Are social relationships always beneficial?

Background

Social connections are a fundamental part of human life and essential to our health and wellbeing (Umberson & Montez, 2011; House et al., 1988). Yet, our relationships and interactions with others can sometimes be difficult (Deutsch et al., 2006; Vangelisti et al., 2012). Indeed, most of us know that not all social interactions are positive or helpful and in some cases they can be profoundly distressing (Lincoln, 2015). As such, it is important to consider the health impacts of low-quality relationships, even while recognizing that we need social connection to function and thrive (Fehr, 1996; Newman & Roberts, 2012). In doing so, our understanding ofthese facets of social connection can be leveraged to optimize social health in the face of adversity (Finch et al., 1989).

Purpose

The purpose of this evidence brief is to explore the so called “dark side” of social relationships and how these social challenges can be effectively navigated in order to optimize social health and wellbeing. In doing so, we recognize that there is a large and diverse literature exploring the manifold ways in which relationships can and often do go wrong or come to cause harm in our lives. Rather than providing an in-depth examination into any one social challenge, this review provides a summary overview of the dark sides of social relationships in hopes that doing so can help improve our understanding of the complexities of social experience.

Evidence from Existing Studies

For decades, researchers have emphasized the benefits of high quality relationships to our health and happiness (House et al., 1988; Holt-Lunstad et al., 2010) and the rewarding nature of social interactions (Brent et al., 2013; Kawamichi et al., 2016). However, social interactions and relationships can also be costly and challenging (Homans, 1958; Ekeh, 1974). Having close relationships can also create inter-dependence and vulnerability – opening us up for considerable adversity(Rook & Charles, 2017). Furthermore, the positive (or negative) functions of relationships are contingent on relationship quality (Birditt & Antonucci, 2009; Uchino, 2006, 2009; Kroenke et al., 2014), which itself can be shaped by systemic, structural, and situational factors. Considering these potentially adverse aspects of relationships, the evidence reviewed below dives into the various social challenges faced in the context of interpersonal relationships and strategies for navigating these challenges are reviewed.

The Costs of Social Connection

First and foremost, it is critical to recognize that even though social interaction provides significant value to our lives (Massen et al., 2010), such interactions are inherently costly (Barrett & Dunbar, 2013; Button, 1995). Indeed, socializing requires us to engage our cognitive resources, which draws down metabolic energy in order to power our brains (Lee et al., 2017; Hofstee et al., 2019; Kuzawa et al., 2014; Coto & Traniello, 2021; Byrne & Bates, 2007; Dunbar & Shultz, 2017). Leikas (2020) demonstrates this by showing that social behaviour is related to later fatigue (Jacques-Hmailton et al., 2019) despite observed benefits to mood in the immediate aftermath of social interactions (Leikas & Ilmarinen, 2017). Given these costs, individuals—especially when overexposed to low quality social interactions—may become fatigued by social contact (Zheng & Ling, 2021). It is hypothesized that this is because we have evolved sophisticated cognitive mechanisms that help us to regulate our social energy – causing loneliness when we need to connect and social exhaustion when we need to withdraw (Matthews & Tye, 2019). In considering these mechanisms, it is important to note that one’s social position may exacerbate this fatigue and stress—such as in the case of racial minorities who are observed to experience chronic minority stress through their social interaction (Holoien & Shelton, 2012; Letang et al., 2021; Hobson et al., 2022; Salvatore & Shelton, 2007). Similarly, neurodivergent or introverted individuals may find social interactions more taxing (Overland et al., 2024)—such as is the case for introverted individuals who appear to have reduced reward sensitivity to social interaction (Lucas et al., 2000). In other words, the costs of social interaction may not be experienced equally across individuals.

