American Journal of Community Psychology, Vol. 11, No.

2, 1983

Social Intimacy: An Important Moderator of

Stressful Life Events 1
Rickey S. Miller 2 and Herbert M. Lefcourt
University of Waterloo

Two studies were conducted to explore the role of social intimacy in predict-
ing the indivMuars response to stress. In the first study the experimenter
reinforced the experimental subjects' verbalizations during an interview on
a fixed schedule for the first 3 minutes, withdrawing reinforcement for the
final 4 minutes. The control group received reinforcement on a fixed
schedule for the total 7 minutes. Subjects scoring low on a measure of
intimacy disclosed less personal material during the withdrawal period in
the experimental condition than in the control condition in contrast to high
scoring subjects who maintained their level of disclosure for both parts of
the interview. In the second study, previously experienced life change events
were assessed. IndivMuals lacking a current intimacy were found to be
prone to higher levels of emotional disturbance especially when many
previous negative or f e w positive life change events had occurred.

In the last 20 years there have been many investigations which focus on life
stress as an important antecedent of psychiatric and physical illness (e.g.,
Dohrenwend & Dohrenwend, 1974). However, Johnson and Sarason (1978)
point out that life stress alone most often accounts for less than 1070 of the
variance in the prediction of dependent measures and they suggest, as do
Rabkin and Streuning (1976), that predictive accuracy would be enhanced
by the identification of variables which function to moderate the deleterious

~This article is partially based on the first author's doctoral dissertation supervised by the
second author and submitted to the Psychology Department, University o f Waterloo, 1979.
The authors wish to t h a n k Ed Ware for his critical comments as well as Debbie Sherk and
Carl von Baeyer for their help in running subjects. This research was supported by a re-
search grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of C a n a d a 410-78-
0297 to the second author.
2All corresponaence should be sent to Rickey Miller, Psychology Department, Eaton Building,
Toronto General Hospital, University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
127
0091-0562/83/0400-0127503.00/0 1983PlenumPublishingCorporation
 128 Miller and Lefcourt

effects of stressful events. Several studies have generated data which point
to social intimacy as one such moderating variable.
Brown, Sklair, Harris, and Birley (1973; Brown, Bhorlchain, & Harris,
1975; Brown, Harris, & Copeland, 1977; Brown & Harris, 1978) interviewed a
random sample of women living in London, England (n = 220) and a sample
of women who were being treated for a depressive episode which had emerged
within the previous year (n = 114). Each subject was screened for psychiatric
disturbance by a standardized interview. Brown et al. (1975) assessed recent
life change events and the presence of a confidant (someone with whom the
subject could discuss problems) and found that women who had ex-
perienced severe life events and who lacked a confidant were 10 times more
likely to become depressed than were those who had been similarly stressed
but who had a confidant.
Investigators exploring the individual's response to bereavement have
noted that widows and widowers who already had or who came to develop
close relationships with others after their loss evidenced a significantly
lower risk of illness and mortality than did those with only superficial rela-
tionships with friends and other relatives (Lynch, 1977; Jacobs & Charles,
1980).
In a study predicting the frequency of complications during
pregnancy, Nuckolls, Cassel, and Kaplan (1972) have presented data which
indicate that women who had superficial interpersonal relationships and
who had experienced high levels of stress prior to and during pregnancy
were three times more likely to suffer complications than were similarly
stressed women who had closer relationships with others. Lewis and Jones
(1980; Note 1) noted similar results in a study of pregnant adolescents. Those
women who experienced high levels of stress before and during pregnancy
and who reported receiving little support from family and friends
experienced significantly more complications during delivery than did
similarly stressed women who reported receiving more support from others.
The importance of intimacy in predicting the effects of stress has
received empirical support despite the imprecise global measures employed.
Brown and his associates asked their subjects a few questions to assess
whether or not they had a confidant; Nuckolls et al. (1972) assessed
subjects' feelings and perceptions of self, marriage, extended t'amily, social
resources, and pregnancy and referred to the composite as a measure of
social assets; Lewis and Jones (1980; Note 1) employed standardized rating
scales to assess the degree of social support available to their subjects. While
other researchers have developed measures of social support (e.g., Habif &
Lahey, 1980; Kaplan, 1977, cited in Turner, 1981; Sandler & Lakey, 1982)
none have directly assessed intimacy (depth of involvement) which has been
implicated as an important variable in predicting the individual's response
to stress.
Social lnlimacy 129

