THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EXCLUSION, LONELINESS ANXIETY AND CRIME AMONG YOUNG PEOPLE

AYDIN ADNAN MENDERES UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF HUMANITIES AND SOCIAL SCIENCES DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EXCLUSION, LONELINESS ANXIETY AND CRIME AMONG YOUNG PEOPLE

The Case of Undergraduate Students at Aydın Adnan Menderes University

June 2026

Abstract

This study aims to examine the relationship between exclusion, loneliness anxiety, and the tendency toward crime among young people within a sociological framework. The starting point of the research is the view that young people’s experiences of loneliness and exclusion should not be treated merely as individual psychological problems, but rather as social phenomena shaped by family relations, peer groups, social media, economic position, identity perception, school/campus environment, and everyday networks of interaction.

The study is designed around the case of undergraduate students at Aydın Adnan Menderes University and is structured as a cross-sectional and relational survey based on a quantitative research approach. The questionnaire used in the study consists of questions designed to measure demographic variables, family and friendship relations, social media use, levels of loneliness and belonging, fear of exclusion, anger control, attitudes toward rules, and inclination toward risky behaviors.

Since the detailed statistical analysis of the data has not been completed, the findings section is interpreted not through definitive percentages, but through thematic tendencies that are consistent with the research questions and survey dimensions. In the theoretical framework, Durkheim’s concept of anomie, Marx’s concept of alienation, Weber’s status groups, Simmel’s analyses of modern life and loneliness, Goffman’s stigma approach, Merton’s strain theory, Agnew’s general strain theory, and Hirschi’s social bond theory are evaluated together.

The main argument of the study is that loneliness and anxiety about exclusion do not directly cause crime on their own; however, when combined with weak social support, peer pressure, problems in anger control, alienation from rules, and the pressure of digital visibility, they may create an area of social vulnerability that increases young people’s inclination toward risky behaviors.

Keywords: Youth sociology, loneliness, exclusion, social belonging, tendency toward crime, violence, social media, anomie.

Introduction

Youth is a transitional period in which the individual both attempts to define the self and searches for a place within society. This period cannot be explained solely through biological age or educational level; it also includes numerous social experiences such as partial distancing from the family, increasing orientation toward peer groups, confrontation with career and future anxiety, the search for economic independence, identity construction, and the need for social acceptance. Therefore, from the perspective of youth sociology, the loneliness of the young individual should not be understood merely as a state of introversion, but as an important indicator of the quality of the bond that the individual establishes with society. When a young person cannot feel that they belong to a family, a group of friends, a class, a faculty, an online community, or society in a broader sense, loneliness ceases to be merely a personal emotion; it turns into a sphere in which social bonds are weakened, belonging is fractured, and the individual feels vulnerable.

The main subject of this study, namely exclusion and loneliness anxiety, is one of the most important social problems faced by contemporary youth. In modern society, the rise of individualization, the weakening of traditional networks of solidarity, the rapid formation and dissolution of social relations, and the placement of digital environments at the center of everyday life have transformed young people’s ways of establishing relationships. On the one hand, young people appear to be constantly connected through social media; on the other hand, this state of connection does not always produce strong belonging. In fact, the pressure to be constantly visible, liked, commented on, followed, and compared with others may sometimes lead young individuals to feel lonelier, more worthless, and more excluded. This paradox constitutes one of the starting points of the study.

There is a strong relationship between loneliness and exclusion; however, these two concepts do not mean the same thing. Loneliness is a subjective experience that emerges when the quantity or quality of an individual’s relationships fails to meet their expectations. Exclusion, on the other hand, is related to the individual’s perception that they are not accepted, are ignored, are rejected, or are devalued by a group, environment, or society. A young person may feel lonely even in a crowd; may think that they are not fully accepted even though they are included in a friend group; or may feel worthless when their social media posts receive little attention despite reaching many people online. For this reason, loneliness and anxiety about exclusion can become particularly decisive in shaping young people’s self-perception, sense of social security, and behavioral orientations.

The relationship with crime mentioned in the title of the study does not imply a reductionist claim that loneliness and exclusion automatically lead to crime. Sociologically, crime is not a narrow behavior that can be explained only by an individual’s personal morality or character. The tendency toward crime and violence must be examined together with a wide range of factors such as family bonds, peer environment, economic inequalities, school experiences, social control mechanisms, exclusion, stigmatization, anger, strain, status-seeking, and attitudes toward rules. In this context, the central question of the study is as follows: Under what conditions do loneliness and anxiety about exclusion among young people turn into a social risk area that may increase the tendency toward crime or violence? This question aims to discuss the social mechanisms through which loneliness may be related to criminal tendency, without reducing the cause of crime to loneliness.

This article examines young people’s loneliness, exclusion, social belonging, peer influence, social media use, and attitudes toward rules together. The questions in the survey form also reflect this multidimensional approach. The form includes questions about demographic information, family relations, peer environment, social media use, sources of social support, experiences of loneliness, reactions to exclusion, openness to risky behaviors, and attitudes toward rules. In particular, Likert-type statements such as “When I am excluded, obeying rules seems meaningless,” “I may violate rules under the influence of my friend group,” and “When I get angry, I may act without thinking about the consequences” are important for evaluating the behavioral consequences of loneliness and exclusion. Therefore, the research seeks to understand not only how young people feel, but also how these feelings may be reflected in social behavior.

Following the introduction, the article first explains the relationship between youth, modern society, and loneliness. It then discusses the concepts of exclusion, belonging, and stigmatization. Afterwards, the possible relationship between loneliness, exclusion, and the tendency toward crime is examined within the framework of the sociology of crime. In the theoretical section, the sociological foundation of the research is established through Durkheim, Marx, Weber, Simmel, Goffman, Merton, Agnew, and Hirschi. The methodology section explains the research model, population and sample, data collection process, and analysis plan. In the findings section, instead of definitive statistical results, estimated and thematic categories of findings are interpreted based on the survey dimensions prepared for data evaluation. This preference aims to state the limitations of the study openly and to keep the research on a more honest academic ground.

Youth, Modern Society, and Loneliness

Although youth is often considered a dynamic category representing the future of societies, the everyday life of young people is frequently shaped by uncertainty, pressure, and the search for direction. This situation is even more apparent among university youth. A university student attempts to transition into adulthood while simultaneously coping with economic insecurity, pressure for academic success, family expectations, the need to be accepted by peers, and anxiety about the future. In this process, loneliness does not simply mean being physically alone. Feeling misunderstood while living in the same house with one’s family, feeling invisible in a crowded classroom, thinking that one’s words are not valued within a friend group, or constantly looking at other people’s lives on social media and seeing one’s own life as inadequate may also intensify the experience of loneliness.

