Harvard University
Homesickness and Adjustment Across the First Year of College: A Longitudinal Study
Tammy English, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis
Jordan Davis, Department of Psychology, Temple University
Melissa Wei, and Department of Psychology, Harvard University
James J. Gross Department of Psychology, Stanford University
Abstract
Homesickness can put individuals at risk for a host of adjustment difficulties. The millions of
students that leave home for college each year may be particularly susceptible to experiencing
homesickness. There is little work, however, examining individual variation in homesickness over
time and how these changes predict different outcomes in college. The present study examines
weekly levels of homesickness during the first term of college and tests the associations between
homesickness and various aspects of adjustment. Results showed that, on average, homesickness
decreased slightly across the first semester of college, but there were individual differences in
homesickness trajectories. Freshman who reported higher levels of homesickness showed worse
overall adjustment to college, even when controlling for negative emotional experience and prior
adjustment. Homesickness was associated with poorer social outcomes, but these social difficulties
were limited to interactions with others in the college environment. Academic outcomes were not
adversely impacted by homesickness. Findings suggest that homesickness is a common experience
for freshman and, despite its relatively transient nature, homesickness has important implications
for college adjustment.
Keywords
homesickness; emotion; college experience; adjustment; social functioning
Homesickness—“the distress or impairment caused by an actual or anticipated separation
from home” (Thurber & Walton, 2012, p. 1)—can be experienced by anyone. However,
college students may be particularly susceptible to homesickness given that the move to
college is often their first extended time away from home. Homesickness may place
individuals at risk for poor adjustment outcomes, such as emotional and social difficulties
Correspondence regarding this article should be addressed to Tammy English, Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO; [email protected].
HHS Public Access Author manuscript Emotion. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2018 February 01.
Published in final edited form as: Emotion. 2017 February ; 17(1): 1–5. doi:10.1037/emo0000235.
A uthor M
anuscript A
uthor M anuscript
A uthor M
anuscript A
uthor M anuscript
(for review, see Stroebe, Schut, & Nauta, 2015). In the present study, we take a longitudinal
approach to examine weekly levels of homesickness experienced by students across their
first term at college, and test the effects of homesickness on various aspects of adjustment.
Prevalence of Homesickness and Change Over Time
Current estimates of the prevalence of homesickness vary greatly. Nineteen to 70% of
university students have been found to experience homesickness, depending on how
homesickness is measured and the specific populations of interest (e.g., Brewin, Furnham, &
Howes, 1989; Carden & Feicht, 1991; Fisher & Hood, 1987; Fisher, Murray, & Frazer,
1985). Longitudinal approaches can provide a better understanding of how homesickness
may change as individuals adapt to their new environment. For instance, in a sample of
college students, Bell and Bromnick (1998) found that homesickness declined from the first
week to the sixth week of the semester. In addition, in a longitudinal study of children at a
two-week overnight summer camp, 95% felt homesick for at least one day of their stay and
those who felt intensely homesick at the start of camp were more likely to have increasing
levels of homesickness (Thurber, 1999).
Overall, homesickness seems to be relatively common, but individuals differ in the intensity
and duration of their homesickness (Stroebe et al., 2015). Understanding how homesickness
changes over time is especially important given its potential impact on adjustment.
Homesickness and Adjustment in College
Homesickness may negatively affect individuals’ ability to adjust to their new social
environment. Past work has documented various psychological and physical health
consequences of homesickness (Stroebe, et al., 2015). Students that become homesick upon
entering college may have difficulty adjusting to the college setting, leading to social and
academic difficulties.
Homesickness has been linked to certain social factors, such as social anxiety and social
support (Urani et al., 2003), as well as levels of belonging (Watt & Badger, 2009). However,
homesickness has typically not been tested as a risk factor for later social problems. When
examining these potential social effects, it may be important to distinguish between
relationships with people at home versus people in the new environment. Fewer positive
interactions with peers and not fitting in may lead homesick students to seek contact and
support from family and friends at home, strengthening these outside relationships but
interfering with the development of new relationships (Tochkov, Levine, & Sanaka, 2010).
The potential for homesickness to also interfere with academics is noteworthy given the
important long-term consequences (e.g., employment prospects, graduate admissions).
Fisher (1989) proposed that the ruminative aspect of homesickness could create attentional
demands that would lead to absent-mindedness and reduce students’ academic abilities.
While some have found no evidence that homesickness is related to academic performance
(Van Vliet, 2001), others have found homesickness predicts lower concentration abilities
(Burt, 1993) and dropout (Thurber & Walton, 2012).
English et al. Page 2
Emotion. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2018 February 01.
