Rethinking Loneliness — A Qualitative Study about Adolescents’ Experiences of Being an Outsider in Peer Group

Open Jou nal o Dep ession, 2014, 3, 125-135 Published Online Augus 2014 in SciRes. h p://www.sci p.o g/jou nal/ojd h p://dx.doi.o g/10.4236/ojd.2014.34016 How o ci e his pape : Ko kiamäki, R. (2014). Re hinking Loneliness—A Quali a i e S udy abou Adolescen s’ Expe iences o Being an Ou side in Pee G oup. Open Jou nal o Dep ession, 3, 125-135. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.4236/ojd.2014.34016 Re hinking Loneliness—A Quali a i e S udy abou Adolescen s’ Expe iences o Being an Ou side in Pee G oup Riikka Ko kiamäki School o Managemen , Uni e si y o Tampe e, Tampe e, Finland Email: Riik[email p o ec ed] Recei ed 5 June 2014; e ised 9 July 2014; accep ed 28 July 2014 Copy igh © 2014 by au ho s and Scien i ic Resea ch Publishing Inc. This wo k is licensed unde he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion In e na ional License (CC BY). h p://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/ Abs ac F iends and pee s a e ema kably impo an o young people, and p oblems in pee ela ions a e o en causes o adolescen s’ emo ional s ess. The pu pose o his s udy was o in es iga e adoles- cen s’ iews abou wha i means o be excluded in pee g oup and how his kind o expe ience is linked o hei emo ional wellbeing. The s udy exploi ed quali a i e me hodology and he indings we e based on adolescen s’ pe sonal accoun s o iden i ying hemsel es as “ou side s”. The da a we e p oduced in dialogical in e iews wi h 126 Finnish adolescen s. As a esul , ou di e en ypes o being an ou side we e iden i ied. These we e ound o be closely a ached o emo ional s ess and eeling o loneliness expe ienced by adolescen s. The esul s imply ha adolescen s’ loneliness should no be looked a as a single ca ego y bu i should a he be pu in o he con ex o young pe son’s own meaning-making, p e e ences o belonging, and pe sonal biog aphy. The s udy complimen s ea lie s udies wi h quali a i e insigh and expe ien ial accoun s abou ado- lescen ’s sel -pe cei ed expe iences o pee exclusion. These could be aluable in p ac ices o psychology, psychia y, social wo k and you h wo k, in seeking o unde s and adolescen s’ li ed wo lds and hei ways o in e p e ing pee in e ac ion. Keywo ds F iendship, Loneliness, Pee Rela ions, Social Exclusion, You h 1. In oduc ion Je ome S. B une s a es in his o ewo d o Judy Dunn’s (Dunn, 2004) Child en’s F iendships ha “being iendless is a o m o lonely hell”. Many o he s—scien is s, p o essionals, and people wi h expe ien ial know- R. Ko kiamäki 126 ledge alike—may easily ag ee. Lack o iends is ecognized o cause dep ession, anxie y, and o he emo ional p oblems, and o co ela e wi h low sel - espec , i a ional ea s, de iance, pe sonali y diso de s, social exclu- sion, and po e y (Jun ila, 2010; Qual e & Munn, 2002; Ashe & Paque e, 2003). While his esona es wi h people o all gene a ions, i is suspec ed o be especially ue wi h eenage s, whose iden i ies, sel -es eem and expe iences o belonging a e o la ge pa cons uc ed among iends and pee g oup. The expe ience o being unpopula o disliked in pee g oup, o lonely wi hou a close iend, is said o cause deep eelings o sadness and despai , and may esul in long-las ing pain and li e-long auma (Ashe & Coie, 1990; Ashe & Paque e, 2003; Dunn, 2004). Adolescence is a li e pe iod which includes majo changes in young pe son’s physical, social, emo ional, and cogni i e g ow h and de elopmen (Dumon & P o os , 1999; Tho s einsson e al., 2013). This makes i a sensi- i e phase o li e in which s ess, conce n and ex eme emo ions occu e en when he o e all li e condi ions a e sa is ac o y (Romeo, 2010). Howe e , occasionally hese moods, hough s and si ua ions may exceed he indi- idual esilience, which migh cause inc eased isk o emo ional di icul ies and beha io al p oblems (Ande sen & Teiche , 2008; Tho s einsson e al., 2013). Dep ession is said o be no an uncommon p oblem among ado- lescen s (Cos ello e al., 2003; Sha e s, 2014; Shuga & Lopez, 2002), causing a isk o disabili y o unc ion in socie y as well as in pe sonal communi ies (Hankin, 2006; Sha e s, 2014). Adolescen s con on a ious kinds o s ess ul li e e en s and si ua ions. Some o hese conce n amily ela- ions, school pe o mance, u u e plans, and o example economic di icul ies (By ne e al., 2007; Tho s einsson e al., 2013; Moon & Rao, 2010). One o he mos impo an causes o adolescen s’ anxie y and dep essi e eel- ings a e, howe e , ela ionships wi h same-age iends and pee s. Pee ela ions a e o ex eme signi icance o young people who o en ind i di icul o iden i y hemsel es wi h o he age g oups, namely child en and adul s. Same-age iends and pee s a e impo an sou ces o suppo , us , and posi i e emo ions, bu hey also o m a majo pa o wha s ains, upse s, and s esses young people. In addi ion o all he un and pleasu es p o ided by iends, also easing, bullying, ic imiza ion, be ayals, and ejec ion a e he a ibu es ha come along wi h adolescen s’ pee ela ions. As