 .216* .026 .023 .255** .335**
Q11 .078 .112 .213* .043 .091 .237* .267**
Q12 .118 .152 .217* -.013 .061 .297** .218*
Q13 .124 .045 .233* .240* .188* .100 -.212*
Q14 .148 .014 .501* .143 .331* .161 -.005
* *
Q15 .326* .201* .319* .316** .344* .216* .214*
* * *
Q16 .154 .183 .408* .297** .532* .254** .136
* *
Q17 .326* .360** .282* .365** .192* .300** .037
* *
Q18 .324* .388** .272* .137 -.002 .355** .118
* *
Q19 .204* .201* .430* .266** .420* .216* .126
* *
Q20 .107 .090 .285* -.109 .163 .088 -.072
*
Q21 .214* .223* .553* .346** .420* .213* .136
* *

Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13 Q14

Q8 1
Q9 .332* 1
*
Q10 .257* .136 1
*
Q11 .328* .452** .487** 1
 *
Q12 .287* .179 .457** .440** 1
*
Q13 -.001 .047 -.227* -.119 -.035 1
Q14 .143 .277** .106 .145 .191* .354** 1
Q15 .268* .310** .154 .150 .161 .140 .339**
*
Q16 .232* .286** .007 .082 .099 .225* .333**
Q17 .496* .215* .078 .112 .088 .214* .193*
*
Q18 .312* .146 .273** .225* .192* -.097 .125
*
Q19 .192* .357** .078 .150 .015 .287** .512**
Q20 .125 .031 .011 .055 .111 .132 .299**
Q21 .307* .239* .007 .120 .207* .334** .586**
*

Q15 Q16 Q17 Q18 Q19 Q20 Q21

Q1 1
5
Q1 .245** 1
6
Q1 .446** .245** 1
7
Q1 .210* -.050 .171 1
8
Q1 .410** .609** .373** .095 1
9
Q2 .086 .101 .196* -.119 .159 1
0
Q2 .391** .495 .427** .026 .573* .319** 1
1 *
** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Table 3 shows the correlation matrix between the items of the scale. This allows us
to understand how well each item is associated or correlated with other items in the
scale. It is also shown the significance level of the correlation which indicates that
there is a significant correlation between scale items.
Item 1 significantly correlates with item number 5,19 and 21 at 0.05 level and item
number 2,3,4,6,8,9,15,17 and 18 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 2 significantly correlates with item number 3,15,19 and 21 at 0.005 level and
item number 4, 6, 8, 17 and 18 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 3 significantly correlates with item number 10, 11, 12 and 13 at 0.05 level
and item number 5, 6, 8,9,14, 15,16,17,18,19,20 and 21 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 4 significantly correlates with item number 9 and 13 at 0.05 level and item
number 5,6,15,16,17, 19 and 21 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 5 significantly correlates with item number 6,8,13,15 and 17 at 0.05 level
and item number at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 6 significantly correlates with item number 11,15,19 and 21 at 0.05 level and
item number 8,9,10,12, 16,17 and 18 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 7 significantly correlates with item number 8,9,12,13 and 15 at 0.05 level
and item number 10 and 11 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 8 significantly correlates with item number 16 and 19 at 0.05 level and item
number 9,10,11,12,15, 17,18 and 21 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 9 significantly correlates with item number 17 and 21 at 0.05 level and item
number 11,14,15,16 and 19 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 10 significantly corelates with item number 13 at 0.05 level and item number
11,12 and 18 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 11 significantly correlates with item number 18 at 0.05 level and item
number 12 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 12 does not significantly correlate with any items at 0.05 level but
significantly correlate with item number 14,18 and 21 at 0.05 level..
Item 13 significantly correlates with item number 16 and 17 at 0.005 level and
item number 14,19 and 21 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 14 significantly correlates with item number 17 at 0.05 level and item number
15,16,19,20 and 21 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 15 significantly correlates with item number 18 at 0.05 level and item number
16,17,19 and 21 and 21 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 16 does not significantly correlate with any items at 0.05 level but
significantly correlates with item number at 17,19 0.01 level respectively.
Item 17 significantly correlates with item number 20 at 0.05 level and item number
19 and 21at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 18 does not significantly correlate with any items at 0.05 level as well as 0.01
level
Item 19 does not significantly correlate with any items at 0.05 level but
significantly correlates with item number 21 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 20 does not significantly correlate with any items at 0.05 level but
significantly correlates with item number 21 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 21 does not significantly correlate with any items at 0.05 level as well as 0.01
level.

