The social cure theory rests on a bedrock of robust findings that belonging to many social groups benefits a person’s physical and mental health. However, our recent cross-cultural research (Easterbrook, Grigoryan, et al., 2024) questions the applicability of this theory for societies where social groups might serve other functions.

The social cure theory encompasses findings, from mostly Western societies, which show that the social networks a person belongs to, and the social support they have access to as a result, can shape their health and wellbeing. These social relationships are just as, if not more, important than poor health behaviours such as smoking, in determining health outcomes over the lifespan (Haslam et al., 2018; Holt-Lunstad et al., 2010). As per Tajfel and Turner’s social identity theory (1979), group memberships are a part of a person’s self-concept — affecting their self-worth, sense of belonging and the values they hold. It seems intuitive that positively identifying with different social groups, that is, viewing them as having a meaningful and rewarding place in one’s life, can protect against feelings of depression and stressful life events, and even aid chronic illness management (Cruwys et al., 2014; Haslam et al., 2016; Wakefield et al., 2020). But is this a universal cure?

However robust the finding that belonging to multiple groups bolsters well-being for Western societies, the strength of this ‘social cure’ effect wavers when investigated in East Asian societies, for whom cultural norms around social relationships focus on loyalty, harmony and the impermeability of group boundaries. Chang and colleagues (2016) found that for a sample of 60 Asian students, there was no relationship between belonging to multiple social groups and self-rated

© Psychology Today