Dunn (2004) pu s i , child en and young people can “make o b eak each o he ’s pleasu e and happiness” (Dunn, 2004; Whi ehouse e al., 2009; Rönkä e al., 2014). One o he c ueles o ms o adolescen s’ pee con lic is said o p esen i sel in loneliness. Apa om i s connec ion o low school pe o mance (Benne , 2011), isk o physical illness (Goosby e al., 2013), and heal h isk beha io (S ickley e al., 2014), loneliness has been disco e ed o co ela e wi h dep ession and emo ional diso de s. In a s udy conduc ed in 1989 by Goodye and colleagues, i was ound ha 48 pe cen o adolescen s who we e clinically anxious o dep essed had no , du ing he p e ious 12 mon hs, expe ienced close, ca ing o suppo i e iendships, while he co esponding numbe o adolescen s wi hou emo ional diso de s was 16 pe cen (Goodye e al., 1989; Dunn, 2004). In B age’s s udy om 1993, signi ican ela ionship be ween ado- lescen s’ pee -g oup- ela ed loneliness and dep ession was disco e ed, whe eas o example amily s eng hs and mo he -you h communica ion did no ha e such an impac (B age, 1993). Acco dingly, mo e ecen s udies ha e disco e ed ha adolescen loneliness, pa icula ly i he expe ience is s able, is associa ed wi h diagnosed dep ession (Goosby e al., 2013) and he gain o dep essi e symp oms o e ime (Ladd & E ekal, 2013; Van- hals e al., 2012). Mo eo e , based on hei s udy wi h adolescen s wi h Aspe ge ’s, Whi ehouse and o he s (2009) epo ed ha poo quali y iendships (including con lic /be ayal) seemed o lead o loneliness and de- p essi e symp oms. As o a comp ehensi e s udy o a Finnish bi h coho , aged 16 a he ime, i was demon- s a ed ha no ha ing close iends, eeling unliked, being ic im o bullying, and a oiding company we e as- socia ed wi h loneliness expe iences, which we e also linked wi h eeling unhappy, sad, o dep essed (Rönkä e al., 2014). The e’s also e idence ha adolescen s who expe ience loneliness a e in isk o dep ession despi e o pa en al suppo (Goosby e al., 2013). In Goswick’s and Jones’s (Goswick & Jones, 1982) s udy almos all he loneliness componen s we e di ec ly linked o ela ionships wi h pee s, al hough pa en al disin e es was also o some signi icance. These indings highligh he ex eme impo ance o iendships, and make pee in ol emen key o he quali y o young people’s li es and hei men al heal h (Dunn, 2004). Howe e , he ela ionship be ween adolescen s’ pee ela ions and hei emo ional wellbeing should no be looked a oo s aigh o wa dly. Fi s ly, he e a e some con lic ing esul s ega ding he links be ween loneliness and dep essi e symp oms (see Vanhals e al., 2012), as well as media ing ac o s ha should be examined mo e ca e ully. Fo example, social suppo is some hing ha comes along wi h ha ing close iends. Suppo om iends and pee s is o en pe cei ed as mos meaning ul by adolescen s compa ed o some o he sou ces o sup- po (Ruege e al., 2010; P ei e e al., 2011), hus he lack o iends o en means signi ican loss in si ua ions R. Ko kiamäki 127 o dep essi e eelings and sea ch o suppo (Dunn, 2004; Tho s einsson e al., 2013; Tho s einsson & Da ey, 2014). Also, poo sel -es eem is iden i ied as one o he symp oms ha ela es o adolescen dep ession (O h e al., 2008; Tho s einsson & Da ey, 2014), while adolescen s’ sel -es eem is pa excellence c ea ed and sus ained and may hence also be c ushed in pee ela ions (Eddles-Hi sch, 2012; Valdez, 2011). On op o hese and o he media o s, i is wo h no icing ha in adolescence he ela ionship be ween loneliness and belonging is mos complica ed. Being alone o no ha ing same age iends does no necessa ily mean loneliness, and empo a y eelings o loneliness do no ine i ably cause dep ession. In ac , hey a e mundane pa o mos adolescen s’ li es (Dunn, 2004). Hence, adolescen s’ loneliness is no simply ela ed o how well hey a e accep ed by hei pee s, o whe he hey ha e iends o no . Nei he does a small amoun o iends indica e loneliness. The e a e young people who seem o eel qui e sa is ied on hei own, and o he s who ha e se e al iends and s ill eel lonely (Dunn, 2004; Ko kiamäki & Ellonen, 2010). Meanwhile, he e a e hose who would despe a ely wan o ha e iends o be pa o a g oup bu o unp edic able easons ail o do so (Dunn, 2004). Whils mos you h ind belongingness among close iends o la ge pee g oup, pee s’ social and spa ial o de ings and labeling epu a ions posi ion some adolescen s ou side he g oup. Resea ch on popula i y, accep ance and ejec ion has demons a ed ha hese excluding epu a ions and p ac ices ha e impo an impac on young people’s mood, adjus men , and de- elopmen (Ashe & Coie, 1990; Rubin e al., 1998). The pa adox o you h ne wo king and g oup sus ainmen is ha someone’s loneliness is o en c ea ed by o- ge he ness and belonging o o he s. Enhancing “ou g oup” h ough cons uc ing bo de s be ween “Us” and “ he o he ” can be seen as habi ual ea u e o adolescen s’ pee g oup o ma ion (Eddles-Hi sch, 2012; Hopkins, 2010; Ko kiamäki, 2013). This complex in e ela ion be ween belonging and being le ou in i es mo e esea ch on adolescen s’ pe sonal expe iences o exclusion