In response to the need for a more precise and standardized

instrument, the Miller Social Intimacy Scale (MSIS, Miller & Lefcourt,
1982), a 17-item measure o f the maximum level of intimacy currently ex-
perienced in the context of friendship or marriage was developed.
An initial pool of items was generated by systematic interviews with
students (n = 50) which explored the nature and function of their
relationships with friends, acquaintances, and family members in an
attempt to specify the defining characteristics of relationships they
considered intimate. An analysis of inter-item and item-total correlations
resulted in the selection of 17 items, of which 6 required frequency and 11
required intensity ratings. Items which were retained included the
following: " H o w often do you show him/her affection?" and " H o w much
do you feel like being encouraging and supportive to him/her when he/she
is unhappy?" by instructing subjects to describe their closest relationship,
the sum o f their ratings yield a measure of the maximum level of intimacy
being experienced at present. Initial psychometric studies have revealed
promising evidence for internal consistency of the MSIS (Cronbach alpha
coefficients of .91, n = 45 and .86, n = 39) as well as test-retest reliability (r
= .96,p < .001, n = 25 over a 2-month interval; r = .84,p < .001, n = 20
over a 1-month interval).
The data generated by the early validation studies (Miller & Lefcourt,
1982) have also helped to define the construct assessed by the MSIS.
Subjects who scored high on the intimacy scale also described their closest
relationship as being characterized by high levels of trust and intimacy (r =
.71, p < .001, n = 45) on the 52-item Interpersonal Relationship Scale
developed by Schlein, Guerney, and Stover (1971, cited in Guerney, 1977).
Subjects who scored low on the MSIS also described themselves as lonely (r
= -.65, p < .001, n = 59) on the U C L A Loneliness Scale (Russell,
Peplau, & Ferguson, 1978). That the scale measures closeness is supported
by the finding that subjects obtained higher MSIS scores when describing
their closest friends than when describing casual friends (t = 9.18, p <
.001, n = 25). In order to ascertain whether the MSIS contributes greater
precision in assessing intimacy than a simple assessment o f marital status,
the scores of three different samples were compared: unmarried students (n
= 216), married students (n = 34), and married individuals (n = 30)
seeking cojoint marital therapy in a psychiatric facility. The mean intimacy
score for the married students was significantly greater than that for the un-
married students (t = 8.17, p < .001), supporting the assumption that
marital relationships in general are characterized by higher levels of
intimacy than are nonmarital relationships. However, the mean of the
MSIS scores for the married students was also significantly greater than that
for the distressed clinic couples (t = 6.41, p < .001). This points to the
variability in intimacy experienced by married people. In fact, the un-
130 Miller and Lefcourt

married students achieved a higher mean intimacy score than the married
clinic sample (t = 2.56, p < .02). These findings suggest the MSIS can be a
more precise measure of intimacy than the assessment of marital status.
In light of evidence supporting the reliability and validity of the MSIS,
two studies were designed to test the hypothesis that subjects lacking an
intimate relationship and who experience stress will be more prone to
psychological disturbance than will similarly stressed subjects who have an
intimate relationship.
The general assumption was that persons who enjoy an intimate
relationship are more apt to feel secure in their interactions with others.
Whether such security derives from feelings of being esteemed, of having an
opportunity for confirmation of one's views, or of having someone with
whom one can ventilate one's feelings, the result of such security is that the
individual should be more resilient or less vulnerable in facing various
potential stressors.
In the first study described below, a laboratory situation was created
in which subjects experienced a facsimile of social rejection, as was
evidenced in the growing disinterest of an interviewer who had solicited
their views about a number of issues. In the second study, actual life
stressors were assessed by a life events questionnaire. In both studies the
hypothesis was that subjects who scored low on the MSIS would experience
more distress than would subjects scoring higher on the MSIS as indicated
by avoidance behavior in the first study and self-reports of mood disturbance in
the second study.