In addition to the metabolic costs reviewed above, maintaining relationships requires significant investments of time and other resources (Kummer, 1978; Topor et al., 2015; Roberts & Dunbar, 2011). In some cases, we make sacrifices for others that can undermine our personal wellbeing (Impett et al., 2005; Killen et al., 2021; Silk, 2003). We may also experience empathetic distress when our friends and loved ones are facing adversity (Smith & Rose, 2011); we may feel disappointment when our relationships fail to be as intimate as we would like them to be (Bleske-Rechek et al., 2012; Hand & Furman, 2009); and we may find that our (dis)loyalty to our friends results in interpersonal challenges (Shaw et al., 2017). In all these ways and more, relationships present both tangible and intangible costs.

Sources of Vulnerability in Relationships

In addition to the inherent costs of maintaining relationships, close relationships also involves vulnerability (Rook & Charles, 2018; Abbey et al., 2010). This vulnerability presents itself in a number of ways.

First, some relationships can become harmful over time. This is especially so when relationships are subject to power imbalances, the reification of social hierarchies, the promotion of interpersonal competition, or to the influence of individuals with so called“dark triad personality traits” (i.e., narcissism, psychopathy, Machiavellianism) they may become stressful, dissatisfying, and painful (Tsomokos & Salvich, 2024; Mehraein, 2023; Berndt, 1999; Jonason et al., 2020; Forth et al., 2021; Lyons & Hughes, 2015; Lyons & Aitken, 2010; Jonason & Schitt, 2012; Koladich & Atkinson, 2016; Ciarrochi et al., 2019; Maass et al., 2018; Mooney et al., 2019; Grieve & Mhar, 2010; Brewer et al., 2023; Mager et al., 2014; Leedom, 2017). For example, our confidence might be betrayed by close friends (Valdman, 2016), leading to any number of diverse health and social consequences (Rothbard, 2001; Reina & Reina, 2015). As well, relationships may become one sided or even abusive (Goldner, 2008; Brooks & Shetter, 2011). These low quality and negative relationships have very real consequences for health and wellness, including greater activation of the stress response and greater burden on the cardiovascular system (De Vogli et al., 2007; Friedman et al., 2012; Brooks & Shetter, 2011). Illustrating this, Harris & Orth (2020) report that poor quality and negative relationships erode self-esteem, which can have cascading consequences across domains of life. Similarly, Ellis & Zarbatany (2007) showed that children with past experiences of friendship victimization have future difficulties forming new relationships. As a result of these myriad negative effects, Rook (1984) reports that negative social relationships are more strongly related to health and wellbeing than are positive ones – highlighting the need to not only foster positive relationships, but also minimizeexposure to distressing ones (Newsom et al., 2005, 2008; Lincoln,2015; Schuster et al., 1990; Collisson et al., 2021).

While we may readily recognize the harms caused by negative relationships, a significant and growing body of literature also illustrates the health and social challenges posed by so called “ambivalent relationships” (Holt-Lunstad et al., 2003, 2007a, 2007b; Uchino et al., 2013; Pillemer et al., 2007). Ambivalent relationships are those that involve mixed or conflicting feelings, where individuals experience both positive and negative emotions toward the same person, leading to uncertainty and tension in their interactions (Zopplat et al., 2023). Such relationships are more common with close ties (whereas relatively more distal ties tend to be viewed as solely problematic when they are not positive; Fingerman et al., 2004). Ambivalence in these relationships appears to be distressing – causing physiological and psychological harms when present in a diverse range of relationships (Holt-Lunstad & Uchino, 2019; Herr et al., 2019). For example, Uchino et al. (2012) showed that, regardless of the number of positive relationships, having a higher number of ambivalent relationships in one’s social network was associated with shorter telomere length – a measure of longevity. Yet, people tend to stick with these relationships out of an internal sense of commitment or an appreciation for the positive aspects of these relationships (Bushman & Holt-Lunstad, 2009). As well, these relationships may naturally emerge due to conflicts of interest, such as those that may exist in workplace settings or between neighbours (Pillemer & Rothbard, 2018; Kramer, 1999; Sias et al., 2004; Shoukat et al., 2024; Komorita & Parks, 1995; Ammirati & Kaslow, 2017). In such settings, it may be difficult to establish and ensure healthy social relationships (Pillemer & Rothbard, 2018), especially because many of these conflicts activate evolutionarily beneficial cognitive mechanisms that in early human social environments served to help manage threat and scarcity (Neuberg & Shaller, 2016; Neuberg & DeScioli, 2015).

