By Donnie Yance

“I Fear the Day That Technology Will Surpass Our Human Interaction” -Albert Einstein

“We communicate by the tone of our voice, with our eyes, with our body language, with our hands. The influx of our voice. There are so many things that we use to communicate,” notes communication researcher Amit Kumar. This multifaceted nature of human interaction becomes critically important when examining how different communication media affect our social connections and overall well being.

Technology can connect us to the world, but can disconnect us from each other,

Cell phones can have a negative impact on close relationships, closeness, connection, and conversation quality.¹

Believe it or not, I still used a flip phone until about a year ago, when it finally broke. Now I use my son’s hand-me-down iPhone. I’ve deliberately kept it disconnected from my computer and haven’t set up email on it. Since I spend countless hours on my computer each day, I’ve made a conscious decision that when I step away from my desk, I want to be truly free from the digital world.

I also prefer minimal texting and often ask people to call me when I believe a phone conversation would be more appropriate. Unfortunately, I’ve noticed that many people seem reluctant to talk on the phone anymore. They don’t answer calls and sometimes don’t even have voicemail set up on their devices. I think we are overly involved in the world’s issues, while we know nothing about our neighbors, or our local community.

Our society faces a growing health crisis that demands immediate attention: the epidemic of social isolation and diminishing human connection. We need to raise awareness about this critical issue, foster a collective desire for change, and provide accessible tools that empower individuals to rebuild meaningful connections. By addressing this challenge, we can create pathways toward healthier, more fulfilling lives for everyone—transforming not just individual well-being, but the social fabric that binds us together.

Loneliness: America’s Growing Epidemic

U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy placed a spotlight on America’s problem with loneliness when he declared the issue an epidemic in the spring of 2023.² Murthy explained, in a letter that introduced an urgent advisory, that loneliness is far more than “just a bad feeling” and represents a major public health risk for both individuals and society. Murthy also pointed out that, although many people grew lonelier during the COVID-19 pandemic, about half of American adults had already reported experiences of loneliness even before the outbreak.

The advisory emphasized how chronic loneliness correlates with increased risks of cardiovascular disease, dementia, stroke, depression, anxiety, and premature death. 

In fact, the health impact of prolonged social isolation has been compared to smoking up to 15 cigarettes daily, making it a more significant mortality risk factor than obesity or physical inactivity.

Research Findings on American Loneliness

Over the past four years, researchers with Harvard Graduate School of Education’s Making Caring Common (MCC) project have been investigating the underlying causes of loneliness. In May 2023, they conducted a national survey with the company YouGov to find out what Americans had to say about the problem as well as the types of solutions they supported.

The survey revealed several key insights:

• Nearly 50% of Americans reported feeling lonely at least once a week
• Young adults (18-25) and older adults (65+) reported the highest rates of chronic loneliness
• Social media use showed complex relationships with loneliness, with heavy users reporting more frequent feelings of isolation despite constant virtual connection
• Economic factors play a significant role, with financial insecurity strongly correlating with higher loneliness rates

The Societal Impact

The loneliness epidemic carries substantial societal costs beyond individual suffering. Research indicates that loneliness contributes to decreased workplace productivity, increased healthcare utilization, and weakened community bonds. The collective economic burden of loneliness in the United States is estimated to exceed $100 billion annually in additional healthcare expenses.

Moreover, loneliness has been linked to increasing political polarization, as isolated individuals are more susceptible to extremist viewpoints and less likely to engage in community-building activities that bridge social divides.

Positive social connections improve psychological and physical wellbeing. With the increase in technology offering more diverse ways to connect with others, understanding which media strengthen social bonds most effectively has become essential. This review examines emerging research suggesting that our intuitions about communication media may be misaligned with their actual effects on social connection.

Voice-Based Communication Creates Stronger Social Bonds

Kumar and Epley (2021)³ investigated how people’s preferences for communication media align with the actual benefits of different interaction modes. Their research predicted that people’s media choices would be influenced by anticipated costs (awkwardness) and benefits (connection), but that people would consistently undervalue voice-based interactions.