o being pa o a g oup. I is impo an o ask how young people hemsel es pe cei e loneliness, being alone o being le ou . In addi ion o he weigh y quan i a i e esea ch domina ing he ield, he e is a need o quali a i e s udies on young people’s expe iences, meanings and de ini- ions on how loneliness is cons uc ed in ela ion o belonging, and wha i means o ha e iends o s and as “an ou side ”. Gi en he complex ela ionship be ween belonging and loneliness, he di e ing meanings o being alone, and he ex eme impo ance o pee ela ions o adolescen s’ emo ional wellbeing, he pu pose o his s udy was o cap u e he a ie y o adolescen s’ iews abou wha i means o be excluded in pee g oup and how his kind o “being ou side” a ec s hei emo ional s andpoin . Acco dingly, “ou side ness” is s udied as po en ial s ess ac o which migh be sel -pe cei ed as loneliness and can cause dep essi e eelings. Simul aneously, he aim is o ecognize he a iance o sel - epo ed ou side expe iences, and hus a oid pa hologizing adolescen s’ being alone. The concluding goal is hus o p o ide expe ien ial in o ma ion and a complemen a y iewpoin o you h and social wo ke s, eache s, psychologis s, and counselo s o discuss abou and deal wi h adolescen s’ loneli- ness, nega i e moods, and pee g oup belonging. 2. Me hods The s udy is pa o a Finnish esea ch p ojec called Ea ly Recogni ion in Cu bing he Ma ginaliza ion Risk o Child en and You h (2013-2015) ha seeks o ake pa in cu en deba es on ea ly in e en ion by sugges ing ha mo e a en ion should be paid o adolescen s’ expe iences o belonging and communali y as p e-emp i e measu es ha migh na ow he isk o ma ginaliza ion. The esul s o he p ojec a e expec ed o ha e bo h sci- en i ic and p ac ical alue, and ele ance o policy making and end use s aiming a child en and young people’s wellbeing and hei communal and socie al engagemen in Finland and elsewhe e. The s udy employs quali a i e me hodology. 2.1. Da a Collec ion and Pa icipan s The da a collec ion was ca ied ou in 2012 in wo schools si ua ed in middle-class neighbou hoods o wo ai ly la ge Finnish ci ies (popula ion 250,000 - 600,000). The 5 h g ade s (11 - 12 yea s o age) and he 9 h g ade s (15 - 16 yea s o age) o bo h schools we e o e ed a possibili y o pa icipa e in he esea ch. The pa icipa ion was olun a y, bu nea ly all he 5 h and 9 h g ade s in bo h schools decided o pa icipa e, esul ing in 73 5 h g ade and 53 9 h g ade pa icipan s. 70 o hem we e gi ls and 56 we e boys. Thei socio-economic backg ound was mos ly middle-class, and mos o hem we e Finnish by hei e hnic and acial backg ound, ep esen ing he R. Ko kiamäki 128 schools’ s uden popula ion. In o med consen was ecei ed om hese 126 adolescen s as well as hei pa en s, and he equisi e pe missions we e g an ed by school o icials and pe sonnel. The ma e s o con iden iali y, anonymi y, and sec ecy we e espec ed h oughou he da a collec ion, and discussed wi h pa icipan s and hei gua dians. The da a collec ion was a anged in school en i onmen du ing school hou s, bu i was conduc ed by e- sea che s and ca e ully dissocia ed om academic school wo k. The da a consis o biog aphical na a i es which we e p oduced h ough mapping exe cise, dialogical in e iews, and hema ic essays. Fi s ly, he mapping exe cise ook place, p o iding i s -hand in o ma ion abou pa icipan s’ socio-spa ial belonging. In he exe cise, he pa icipan s ma ked di e en ly scaled mapping pla o ms wi h di e en colou s, indica ing hei pe cep ions abou he ma ked loca ions ( o de ails, see e.g. Kallio, 2014). The maps we e hen discussed wi h each pa ici- pan indi idually in dialogical non-s uc u ed in e iews wi h wo esea che s p esen . Each pa icipan ’s indi- idual map ope a ed as di ec i e o he in e iew, esul ing in a ious in e iew hemes o igina ing on adoles- cen ’s ini ia i es. Rega dless, all in e iews included na a i es abou e e yday li e in di e en ins i u ional and in o mal con ex s, social ne wo ks and ela ionships, pa icipa ion, and inclusion and belonging. In he cou se o he in e iews, he e e se hemes o exclusion, aliena ion and he p oblems in social ela ions a ose, as expec ed. I is no ewo hy ha all pa icipan s chose o alk abou pee ela ions, indica ing he impo ance o iends and pee s o young people. The in e iews ook om 10 o 60 minu es, and hei in ensi y a ied g ea ly. A e he in e iews, he na a- i es we e comple ed by hema ic essays po aying pleasu es and challenges o social ela ionships and socio- spa ial a achmen s. The p ima y ocus o his s udy is in he accoun s o belonging, exclusion, and pee ela ions, p oduced in he in e iews o 9 h g ade s. 2.2. Analysis The da a we e analysed as dialogical biog aphical na a i es in ol ing pa ial u hs abou he pa icipan s’ ex- pe ien ial wo lds, ollowing he idea o c i ical documen a y e hnog aphy (see O ne , 2002). I was cen al in he analysis o acknowledge he si ua edness o knowledge as well as he posi ionali y o he esea che s and he pa icipan s (see Mason, 2002). The analysis o he da a implemen ed he me hod o quali a i e con en -analysis