One of the important factors that increases loneliness in modern society is the transformation in the quality of social relations. In traditional societies, individual identity was shaped largely through family, neighborhood, kinship, and religious or cultural communities. In modern society, however, individuals form more mobile, selective, and individualized relationships. While this creates a space of freedom in one respect, it may also make the individual more fragile in another. The young individual is no longer born into a ready-made world of belonging; rather, they are constantly required to reconstruct their own environment, identity, and position. When this construction process fails, or when a distance emerges between individual expectations and social reality, loneliness anxiety deepens. Especially among students who are new to university, adapting to campus culture, establishing new friendships, and breaking away from the old social environment can make this anxiety more visible.

From a sociological perspective, loneliness is a problem of bonds. Here, the concept of bond refers both to emotional closeness and to social participation. Having people one can trust, knowing whom to turn to in difficult times, feeling that one’s thoughts are valued, and believing that one is valued at school or within a peer environment may reduce loneliness. In contrast, a low number of close friends, distant family relations, discomfort in social environments, invisibility in digital spaces, and fear of being judged by others may increase loneliness. Therefore, loneliness cannot be explained only by the individual’s personality traits. The inclusiveness of the student’s social environment, the adequacy of social spaces in campus life, economic conditions, and the quality of peer relations are also important.

In this study, youth loneliness is examined on three levels. The first level is the individual’s subjective experience of loneliness. At this level, the person’s feelings of being misunderstood, worthless, socially unsupported, or lacking adequate social surroundings are important. The second level is the level of social belonging. At this level, the study evaluates whether the student feels attached to family, a friend group, the school environment, or online communities. The third level is behavioral reflection. Feelings of loneliness and exclusion may lead the individual to withdraw, turn toward social media, react angrily, become more open to risky behaviors, or develop a more distant attitude toward rules. The crime-related dimension of the study is particularly concerned with this third level.

It is also important to distinguish loneliness from being alone. Being alone is not always negative; in fact, some young people may find an opportunity to think, rest, and recover when they are alone. However, loneliness anxiety emerges when being alone is experienced not as a chosen calmness, but as an unwanted rupture. The statement in the questionnaire, “Being alone with myself makes me uncomfortable,” is important at this point. Some young people may find it difficult to face their own thoughts when they are alone and may turn to social media or other distracting areas to suppress this inner tension. This shows that loneliness is related not only to the lack of a social environment, but also to the relationship the individual establishes with the self.

Exclusion, Belonging, and Social Stigmatization

Exclusion is the feeling that one is not accepted, not valued, or deliberately left outside social relations by a group. For young people, the experience of exclusion can take many different forms. Not being invited to the plans of a friend group, not having the opportunity to speak in class, not receiving replies to messages on social media, being mocked because of economic status, or being judged because of political views, lifestyle, religious belief, or sexual identity may strengthen the perception of exclusion. These experiences do not always appear as explicit insults or physical bullying. Sometimes silence, being ignored, leaving a message unanswered, not including someone in a group, or making them feel “you are not one of us” can also be effective forms of exclusion.

Sociologically, exclusion is not only a matter of the individual feeling bad; it is also a relation of power. The power of a group to determine who remains inside and who stays outside reflects that group’s symbolic authority. Popular friend groups, certain consumption styles, forms of appearance, ways of speaking, and political or cultural preferences may turn into criteria of acceptance among young people. Those who do not fit these criteria may sometimes be left outside. Therefore, although exclusion may seem like a small and everyday interaction, it is in fact related to status, power, and the production of norms. Goffman’s approach to stigma is explanatory here. The stigmatized individual is positioned outside the criteria accepted as normal in the eyes of others, and this position restricts their social relations.

Belonging stands at the opposite pole of exclusion. A sense of belonging indicates that the individual is recognized, accepted, valued, and feels safe within a group or community. For young people, belonging is often established through family, friend groups, departments, faculties, school clubs, sports circles, or online communities. However, strong belonging does not occur simply by being physically present within a group. A student may be physically present in a classroom, but if they hesitate to express their opinions, think that they will constantly be judged among friends, or feel that they will be forgotten when they are not visible on social media, belonging may weaken. Therefore, belonging has a qualitative dimension. The individual’s relationships must be sincere, secure, and reciprocal.

The effects of exclusion on the young individual may not remain only at the emotional level. An excluded individual may withdraw, search for new groups, turn more toward social media, give angry and impulsive reactions, or become more open to violating rules. In the questionnaire used in this research, possible reactions to exclusion include withdrawing, searching for new groups, giving harsh reactions, turning to social media, and becoming open to risky behaviors. This is important because the main issue is not that exclusion alone causes crime, but that exclusion may lead the individual to feel disconnected from society and weaken their bond with rules.

The experience of exclusion may also increase problems of self-esteem among young people. When a person constantly thinks that they will be excluded, judged, or not accepted, they may avoid entering social environments. Over time, this avoidance increases loneliness; as loneliness increases, the person has fewer social experiences, and this reproduces the fear of exclusion. Thus, a cyclical relationship emerges between exclusion and loneliness. The young individual may change their behavior out of fear of not being included in a group, suppress their own thoughts, or turn to risky behaviors in order to be accepted. The pressure to adapt to a peer group is an important intermediate mechanism that must be considered especially in relation to the tendency toward crime and violence.

The Relationship Between Loneliness, Exclusion, and the Tendency Toward Crime

From the perspective of the sociology of crime, criminal behavior cannot be explained only by the individual’s personal choice. The social environment in which the individual lives, mechanisms of social control, economic conditions, peer groups, family bonds, school experiences, and cultural values may all be influential in the formation of a tendency toward crime. In this study, the concept of tendency toward crime is addressed not as direct criminal behavior, but through attitudes such as inclination to violate rules, refusal to obey rules perceived as unjust, turning toward risky behaviors under the influence of peers, acting uncontrollably when angry, interest in violent content, or finding certain illegal behaviors understandable. This choice is important because measuring direct criminal behavior in a study conducted among university students may be ethically and practically more difficult and sensitive.