STUDY 1

Method

Subjects

A group of 21 male and 24 female undergraduate students from the

University of Waterloo, with a mean age of 20.5 years, were employed in
the experimental group; 30 male and 43 female undergraduates constituted
the control group. Their average age was 21.2 years. Each group was comprised
of students from a different psychology class. Assignment to condition was
therefore not random. One male and one female experimenter interacted
with the experimental subjects, whereas a female experimenter interacted
with all of the control subjects. The latter experimenter was known bY 12 of
the male and 35 of the female control subjects due to their having
participated in a previous experiment with her.
Social Intimacy 131

Procedure

A method implemented by Adams and Hoffman (1960) was modified

to generate an interview task. Subjects completed the MSIS and other scales
related to another concurrent study and were then individually invited into
another lab. The experimenter, who had no knowledge of subjects' intimacy
scores, picked up a clipboard with paper on it to indicate that the task
would require him/her to take notes. The subjects were told to discuss their
views on three structured topics for 7 minutes. The topics were anticipating
marriage in the future; the merits of traditional marriage versus living
together; and extramarital sex.
Experimental Condition. During the initial 3-minute period the
experimenter reinforced the subjects' verbalizations with appropriate eye
contact, interested mm-hm's and head nods for the first and third 15-second
interval of each minute. For the second and fourth 15-second interval of
each minute the experimenter took notes at a leisurely pace and looked
down at the clipboard. During the last 4 minutes of the interview the
experimenter withdrew verbal and nonverbal cues of interest, with only
some slow note-taking activity persisting.
Control Condition. The female experimenter consistently and
appropriately reinforced subjects' verbalizations with gaze, interested mm-
hm's, and head nods for the entire 7-minute interview period.
Subjects were debriefed about the procedure following the completion
of the entire study.

Measures

The videotaped recording of subjects' interactions with the interviewer

were rated independently by two judges for degree of verbal disclosure
during each interval of the interview. Verbalizations were rated from 0 to 5,
with 0 assigned to "no verbalization," 1 for "superficial, closed, inhibited,
reserved," 3 for "moderately personal, somewhat revealing of feelings," and
5 for "personal, revealing of feelings, involved, open." The correlation
between ratings of disclosure for 15 (randomly chosen) subjects produced
an r of .94.
In addition, the duration of eye contact throughout each interval of
the interview was scored using an event recorder. The summed scores for
duration of eye contact were rated by two judges who attained an r of .93
for a subset of 15 subjects.
Since the sex of the experimenter was a potential confound between
conditions, an analysis of variance of dependent measures in each segment
of the interview was planned as opposed to the use of simple change scores.
132 Miller and Lefcourt

This was done to examine for possible base rate differences in the behavior
of control and experimental subjects.

Results

In order to perform an analysis of variance of the duration of gaze and

disclosure variables, subjects' intimacy scores were divided at the median to
form high and low groups. The analysis of variance of duration of gaze
revealed only one significant main effect, for interval, F = 32.11, p < .001,
1/85. All subjects looked at the experimenter less in the second part of the
interview than in the first. No other main effects or interaction terms
attained significance.
The analysis of variance performed on disclosure scores, in contrast,
generated a three-way interaction between interval, condition, and
intimacy, F = 13.28, p < .001, 1/90, and is illustrated in Figure 1.

H I G H M S I S - E X P T L GROUP
H I G H MStS-CONTROL GROUP
LOW M S I S - E X P T L GROUP
[~ LOW MSIS-CONTROL GROUP

3.5

L~J
~" 3.0

CO
o

if)
F, 2.s

LL
o
2.0,

<

1.5 ,

1,0

FIRST SECOND

INTERVIEW INTERVAL

Fig. 1. Disclosure as a function of intimacy, condition, and interval.

Social lnlimacy 133

Subjects scoring low on the intimacy scale showed a significantly

greater decrease in disclosure in the second interval of the experimental
condition than in the control condition. In the absence of the listener's cues
of interest, the verbal content of the low-scoring subjects became very
superficial and may reflect their motivation to withdraw from the interac-
tion. In contrast, subjects scoring high on the MSIS evidenced a significant
decline in disclosure from the first to the second interval only in the control
condition. This may reflect the tendency of subjects in this situation to
become more superficial over time. In the experimental condition the
behavior of the high-scoring subjects was significantly different from that
of all other groups. In this situation these subjects showed a slight increase
in disclosure levels. The apparent decrease in interest displayed by the
interviewer functioned to motivate further disclosure on the part of these
subjects possibly reflecting their attempt to reengage the listener's interest.
Post hoc Scheff6 comparisons revealed that the control subjects
disclosed significantly more personal material initially than did the
experimental subjects. This finding may be due to the fact that 47 of the
control subjects were familiar with the experimenter from their participa-
tion in a previous study. Despite this problem of lack of comparability
between groups at base line, the three-way interaction between interval,
condition, and intimacy indicates that the behavior of subjects is dif-
ferentiated by their intimacy scores and not only by condition.
In an attempt to confirm the stressful impact of the listener's
decreased interest, the experimental subjects were interviewed after
completing the procedure. Surprisingly, none reported having noticed the
change in the experimenter's behavior.