and in-dep h eading, speci ied in he iden i ica ion o pa icipa ing adolescen s’ pee ne wo ks, communi ies, and iendships, and de ining he p ac ical and quali a i e ea u es o hese ela ionships (c . May ing, 2000; Ti sche , 2000). In addi ion, he accoun s o sel -pe cei ed ou side ness we e iden i ied and examined o ecog- nize he social con ex o ou side ness ( eeling excluded om eg. iendship/speci ic pee g oup/school ma es/you h in gene al), he posi ion o being an ou side (e.g. empo a y/s able, s ong/weak), and he emo ional meaning o expe iencing ou side ness, pa icula ly whe he he pa icipan s who iden i ied hemsel es as ou side s ex- p essed loneliness, dep essed mood (like eeling sad, hopeless, o despe a e), loss o in e es o pleasu e wi h pee s, eeling low sel -es eem, o ending in e ac ion wi h pee s (c . Ja a i e al., 2014; Sha e s, 2014). Acco ding o p ocedu e o quali a i e con en -analysis, he indings we e ca ego ized in espec o bo h he esea ch ques ion and he induc i e disco e y (May ing, 2000). Consequen ly, ou ca ego ies o expe iencing ou side ness we e iden i ied among pa icipa ing adolescen s. The desc ip ions o emo ional s ess we e s udied wi hin hese ca ego ies. 3. Resul s 42 o he 126 pa icipan s desc ibed hei subjec i e expe ience o ou side ness, exclusion o ejec ion among pee s. 24 (ou o 73) o hese we e 5 h g ade s and 18 (ou o 53) we e 9 h g ade s, hus implying no signi ican di e ence in he equency o expe iencing ou side ness be ween he age g oups. Ins ead, he e was some a ia- ion ac oss gende : gi ls desc ibed eeling le ou app oxima ely wice as o en (15 5 h g ade s and 13 9 h g ade s) han boys (nine 5 h g ade s and i e 9 h g ade s). This may be due o gi ls’ mo e ex o e communica ion in bo h hei dealings wi h each o he as well as in exp essing hemsel es in in e iews, bu i could also be aced back o he aci in igues o en said o po ay gi ls’ iendships (e.g. Goodwin, 2006). Howe e , i is impo an o no- ice ha no all ou side expe iences, nei he boys’ no gi ls’, we e unambiguously nega i e. The di e ing “ ypes” o being an ou side a e exempli ied in he ollowing, ensued by connec ing hese o he emo ions de- sc ibed by “ou side s”. The exempli ying quo es a e selec ed due o being ep esen a i e o each ca ego y. R. Ko kiamäki 129 3.1. Types o Expe iencing Ou side ness The pa icipan s’ accoun s o ou side ness included some simila i ies, bu he di e ences we e mo e s iking. Fou di e ing ca ego ies o expe iencing ou side ness we e iden i ied. Wi hin hese ca ego ies, he ea u es we e a he consis en , ep esen ing he simpli ied ypes o s andpoin s ha adolescen s ake in ega d o hei sel -pe cei ed exclusion om pee s. Howe e , i needs o be ema ked ha si ua ing adolescen s in hese ca e- go ies is by no means sel -e iden , as hei posi ion migh change o e ime and om communi y o ano he . Some o hem could also be si ua ed in se e al ca ego ies. Thus, he ypology p esen ed he e is a esea che ’s simpli ying in e p e a ion, and young people’s indi idual expe iences should no be subo dina ed in o his y- pology exclusi ely. 1) Feeling sligh ly ejec ed. Some adolescen s exp essed in he in e iews ha hey el ge ing delibe a ely ejec ed by hei pee s. This mos ly occu ed in public con ex s like schools o you h ga he ing places, and he eason o ejec ion was iden- i ied by he ejec ed one. Mos usually i was appea ance, like in he ollowing quo e, bu social indica o s like amily backg ound we e also named. “Yeah, so i ’s like, like I wea boys’ clo hes, so hey migh look a you ha way, like look wha she’s wea ing. Bu hen, you shouldn’ eally ca e, like hey’ e said hings o me, and I didn’ ca e a all /.../ so I’ e come up wi h his idea, ha I know who I am, and e en when hey say some hing, I ha e his idea, and I can’ please e e yone in his school. So i always hu s a bi , i hey don’ like you, bu hey don’ eally know me, who I am inside.” (Female, 15 y s). Unde his ca ego y he adolescen s main ained hei posi ion as sel -su icien ac o s despi e o eeling e- jec ed by he majo i y o pee s. Ge ing ejec ed in a la ge pee g oup did no necessa ily mean being all iend- less, and hey o en expe ienced belonging in close one-on-one iendships o in small and igh g oup o iends who we e “di e en ” oge he . This kind o posi ion o being an ou side in cul u ally dominan pee g oup wi hou being excluded om all p ac ical pee ela ions was usually desc ibed as con inuous, bu i s ill did no de ine he whole sel -image o he ejec ed one. The ejec ion el un ai , bu “inside” hey knew ha hey a e “all igh ” and accep ed by he people who ma e o hem. 2) Ge ing ic imized. No many adolescen s in he da a epo ed ge ing ac i ely bullied o o he wise ic imized, nei he physically no e bally, bu he e we e ew ha explici ly exp essed hese kinds o expe iences. Unlike he “sligh ly e- jec ed”, mos o hese adolescen s iden i ied hemsel es p ima ily as he bullied ones and hey could only wi h e o name places o communi ies o pee belongingness. The expe ience o being an ou side would be p esen ega dless o he con ex . “I ’s been se en and hal