Through a field experiment where participants reconnected with old friends either by phone or email, and laboratory studies where strangers communicated via video, voice, or text, they found compelling evidence that voice-based communication creates stronger social bonds without increasing awkwardness, contrary to many participants’ expectations.

Their findings reveal that interactions including voice (phone calls, video chats, and voice messages) fostered significantly stronger social connections compared to text-based media (email, text messaging). Importantly, these voice-based interactions did not produce the heightened awkwardness that participants often anticipated, suggesting a systematic misunderstanding of communication media effects.

Qualitative representation of factors influencing pandemic wellbeing in our cross-national sample. Circle sizes reflect approximate effect sizes (β values). Education was also included as a covariate but was consistently non-significant (ps > .736). Staying at home had a consistently marginal effect on wellbeing (ps < .077).

“Misunderstanding the consequences of using different communication media could create preferences for media that do not maximize either one’s own or others’ wellbeing.” (Kumar & Epley, 2021) 

Dr. Fauci says he doesn’t think Americans should ever shake hands again to prevent spread of coronavirus; yet research shows the opposite might be true. Perceived social support has been hypothesized to protect against the pathogenic effects of stress and acute infections.⁴

The Protective Effect of Social Support and Hugs

While scientists know that social support can protect against illness, exactly how this happens remains unclear. One study investigated this question with 406 healthy adults.

Study Method

• They measured perceived social support using questionnaires
• Participants reported daily interpersonal conflicts and hugs through evening phone interviews for two weeks
• Researchers then exposed participants to a common cold virus and monitored them in quarantine

Key Findings

• Participants with higher perceived support were less likely to get infected as their conflict frequency increased
• Hugging explained 32% of this protective effect
• Among those who did get infected, both perceived support and frequent hugs predicted milder symptoms

The results of this study suggest that hugging effectively communicates social support, which may help protect against stress-related illness.

Digital Vs. Face-To-Face Contact During the COVID-19 Pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic provided a unique natural experiment to examine how different communication modes affect wellbeing when face-to-face interactions were restricted. Newson and colleagues (2024)⁵ conducted a large multinational study (n = 6,436) investigating the relationship between communication modes and wellbeing during pandemic lockdowns.

Their research revealed several key insights:

1. Prevalence of computer-mediated communication (CMC): Digital communication became more common than face-to-face interaction, with usage patterns influenced more strongly by COVID-19 death rates than by government stringency measures.
2. Differential wellbeing effects: Despite legal restrictions and health risks, face-to-face contact remained positively associated with wellbeing, while certain forms of CMC—particularly messaging apps—showed negative associations with wellbeing.
3. Vulnerability considerations: Perceived household vulnerability to COVID-19 reduced the positive effect of face-to-face communication on wellbeing. Surprisingly, individuals’ concerns about their own vulnerability did not show the same moderating effect.
4. Demographic differences: Computer-mediated communication showed particularly negative associations with wellbeing among younger participants and those with higher empathy scores.

Implications

Together, these studies highlight a critical disconnect between our communication preferences and the actual wellbeing benefits derived from different media. While technological convenience and perceived safety often lead people to choose text-based or computer-mediated communication, the research suggests that voice-based and face-to-face interactions provide superior wellbeing benefits.

This misalignment has significant implications for:

• Personal communication choices: Individuals might optimize wellbeing by overriding initial reluctance to voice and face-to-face communication.
• Organizational policies: Workplaces designing remote or hybrid work environments should consider going back to working at the workplace.
• Public health messaging: During crises requiring physical distancing, recommendations might include guidance on maintaining wellbeing through optimal communication choices.
• Community infrastructure: Creating more public spaces designed for meaningful social interaction
• Workplace initiatives: Implementing programs that foster connection among employees
• Educational approaches: Teaching social-emotional skills from an early age, and minimizing exposure to screens and social media.
• Intergenerational programs: Connecting younger and older Americans through structured volunteer opportunities

As Dr. Richard Weissbourd, director of the MCC project, notes:

 “Loneliness isn’t just a personal problem—it’s a public health crisis that requires coordinated societal response. The good news is that meaningful human connection remains our most powerful tool for addressing this epidemic.”