Table 4: shows over all scale statistics

Mean Variance Std. Deviation N of Items

7.66 24.100 4.909 21

Table 4 shows the overall scale statistics, this scale has 21 items and the mean of
the scale was found to be 7.66, standard deviation is 4.909 and variance is 24.100
respectively.
Table 5: Reliability statistics for the scale of Social Media Usage
Cronbach’s Alpha No. of Items

.845 19

Table 5 provides an overview of the scale statistics, the 19 items scale indicated
Cronbach’s alpha coefficient value of 0. 845.This high alpha coefficient score
signifies a strong level of internal consistency and reliability within the scale. The
scale can be considered as reliable and ensuring that data obtained from this scale
can be considered trustworthy. However, the scale can be further subjected to
refinement to attain a more precise and dependable assessment of Social Media
Usage.
Table 6: Showing the descriptive statistics for each item of Social Media Usage
Scale
Item Mean Std. Deviation
Q1 .59 .493
Q2 .48 .502
Q3 .35 .480
Q4 .41 .495
Q5 .56 .499
Q6 .57 .498
Q7 .58 .496
Q8 .56 .499
Q9 .22 .414
Q10 .24 .431
Q11 .32 .467
Q12 .48 .502
Q13 .38 .487
 Q14 .19 .393
Q15 .35 .480
Q16 .17 .378
Q17 .35 .480
Q18 .40 .491
Q19 .45 .500
In item 1- I spend more time on social media than I intend to. The obtained mean
score is 0.59 with the standard deviation of 0.493, based on a dataset comprising of
111 responses.
In item 2- I find myself avoiding interpersonal interactions. The obtained mean
score is 0.48 with the standard deviation of 0.502, based on a dataset comprising of
111 responses.
In item 3- social media has affected my social life and relationships. The obtained
mean score is 0.35 with the standard deviation of 0.480, based on a dataset
comprising of 111 responses.
In item 4- I find it difficult to disengage from social media. The obtained mean
score is 0.41 with the standard deviation of 0.495, based on a dataset comprising of
111 responses.
In item 5- I tend to doom scroll on social media. The obtained mean score is 0.56
with the standard deviation of 0.499, based on a dataset comprising of 111
responses.
In item 6- I tend to use 3 or more social media apps in a single day. The obtained
mean score is 0.57 with the standard deviation of 0.498, based on a dataset
comprising of 111 responses.
In item 7- I tend to multitask while using social media. The obtained mean score is
0.58 with the standard deviation of 0.496, based on a dataset comprising of 111
responses.
In item 8- I frequently switch between social media apps or app hop in a single
time period. The obtained mean score is 0.56 with the standard deviation of 0.499,
based on a dataset comprising of 111 responses.
In item 9- I have multiple profiles and accounts for every social media app I use.
The obtained mean score is 0.22 with the standard deviation of 0.414, based on a
dataset comprising of 111 responses.
In item 10- When I’m not using social media I feel restless and keep thinking about
it. The obtained mean score is 0.24 with the standard deviation of 0.431, based on a
dataset comprising of 111 responses.
In item 11- I compulsively use social media in the presence of people. The obtained
mean score is 0.32 with the standard deviation of 0.467, based on a dataset
comprising of 111 responses.
In item 12- I tend to procrastinate by using social media. The obtained mean score
is 0.48 with the standard deviation of 0.502, based on a dataset comprising of 111
responses.
In item 13- Social media content and news influences my lifestyle. The obtained
mean score is 0.38 with the standard deviation of 0.487, based on a dataset
comprising of 111 responses.
In item 14- I feel my social media image and life is more prominent than my real-
life image. The obtained mean score is 0.19 with the standard deviation of 0.393,
based on a dataset comprising of 111 responses.
In item 15- I have been told that I use social media too often. The obtained mean
score is 0.35 with the standard deviation of 0.480, based on a dataset comprising of
111 responses.
In item 16- I feel irritated when somebody interrupts me while I’m occupied with
social media. The obtained mean score is 0.17 with the standard deviation of 0.378,
based on a dataset comprising of 111 responses.
In item 17-I often sleep less due to endlessly scrolling through social media. The
obtained mean score is 0.35 with the standard deviation of 0.480, based on a dataset
comprising of 111 responses.
In item 18- The first thing I do as soon as I wake up is surf through all (or some) of
my social media apps. The obtained mean score is 0.40 with the standard deviation
of 0.491, based on a dataset comprising of 111 responses.
In item 19- I have a limited time and schedule to engage with social media. The
obtained mean score is 0.45 with the standard deviation of 0.500, based on a dataset
comprising of 111 responses.