Loneliness and anxiety about exclusion can be related to the tendency toward crime in several ways. First, the weakening of social bonds may reduce the individual’s commitment to social norms. A young person who does not see themselves as part of society, does not feel valued in the school environment, or believes that there is no one around who accepts them may also fail to see the rules of society as belonging to them. In this case, rule violation may become not merely an act against the law, but a symbolic response developed by the individual against an order that they feel has excluded them. This interpretation can be associated particularly with Durkheim’s concept of anomie and Hirschi’s social bond theory.

Second, exclusion may produce anger and strain. When a young person is excluded from a friend group, ignored on social media, or judged because of their identity, they may experience this as a feeling of worthlessness, shame, anger, or injustice. Agnew’s general strain theory argues that the strain and anger individuals experience in the face of negative experiences may pave the way for crime or deviant behavior. In the context of this study, exclusion and loneliness may not directly create criminal behavior among young people, but they may create a background that weakens anger control, increases impulsive reactions, and makes risky behaviors more understandable.

Third, peer group influence is important. A young person who feels lonely or excluded may turn toward new groups in order to be accepted. These groups may be supportive and positive, but they may also normalize risky behaviors. The questionnaire includes questions about the prevalence of risky behaviors within the friend group, the influence of the peer environment on behavior, and the tendency to change behavior in order to adapt to the group. These questions show that the tendency toward crime should not be considered only in relation to individual anger or loneliness, but together with peer pressure. Within a group where minor offenses are considered ordinary, rule violation is normalized, or unjust gain is legitimized, risky behavior may become the price of acceptance for an excluded individual.

Fourth, digital environments may indirectly affect the tendency toward crime and violence. Exclusion on social media, cyberbullying, digital insults, and violent content may affect young people’s emotional states. Exposure to violent content does not create violent behavior in every young person; however, when combined with anger, loneliness, and feelings of worthlessness, violence may become normalized or appear attractive. Therefore, in this study, social media is considered not merely as a communication tool, but as a new social space in which young people experience visibility, comparison, approval, and exclusion.

At this point, an important warning must be made: not every young person who is lonely or excluded shows a tendency toward crime. On the contrary, many young people may manage the experience of loneliness through art, sports, academic success, introspective thinking, or the search for healthier social environments. The purpose of this study is not to criminalize loneliness or treat it as a crime. The aim is to understand how loneliness and anxiety about exclusion may create a risk area when combined with lack of social support, family communication problems, peer pressure, economic inequalities, and alienation from rules. If this distinction is not made, the study may drift into a language that stigmatizes young people. However, the sociological approach should seek to understand the individual within specific social relations rather than blaming them.

Social Media, Visibility Pressure, and Digital Exclusion

Today, it is necessary to take social media into account in order to understand young people’s experiences of loneliness and exclusion. Although social media platforms provide young people with opportunities to communicate, express themselves, follow current issues, and meet new people, they also produce the pressure to be constantly visible and to receive approval. A post receiving no likes, messages left unanswered, being ignored in group chats, seeing friends share plans on social media, or encountering others who appear happier and more successful may increase feelings of exclusion among young people. Therefore, digital exclusion can be seen as a new form of classical face-to-face exclusion.

Social media makes it easier for the young individual to compare themselves with others. The person often sees other people’s selected, edited, and best moments, while experiencing their own everyday life with all its shortcomings and ordinariness. This comparison may create a sense of inadequacy in the young person. For young people with limited economic means, narrow social circles, or feelings of being behind in terms of academic or personal success, social media may intensify these emotions. This situation can also be associated with Marx’s concept of alienation. The individual looks at their own life from the outside, devalues their own experience, and constantly measures themselves against the idealized lives of others.

FoMO, or the fear of missing out on developments in social environments, is one of the important concepts explaining the social media dimension of this study. A young person with a high level of FoMO may think that they are missing important things when offline, may feel as though they are becoming disconnected from their environment when they are not actively visible on social media, and may perceive likes and comments as indicators of their social value. The Turkish adaptation of the FoMO scale by Can and Satıcı, together with recent studies conducted on university students in Turkey, shows significant relationships between FoMO and problematic social media use. In this context, social media may function as a tool that reduces loneliness, but it may also turn into a space that increases loneliness through superficial relationships and visibility pressure.

The questionnaire includes questions about duration of social media use, the main purpose of internet use, the importance of likes and comments, the effect of social media on loneliness, feelings experienced when posts do not receive enough attention, and the experience of being ignored in social media groups. These questions are important for understanding the place of the digital sphere in young people’s experiences of loneliness and exclusion. In particular, the option of feeling excluded or worthless when receiving insufficient attention on social media demonstrates the effect of digital approval on self-perception. This shows that young people experience the need for social acceptance not only in face-to-face relations, but also in fields of online visibility.

The relationship between social media and the tendency toward crime cannot be established directly; however, indirect mechanisms are important. Digital exclusion and cyberbullying may create anger, shame, and feelings of worthlessness. Frequent exposure to violent content may contribute to the normalization of violence, especially among young people who already feel angry or excluded. In addition, online groups may present certain rule violations as entertaining, brave, or prestigious. Therefore, social media should be evaluated not only as an element that isolates young people, but also as a space in which some risky behaviors are learned, normalized, or approved.

Methodological Theory and Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework of this study is not reduced to a single sociological approach. This is because loneliness, exclusion, and the tendency toward crime are multidimensional phenomena. On the one hand, there are macro-level processes such as the weakening of social bonds, the uncertainty of norms, and economic and cultural inequalities. On the other hand, there are micro-level experiences such as being judged, stigmatized, ignored, not liked, and misunderstood in everyday interactions. For this reason, the approaches of Durkheim, Marx, Weber, Simmel, and Goffman are considered together with crime and deviance theorists such as Merton, Agnew, Hirschi, and Becker.

Durkheim’s concept of anomie is a fundamental starting point for understanding the relationship between loneliness and crime among young people. According to Durkheim, society is not merely a structure that externally restricts the individual; it also creates an order that provides meaning, direction, and belonging. When this order weakens, the individual has difficulty determining how to act, which goals are legitimate, and within which social bonds they should position themselves. For university youth, anomie may combine with future uncertainty, fear of unemployment, academic competition, family expectations, and pressure for social acceptance. When a young person feels that the norms connecting them to society are weak, rule violation may appear more understandable or less problematic.

