Cruwys et al 229 to our condition as social beings,it follows that an inability relation to RO3.it therefore follows too that attempts to cul to do this should be inimical to a state of psychological equa tivate social connectedness are most likely to be beneficia nimity and(if )may lead to non-effective when ney fa itate group forma on anc ine of a p life ande adap stig atizing r prisingly,these proposed mechanisms each have some over However,many questions remain unanswered,both theo lap with existing theoretical perspectives on socia retically and empirically.In this section,we discuss what we an vever,the membership (i.social identity) can be divided into two key areas of research:first. as the driving force behind these relationships and in using this to provide a c ions of th ond cally oriented work to e Improve outcomes fo An Agenda for Research Into Socia Theoretical Research Questions d De pression Throughout this revier we have made the a ent that the SIA provides a novel and valuable n health outcomes (including depression)better than mere standing how and why social con is so critical to I contact (H4). This s nt with work by S .This revie laslam ct social connce st the develonment of on shared depression,(b)is compromised in depression,and(c)con- that these findings be replicated and extended,to examine 10n He there is pptoactvn might legitimately he taken as a starting point for future social support,social identification,loneliness and social rese arch capital to dep ion-related outcomes.Currently, there is More cont ugh is the precise direction tha e be cen res n ve highlighted three s of particular co tion for the field: quality expe imental or prospective rese arc that comp dne different conceptua ations as outlined in ia ffec hin the de sion (i.e..what is the mechanism of action)? RO3:What types of social coectedness are likely tob ied extensivel and has yielded reliable evidence of the most be? cial in treating (or reducing the likelihood ced and soc 10 studies have l ked at the Although ongoing research is needed,we believe that the decline)of social identities among specific clinical popul ical contributions and the empirical support of the tions.Yet.this avenue of research is promising for several ddm in ghts int how these three issues might be ssible that the With regard to ROl and in line with H1.H2,and H4,we ed in de ed n lati ond to difference suggest that the quality of social relationships might be best in social identification.This raises the interesting question of yed using subjective psychological m ures that pro nether,on one hand,being depre ed m way in one such variable (see Table 4).Moreover.speaking abou in terms of social identity makes a person depressed.Indeed. RQ2,we believe that social identification might be a particu this is the b mechanism c isengagement occurs and 304 Cruwys et al. 229 to our condition as social beings, it follows that an inability to do this should be inimical to a state of psychological equa￾nimity and (if sustained over time) may lead to non-effective functioning of the form implicated in depression onset. Social identity is the engine of group life and so unsur￾prisingly, these proposed mechanisms each have some over￾lap with existing theoretical perspectives on social connectedness and depression. However, the social identity perspective is unique in focusing squarely on a person’s internalized sense of group membership (i.e., social identity) as the driving force behind these relationships and in using this to provide a coherent explanation and integration of the various elements that alternative models correctly identify as important. An Agenda for Research Into Social Identity and Depression Throughout this review, we have made the argument that the SIA provides a novel and valuable perspective on under￾standing how and why social connectedness is so critical to the development and treatment of depression. This review has outlined the extensive body of work demonstrating that social connectedness (a) protects against the development of depression, (b) is compromised in depression, and (c) con￾tributes to remission from depression. The literature is approaching consensus on these claims and hence, it seems relatively uncontroversial to suggest that these observations might legitimately be taken as a starting point for future research. More controversial though, is the precise direction that future research should take, and in the first section of this review, we highlighted three questions of particular conten￾tion for the field: RQ1: How should social connectedness be measured? RQ2: Why and how does social connectedness affect depression (i.e., what is the mechanism of action)? RQ3: What types of social connectedness are likely to be the most beneficial in treating (or reducing the likelihood of) depression? Although ongoing research is needed, we believe that the theoretical contributions and the empirical support of the SIA offer some insights into how these three issues might be usefully addressed and resolved. With regard to RQ1 and in line with H1, H2, and H4, we suggest that the quality of social relationships might be best assayed using subjective psychological measures that pro￾vide insights into the way in which an individual is currently experiencing his or her social world. Social identification is one such variable (see Table 4). Moreover, speaking about RQ2, we believe that social identification might be a particu￾larly useful measure because it captures what we see as a crucial mechanism of action (discussed in detail above). In relation to RQ3, it therefore follows too that attempts to cul￾tivate social connectedness are most likely to be beneficial when they facilitate group formation and social identifica￾tion (H6) providing those groups do not cohere around mal￾adaptive or stigmatizing normative content (H3). However, many questions remain unanswered, both theo￾retically and empirically. In this section, we discuss what we see as the most urgent issues to be addressed in building the bridge between social identity and depression. Broadly, this can be divided into two key areas of research: first, theoreti￾cal work to clarify conceptual issues and test the proposi￾tions of the SIA and, second, clinically oriented work to deliver on the promise of the SIA and improve outcomes for people with (or at risk of) depression. Theoretical Research Questions Sani and colleagues (2012) have made an important contri￾bution in demonstrating that social identification predicts health outcomes (including depression) better than mere social contact (H4). This is also consistent with work by S. A. Haslam et al. (2005, 2011) demonstrating that social sup￾port, trust, and cooperation emerge from, and are dependent on, shared group membership (H5). However, it is essential that these findings be replicated and extended, to examine the specific symptoms of depression. Here, there is also a particular need for experimental studies designed to disen￾tangle the causal contributions of the related constructs of social support, social identification, loneliness, and social capital to depression-related outcomes. Currently, there is something of a stalemate between researchers from different theoretical backgrounds in how to measure and, more cru￾cially, how to conceptualize social connectedness. High quality experimental or prospective research that competi￾tively tests the different conceptualizations as outlined in Table 3 is needed to advance research in this area. Within the social-psychological literature, the categoriza￾tion process that enables social identification has been stud￾ied extensively and has yielded reliable evidence of the antecedents of both social identification and social identity salience (e.g., see S. A. Haslam, 2001; Oakes et al., 1994). However, few studies have looked at the emergence (or decline) of social identities among specific clinical popula￾tions. Yet, this avenue of research is promising for several reasons. First, it seems possible that the social skills deficits often observed in depressed populations correspond to differences in social identification. This raises the interesting question of whether, on one hand, being depressed makes a person less able to self-categorize in terms of social identity and/or whether, on the other hand, being less able to self-categorize in terms of social identity makes a person depressed. Indeed, on the basis of the foregoing evidence, it seems reasonable to propose that this is the bi-directional mechanism through which social disengagement occurs and social relationships Downloaded from psr.sagepub.com at Remen University of China on September 6, 2015