Differential Loneliness Scale (DLS)

Abstract

The Differential Loneliness Scale (DLS) is a specialized psychological scale developed to measure the subjective experience of loneliness across four distinct areas of social interaction. Unlike global measures of loneliness, the DLS recognizes that an individual may feel satisfied in one relational domain (e.g., family) while experiencing significant deficits in another (e.g., romantic relationships or community involvement). The instrument consists of 60 true/false items designed to assess perceived deficits in the quantity and quality of relationships within four key social spheres: romantic/sexual relationships, friendships, family relationships, and relationships with the community. This differential approach allows researchers and clinicians to identify specific sources of relational distress, offering a nuanced understanding of social isolation.

Keywords

Differential Loneliness Scale, DLS, loneliness, social isolation, relationship quality, social support, family relationships, romantic relationships, psychometric scale, psychological assessment.

Authors

N. Schmidt, V. Sermat.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the Differential Loneliness Scale (DLS) is to provide a comprehensive and dimension-specific measurement of loneliness. Prior scales often treated loneliness as a unidimensional construct. Schmidt and Sermat (1983) aimed to overcome this limitation by creating an instrument capable of differentiating between feelings of relational deprivation stemming from specific social contexts. This allows for a more precise diagnosis of social deficits and the targeting of interventions tailored to the specific type of relationship lacking adequate fulfillment.

The scale is designed for use in academic research exploring the etiology, correlates, and outcomes of different types of loneliness, particularly in relation to personality traits, life stage, and social environment. It serves as a robust tool for measuring the subjective quality of an individual’s social network across multiple domains.

Construct

The DLS measures the construct of differential loneliness, defining it as the discrepancy between desired and achieved levels of social contact and intimacy within four predetermined social domains. This approach views loneliness not as a unitary state, but as a potential deficit experienced uniquely within specific types of relationships. The core dimensions assessed are:

• Romantic/Sexual Relationships: Measures satisfaction and feelings of connection within intimate partnerships.
• Friendships: Measures the perceived availability and quality of close non-familial social ties.
• Family Relationships: Measures feelings of belonging, understanding, and support derived from immediate and extended family.
• Relationships with the Community: Measures feelings of integration, belonging, and connection to broader social groups or neighborhood structures.

Validity

The original research by Schmidt and Sermat (1983) established strong validity for the DLS. Construct validity was supported by the scale’s ability to differentiate between the four intended dimensions, demonstrating that deficits in one area do not necessarily correlate perfectly with deficits in another. Furthermore, the DLS showed significant correlations with established global measures of loneliness, such as the UCLA Loneliness Scale, indicating good convergent validity.

Discriminant validity was also evidenced by low correlations between the DLS subscales and measures of unrelated psychological constructs, confirming that the DLS primarily assesses relational deficits rather than general distress or neuroticism. Subsequent studies have reaffirmed its utility in distinguishing between social and emotional loneliness components within specific relationship contexts.

Reliability

The DLS exhibits acceptable to strong levels of internal consistency (reliability). Across the four subscales in the original study, Cronbach’s alpha coefficients generally ranged from 0.70 to 0.90, indicating good homogeneity within each dimension. The Romantic/Sexual subscale and the Friendships subscale typically show the highest internal consistency, reflecting the coherence of items measuring these specific relational needs.

While specific test-retest reliability data were not universally reported across all subsequent studies, the stability of the measure over short periods has been generally supported, suggesting that the DLS provides consistent scores when measuring chronic feelings of relational deprivation. The robust psychometric properties support its use in both cross-sectional and longitudinal research designs.

Factor Analysis

The development of the DLS was explicitly guided by the hypothesis that loneliness is multidimensional. The initial Factor Analysis (FA) employed by Schmidt and Sermat (1983) supported a clear four-factor structure, corresponding precisely to the four proposed relational domains: romantic/sexual, friendship, family, and community. This confirmed the scale’s differential nature and its ability to measure distinct components of relational quality.

Subsequent confirmatory factor analyses in various populations have generally upheld this four-factor model, although some minor cross-loadings have been occasionally noted, particularly between the family and friendship subscales in certain demographic groups. Overall, the statistical evidence strongly supports the use of the four subscales for scoring and interpretation, reinforcing the scale’s theoretical foundation.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report questionnaire, Psychometric scale.

Format: 60 items administered in a dichotomous True/False response format. Scoring involves summing points for responses indicating loneliness (T for non-asterisked items, F for asterisked items). The original scoring key specifies which items belong to each of the four subscales.

Language Available: Primarily English; translations may exist in academic literature but require independent validation.

Population Group: General population, Clinical samples, College students, Adults.

Age Group: Typically utilized with adolescents (late teens) and adults.

Population Details: Originally validated using university student populations, but subsequently applied successfully to broader adult samples investigating social isolation and relationship satisfaction.

Test Methodology: Pencil-and-paper or digital administration. Scores are calculated for the total scale (overall loneliness) and separately for each of the four differential subscales, allowing for detailed profile analysis of relational deficits.

Keywords

Psychological assessment, social isolation, relationship fulfillment, psychometrics, Schmidt and Sermat, multidimensional loneliness, community integration, interpersonal relationships.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in the source material.

Affiliation Email addresses: Unavailable.

Correspondence Address: Unavailable (Original correspondence would be directed to the authors’ institutional affiliations at the time of publication).