Discussion

The findings from the experimental study are suggestive but must be
interpreted cautiously. While the data concerned with eye contact failed to
reflect the anticipated avoidance behavior, the ratings of disclosure did
reveal changes between conditions and intervals of the interview as a
function of intimacy scores. Those who scored low on the MSIS became less
disclosing in general as the interview proceeded beyond the first 3 minutes.
However, when the interviewer ceased to show interest in the subjects'
commentary an even more marked decline occurred in disclosure levels
among those low in intimacy. Subjects with high intimacy scores, on the
other hand, were not consistent in their responses. Those in the control
condition displayed the same sort of "winding down" as did the low-
intimate subjects. Those in the experimental condition retained their levels
of disclosure throughout the entire interview.
134 Miller and Lefcourl

Our findings suggest that persons who have closer relationships with
others may work to maintain interactions more often than those for whom re-
lationships are more distant. That high intimates "wind down" as do others
in the control conditions makes the performance of high intimates in the
experimental condition seem to be an "added effort" more than just a
maintenance of conversation.
These findings, then, suggest that in the unusual circumstances of one-
way communication that we required, the apparent withdrawal of a
listener's attention affects people differently, dependent upon their level of
intimacy with others. However, the confound deriving from varied
familiarity of experimenter and possible nonrepresentativeness of our
interview situation with its demand for a monologue give reason for caution
in the interpretation of the data.

STUDY 2

Given these shortcomings a second study was designed to investigate

the role of intimacy in predicting the individual's response to previously
experienced important life change events. The hypothesis as noted
previously was that subjects who had experienced a considerable number of
life changes and who lacked a current intimate relationship would be more
prone to psychological distress than would those experiencing a similar
number of changes but who had a current intimacy.

Method

Subjects

A group of 13 male and 34 female undergraduate University of

Waterloo students volunteered for this study. Their mean age was 22.1
years.

Procedure and Measures

Subjects completed three scales in a counterbalanced order: (a) a

modified version of the Coddington Life Events Checklist (1972). Events
which occurred during the high school period were affectively rated as
positive, neutral, or negative in impact. Positive and negative life change
scores were derived from this scale. (b) The Profile of Mood States (POMS,
McNair, Lorr, & Droppleman, 1971) was completed once on each of 4
consecutive weeks. The POMS consists of 65 adjectives and yields scores for
tension, depression, anger, fatigue, vigor, and confusion. A total mood
Social Intimacy 135

disturbance score is derived from summing the negative affects scores and
subtracting the vigor score from that total. The POMS scores used in the
study were the averages of the total mood disturbance from the four
administrations. (c) the Miller Social Intimacy Scale (MSIS).

Results

The data generated by the independent variables were subjected to a

hierarchical multiple regression analysis with life change scores entered
first, the MSIS score entered second, followed by the product of the first
two variables, predicting to the mean total mood disturbance scores. Table
I presents the results of this analysis for total mood disturbance.
Noting the R 2 increment with respect to negative life events it is
apparent that the intimacy score explains an additional 12% of the total
variance beyond the 17% explained by negative life change events. The
cross-product (interaction) term, AB, does not add significantly to the
predictive power contributed by the first two variables and suggests,
therefore, that the intimacy and negative life events scores are independent
predictors of emotional functioning but not that intimacy moderates the
effects of the negative life changes as hypothesized earlier.
With respect to postive life events, the positive events score by itself
accounts for only 5% of the total variance with the intimacy score
explaining an additional 22%. In contrast to the analyses with negative life
events, the cross-product term representing the interaction accounts for an
additional 5% of the variance.
Figure 2 illustrates the regression analyses with scores on the intimacy
scale and both positive and negative life events measures split at the median.
It can be seen in Figure 2 that the higher the negative life events score
and the lower the intimacy score the greater is the mood disturbance score.
The least distressed group is comprised of subjects who have experienced few

Table I. Hierarchically Arranged Multiple Regression of Total Mood Disturbance on Life Events
(A) and MSIS (B)
Independent Simple Cumulative R2 F
variables r R2 increment test p
First analysis
Negative life events A .41 .17 .17 13.60 < .001
Intimacy B -.49 .29 .12 9.60 < .005
Interaction AB -.20 .31 .02 1.87 n.s.