Marx’s concept of alienation is a powerful tool for explaining the loneliness experience of modern youth. Although Marx discusses alienation through the labor process, the concept can be interpreted more broadly as the modern individual’s alienation from their own production, environment, other people, and self. Today’s youth encounter constant pressure to be more successful, more attractive, more popular, and wealthier through consumer culture and social media. Under this pressure, the young person may see their real life as incomplete and worthless. The fact that young people with limited economic resources may remain in the background within social circles requires the relationship between exclusion and crime to be evaluated through the dimension of class inequality. In this respect, the Marxist approach reminds us that exclusion is not only psychological, but also has material and class-based foundations.

Weber’s concepts of status groups and social closure are also important for understanding exclusion. According to Weber, society does not consist only of economic classes; prestige, lifestyle, cultural capital, respectability, and status are also decisive in social differentiation. Among young people, what clothes are worn, which places are visited, which social circles one belongs to, on which digital platforms one is visible, and what cultural tastes one has may turn into indicators of status. Young people who do not possess these indicators may be left outside. Therefore, exclusion can be read not only as poverty or personal maladjustment, but also as the way status groups protect their own boundaries.

Simmel’s analyses of modern life are highly functional in explaining the experience of loneliness in a crowd. Simmel emphasizes that in modern urban life, the individual encounters a large number of people, yet these encounters are often superficial, temporary, and distant. The university campus may similarly be a crowded but anonymous social space. A student may be in the same environment as hundreds of people every day, but may fail to establish deep relationships. In this case, loneliness arises not from physical solitude, but from the superficiality of relationships. Social media also creates a digital crowd similar to Simmel’s modern metropolis. Everyone is visible, yet it is not possible for everyone to be truly seen.

Goffman’s stigma approach has a central place in explaining the relationship between exclusion and self-presentation among young people. According to Goffman, individuals present themselves to others in certain ways in everyday life and try to manage impressions in order to gain social acceptance. Young people also constantly perform self-presentation among peers, at school, and on social media. However, the fear of being judged because of one’s religious belief, political view, sexual identity, economic status, physical appearance, or lifestyle may increase the fear of stigmatization. The fear of stigmatization feeds anxiety about exclusion, and anxiety about exclusion may lead the individual to withdraw from social environments or to change their behavior in order to be accepted.

Merton’s strain theory emphasizes the mismatch between social goals and the legitimate means of achieving these goals. Modern society presents young people with goals such as success, wealth, popularity, and comfort; however, equal access to these goals is not possible for everyone. In this situation, some individuals may find bending rules or legitimizing unjust gain more acceptable. Statements in the questionnaire such as “If I will eventually achieve wealth and comfort, there is no harm in bending the rules” are suitable for measuring this strain logic. Agnew’s general strain theory, on the other hand, explains how negative experiences such as loneliness, exclusion, and anger may create an emotional background that can increase the tendency toward crime.

Hirschi’s social bond theory is one of the most directly relevant theoretical foundations of this research. According to Hirschi, when an individual’s attachment to society is strong, the probability of turning toward criminal behavior decreases. Attachment is established through investment in family, school, friends, social values, and the future. If a young person feels understood by their family, valued in the school environment, and accepted by friends, their motivation to obey rules may be stronger. In contrast, the absence of close friends, lack of family support, feelings of worthlessness at school, and the belief that one has no place in society indicate weakened social bonds. When these bonds weaken, turning toward risky behaviors becomes more understandable.

Becker’s labeling approach adds another dimension to the relationship between exclusion and crime. According to Becker, deviance is not only a property of a particular behavior, but is also related to how society defines that behavior. Once a young person is labeled as problematic, aggressive, maladjusted, or unsuccessful, this label may affect their social relations. The excluded and stigmatized young person may, over time, internalize the identity imposed upon them or begin to act in accordance with that identity. Therefore, language is important in studies concerning young people. The research should aim not to stigmatize young people as “prone to crime,” but to understand which social conditions may increase risky behaviors.

Research Method and Model

This study is designed as a cross-sectional and relational survey based on a quantitative research approach. The cross-sectional model makes it possible to measure young people’s attitudes toward loneliness, exclusion, belonging, social media use, and tendency toward crime within a specific time period. The relational survey model is suitable for evaluating the connections among these variables. The aim of the research is not to conduct a causal experiment, but to sociologically interpret the possible relationships between young people’s social experiences and their attitudes toward risky behaviors. Therefore, the study avoids simple cause-and-effect propositions such as “loneliness causes crime”; instead, it questions through which mediating mechanisms loneliness and exclusion may approach the tendency toward crime.

A structured questionnaire was used as the data collection tool. The questionnaire consists of demographic questions, multiple-choice evaluation questions, and five-point Likert-type attitude items. The demographic section includes variables such as age, gender, faculty/department, year of study, marital status, family income level, hometown, family structure, whether the parents are alive, academic success, and grade point average. These variables are important for evaluating the relationship between experiences of loneliness and exclusion and social position. This is because young people’s sources of social support and experiences of exclusion may vary according to gender, income, family structure, academic achievement, and faculty environment.

The second dimension of the questionnaire concerns family, peer environment, and social support. It asks whether family relations are warm, supportive, distant, or conflictual; the extent to which the individual feels understood by the family; the number of close friends; the degree to which friends influence behavior; the prevalence of risky behaviors within the friend group; and the tendency to change behavior in order to adapt to the group. This section is also consistent with Hirschi’s social bond theory. Family and peer environment are fundamental mechanisms through which the young individual becomes attached to society. The weakening of these bonds may increase feelings of loneliness and exclusion while also weakening protective mechanisms against risky behaviors.

The third dimension of the questionnaire concerns social media and digital visibility. Daily duration of social media use, the main purpose of internet use, the importance of likes and comments, the effect of social media on the feeling of loneliness, feelings when posts do not receive enough attention, and experiences of being ignored in social media groups are addressed in this section. These questions show that in contemporary youth, experiences of loneliness and exclusion are produced not only in face-to-face relations but also in digital interactions. FoMO and the need for digital approval are especially important for understanding the psychosocial dimension of young people’s relationship with social media.

The fourth dimension of the questionnaire concerns loneliness, exclusion, belonging, and behavioral response. Participants were asked in which social environment they feel most comfortable, where they feel most excluded, which group they feel they belong to, whom they first turn to in difficult times, when they feel most lonely in daily life, how they feel when they are alone for a long time, and what they do when they feel excluded. This section allows loneliness and exclusion to be evaluated not only at the emotional level, but also in terms of behavioral outcomes. In particular, options such as “I may turn to uncontrolled behaviors” and “I may turn to behaviors that involve violating rules” are notable in relation to crime.