A uthor M
anuscript A
uthor M anuscript
A uthor M
anuscript A
uthor M anuscript
Present Research
The present research addresses two main questions. First, how do levels of homesickness
change across the first term of college? Second, is homesickness a risk factor for poor
adjustment in college? We expect homesickness will predict poorer overall, social, and
academic adjustment. Social difficulties, however, are expected only for interactions in
college, not for relationships with close friends and family from home.
The current study extends previous work in several ways. We examine individual
homesickness trajectories using weekly assessments across the first ten weeks of college.
Adjustment is also tracked across this same period, allowing us to test the temporal relations
between homesickness and different aspects of adjustment. Additionally, when examining
social adjustment, we distinguish newly formed relationships with others at college from
pre-existing relationships with people outside of college. Finally, we disentangle
homesickness from global negative affect in order to ascertain the unique effects of
homesickness.
Method
Participants
Participants were 174 undergraduates (59% female) who had moved away from home for
college and completed at least four weekly reports during the first term of their freshman
year of college. They were diverse in terms of ethnicity: 6% African-American, 29% Asian-
American, 64% European-American, 13% Hispanic/Latino, 3% Native American/Indian.
Procedure
Homesickness, emotional experience, and adjustment were assessed from questionnaires
emailed to participants once a week during the first ten weeks of freshman year. Adjustment
was assessed again in a questionnaire emailed at the end of the first term of freshman year.
The data reported here were collected as part of a larger study of personality and emotion
during college (Srivastava et al., 2009) but none of the current findings have been reported
elsewhere.
Measures
Weekly homesickness—Each week participants reported how much they felt “Homesick, missing my old life” over the past week, on a scale from 0 (not at all) to 4 (extremely).
Weekly emotional experience—Each week participants reported how much they felt a list of emotions over the past week, on scale of 0 (not at all) to 4 (extremely). The negative emotion composite consisted of 5 items: “anxious, nervous,” “angry, irritated,” “tired, fatigued,” “put down, hurt, rejected by others,” and “sad, depressed, down” (α=.80).
Weekly adjustment to college—Each week participants reported on their overall adjustment to college (“How settled in (comfortable, at home) do you feel at [college] right
now?”; 1 = not at all, 7 = very), as well as their academic adjustment (“How satisfied did
English et al. Page 3
Emotion. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2018 February 01.
A uthor M
anuscript A
uthor M anuscript
A uthor M
anuscript A
uthor M anuscript
you feel with your academic life?”), and social adjustment (“How satisfied did you feel with
your social life?”; 1 = not at all, 7 = extremely).
We examined different types of social network members in order to compare new, college
relationships (roommate and friends) to pre-college, home relationships (parents and non-
college affiliated friends). For each of these four relationships, participants reported their
frequency of contact (“total number of hours that you talked with each person (or group) this week by phone, in person, by computer.”), enjoyment (1=no enjoyment, 7=great enjoyment), difficulty (1=no difficulty, 7=great difficulty), and emotional support (1=no support, 7=great support). We averaged across items for the college relationships and home relationships to create indices for frequency of contact (college contact: α=.68, home contact: α=.53) and relationship quality (enjoyment, support, and reverse-scored difficulty; college quality: α=.62, home quality: α=.68). Intraclass correlations ranged from .21 to.78 (M=.52).
End-term adjustment to college—Global adjustment to college was assessed with three items (α=.76): “How satisfied are you with this quarter?” (1=not at all, 7=extremely), “How well do you think you’ve adjusted to (this university)” (1=not very well, 7=very well), “Did you ever have thoughts of transferring to another school or quitting school? How often?” (1=never, 7=very often; reverse-scored). Social adjustment was assessed with two items (α=. 67): self-reported satisfaction in this domain (“How satisfied were you with social life at [this university]?”; 1=not at all, 7=extremely) and perceived belongingness (“I fit in really well here at [this university]”; 1=strongly disagree, 7=strongly agree). Academic adjustment was assessed with two items: self-reported satisfaction in this domain (“How satisfied were you with your own academic performance at [this university]?”; 1=not at all, 7=extremely) and grade point average (GPA); these two items were z-scored then combined (α=.72).
To control for baseline levels of adjustment, we included measures taken from the summer
before college. Global adjustment was assessed with the Satisfaction with Life Scale
(Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985; α=.85). Social and academic adjustment were assessed with the items “I am satisfied with my social life” and “I am satisfied with my
academic performance”, respectively; 1=disagree strongly, 5=agree strongly.
Data Analysis
We conducted multilevel modeling to examine trajectories of homesickness (with time
centered at week 1) and within-person associations between homesickness and adjustment.