Of course, people do end low quality relationships—even if recognizing these relationships can be difficult (Helm et al., 2016). For example, divorce is now common in romantic relationships across many cultures (Sheykhi, 2020). However, in ending relationships, people tend to gradually terminate friendships rather than end them immediately and many relationships persist despite their low quality (Mills et al., 2023; Apostolou, 2023; Johnson et al., 2009; Rose & Serafica, 1986; Gooden et al., 2022). As such, a great many people experience significant harm from poor quality negative relationships with others. However, even when these ends are inevitable and appropriate, separation can be deeply challenging and disruptive. For example, according to Sbarra et al. (2016), marital separation and divorce are significant stressors involving psychological, financial, legal, and social challenges. Other researchers have shown that the difficulties of separation are true not only for romantic relationships, but also for the dissolution of friendships and other social ties (Doherty, 2021; Eyal & Cohen, 2010).

Another way relationships can end is through death, which can be highly distressing (Rook & Charles, 2018). Indeed, in addition to the profound grief caused by these experiences (Holland et al., 2014), individuals may find it difficult to replace lost friends and romantic partners, leading to extended periods of loneliness or isolation (Lamme et al., 1996). As well, such losses can be tightly interlinked with our prior social status and position (Cornwell, 2015; Horwitz et al., 1998) and lead to physical decline and even increased risk of death (Moon et al., 2011; Ytterstad & Brenn, 2015). In other words, social losses are inter-linked with other aspects of life (e.g., financial security, social status, and health) in ways that can magnify their burden (Kraus et al., 2011).

Importantly, even positive relationships can have significant adverse impacts on individuals. For example, researchers have shown that social relationships can facilitate the diffusion of harmful behaviours, attitudes, beliefs, and ways of thinking (Baller et al., 2009). Such diffusion can happen naturally through normative influences or through more explicit peer pressure (Veenstra & Laninga-Wijnen, 2022; Chung et al., 2021; Ivaniushina & Titkova, 2021). Along similar lines, whether intentional or not, sometimes interpersonal communication in the course of a positive relationship can lead to offense, hurt, or disagreement (Spitzberg & Cupach, 2007) – particularly when individuals do not share a cultural basis or when they act without considering the feelings of others (Czarna et al., 2016). Sometimes this may be because someone said something insensitive. Other times, individuals may engage in gossip – which while sometimes acting to strengthen relationships, can also cause harm (Ellwardt et al., 2012). Moreover, individuals may sometimes simply disagree over strongly held view points – leading to a sense of interpersonal alienation (Afifi & Guerrero, 2009). While many of these interpersonal challenges are obvious, it is important to recognize that even well-intentioned actions and comments sometimes create friction (McTernan, 2021; Poggi & D’Errico, 2018). This is best illustrated in research showing how provisions of social support can sometimes be interpreted as demeaning or threatening to one’s sense of autonomy, competence, and self-determination (Palant & Himmel, 2018) – highlighting potential harm from even the best of intentioned behaviour. As well, even when social support is appreciated, it can sometimes enable maladaptive and bad behaviorus (Calkins et al., 2020). Being aware and attuned to how good intentions might create harms is therefore necessary.

In addition to the interpersonal challenges outlined above, there are also systemic challenges posed by our relationships and connections (Villalonga-Olives & Kawachi,2017). For example, close-kint social groups can create a strong sense of belonging, but may also pressure individuals to conform to group standards and reject outsiders (Fukushima et al., 2008; To et al., 2019; Boehm, 2000; Werland et al., 2018; Koch & Koch, 2007). Cultural differences can create friction and distress, leading to systemic challenges (Lu et al., 2023; Rouchy et al., 2002; Bos, 2004; Chadha et al., 2024). This is particularly so in hierarchical social settings in which power dynamics may create inequality and exclusion (Beckwith, 2019; Trawalter et al., 2021; Sabato & Kogut, 2021). These dynamics may create inequalities that systematically disadvantage some, while advantaging others.