Second analysis
Positive life events A -.21 .05 .05 4.06 < .05
Intimacy B .49 .27 .22 17.89 < .001
Interaction AB .18 .32 .05 4.06 < .05
136 Miller and Lefcourt

HIGH MSIS

E3LOW MSIS

150

125.
111
0
Z
<
tn
n-
100"
I-
(,9
7,

75'
0

Y
0

_J
B
< 50'
I--
0
I--

Z 25'
<
W

~w .~'G. Lbw .l~.

NEGATIVE POSITIVE

LIFE EVENT SCORES

F i g . 2. Total m o o d disturbance as a function o f life events and intimacy.

negative life changes and who currently are enjoying a more intimate
relationship with someone else.
Figure 2 also reveals that subjects who score below the median on both
the positive life change and intimacy measures report the highest levels of
mood disturbance. The absence of positive events is most highly associated
with mood disturbance for individuals lacking an intimate relationship.
Subjects with scores above the median on positive events but who lack a
current intimacy, experience less mood disturbance than the previous
group. Subjects with a current intimacy are not differentiated by positive
life change scores. High intimacy subjects experience the lowest levels of
mood disturbance in general.
Social lnlimacy 137

Discussion

Results from Study 2 suggest that individuals who lack a current

intimate relationship are prone to high levels of emotional disturbance
especially when many previous negative or few positive life change events
have occurred. However, several methodological problems must be
addressed. It is possible that current moods influence the recall and
affective evaluation of life events. The positive correlation observed
between negative life events and mood disturbance (r = .41, p < .005)
could be interpreted as meaning that subjects recall more aversive events or
evaluate past events more negatively as a result of their current distress. On
the other hand, if this line of reasoning was correct we would expect that
the distressed subjects would recall fewer positive events as well, a finding
which received weak and insignificant support (r = - .21, ns).
Another problem concerns the ambiguity in interpreting the observed
correlation between mood disturbance and intimacy (r = - .49, p _< .003).
While it may be that individuals experience distress because they lack an
intimate relationship, it is also possible that individuals do not establish
intimate relationships due to their distress. Nevertheless, two important
prospective studies have generated data which support the hypothesis that
the absence of an intimate relationship is one variable that determines the
development of physical and psychological problems. Medalie and
Goldbourt (1976) completed a 5-year prospective study of the development ~
of new angina pectoris cases among 10,000 Israeli men, age 40 and over.
They assessed physiological risk factors pertinent to heart disease and asked
subjects whether they felt their wives showed them her love. The response to
this question was rated dichotomously. If the individual felt he had a loving
wife the risk of angina pectoris was reduced from 93 to 52 per 1,000 despite
high levels of anxiety, serum cholesterol, and the presence of electro-
cardiograph abnormality. Thomas and Duszynski (1974) conducted a
prospective study of over 1,300 medical students and found that psychiatric
illness and cancer were associated with the individual's retrospective
perception of having had superficial relationships with both parents
throughout childhood. Despite this preliminary evidence that the absence of
intimacy predicts distress, a future study assessing mood and events as they
occur, together with a concurrent evaluation of the level of intimacy
experienced, would help clarify the causal relationship among these
variables.

CONCLUSION

The mechanism which accounts for the relationship between intimacy

and the individual's response to life stress remains unclear and open to
138 Miller and Lefcourt

v a r i o u s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . It is likely t h a t the experience o f a c u r r e n t i n t i m a c y