Table 7: shows the correlational matrix for the Social Media Usage
Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q5 Q6 Q7
Q1 1
Q2 .275* 1
*
Q3 .262* .279** 1
*
Q4 .359* .148 .262* 1
* *
Q5 .448* .123 .198* .490** 1
*
Q6 .205* .070 .109 .291** .213* 1
Q7 .221* .016 .211* .314** .156 .503** 1
Q8 .190* .087 .236* .380** .342* .506** .450**
*
Q9 .077 -.020 .164 .047 .070 .238* .229*
Q10 .212* .173 .418* .376** .208* .113 .188*
 *
Q11 .323* .205* .110 .334** .447* .123 .228*
* *
Q12 .422* .169 .279* .331** .450* .215* .272**
* * *
Q13 .304* .221* .243* .173 .245* .081 .217*
* *
Q14 .258* .091 .223* .294** .198* .050 .181
*
Q15 .377* .052 .288* .300** .312* .185 .172
* * *
Q16 .034 .092 .267* .249** .067 .155 .099
*
Q17 .377* .090 .328* .415** .350* -.043 .211*
* * *
Q18 .294* .110 .137 .178 .127 .113 .098
*
Q19 .194* .077 .016 .194* .221* .132 .116

Q8 Q9 Q10 Q11 Q12 Q13

Q8 1
Q9 .247** 1
Q1 .293** .365** 1
0
Q11 .252** .209* .474* 1
*
Q1 .232* .155 .257* .322** 1
2 *
Q1 .245** .132 .250* .350** .221* 1
3 *
Q1 .151 .361** .530* .464** .321** .477**
4 *
Q1 .274** .209* .330* .313** .165 .282**
5 *
Q1 .259** .400** .356* .258** -.003 .237**
6 *
Q1 .198* .072 .374* .353** .392** .282**
7 *
Q1 .164 .111 .356* .322** .184 .317**
8 *
Q1 .112 -.080 -.049 .087 .150 -.034
9
 Q14 Q15 Q16 Q17 Q18 Q19
Q1 1
4
Q1 .271** 1
5
Q1 .330** .317** 1
6
Q1 .367** .447** .217* 1
7
Q1 .267** .137 .218* .252** 1
8
Q1 -.021 .054 -.027 .054 .044 1
9
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
Table 7 shows the correlation matrix between the items of the scale. This allows us
to understand how well each item is associated or correlated with other items in the
scale. It is also shown the significance level of the correlation which indicates that
there is a significant correlation between items in scale.
Item 1 significantly correlates with item number 2,3,4, 5,11,12,13,13,14,19 at 0.05
level and item number at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 2 significantly correlates with item number 11 and 13 at 0.05 level and item
number 3 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 3 significantly correlates with item number 5,7 and 8 at 0.05 level and item
number 4, 9 and 11 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 4 significantly correlates with item number 19 at 0.05 level and item number
5,6,7,8,9,10 and level at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 5 significantly correlates with item number 6,10,14 and 18 at 0.05 level and
item number 8,11,12,13,15, and 17 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 6 significantly correlate with item number 9 and 12 at 0.05 level and item
number 7 and 8 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 7 significantly correlates with item number 9,10, 11,12,13 and 17 at 0.05
level and item number 8 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 8 significantly correlates with item number 12 and 17 at 0.05 level and item
number 9,10,11,13,15 and 16 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 9 significantly correlates with item number 11 and 15 at 0.05 level and item
number 10, 14 and 16 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 10 does not significantly correlate with any items at 0.05 level and correlates
with item number 11,12,13,14,15,16,17 and 18 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 11 does not significantly correlate with any items at 0.05 level and item
number 12,13,14,15,16,17 and 18 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 12 significantly correlates with item number 13 at 0.05 level and item number
14 and 17 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 13 does not significantly correlate with any item number at 0.05 level and
significantly correlates with item number 14,15,16,17 and 18 at 0.01 level
respectively.
Item 14 does not significantly correlate with any item number at 0.05 level and
significantly correlates with item number 15,16,17 and 18 at 0.01 level
respectively.
Item 15 does not significantly correlate with any item number at 0.05 level and
significantly correlates with item number 16 and 17 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 16 significantly correlates with item number 17 and 18 at 0.05 level and does
not significantly correlate with any item number at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 17 does not significantly correlate with any items at 0.05 level but
significantly correlates with item number 18 at 0.01 level respectively.
Item 18 does not correlate with any item at 0.05 level as well as 0.01 level of
significance
Item 19 does not correlate with any item at 0.05 level as well as 0.01 level of
significance.

Table 8: shows over all scale statistics of Social Media Usage

Mean Variance Std. Deviation N of Items

7.64 21.451 4.631 19

Table 7 shows the overall scale statistics, this scale has 19 items and the mean of
the scale was found to be 7.64, standard deviation is 4.631 and variance is 21.451
respectively.