Likert-type items constitute the most comprehensive measurement area of the study. These items include statements on loneliness, the ability to establish strong relationships, the adequacy of the social environment, feeling misunderstood, whether there is anyone from whom support can be received, fear of rejection, anxiety about not being included in a group, hesitation about being judged, perceived exclusion due to religious belief, political view, or sexual identity, finding a place in society, feeling valued in the school environment, satisfaction with social relations, obeying rules, not obeying rules considered unjust, interest in violent content, rule violation under peer influence, acting uncontrollably when angry, seeing minor crimes as ordinary, and finding some illegal behaviors acceptable. Thus, the research evaluates the relationship between loneliness and the tendency toward crime not through a single question, but through multiple sub-dimensions.

Population and Sample

The population of the research consists of undergraduate students studying at Aydın Adnan Menderes University. University students constitute a suitable population for this research because an important part of the youth period is shaped within university life. The university brings together young people from different cities, economic conditions, family structures, and cultural environments within the same social space. This situation creates opportunities to establish new forms of belonging, but it also makes experiences such as exclusion, adaptation problems, loneliness, and status competition visible. Campus life, classroom relations, peer groups, social media use, and academic achievement pressure especially have a strong influence on young people’s social experiences.

The sample consists of undergraduate students who voluntarily participated in the research and responded to the questionnaire. Reaching approximately 1,000 students during the term shows that the research touched a broad student population. However, since the detailed statistical analysis of the data has not been completed in this article, the exact distributions of the sample are not presented in percentage tables. Instead, the sample is defined through the target population of the research and the scope of the field application. In terms of academic honesty, it is important to state this limitation openly. Producing definitive rates from unanalyzed data would weaken the reliability of the research.

The inclusion criteria for the sample are being an active undergraduate student, being 18 years of age or older, giving voluntary consent to participate, and agreeing to answer the questionnaire. Since no identifying information was requested, the anonymity of the participants was protected. The questionnaire stated that participation was entirely voluntary, that participants could choose not to answer any question, and that they could leave the survey unfinished. These principles are important for the ethical quality of the research. Since sensitive topics such as loneliness, exclusion, crime, and the tendency toward violence are studied, participants should not feel under pressure.

Ideally, in order to strengthen the sample, a stratified distribution should be followed according to variables such as faculty, year of study, gender, and income level. This would prevent the responses from being limited to students from only certain faculties or specific peer circles. For example, students studying in social sciences, natural sciences, health sciences, and education may have different campus experiences. Similarly, the experiences of loneliness and social support may vary between students living with their families and those living in dormitories or with roommates. Therefore, in future studies, organizing the sample in a stratified manner would increase the representational strength of the research.

Data Collection Process and Data Analysis

The data collection process was carried out through the questionnaire form. In the introductory section of the questionnaire, the purpose of the research was explained, and it was stated that the data would be used only within the scope of scientific research, would not be shared with third parties, participation was voluntary, and no identifying information would be requested. This explanation is important for allowing participants to respond more comfortably. Topics such as tendency toward crime, attitudes toward violence, exclusion, and loneliness may be perceived as sensitive by participants. Although anonymity does not completely eliminate the effect of social desirability, it is a method that may reduce it.

The planned data analysis of the research is based on quantitative data analysis techniques. In the first stage, participants’ demographic characteristics can be presented through frequency and percentage distributions. Variables such as age, gender, faculty/department, year of study, family income level, family structure, academic achievement, number of close friends, and duration of social media use can be described at this stage. In the second stage, Likert-type items can be divided into sub-dimensions and evaluated. Mean scores can be created for dimensions such as loneliness, exclusion, belonging, social media/need for approval, peer influence, attitudes toward rules, anger control, and tendency toward crime/violence.

During the analysis process, some items need to be reverse-coded. For example, positive statements such as “Establishing close relationships is easy for me,” “I can establish strong and meaningful relationships with people,” “I feel comfortable and safe in social environments,” “I feel valued in my school environment,” “Obeying the law is a priority for me,” and “I always stay away from risky behaviors” indicate protective social bonds when they receive high scores, rather than loneliness or tendency toward crime. In contrast, statements such as “I often feel lonely,” “I often feel excluded from society,” “I may violate rules under the influence of my friends,” and “When I am excluded, obeying rules seems meaningless” point more directly to the risk dimension. Therefore, before creating total scores, the direction of the items must be carefully arranged.

Correlation analysis can be used to examine the relationships between variables. Relationships such as loneliness score and exclusion score, exclusion score and anger control, duration of social media use and perception of digital exclusion, and belonging score and tendency toward crime score can be observed through this analysis. In addition, t-tests can be used for comparisons between two groups, while one-way analysis of variance can be used for comparisons among more than two groups. For example, whether loneliness and exclusion scores differ according to gender, income level, year of study, or number of close friends can be examined. Regression analysis can be used to determine which variables explain the tendency toward crime more strongly.

Since the detailed statistical analysis has not been completed in this article, the findings are presented not through definitive rates, but through thematic interpretations. This method is a limitation of the study; however, interpreting possible tendencies sociologically based on the areas measured by the questionnaire is considered more appropriate than inventing data. Therefore, the findings section should be read not as “definitive statistical results,” but as “thematic findings and expected tendencies based on survey dimensions.” This preference ensures the applicability of the research within the conditions of a final assignment while also preserving scientific honesty.

Findings: Thematic and Categorical Evaluation

In this section, the findings are evaluated thematically and categorically because the full statistical analysis of the survey data has not been completed. The interpretations are made by taking into account the question groups in the questionnaire, the theoretical framework of the research, and general tendencies in the literature on youth sociology. Therefore, the evaluations presented here should not be read as definitive percentages or statistically significant results. Rather, they aim to show which areas of findings the research points to, which behavioral outcomes loneliness and anxiety about exclusion among young people may be associated with, and how demographic variables may differentiate this relationship.

The first category of findings concerns the experience of loneliness and belonging. Statements in the questionnaire such as “I often feel lonely,” “My social environment is inadequate,” “I usually feel misunderstood,” and “There is no one from whom I can receive support in difficult times” are designed to understand young people’s subjective level of loneliness. In contrast, statements such as “I have close and reliable friendships,” “I can establish strong and meaningful relationships with people,” “I think I have a place in society,” and “I feel valued in my school environment” measure the dimension of belonging and social support. The expected tendency is that students with a higher number of close friends, supportive family relations, and a sense of being valued in the school environment will have lower levels of loneliness. This supports the protective effect of social bonds.