We ran two-level models, with weeks nested within persons, using maximum likelihood
estimation to account for missing data. We examined lagged effects to test whether
homesickness predicted subsequent changes in adjustment (e.g., T2 adjustment predicted
from T1 homesickness controlling for T1 adjustment) and vice versa (e.g., T2 homesickness
predicted from T1 adjustment controlling for T1 homesickness). All predictors were person-
mean centered and negative emotional experience was included as a covariate. Semi-partial
R2 values were computed as estimates of effect size (Edwards, et al., 2008). Results are
reported in Table 1.
English et al. Page 4
Emotion. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2018 February 01.
A uthor M
anuscript A
uthor M anuscript
A uthor M
anuscript A
uthor M anuscript
To test whether homesickness predicts later adjustment, the individual homesickness slope
and intercept estimates, as well as their interaction, were used as predictors in regression
analyses. Negative emotion (averaged across all available weekly reports), sex (1=female,
0=male), race (1=European-American, 0=not European-American), and the baseline
adjustment indictor of the criterion variable were included as covariates. Results are reported
in Table 2.
Missing data—Of the 174 participants, 9% (n = 16) did not complete the end-term assessment of adjustment so they were excluded from those regression analyses.
Results
Prevalence of Homesickness
During the first 10 weeks of college, 94% of students reported experiencing homesickness at
some point (i.e., only 6% rated homesickness as zero every week). On average homesickness
decreased slightly across the first term of freshman year (γ= −0.023, SE=.011, p=.041, 95%CI [−0.05, −0.001]; semi-partial R2=0.025). This rate of change (−0.023 per week)
reflects a quarter-point decrease on the homesickness scale across the term. There was
significant variability in the rate of change, however (γ=0.011, SE=.002, p<.001, 95%CI [0.01, 0.02]), suggesting individual differences in the trajectory of homesickness. The
intercept-slope correlation was also significant (γ= −0.049, SE=.015, p<.01, 95%CI [−0.08, −0.19]).
Homesickness and Adjustment
First, we examined the within-person associations between weekly ratings of homesickness
and adjustment (see Table 1). On weeks where participants felt more homesick, they also felt
less settled in at college (semi-partial R2=0.029, 95%CI: [−.230, −.112]), less satisfied with
social life (semi-partial R2=0.030; 95%CI: [−.292, −.145]), and marginally less satisfied
with academic life (semi-partial R2=0.003; 95%CI: [−.135, .004]). Homesickness also
correlated with ratings of social network members: as expected, college relationships were
worse (semi-partial R2=0.011; 95%CI: [−.123, −.034]), but relationships with people outside
of college were better (semi-partial R2=0.005; 95%CI: [.012, .120]). There was not an
association with frequency of contact for either type of relationship. When examining lagged
effects, homesickness continued to predict feeling less settled in (semi-partial R2=0.004;
95%CI: [−.143, .004]) and socially satisfied (semi-partial R2=0.005; 95%CI: [−.184, −.001])
the following week. In contrast, there was no evidence of adjustment predicting subsequent
change in homesickness (ts < 1).
Next, we examined whether individual differences in levels of homesickness and
homesickness trajectories predict end-term adjustment to college (see Table 2). As expected,
individuals who experienced higher levels of homesickness at the start of college reported
worse overall adjustment to college (β=−.31, p<.01) and worse adjustment in the social domain (β=−.29, p<.01), but not the academic domain (β=.07, p=:.372). These findings hold even when taking into account pre-college adjustment, suggesting that homesickness leads
to declines in adjustment. Homesickness trajectories only predicted academic adjustment
English et al. Page 5
Emotion. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2018 February 01.
A uthor M
anuscript A
uthor M anuscript
A uthor M
anuscript A
uthor M anuscript
(β=.18, p<.05), such that students had slightly worse academic outcomes if their homesickness levels had declined more quickly.
Discussion
The present study advances past work on homesickness by using a more intensive
longitudinal approach, examining a wide range of adjustment outcomes, and separating
effects of homesickness from general negative affect. Consistent with past work (e.g.,
Thurber, 1995), homesickness was a common experience among undergraduates: 94% of
students reported at least some homesickness during their first term. Despite its initial
pervasiveness, homesickness tended to decline over the course of the first term, although the
effect size was small. These findings may help normalize the experience of homesickness for
students who feel isolated as they struggle to adjust to their new lives away from home, as
this study suggests that their homesickness will likely fade over time.
Homesickness was associated with a number of adjustment problems during the first term of
college. It was a robust predictor of lower overall adjustment to college, as well as
adjustment in the social domain. These effects of homesickness were evident even after
taking into account negative emotion, suggesting that the experience of homesickness has a
unique contribution to adjustment. Given the adverse effects of homesickness at the start of
college, interventions aimed at preventing homesickness before arriving on campus may be
most impactful. Importantly, relationships with people outside of college did not seem to be
harmed by homesickness (if anything, these social bonds became stronger); only newly
formed relationships suffered. Homesickness also did not interfere with academic
performance, consistent with previous cross-sectional research (Van Vliet, 2001).