e n h a n c e s self-esteem b y v a l i d a t i n g the i n d i v i d u a l ' s w o r t h . In a d d i t i o n , t h e
i n t i m a t e r e l a t i o n s h i p p r o v i d e s an o p p o r t u n i t y f o r the i n d i v i d u a l to share
stressful events with a n d receive s u p p o r t a n d help in p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g f r o m
the friend. T h e close r e l a t i o n s h i p , h o w e v e r , r a t h e r t h a n e n h a n c i n g self-
esteem a n d p r o b l e m - s o l v i n g a b i l i t y m a y be e s t a b l i s h e d as a c o n s e q u e n c e o f
these a t t r i b u t e s . I n d i v i d u a l s w h o are a l r e a d y c h a r a c t e r i z e d b y high levels o f
self-esteem a n d w h o can p r o b l e m - s o l v e effectively m a y establish close
r e l a t i o n s h i p s which e n h a n c e these a t t r i b u t e s f u r t h e r . In a d d i t i o n to the
c o n t r i b u t i o n o f i n t i m a c y in helping the i n d i v i d u a l c o p e with stress, the
process o f s h a r i n g the stress likely c o n t r i b u t e s to an e n h a n c e m e n t o f the
intimate relationship.
A l t h o u g h the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s f r o m b o t h o f the a b o v e studies m u s t
r e m a i n t e n t a t i v e , the d a t a r e p o r t e d gain in c r e d i b i l i t y given their c o n g r u e n c e
with the h o s t o f i n v e s t i g a t i o n s n o t e d earlier w h i c h have i m p l i c a t e d social
e m b e d d e d n e s s a n d social s u p p o r t in the a b i l i t y to resist the effects o f
stressors. T h e p r e s e n t studies suggest t h a t the M S I S can be used t o assess the
degree o f closeness o r social embeddednes"s which m a y p l a y such an
i m p o r t a n t role in the m o d e r a t i o n o f stress r e a c t i o n s .

REFERENCE NOTES

1. Dise, J. E., & Jones, A. C. Psychological stress, social support systems, and prgenancy com-
plications in adolescents. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological
Association, Montreal, 1980.

REFERENCES

Adams, J. S., & Hoffman, B. The frequency of self-reference statements as a function of

generalized reinforcement. Journal o f Abnormal & Social Psychology, 1960, 60, 384-
389.
Brown, G. W., Bhorlchain, M. N., & Harris, T. Social class and psychiatric disturbance
among women in an urban population. Sociology, 1975, 9, 225-254.
Brown, G. W., & Harris, T. Social origins o f depression. London: Tavistock Publication,
1978.
Brown, G. W., Harris, T., & Copeland, J. R. Depression and loss. British Journal o f Psy-
chiatry, 1977, 30, 1-18.
Brown, G. W , Sklair, F., Harris, T. O., & Birley, J. L. T. Life events and psychiatric dis-
orders: 1. Some methodological issues. PsychologicalMedicine, 1973, 3, 74-87.
Coddington, R. D. The significance of life events as etiologic factors in the diseases of child-
ren. 2: A study of a normal population. Journal o f Psychosomatic Research, 1972, 16,
205 -213.
Dohrenwend, B. S., & Dohrenwend, B. P. (Eds.). Stressful life events." Their nature and
effects. New York: Wiley, 1974.
Guerney, B. C. Relationship enhancement. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1977.
Social Intimacy 139

Habif, V., & Lahey, B. Assessment of the life stress-depression relationship: The use of social
support as a moderator variable. Journal of Behavioural Assessment, 1980, 2, 167-173.
Jacobs, T., & Charles, E. Life events and the occurrence of cancer in children. Psychosomatic
Medicine, 1980, 42, 11-23.
Johnson, J., & Sarason, I. Recent developments in research on life stress. In V. Hamilton &
D. M. Warburton, (Eds.), Human stress and cognition: An information processing ap-
proach. New York: Wiley, 1978.
Lynch, J. The broken heart. New York: Basic Books, 1977.
McNair, D. M., Lorr, M. & Droppleman, L. F. Profile of mood states. San Diego: Edits,
1971.
Medalie, J. H., & Goldbourt, U. Angina pectoris among 10,000 men. American Journal of
Medicine, 1976, 60, 910-921.
Miller, R. S., & Lefcourt, H. M' The assessment of social intimacy. Journal of Personality
Assessment, 1982, 46, 514-518.
Nuckolls, K., Cassel, J., & Kaplan, B. H. Psychosocial assets, life crisis and the prognosis of
pregnancy. American Journal of Epiclemiology, 1972, 95, 431-441.
Rabkin, J., & Struening, E. Life events, stress and illness. Science, 1976, 94, 1013-1020.
Russell, D., Peplau, L. A., & Ferguson, M. C. Developing a measure of loneliness.
Journal of Personality Assessment, 1978, 42, 290-294.
Sandier, I. N., & Lakey, B. Locus of control as a stress moderator: The role of control percep-
tions anti social support. American Journal of Community Psychology, 1982, 10, 65-
80.
Thomas, C. B., & Duszynski, K. R. Closeness to parents and the family constellation in a
prospective study of 5 disease states. Johns Hopkins Medical Journal, 1974, 134, 251-
270.
Turner, R. J. Social support as a contingency in psychological well-being. Journal of Health
and Social Behaviour, 1981,22, 357-367.