yea s ha hey’ e bullied me. Some imes i ’s been ha d and hen you jus hink ha omo ow will be be e , bu hen i wasn’ , so hen you hink he nex day mus be a eally good day, bu i ne e comes /…/ Like i s i was jus his one guy, bu hen hey all s a ed, he whole class /…/ When I was li le hey didn’ wan o be wi h me, and when I go olde hey didn’ wan o be wi h me, and hey call me names and push me a ound and blackmail me and won’ le me in he oom and all ha /…/ And I don’ know a all why hey do his, I y o igu e i ou e e y day bu I s ill don’ know why, like i ’s a mys e y /…/ No, I don’ [ha e any iends ou side o school], I can’ emembe any since hi d g ade. Like he whole summe , I was all alone a home, ska e boa ding on my own. Like I wouldn’ go on he amp, I would ska e a my home ya d alone e en hough he e would be a amp close by.” (Male, 15 y s). Unlike he “sligh ly ejec ed”, he ac i ely ic imized adolescen s could a ely speci y any g ounds o hei mal ea men . Along wi h usually cons an and long-las ing expe ience o ic imiza ion, he “mys e y” o eason b ough on he lack o subjec i i y and he comp ehensi e expe ience o being an ou side , causing he a oid- ance o pee con ac . The desc ip ions we e a a loss and hopeless wi hou expec a ions o he si ua ion ge ing any be e . 3) Being igno ed. Apa om ac i e ejec ion expe ienced by “sligh ly ejec ed” and “ ic imized”, he e we e adolescen s in he sample who desc ibed hemsel es as no eally ge ing eased, bullied o ejec ed, bu a he being igno ed o neglec ed in hei immedia e pee g oup, like in school o neighbo hood. This kind o passi e ejec ion p esen ed i sel mainly in no ha ing iends in a la ge pee g oup, al hough ha dly any o he adolescen s in his ca ego y desc ibed close iendships wi h same-age pee s. Ins ead, se e al o hem po ayed igh kinships o o he adul -in ensi e communi ies, in which hey could eel emo ional belonging. R. Ko kiamäki 130 “I don’ eally ha e many iends in my class, well, I don’ ha e any /…/ I don’ know, i doesn’ eally ha e any e ec on me /…/ like I don’ ge bullied o any hing /…/ Bu no, well yeah, some imes I hink o cou se ha i would be nice i he e would be someone like me, and i I could inally ge iends, bu no, I don’ eally hink abou i /…/ I’m no lonely /…/ Well, some imes I alk o my mom’s iend.” (Female, 15 y s). Pe haps because o he amily o o he signi ican adul ela ionships, he igno ed adolescen s did no eel se- e ely le ou . Being ou side in pee g oup did no ex end o all hei meaning ul communi ies, lea ing space o expe iencing inclusion and belonging elsewhe e. Howe e , adul ela ionships do no seem o ully eplace he company o pee s, as is w i en in he wo ds in abo e quo e. Ano he di e ence be ween his ca ego y and he p e ious ones was ha being igno ed showed as a mo e empo a y posi ion han being ac i ely ejec ed. These you h o en desc ibed ha ing iends ea lie , o example in childhood o in hei p e ious school. Those iendships had some imes ended because o a con lic be ween iends, bu mo e o en due o eloca ion o he amily o o he inciden ha did no es on he adolescen ’s cha ac e is ics o beha io . Thus, hei sel -es eem was no buil on hopeless ejec ion, bu a he on po en ial o ha ing iends in u u e as hey did be o e. 4) Ou side s by choice. The posi ion o adolescen s who we e si ua ed in he abo e h ee ca ego ies was dic a ed by “inside s”, ha is he dominan mains eam o young people, lea ing he “ou side ” ela i ely li le oom o sel -loca e o change his/he posi ion as an ou side ( his oom being mo e eclaimed by he “igno ed” and “sligh ly ejec ed”, and much less by he “ ic imized”). Qui e he con a y, some adolescen s chose o s and ou side o he mains eam, desc ibing hemsel es as no belonging o he pee g oups o hei e e yday li ing en i onmen s in school, neighbo hood, o he public and semi-public places, o he dominan you h cul u e. They we e ou side s by hei own choice. “Well, I don’ eally know many young people he e who would say in public ha hey don’ d ink. I ’s like when you lis en hem alk, i ’s always on Wednesdays, Thu sdays, F idays, like hey, le ’s ge d unk, we’ e gonna ge d unk, and hen I’m like no, his is no o me /…/ So yeah, some imes i eels like hey don’ wan o be wi h me, bu hen, I know many people who d ink /…/ hey hink ha how can you be a ee o ale , and I hen go like, easily, no p oblem a all.” (Female, 15 y s). These kinds o “ou side by choice” posi ions we e desc ibed as pe manen , p obably because hey we e g ounded on a i udes and missions ha qui e na u ally a e no ba ed o change in nea u u e. Likewise, hese posi ions we e in ense and de e mined. A he same ime, howe e , ou side s by choice e lec ed hei belonging on la ge pee g oup, e ealing eelings o being le ou . This was la gely dependen on whe he he adolescen had simila -minded iends wi h whom he/she could eel belonging oge he . Qui e o en being ou side he do- minan pee cul u e ein o ced he oge he ness o he g oup o ou side s, hus c ea ing belonging h ough exclu- sion. Only his ime, he excluded ones became “inside s”, e lec ing he complex connec ion be ween belonging and social exclusion. 