The second category of findings concerns anxiety about exclusion. Items such as fear of being rejected by people, anxiety about not being included in a group, hesitation about being judged by others, and feeling excluded due to religious belief, political view, or sexual identity constitute this dimension. The importance of these items lies in showing that exclusion is not only a general social problem, but may also be experienced through identity and values. If a young individual thinks that they will be excluded when they express themselves as they are, they may behave more cautiously in social environments. This may reduce the courage to establish social relations and reproduce loneliness. Therefore, it is estimated that there is a mutually reinforcing relationship between anxiety about exclusion and loneliness.

The third category of findings concerns family and social support. A warm and supportive family, the student’s feeling of being understood, and having people to turn to in difficult times can be evaluated as protective factors against loneliness and risky behaviors. In contrast, problematic and conflictual family relations, not being understood by the family, or a tendency not to turn to anyone in difficult times may increase loneliness. Here, the family is not only a source of emotional support, but also a mechanism of social control. A young person who has strong bonds with their family may feel more secure and may be more resistant to risky behaviors. However, if family support is established in an oppressive or judgmental manner, the opposite result may also emerge. Therefore, the quality of family relations is important.

The fourth category of findings concerns the peer environment and peer influence. The number of close friends, the extent to which friends influence behavior, the prevalence of risky behaviors within the friend group, and the tendency to change behavior in order to adapt to the group are critical variables in relation to crime. The expected tendency is that young people who are in friend groups where risky behaviors are normalized and who are more willing to change their behavior in order to be accepted by the group will have more positive attitudes toward rule violation. This shows that the tendency toward crime is influenced not only by individual anger or loneliness, but also by the norms of the peer group. The tendency of excluded young people to approach risky groups in order to be accepted is an important risk mechanism in this context.

The fifth category of findings concerns social media, visibility, and digital exclusion. It is expected that loneliness and anxiety about exclusion may be stronger among students who use social media for long periods, attach importance to likes and comments, feel excluded or worthless when their posts do not receive attention, and think that they are ignored in social media groups. Here, social media has a dual function. Some young people may turn to social media to reduce their loneliness; however, when this orientation turns into superficial relationships, comparison pressure, and the need for digital approval, loneliness may increase even further. Therefore, the effect of social media is related not only to duration of use, but also to the manner of use.

The sixth category of findings concerns the behavioral reactions to loneliness and exclusion. The questionnaire includes options such as feeling worthless, angry, and uneasy when alone for a long time, or turning toward uncontrolled behaviors; and when feeling excluded, withdrawing, searching for new groups, giving harsh and impulsive reactions, or turning toward behaviors that may involve violating rules. The expected tendency is that young people who experience loneliness more intensely and negatively will show more withdrawal or turn more toward social media. However, when loneliness combines with anger and feelings of worthlessness, impulsive reactions and openness to risky behaviors may increase. This is the basic point at which the connection with the tendency toward crime is established.

The seventh category of findings concerns attitudes toward rules and the tendency toward crime. Statements such as “I do not obey rules that I find unjust,” “I may violate rules under the influence of my friend group,” “When I get angry, I may act without thinking about the consequences,” “I may turn to risky behaviors for momentary gain,” “Minor crimes may be considered ordinary in my friend group,” and “Some illegal behaviors may be understandable and acceptable” are designed to measure the tendency toward crime directly. In contrast, statements such as “Obeying the law is a priority for me,” “I always stay away from risky behaviors,” “Even when I get angry, I try not to lose control,” and “I avoid obtaining unjust gain” point to protective norms. The expected finding is that as exclusion and loneliness increase, alienation from rules may also increase; however, this relationship may be weakened by social support and family/peer bonds.

The eighth category of findings concerns demographic differences. Gender, income level, family structure, academic achievement, year of study, and living arrangements may differentiate experiences of loneliness and exclusion. Students with low income levels may feel economic exclusion more strongly. Students living away from their families may experience loneliness and adaptation problems, especially in their first years. Students with lower academic achievement may feel less valued in the school environment. However, demographic variables are not decisive on their own. For example, a low-income student may feel less lonely thanks to strong peer support, while a high-income student may experience intense anxiety about exclusion due to social media comparisons. For this reason, demographic findings should be interpreted together with social support and belonging.

The ninth category of findings concerns the tendency toward violence. Here, the tendency toward violence is evaluated not through the behavior of physically applying violence, but through attitudes such as interest in violent content, losing control when angry, giving harsh reactions, and seeing minor rule violations as ordinary. The expected tendency is that tolerance toward violence will be higher among students who experience intense exclusion and feelings of worthlessness, whose peer environment normalizes risky behaviors, and who have difficulty controlling anger. In contrast, students who are satisfied with their social relations, feel valued in the school environment, and desire to contribute to social order are expected to have a lower tendency toward violence.

In general, the findings indicate that loneliness and anxiety about exclusion do not explain the tendency toward crime on their own; however, when these two variables combine with lack of social support, peer pressure, digital exclusion, anger control problems, and alienation from rules, they may pave the way for risky behaviors. This result is consistent with the main assumption of the research. There is no single cause that pushes young people toward crime. The tendency toward crime is shaped at the intersection of processes such as the weakening of social bonds, feelings of injustice, feelings of worthlessness, group pressure, and the questioning of norms.

Discussion

The thematic findings of the research show that loneliness and anxiety about exclusion among young people are multilayered issues. These findings suggest that approaches which treat loneliness merely as an individual psychological problem are insufficient. When a young individual feels lonely, the reason is not always personal introversion. Being misunderstood within the family, not being accepted by peers, not feeling valued in the school environment, being invisible on social media, being unable to enter certain circles due to economic conditions, or thinking that one will be judged because of identity characteristics all produce the experience of loneliness. Therefore, loneliness is a sociological indicator of the quality of the bond that the individual establishes with society.

When evaluated through Durkheim’s concept of anomie, loneliness and exclusion among young people point to points where the bond between the individual and social order weakens. When the young person does not see themselves as part of society and does not feel a meaningful connection between social rules and their own life, rule violation may appear less problematic. However, this does not necessarily turn directly into criminal behavior. At this point, mediating variables such as social support, family bonds, school belonging, and the peer environment come into play. Therefore, in order to understand the tendency toward crime, it is necessary to look not at loneliness itself, but at the social conditions under which loneliness is experienced.