Strategies for Navigating Social Challenges

For all the reasons outlined above, people may avoid relationships and interdependence (Wiltermuth & Cohen, 2014). However, despite the complexities and challenges of social dynamics, it is important to know that it is possible to foster healthy and positive relationships. Among the ways we can foster positive relationships is treating relationships as a responsibility and living up to high standards of interpersonal conduct (Hall, 2012, 2014). For example, providing support, maintaining boundaries, being loyal, keeping trust, and accepting one’s friends is critical to solidifying and maintain the bonds of friendship (Walker et al., 2016; Reisman & Shorr, 1978). Communication is a key strategy for meeting these standards and includes both communicating your needs and checking-in with others to ensure their needs are met and boundaries are being respected (De Netto et al., 2021; Kanter et al., 2021; Sharma & Patterson, 1999). When conflicts arise, it is important to take the perspective of those you care about and empathetically explore the various opportunities for resolution (Feiring et al., 2022; Reid & Overall, 2024; Cahill et al., 2020; Schroder-Abe & Shutz, 2011; Franzoi et al., 1985). Of course, at times you must also protect or advocate for yourself and set boundaries – particularly to avoid being taken advantage of or enabling continued poor behavior (Trefalt, 2012; Ryder & Bartle, 1991; Norton & Baptist, 2014).

In addition to these relationship maintenance strategies, it can also be beneficial to seek out solitude in order to recharge your “social battery” (Luo et al., 2022; Ren, 2015; van de Kieft & Timmer, 2023). While isolation is incredibly averse to wellbeing, some amount of time alone – particularly when engaged with in a healthy manner – can be beneficial (Larson et al., 1985; Rokach & Chan, 2021). Helping individuals develop a healthy relationship with solitude can therefore be a useful tool for improving emotional wellbeing (Rodriguez, 2020).

Other intentional and systemic efforts are also needed to promote social health. Emotional and social development programs, implemented across the age spectrum, can help individuals and communities make good social behaviour natural (Sancassiani et al., 2015; Pollak et al., 2022; Suragarn et al., 2021). Furthermore, cultural programs can build cross-cultural competencies and understanding to reduce social frictions and help facilitate healthy social exchange—therby helping to reduce out-group biases, discrimination, and stigma (Keles et al., 2021; Terrana & Al-Delaimy, 2023; Gronholm et al., 2017). Of course, in some cases, therapeutic interventions at the individual-, relationship-, or family-level may be needed to help individuals cope with emotional or social challenges (Reardon-Anderson et al., 2005; Case-Smith, 2013; Paz et al., 2021). These and other strategies can help remediate systematic and structural challenges to social inclusion.

Analyses from The Canadian Alliance for Social Connection and Health

To explore the challenges of social behavior and recommend ways to overcome them, we analyzed open-text survey data from 319 participants in the Canadian Social Connection Survey. Our qualitative analyses focused on solutions and strategies for maintaining social life, as the survey includes limited variables assessing negative dimensions of relationships. Open-text questions from the survey used in this analysis included: "How would you recommend someone decide who they want to explore a friendship with?", "What do you think people should know about maintaining strong friendships?", "What social skills should people work on to help them initiate friendships?", and "What do you think people should know about ending friendships?"

Advice for Building Friendships

Our first area of analysis focused on relationship initiation. To initiate friendships, participants indicated that openness and taking the initiative are crucial. This includes checking in with friends, being open-minded and genuine, and demonstrating interest and curiosity about others by asking good questions. Kindness and positivity, such as being encouraging and empathetic, were frequently mentioned. Effective communication skills, including conversational skills and small talk, were deemed essential. Good listening skills, mindfulness, and attentiveness to others' needs were also highlighted. Awareness of social cues and respecting boundaries were necessary for healthy interactions. Emotional intelligence, including emotional regulation and empathy, was emphasized as important for understanding and connecting with others. Confidence and self-esteem were vital for initiating friendships, as was participating in social activities and shared interests. Participants highlighted the importance of dealing with anxiety and fear of rejection. Lastly, good manners and personal hygiene positively impacted social interactions and the initiation of friendships.