3.2. Ou side ness, Emo ional S ess, and Loneliness Rega ding he emo ional meaning o expe iencing ou side ness, i was s udied whe he he pa icipan s who iden i ied hemsel es as ou side s exp essed emo ional s ess o dep essi e eelings. Many indica o s o emo- ional signi icance o being le ou can mos clea ly be ead om he quo es p esen ed in he abo e sec ion. These eelings o dis ess exp essed by pa icipan s a e eplayed in Table 1. The igu es in Table 1 con i m ha al hough in his sample he ic imized adolescen s a e a e in numbe , hey a e he ones expe iencing nega i e emo ions mos equen ly. All ic imized adolescen s el sad, hu and wi hou pleasu e, and we e a oiding pee con ac . All bu one o hem el hopelessness and ange , exp essed low sel - espec , expe ienced no social suppo , and old ha hey a e lonely. As a g oup o ca ego y, he sligh ly ejec ed and igno ed adolescen s exp essed expe iencing mode a e emo- ional s ess. These g oups, howe e , we e mo e he e ogeneous han he g oup o ic imized you h, meaning ha some ejec ed o igno ed adolescen s epo ed se e al kinds o s ess ul symp oms while o o he s being ou side in pee g oup seemed o be mo e o less insigni ican . Wo h men ioning is ha he sligh ly ejec ed adolescen s, almos all o whom exp essed high sel -es eem, el a he con iden wi h u u e ins ead o hopelessness o des- pai , bu expe ienced ex e nalized eelings o ange and hu ela i ely mo e han o he s. Con adic ing, he ig- no ed adolescen s’ emo ions we e mo e sel -o ien ed, as almos hal o hem el bo ed o lonely, los in e es in R. Ko kiamäki 131 Table 1. Exp essed emo ional s ess by pa icipan s who desc ibed hemsel es as ou side s. Exp essed emo ion Exp essed by (numbe o ) pa icipan s in each ca ego y, n = 42 ejec ed, n = 11 ic imized, n = 4 igno ed, n = 10 by choice, n = 17 eelings o sadness 3 4 3 2 eeling hopeless 1 3 1 1 eeling hu /o ended 7 4 3 1 bo edom, loss o pleasu e 3 4 4 - explici discon en o ange 8 3 3 5 low sel -es eem/sel - espec 1 3 3 - loss o in e es wi h pee s 4 2 4 2 a oid con ac wi h pee s 5 4 2 4 suicidal hough s - 1 - - hough s o e enge - 1 - - pe cei ed lack o suppo 2 3 4 - lack o oge he ness o companionship 6 4 7 2 explici loneliness 2 3 5 1 hei pee s, o el ge ing no suppo om o he s. As expec ed, he ou side s by choice di e ed no ably om o he g oups. Al hough la ges g oup in num- be , hey exp essed leas emo ional s ess. Nea ly one hi d o hem, ne e heless, old abou eelings o discon- en o ange owa ds hei pee s. This was p obably because hey disag eed in opinion wi h he mains eam you h. None o he ou side s by choice exp essed bo edom o loss o pleasu e in pee ela ions, poo sel -es eem, o lack o social suppo , which dis inguishes he g oup om o he ypes o ou side s. In all g oups bu ou side s by choice, mos o he adolescen s exp essed ha hey missed he eeling o oge- he ness o companionship o o he young people. This highligh s he meaning o belonging o a meaning ul communi y as a basic need o adolescen s. Family ela ions o adul iends migh cu back he need o pee g oup belonging, bu he company o pee s canno be comple ely eplaced by adul s. Loneliness was explici ly exp essed by almos all o he ic imized and hal o he igno ed adolescen s. In- s ead, o he sligh ly ejec ed you h and o he ou side s by choice close o none old ha hey would eel lonely. This also demons a es he impo ance o expe ienced belonging ha can be ecei ed in close iendships in ad- di ion o la ge pee g oup: mos o he sligh ly ejec ed adolescen s explained ha ing iends despi e o ge ing ejec ed in pee g oup, and se e al o he ou side s by choice had iends o same opinion, adul iends, o hei amily ela ions we e igh and sa is ac o y. Mo eo e , explici exp essions o loneliness in his sample also in- dica e ha high sel -con idence exp essed by sligh ly ejec ed and olun a ily ou side s p e en o bu e he expe ience o loneliness—e en o ejec ed adolescen s. Also, empo ali y o ou side expe ience seemed o go oge he wi h a he sligh eeling o loneliness, whe eas you h who el cons an ly le ou displayed eeling e y lonely. 4. Discussion As olun a y and pe sonally chosen o m o social ela ionships, iendships a e impo an sou ces o social suppo , belonging, and sel -es eem and, con a ily, o con lic , loneliness, emo ional s ess, and isk o dep es- sion. The main pu pose o his s udy was o in es iga e adolescen s’ iews abou wha i means o be excluded in iendship o pee g oup and how his kind o expe ience is linked o hei emo ional wellbeing. The concep o “ou side ness” was used o cap u e he a ying ways o eeling non-belonging in pee g oup. The s udy ex- ploi ed quali a i e me hodology and he indings we e based on adolescen s’ pe sonal accoun s o iden i ying hemsel es as “ou side s”. The in es iga ion e ealed ha one hi d o he pa icipan s, who supposedly ep esen ed he a e age mid- R. Ko kiamäki 132 dle-class you h in ai ly la ge wes e n (Finnish) ci ies, expe ienced “ou side ness” in su ounding pee g oup. Howe e , hese expe iences a ied g ea ly, om comple e expe ience o being cons