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Differential Loneliness Scale (DLS) was first published in 1983. As an instrument published in the academic domain for research purposes, it is generally considered available for non-commercial academic use, provided appropriate citation is given to the original authors (Schmidt & Sermat, 1983). There are typically no associated fees for academic use, though researchers should verify permissions if using it in commercial or clinical settings.

The original instrument document can be found here: http://www.yorku.ca/rokada/psyctest/lonely.doc.

The original PDF can be downloaded here: http://www.yorku.ca/rokada/psyctest/lonelys.pdf.

Another resource PDF is available here: http://fetzer.org/sites/default/files/images/stories/pdf/selfmeasures/Self_Measures_for_Loneliness_and_Interpersonal_Problems_DIFFERENTIAL_LONELINESS.pdf.

Reference’s

Schmidt‚ N. & Sermat‚ V. (1983). Measuring loneliness in different relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology‚ 44‚ 1038-1047.

Marshall‚ G. W.‚ Michaels‚ C. E.‚ & Mulki‚ J. P. (2007). Workplace isolation: Exploring the construct and its measurements. Psychology and Marketing‚ 24‚ 195-223.

Items of the Differential Loneliness Scale (DLS)

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

1.    I find it easy to express feelings of affection toward members of my family.*

2.    Most everyone around me is a stranger.

3.    I usually wait for a friend to call me up and invite me out before making plans to go anywhere.

4.    Most of my friends understand my motives and reasoning.*

5.    At this time‚ I do not have a romantic relationship that means a lot to me.

6.    I don’t get along very well with my family.

7.    I have at least one good friend of the same sex.*

8.    I can’t depend on getting moral or financial support from any group or organization in a time of trouble.

9.    I am now involved in a romantic or marital relationship where both of us make a genuine effort at cooperation.*

10.I often become shy and retiring in the company of relatives.

11.Some of my friends will stand by me in almost any difficulty.*

12.People in my community aren’t really interested in what I think or feel.

13.My trying to have friends and to be liked seldom succeeds the way I would like it to.

14.I spend time talking individually with each member of my family.*

15.I find it difficult to tell anyone that I love him or her.

16.I don=t have many friends in the city where I live.

17.I work well with others in a group.*

18.I am an important part of the emotional and physical well-being of my lover or spouse.*

19.I don’t feel that I can turn to my friends living around me for help when I need it.

20.I don’t think that anyone in my family really understands me.

21.I have a lover or spouse who fulfils many of my emotional needs.*

22.My friends are generally interested in what I am doing‚ although not to the point of being nosy.*

23.Members of my family enjoy meeting my friends.*

24.I allow myself to become close to my friends.*

25.My relatives are generally too busy with their concerns to bother about my problems.

26.Few of my friends understand me the way I want to be understood.

27.No one in the community where I live cares much about me.

28.Right now‚ I don’t have true compatibility in a romantic or marital relationship.

29.Members of my family give me the kind of support that I need.*

30.A lot of my friendships ultimately turn out to be pretty disappointing.

31.My romantic or marital partner gives me much support and encouragement.*

32.I am not very open with members of my family.

33.I often feel resentful about certain actions of my friends.

34.I am embarrassed about the way my family behaves.

35.People who say they are in love with me are usually only trying to rationalize using me for their own purposes.

36.I have a good relationship with most members of my family.*

37.In my relationships‚ I am generally able to express both positive and negative feelings.*

38.I don’t get much satisfaction from the groups I attend.

39.I get plenty of help and support from friends.*

40.I seem to have little to say to members of my family.

41.I don’t have any one special love relationship in which I feel really understood.

42.I really feel that I belong to a family.*

43.I have few friends with whom I can talk openly.

44.My family is quite critical of me.

45.I have an active love life.*

46.I have few friends that I can depend on to fulfil their end of mutual commitments.

47.Generally I feel that members of my family acknowledge my strengths and positive qualities.*

48.I have at least one real friend.*

49.I don’t have any neighbours who would help me out in a time of need.

50.Members of my family are relaxed and easy-going with each other.*

51.I have moved around so much that I find it difficult to maintain lasting friendships.

52.I tend to get along well with partners in romantic relationships.*

53.I find it difficult to invite a friend to do something with me.

54.I have little contact with members of my family.

55.My friends don=t seem to stay interested in me for long.

56.There are people in my community who understand my views and beliefs.*

57.As much as possible‚ I avoid members of my family.

58.I seldom get the emotional security I need from a romantic or sexual relationship.

59.My family usually values my opinion when a family decision is to be made.

60.Most of my friends are genuinely concerned about my welfare. *

Scoring Details

The DLS uses a True/False response format. Scores are calculated differentially based on the presence of an asterisk (*).

• For items without an asterisk (indicating loneliness/dissatisfaction), a marking of T (TRUE) is given one point.
• For items marked with an asterisk (indicating satisfaction/connection), a marking of F (FALSE) is given one point (reverse scored).

The total score is the sum of points across all 60 items, with higher scores indicating greater overall loneliness. Subscale scores are calculated as follows:

1. Romantic/Sexual Relationships: Items 5, 9, 15, 18, 21, 28, 31, 35, 41, 45, 52, and 58.
2. Friendships: Items 3, 4, 7, 11, 13, 16, 19, 22, 23, 24, 26, 30, 33, 37, 39, 43, 46, 48, 51, 53, 55, and 60.
3. Family Relationships: Items 1, 6, 10, 14, 20, 25, 29, 32, 34, 36, 40, 42, 44, 47, 50, 54, 57, and 59.
4. Relationships with the Community: Items 2, 8, 12, 17, 27, 38, 49, and 56.