Unexpectedly, we found that individuals had slightly lower levels of academic satisfaction
and GPAs if their homesickness had dissipated more quickly. Future work is needed to
replicate these effects and explore how homesickness, and the factors that may mitigate it,
impacts academic engagement (Kuh, Cruce, Shoup, & Kinze, 2008).
One potential limitation of the present research is that homesickness was assessed using a
single item. While there are downsides to using single-item measures, the homesickness
item was face valid and short measures can be advantageous when administered repeatedly
over a short period of time. Additionally, the present study did not explore predictors of
individual differences in homesickness trajectories. Past research on homesickness suggests
there are a number of social risk factors, as well as other psychological and environmental
predictors (Stroebe et al, 2015). Future studies are needed to explore specific mechanisms by
which homesickness leads to poor adjustment outcomes. Such work could allow researchers
to zero in on risk factors associated with certain trajectories and types of outcomes, aiding in
the development of interventions for cases of persistent homesickness.
Acknowledgments
This research was supported, in part, by grant MH58147 from the National Institutes of Health.
English et al. Page 6
Emotion. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2018 February 01.
A uthor M
anuscript A
uthor M anuscript
A uthor M
anuscript A
uthor M anuscript
References
Bell J, Bromnick R. Young people in transition: The relationship between homesickness and self- disclosure. Journal Of Adolescence. 1998; 21(6):745–748. [PubMed: 9971730]
Brewin CR, Furnham A, Howes M. Demographic and psychological determinants of homesickness and confiding among students. British Journal of Psychology. 1989; 80:467–477.
Burt CB. Concentration and academic ability following transition to university: An investigation of the effects of homesickness. Journal Of Environmental Psychology. 1993; 13(4):333–342.
Carden AI, Feicht R. Homesickness among American and Turkish college students. Journal of Cross- Cultural Psychology. 1991; 22:418–428.
Diener E, Emmons R, Larsen J, Griffin S. The Satisfaction With Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment. 1985; 49:71–75. [PubMed: 16367493]
Edwards LJ, Muller KE, Wolfinger RD, Qaqish BF, Schabenberger O. An R2 statistic for fixed effects in the linear mixed model. Statistics in Medicine. 2008; 27:6137–6157. [PubMed: 18816511]
Fisher, S. Homesickness, Cognition, and Health. Hove, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1989.
Fisher S, Hood B. The stress of the transition to university: A longitudinal study of psychological disturbance, absent-mindedness and vulnerability to homesickness. British Journal of Psychology. 1987; 78:425–441. [PubMed: 3427309]
Fisher S, Murray K, Frazer NA. Homesickness, health and efficiency in first year students. Journal Of Environmental Psychology. 1985; 5(2):181–195.
Kuh GD, Cruce TM, Shoup R, Kinzie J. Unmasking the effects of student engagement on first-year college grade and persistence. Journal of Higher Education. 2008; 79:540–563.
Srivastava S, Tamir M, McGonigal KM, John OP, Gross JJ. The social costs of emotional suppression: A prospective study of the transition to college. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2009; 96:883–897. [PubMed: 19309209]
Stroebe M, Schut H, Nauta M. Homesickness: A systematic review of the scientific literature. Review of General Psychology. 2015; 19:157–171.
Thurber CA. The experience and expression of homesickness in preadolescent and adolescent boys. Child Development. 1995; 66:1162–1178. [PubMed: 7671654]
Thurber CA. The phenomenology of homesickness in boys. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology. 1999; 27(2):125–139. [PubMed: 10400059]
Thurber CA, Walton EA. Preventing and treating homesickness. Pediatrics. 2007; 119:192–201. [PubMed: 17200288]
Thurber CA, Walton EA. Homesickness and adjustment in university students. Journal of American College Health. 2012; 60:415–419. [PubMed: 22686364]
Tochkov K, Levine L, Sanaka A. Variation in the prediction of cross-cultural adjustment by Asian- Indian students in the United States. College Student Journal. 2010; 44(3):677–689.
Urani MA, Miller SA, Johnson JE, Petzel TP. Homesickness in socially anxious first year college students. College Student Journal. 2003; 37(3):392–399.
van Vliet, A. Homesickness: Antecedents, consequences and mediating processes. Utrecht, Germany: Utrecht University Press; 2001.
Watt S, Badger E. Effects of social belonging on homesickness: an application of the belongingness hypothesis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. 2009; 35:316–330.
English et al. Page 7
Emotion. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2018 February 01.
A uthor M
anuscript A