In selecting whom to befriend, participants indicated the importance of considering shared interests, values, and hobbies when deciding who to explore a friendship with. Many noted that enjoying similar activities or frequenting the same places can enhance the friendship experience. Additionally, mutual respect and boundaries were frequently mentioned as crucial, with respondents emphasizing the need for potential friends to respect personal space, thoughts, and feelings. Intuition and ease of interaction also stood out. Participants reported that feeling comfortable and at ease with someone, along with having natural conversations, are key indicators of potential friendship. Practical considerations such as proximity and aligned schedules were noted as important to ensure both parties have the time and energy to invest in the relationship. Mutual effort emerged as another significant theme. Respondents stressed the need for both parties to initiate interactions and make time for each other. Taking time to get to know the other person was highlighted as essential for determining compatibility.

Maintaining Strong Friendships

After discussing aspects of initiating relationships, we explored issues related to maintaining friendships. Participants suggested focusing on commonalities rather than differences to maintain strong friendships. Flexibility and adaptability were deemed crucial, as well as accepting imperfections and challenges as part of the relationship. Trust and vulnerability were necessary for building deeper connections. The reciprocity of giving and sharing was frequently mentioned as important in maintaining strong friendships. Respecting boundaries and limits was highlighted, along with listening and communicating openly and clearly. Participants emphasized the importance of being self-aware and authentic to maintain genuine connections. Empathy and perspective-taking were also important, acknowledging and respecting cultural and interpersonal differences. Building a friendship takes time and effort, so not spreading oneself too thin and investing adequate time in nurturing relationships is essential.

Advice for Ending Friendships

Finally, we analyzed data regarding friendship challenges and ending friendships. Participants acknowledged that setting boundaries and communicating them clearly is acceptable. Many noted that toxic or draining relationships can negatively impact mental well-being, and ending these relationships can sometimes be the best course of action. It was noted that it is natural for friendships to end as people evolve and their paths diverge, and prioritizing relationships that matter most is essential for personal growth and happiness. When deciding to end a friendship, respondents recommended being open and clear to provide closure for both parties. Some friendships may fade naturally, while others may have a clear endpoint. Participants noted that the best way to end a friendship varies and should be determined based on individual circumstances, with advice from trusted individuals being helpful. Acknowledging that ending a friendship can be difficult for everyone involved was also emphasized.

Discussion

The evidence reviewed in this brief highlights the complexities and challenges of navigating social relationships. That said, compared to research focusing on the positive aspects of relationships and connections, there is limited research on the dark sides of relationships, particularly beyond romantic relationships. Therefore, studies should better account for the costs and harms encountered in relationships and explore how these negative aspects influence sociability. To date, very few studies have examined how the negative effects of adverse relationships are overcome and the consequences of failing to overcome such adversity. Consequently, it is unclear to what extent coping strategies such as social withdrawal, avoidance, and skepticism are adaptive or maladaptive. This research is important given the robust literature base emphasizing the importance of social relationships to health and well-being. To explore these and related research questions, longer-term life course studies are needed to better describe social development pathways. Interdisciplinary research exploring the biological, psychological, social, and situational factors that shape social experiences continues to be needed. Additionally, the experiences of marginalized and oppressed populations, including racial minorities and queer communities, must be examined to understand the extent to which findings are generalizable to different social experiences.

Conclusion

Based on the available evidence and our analyses, we recommend strategies that promote balanced and healthy social relationships. Such strategies include programs that promote healthy relationship development across the life course (See https://youthrelationships.org/for a notable example). Indeed, social connections are among the most important determinants of our health and happiness, but can also be challenging. Empowering people through communication and social skills and healthy social boundaries is therefore a critical aspect of promoting social wellbeing. Efforts should be undertaken to help individuals develop these attributes.