The research reviewed suggests that despite our increasing reliance on text-based and computer-mediated communication, voice-based and face-to-face interactions remain superior for fostering social connection and wellbeing.  People’s intuitions about which communication media will provide the best experience often lead to suboptimal choices that prioritize avoiding anticipated awkwardness over maximizing actual connection.

As technology continues to evolve and reshape our communication landscape, understanding these effects becomes increasingly important for making informed choices about how we connect with others in ways that truly enhance wellbeing.

Social connection—the structure, function, and quality of our relationships with others—is a critical and underappreciated contributor to individual and population health, community safety, resilience, and prosperity. 

Research consistently demonstrates that- meaningful social bonds serve as protective factors against numerous physical and mental health conditions, including heart disease, depression, and cognitive decline. 

Beyond individual benefits, communities with strong social networks demonstrate greater collective efficacy, reduced crime rates, and enhanced disaster recovery capabilities. Despite this growing body of evidence, public health initiatives and policy frameworks often overlook social connectedness as a fundamental social determinant of health, focusing instead on more tangible factors like income, education, and healthcare access. This oversight represents a significant missed opportunity to leverage social connection as a powerful, cost-effective intervention strategy for addressing complex societal challenges.

Conclusion

In today’s world, it’s easy to believe we’re more connected than ever because of our phones, social media, and other technology. But research shows that real human connection—especially through voice and face-to-face conversations—has a much stronger impact on our well-being than texting or email. While it may feel more convenient or comfortable to avoid phone calls or in-person talks, these forms of communication actually help us feel more supported, less lonely, and healthier overall. As loneliness continues to grow across the country, it’s important to remember that even simple things like a phone call, a hug, or spending time with others can make a big difference. If we want to improve both our personal health and the strength of our communities, we need to focus less on screen time and more on real-life human connection.

About the Author:

Donald R. Yance is the founder of the Mederi Center. A Clinical Master Herbalist and Certified Nutritionist, Donnie is renowned for his extraordinary knowledge and deep understanding of the healing properties of plants and nutrition, as well as of epigenetics, laboratory medicine, oncologic pathology, and molecular oncology. He is a professional member of the American Herbalists Guild, National Association of Nutrition Professionals, Academy of Integrative Health and Medicine, and the Society for Integrative Oncology.

References:

1.  Prybylski, Andrew, et. al., of Social and Personal Relationships May 2013 vol. 30 no. 3 237-246, Behavior & Information Technology, 24, 111–129; National Center for Biotechnology  Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, The Associated Press, April 2nd, 2015

2.  The U.S. Surgeon General’s Advisory on the Healing Effects of Social Connection and Community, O ur Epidemic of Loneliness and Isolation, 2023, https://www.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/surgeon-general-social-connection-advisory.pdf

3.  Kumar, A., & Epley, N. (2021). It’s surprisingly nice to hear you: Misunderstanding the impact of communication media can lead to suboptimal choices of how to connect with others. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 150(3), 595-607. doi: 10.1037/xge0000962

4.  Cohen S, Janicki-Deverts D, Turner RB, Doyle WJ. Does hugging provide stress-buffering social support? A study of susceptibility to upper respiratory infection and illness. Psychol Sci. 2015 Feb;26(2):135-47. doi: 10.1177/0956797614559284. Epub 2014 Dec 19. PMID: 25526910; PMCID: PMC4323947.

5.  Newson, M., Zhao, Y., El Zein, M., Sulik, J., Dezecache, G., Deroy, O., & Tunçgenç, B. (2024). Digital contact does not promote wellbeing, but face-to-face contact does: A cross-national survey during the COVID-19 pandemic. New Media & Society, 26(1), 426-449. doi: 10.1177/14614448211062164