an ly ic imized “by all” o he sense o being ejec ed in la ge pee g oup while s ill ha ing close iends, and o he empo a y eeling o being igno ed in immedia e pee g oup o o example school class. Mo eo e , mos adolescen s who iden i ied hemsel es as ou side s we e “ou side s by choice”, pu posely wi hd awing hemsel es om he dominan you h cul u e. All o hese adolescen s, despi e o hei di e ing expe iences, could be easily mis ecognized as lonely om ex e io poin o iew, possibly leading o aul y diagnose. Thus, while he indings a e consis en wi h p e ious and mos ly quan i a i e s udies abou pee accep ance, ejec ion, and popula i y (see e.g. Ashe & Coie, 1990; Rubin e al., 1998; Ligh , 2007), hey complemen ea lie s udies wi h quali a i e insigh and expe ien ial accoun s abou adolescen s’ sel -pe cei ed expe iences o pee exclusion. These migh p o e aluable in clinical p ac ice in psychology, psychia y, social and you h wo k, in seeking o unde s and adolescen s’ li ed wo lds and hei ways o in e p e ing pee in e ac ion. Equally impo an is he inding ha “being an ou side ”, which is o en pe cei ed as a a less de imen al a ibu e han o example “disc imina ed” o “socially excluded”, may mean se e e emo ional s ess and com- p ehensi e expe ience o loneliness o some adolescen s. S udies by Hymel e al. (1990); Dunn (2004); Co e ell (2007); Hopkins (2010), and many o he s, con i m his no ion. Hence, quali a i e digging in o he indi idual expe ience and pe sonal meaning making o sel -pe cei ed ou side ness should be o e looked nei he in e- sea ch no in p ac ice wi h you h and adolescen s. I could be concluded by he esul s ha i is no “being ou side ” in i sel ha causes p oblems o emo ional s ain, bu a he i is he eeling o no being pa o some hing: a ce ain g oup o same-age pee s, a one-on-one iendship, o he you h in gene al. Fo some adolescen s, no belonging o a g oup o pee s may be a pain ul expe ience, as o o he s, exclusion does no mean loneliness o emo ional p oblems. While i is impo an o dis inguish be ween p oblems in popula i y and lack o a close iend (see Dunn, 2004), hey bo h need o be ecognized as possible causes o dis ess and dep ession. Also, he links be ween pe sonal iendships and pee g oup s a us should be examined mo e ca e ully o unde s and hei signi icance o adolescen s’ wellbeing and adjus men . Fo example, he p esen s udy exp essed indings on ejec ed and igno ed adolescen s’ abili y o a oid men al s ess pa ly because hei ela ions wi h he la ge pee g oup we e media ed by hei pe sonal iendships. Respec i ely, he connec ions be ween quali y o iendship and popula i y in la ge pee g oup ha e been es ablished by Dunn (2004). Acco dingly, i would be use ul o sepa a e emo ional loneliness om social loneliness (e.g. G een e al., 2001; Qual e & Munn, 2002) and s udy hei p esumably dis inc ela ion o adolescen ’s dep ession and emo ional s ess, like he indings o his s udy on ex e nal and mo e sel -o ien ed eelings ensuing om ou side ness implica ed. The indings o he s udy a e limi ed in hei gene alizabili y, as only a ela i ely small numbe o in e iews we e conduc ed in a pa icula con ex o Finnish eenage s. Social ela ionships, including hose wi h pee s, a e o med in ime and place, whe eupon di e ences in cul u e may a ec he way ha ou side ness, loneliness, o pee ela ions in gene al a e cons uc ed and pe cei ed. Di e ences in social, spa ial and cul u al se ing also mean ha adolescen s ha e di e en oppo uni ies o make iends (Dunn, 2004; Ko kiamäki & Kallio, 2014). On he o he hand, in e na ional compa a i e s udies ha e demons a ed ha he meaning o pee ela ions, lone- liness and i s connec ion wi h physical, emo ional and social isk a e no necessa ily condi ioned by loca ion (Da idson e al., 2008; S ickley e al., 2014). The e o e he indings o his s udy could p esumably be in e - p e ed as ele an in mos wes e n cul u es and en i onmen s. I should also be no iced ha he di e ences be- ween age o gende ca ego ies we e no pa icula ly add essed in he s udy, and he e hnic o acial backg ound could ha e no been aken in o accoun because o he homogeneous esea ch se ing. Nei he we e he easons behind he expe iences o ou side ness s udied. Expe iences o “inside s” could p oduce use ul in o ma ion on ela ionship be ween easons o exclusion, loneliness, and emo ional s ess (see Dunn, 2004). Fu he mo e, de- p ession and i s symp oms a e a ied and challenged o iden i y: his s udy elied only on adolescen s’ sel - epo ed exp essions on hei eelings and emo ions and on esea che s’ in o med in e p e a ion on wha kind o exp ession could be iden i ied as emo ional s ess. Despi e hese limi a ions he s udy ep esen s a esh pe spec i e on adolescen s’ a ying expe iences on so- cial exclusion in pee g oup. Addi ionally, h ee no able g ounds a e p esen ed o s udying young people’s iendships and pee ela ions in he con ex o dep ession and emo ional diso de in adolescence. Fi s ly, deal- ings wi h iends and pee s a e among he mos ocal social encoun e s in adolescen s’ li es. I we don’ in ol e