Marx’s concept of alienation is meaningful especially in the context of economic inequalities and social media comparisons. Today’s youth face constant pressure for success, consumption, and visibility. When a student with limited economic means cannot participate in the consumption practices of friends or encounters idealized lives on social media, they may feel excluded. This feeling of being left outside is not only about material deprivation, but also about symbolic worthlessness. Weber’s approach to status groups also becomes relevant at this point. Among young people, status is established not only through money, but also through appearance, peer environment, social media interaction, cultural taste, and popularity.

Goffman’s stigma approach is useful for interpreting the identity-based exclusion items in the questionnaire. Feeling excluded because of religious belief, political view, or sexual identity affects the extent to which young people can express themselves freely in social environments. If a young person thinks that they will be judged when they express their thoughts, they must constantly monitor themselves in social relations. This increases both anxiety and social withdrawal. Goffman’s approach to self-presentation also becomes current when combined with social media. The young individual now has to present themselves not only in face-to-face environments, but also on digital platforms and position themselves according to the gaze of others.

Merton’s and Agnew’s strain approaches are important for explaining the emotional and structural link between exclusion and the tendency toward crime. Society constantly reminds young people of goals such as success, comfort, and status; however, the legitimate means of reaching these goals are not equal for everyone. This inequality may create feelings of injustice, anger, and worthlessness. From the perspective of Agnew’s general strain theory, exclusion, rejection, and feelings of failure produce negative emotions in young people. When these negative emotions cannot be managed in a healthy way, the tendency to react impulsively, legitimize violence, or violate rules may become stronger.

Hirschi’s social bond theory is one of the approaches most clearly supported by the findings. This is because the questionnaire simultaneously addresses family, friends, school, society, and commitment to rules. Young people with strong social bonds are expected to be more distant from risky behaviors. These bonds are important not only in terms of control, but also in terms of producing meaning and belonging. If a young person feels valued by their family, friends, and school environment, their desire to contribute to social order may also be stronger. In contrast, among young people who feel that they do not belong to any group and that there is no one around who truly accepts them, commitment to norms is more likely to weaken.

This discussion would remain incomplete without the social media dimension. Current studies on FoMO and social media show that although young people are digitally connected, experiences of loneliness and addiction may increase. The questionnaire in this study also questions both the socializing and isolating aspects of social media. Social media can be a supportive space for young people; however, when it turns into a measure of value based on likes, comments, and visibility, it may increase anxiety about exclusion. Therefore, young people’s social media use should be evaluated not only in terms of duration, but also through the meaning relationship they establish with social media.

One important conclusion of the discussion is this: loneliness and anxiety about exclusion do not automatically lead young people to criminal behavior; however, they may create a ground that weakens social bonds, increases anger, makes rules meaningless, and facilitates orientation toward risky peer groups. Therefore, policy and practice recommendations should focus not only on intervention after crime occurs, but also on strengthening young people’s social bonds. Social clubs, psychological counseling services, peer solidarity groups, inclusive activities, and digital awareness programs at universities are important in this regard.

Conclusion and Recommendations

This study has evaluated the relationship between exclusion, loneliness anxiety, and crime among young people from a sociological perspective. The main conclusion of the research is that loneliness and exclusion cannot be seen as direct and sole causes of crime; however, when combined with weak social support, peer pressure, digital exclusion, anger control problems, alienation from rules, and feelings of worthlessness, they may create a sphere of vulnerability that can pave the way for tendencies toward crime and violence. Young people feeling valued within family, peer groups, school, and society may provide an important protective effect against risky behaviors.

The results show that from the perspective of youth sociology, loneliness should not be treated as an individual weakness, but as a phenomenon related to the quality of social bonds. If a young person is lonely, this loneliness cannot be explained only by their character. Social environments that exclude, ignore, judge, or impose certain conditions for acceptance also play a role in the production of this loneliness. Therefore, solutions to young people’s experiences of loneliness and exclusion should not blame the individual, but should include approaches that transform the social environment.

Universities are among the most important institutional spaces where young people can establish belonging. Therefore, university administrations should pay attention not only to academic achievement, but also to students’ social integration. Interfaculty social activities, student clubs, sports and arts activities, orientation programs for new students, and peer counseling practices may reduce feelings of loneliness and exclusion. Supportive programs should be developed especially for first-year students, those living away from their families, those experiencing economic difficulty, and those who have difficulty establishing social circles.

The visibility of psychological counseling and guidance services should be increased. It is important for young people to have safe spaces to turn to when they experience emotions such as loneliness, exclusion, worthlessness, and anger. However, these services should not be limited to an individual therapy logic; they should be enriched through group work, social skills workshops, anger control training, digital well-being seminars, and peer support programs. In this way, young people can see that they are not alone and that they can build solidarity with others who experience similar problems.

Awareness work aimed at families is also important. In the questionnaire, feeling understood by the family and the quality of family relations are important variables. Families should not see young people’s experiences of loneliness and exclusion as simple adolescent problems or personal whims. Valuing young people’s opinions, allowing them to share their emotions comfortably, and listening to them without judgment are decisive for social support. When family support is strong, the likelihood that young people will turn toward risky peer groups may decrease.

A conscious rather than prohibitive approach should be adopted toward social media. It is not realistic for young people to completely abandon social media; however, it is important for them to realize that what they see on social media is selected and often idealized content. It should be taught that likes and comments are not measures of personal worth, how digital exclusion experiences can be managed, and which support mechanisms can be used in the face of cyberbullying. Digital literacy should now be regarded as a fundamental area of social support from the perspective of youth sociology.

Policies for preventing crime and violence should also not be based solely on punishment or disciplinary mechanisms. In order to reduce young people’s tendency toward crime, social bonds must be strengthened, a sense of belonging must be increased, peer pressure must be transformed in a positive direction, and skills for coping with anger and strain must be developed. Especially young people who feel excluded and worthless should not be stigmatized; instead, inclusive practices should be developed to help them reconnect with the social environment. It should not be forgotten that even small practices of exclusion in schools and universities may have long-term effects.

Ethical Principles and the Role of the Researcher

Since the subject of this research includes young people’s perceptions of loneliness, exclusion, crime, and the tendency toward violence, ethical sensitivity is especially important. The primary duty of researchers is not to direct participants or force them toward a certain answer, but to create a research environment in which participants can express their own experiences safely and voluntarily. For this reason, the introductory text of the questionnaire explained the purpose of the study, stated that participation was voluntary, that no identifying information would be collected, and that the responses would be used only for scientific purposes. Thus, both the privacy of participants and the principle of informed consent were observed.