and in e es ou sel es in wha goes on be ween young people and hei iends, we a e lacking a cen al pa o R. Ko kiamäki 133 wha is impo an o adolescen s om hei own poin o iew. Secondly, adolescen s spend a huge amoun o ime wi h hei pee s in school, hobbies, and leisu e ime ac i i ies, in ac hey a e o en in he company o same-age pee s mo e han hei amilies. Much o wha is happening in adolescen ’s e e yday li es e ol es a ound pee ela ions and hei consequences. Finally, on one hand, he lack o iendship o sa is ac o y pee ela ionship may esul in disas ous emo ional p oblems and isk beha io , al hough his is no necessa ily he case. On he o he hand, adolescen s p o ide each o he wi h posi i e eelings, social suppo , and suppo i e con ol, and may also compensa e o bu e agains he lack o suppo by adul s (Ko kiamäki, 2013). This de- no es a pe spec i e ha could be de eloped in o inno a i e solu ions in dealing wi h emo ional p oblems and social di icul ies in adolescence. Applying he hinking o Shaw and Gan (2002), i we see adolescen s’ “being alone” s aigh o wa dly as a p oblem, we a e ea ing hem as a unanimous g oup and will only see he nega i e in e p e a ions and un a o - able consequences. Wha we will miss hen, a e he a ie y o expe iences, o which some a e olun a y and chosen and o he s en ail posi i e po en ial in spi e o challenging p emises. Also, i we only ocus on nega i e side o pee ela ions, he po en ial esou ces and bene i s o young people’s mu ual in e ac ion may be un e- ma ked (c . Tho s einsson & Da ey, 2014). Good examples o hese esou ces a e he pee suppo ne wo ks and in e en ions ha ha e o en p o en o be e ec i e in dealing wi h emo ional p oblems (e.g. P ei e e al., 2011). E en in mos p oblema ic you h communi ies o disad an ageous ela ionships he e migh be posi i e po en ial and unu ilized esou ces ha could be u he mobilized. I he adolescen s a e gi en he oppo uni y and means o disen angle hemsel es om nega i e ca ego ies o poo pee ela ions, hey migh be ecognized in new ways by o he s as well as by hemsel es. New iendships a e o en c ea ed h ough amily ela ions, change o school, new hobbies, o i ual ne wo ks, and some imes he seemingly ew o none pee ies a e no hing o be conce ned abou . Loneliness in i sel is no pa hological, and i should be pu in o he con ex o young pe son’s own meaning-making, p e e ences, and pe sonal biog aphy. Acknowledging he a ie y in expe- ienced loneliness may hus be he key o ein o cing exis en and building new communi ies o belonging. Acknowledgemen s This s udy is suppo ed by he Academy o Finland Resea ch P og am on he Heal h and Wel a e o Child en and Young People (SKIDI-KIDS) (P ojec 264436). Also, I hank he membe s o Space and Poli ical Agency Resea ch G oup (SPARG) a Uni e si y o Tampe e o inspi ing esea ch en i onmen and access o he wo hy da a. The commen s by anonymous e iewe s we e ecei ed wi h g a i ude. Re e ences Ande sen, S. L., &Teiche , M. H. (2008). S ess, Sensi i e Pe iods and Ma u a ional E en s in Adolescen Dep ession. T ends in Neu osciences, 31, 183-191.h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1016/j. ins.2008.01.004 Ashe , S. R. & Coie, J. D. (1990). Pee Rejec ion in Childhood. New Yo k, NY: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess. Ashe , S. R. & Paque e, J. A. (2003). Loneliness and Pee Rela ions in Childhood. Cu en Di ec ions in Psychological Science, 12, 75-78. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1111/1467-8721.01233 Benne , A. (2011). La ino Adolescen s’ Loneliness, Academic Pe o mance, and he Bu e ing Na u e o F iendships. Jou - nal o You h & Adolescence, 40,556-567.h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1007/s10964-010-9561-2 B age, D. (1993) Co ela es o Loneliness among Midwes Adolescen s. Adolescence, 28, 685-694. By ne, D. G., Da enpo , S. C., & Mazano , J. (2007). P o iles o Adolescen S ess: The De elopmen o he Adolescen S ess Ques ionnai e (ASQ). Jou nal o Adolescence, 30, 393-416.h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1016/j.adolescence.2006.04.004 Cos ello, E. J., Mus illo, S., E kanli, A., Keele , G., & Angold, A. (2003). P e alence and De elopmen o Psychia ic Dis- o de s in Childhood and Adolescence. A chi es o Gene al Psychia y, 60, 837-844. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1001/a chpsyc.60.8.837 Co e ell, J. (2007) Social Ne wo ks in You h and Adolescence (2nd ed.). London: Rou ledge. Da idson, L. M., Dema ay, M. K., Malecki, C. K., Ellonen, N., & Ko kiamäki, R. (2008). Uni ed S a es and Finnish Ado- lescen s’ Pe cep ions o Social Suppo : A C oss-Cul u al Analysis. School Psychology In e na ional, 29, 363-375. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1177/0143034308093675 Dumon , M., & P o os , M. A. (1999). Resilience in Adolescen s: P o ec i e Role o Social Suppo , Coping S a egies, Sel -Es eem, and Social Ac i i ies on Expe ience o S ess and Dep ession. Jou nal o You h and Adolescence, 28, 343- 363. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1023/A:1021637011732