The fact that no directly identifying information was collected is an important ethical safeguard. Not collecting information such as name, surname, student number, telephone number, or identity number may allow participants to answer questions about tendency toward crime and attitudes toward violence more comfortably. However, anonymity does not eliminate the responsibility of the researcher. Data must be stored securely, not shared with third parties, and reported through collective evaluations rather than individual responses. This approach is also important for preventing the stigmatization of young people.

One of the most important issues regarding the role of the researcher is avoiding judgmental language when relating young people to crime. In this study, the concept of tendency toward crime is used not as a labeling tool to identify young people who directly commit crime, but as an analytical concept for understanding how loneliness and exclusion are related to attitudes toward rules, anger control, risky behavior, and weakened social bonds. Therefore, the researcher should not classify the participant as “prone to crime” or “problematic,” but should try to understand which social conditions may increase risky behaviors. This attitude is also consistent with Goffman’s stigma approach.

Another ethical point is the participant’s right not to answer a question that causes discomfort. Loneliness, exclusion, being judged because of identity, anger, violence, and risky behaviors may be personally challenging topics for some students. Therefore, during the survey application, participants should not feel under pressure, should know that they can leave the research at any time, and should be able to leave questions unanswered. In studies conducted in university environments, the emphasis on voluntariness must be made clearly so that students do not feel that they are participating in the survey because of pressure from courses, instructors, or peers.

Finally, the way data are analyzed and interpreted is also part of the ethical process. Since the detailed statistical analysis of the data has not been completed in this article, definitive rates or unverified percentages have not been produced. Presenting the findings as thematic and estimated tendencies is important for not hiding the limitations of the research. Scientific honesty must be preserved not only during data collection, but also during the reporting of data. Therefore, the study interprets the field experience and the survey structure within an academic framework and does not claim to present definitive empirical results.

Limitations of the Research

The most important limitation of this research is that although a wide participant group was reached through the survey application, the detailed statistical analysis of the data could not be completed. Therefore, the findings in the article are not presented through definitive percentages, means, correlation coefficients, or significance tests. The findings are evaluated as thematic tendencies based on the survey dimensions and theoretical framework. This does not completely eliminate the interpretive power of the study; however, it limits the generalizability of the results. In the future, analyzing the same data set using SPSS, Jamovi, or a similar program would strengthen the research.

The second limitation is that the research is based on the self-report technique. Since topics such as loneliness, exclusion, tendency toward crime, and attitudes toward violence are sensitive, participants may have given socially acceptable responses to some questions. The social desirability effect may emerge especially in items concerning rule violation, finding illegal behaviors acceptable, or acting uncontrollably when angry. Although conducting the questionnaire anonymously is important for reducing this effect, it is not possible to eliminate it completely.

The third limitation is that the study is designed around a single university case. Although undergraduate students at Aydın Adnan Menderes University offer an important field, they do not represent all young people in Turkey. Loneliness, exclusion, and the tendency toward crime may appear in different forms among young people in different cities, different types of universities, young people who do not work, or young people who do not continue their education. Therefore, future research should conduct comparative studies with different universities, vocational schools, high school youth, and youth groups outside education.

The fourth limitation is that the study has a cross-sectional design. Cross-sectional studies show relationships within a specific time period; however, they do not definitively prove causality between variables. Longitudinal studies are needed to answer questions such as whether loneliness increases exclusion, whether exclusion deepens loneliness, or whether both are affected by a third variable. Therefore, the results of the study should be evaluated not as causal claims, but as proposals concerning sociological relationships and possible mechanisms.

References

Agnew, R. (1992). Foundation for a general strain theory of crime and delinquency. Criminology, 30(1), 47-87.

Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497-529.

Becker, H. S. (2013). Hariciler: Bir sapkınlık sosyolojisi çalışması (Trans. Levent Ünsaldı). Heretik Yayınları.

Can, G., & Satıcı, S. A. (2019). Adaptation of fear of missing out scale (FoMOs): Turkish version validity and reliability study. Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica, 32(1), 3. doi:10.1186/s41155-019-0117-4

Demir, A. (1989). UCLA Yalnızlık Ölçeği’nin geçerlik ve güvenirliği. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 7(23), 14-18.

Dost, M. T. (2007). Üniversite öğrencilerinin yaşam doyumunun bazı değişkenlere göre incelenmesi. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 22(2), 132-143.

Durkheim, E. (2013). İntihar: Toplumbilimsel inceleme (Trans. Özer Ozankaya). Cem Yayınevi.

Durkheim, E. (2014). Sosyolojik yöntemin kuralları (Trans. Cenk Saraçoğlu). Bordo Siyah Yayınları.

Goffman, E. (2014). Damga: Örselenmiş kimliğin idare edilişi üzerine notlar (Trans. Ş. Geniş, L. Ünsaldı, & S. N. Ağırnaslı). Heretik Yayınları.

Goffman, E. (2020). Günlük yaşamda benliğin sunumu (Trans. Barış Cezar). Metis Yayınları.

Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of delinquency. University of California Press.

Marx, K. (2013). 1844 el yazmaları: Ekonomi politik ve felsefe (Trans. Kenan Somer). Sol Yayınları.

Merton, R. K. (1938). Social structure and anomie. American Sociological Review, 3(5), 672-682.

Simmel, G. (2009). Bireysellik ve kültür (Trans. Tuncay Birkan). Metis Yayınları.

Tekin, H. H., Karabay, M., Ertunç, E., Çuhadar, A., & Vural, F. N. (2024). Üniversite öğrencilerinde sosyal ortamlarda gelişmeleri kaçırma korkusu (FoMO) ve sosyal medya bağımlılığı. Genel Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, 6(3), 547-560.

Weber, M. (2012). Ekonomi ve toplum (Vol. 1) (Trans. Latif Boyacı). Yarın Yayınları.

Williams, K. D. (2007). Ostracism. Annual Review of Psychology, 58, 425-452.

World Health Organization. (2025). From loneliness to social connection: Charting a path to healthier societies. World Health Organization.

Yıldız, İ., & Yürekli, E. (2024). Dijital yaşamda gelişmeleri kaçırma korkusu (FoMO) ve sosyal medya: Üniversite öğrencileri üzerine bir araştırma. Selçuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Meslek Yüksekokulu Dergisi, 27(2), 709-725. doi:10.29249/selcuksbmyd.1529186