Your Social Portfolio: Why Different Kinds of Relationships Matter

A person's social world is not just a number of friends. It can include family, close friends, neighbors, coworkers, activity companions and people met briefly during the day. Researchers have studied whether the mix of those relationships is associated with wellbeing. A 2022 paper in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 'Relational diversity in social portfolios predicts well-being', offers a more nuanced question than 'How many close friends should I have?'

What relational diversity means

The researchers use the idea of a social portfolio: the variety and relative balance of relationship categories across a person's interactions. Someone might speak only with a partner and one colleague on a particular day; another person might interact with a partner, coworkers, neighbors and acquaintances. The second pattern is more diverse by relationship type, but it is not necessarily warmer or emotionally closer. Diversity describes composition, not the moral value of any interaction.

What the study reports

The PNAS paper documents an association between greater relational diversity and wellbeing. That is an observation across the data and measures the authors analyzed, not evidence that inserting a certain number of strangers into a schedule will improve every individual's mood. Wellbeing may also affect how willing and able someone is to socialize. Personality, life circumstances and health can shape both outcomes. A correlational research finding is not a causal prescription.

The study challenges the tendency to discuss social connection solely as a choice between 'best friends' and 'lonely.' Everyday ties can form part of a meaningful network even when they never become intimate. It is possible to value several different forms of connection without placing the same emotional expectations on every person you meet.

What this looks like in adult life

Consider a week with a supportive longtime friend, a favorite colleague, a neighbor who recognizes you and a person from a reading group. Those relationships provide different kinds of interaction. A colleague might help you understand a project; a neighbor might share knowledge about the area; a friend might know your history. They need not substitute for one another. Nor is it sensible to ask an acquaintance to carry the emotional role of a close friend after one conversation.

Avoid turning diversity into a quota

The phrase 'social portfolio' could sound like another optimization project: three acquaintances, two hobby companions and one deep friendship. That misses the point. Relationships involve other people with their own preferences and limits. Someone who prefers a smaller, quieter circle may still have strong wellbeing. The paper does not establish an ideal number of weekly categories or require people to become more outgoing. It describes a relationship worth studying, not a universal scorecard.

A practical audit without counting people

Instead of measuring dozens of contacts, ask which parts of daily life give you some sense of connection. Do you have someone with whom you can be vulnerable? Is there a setting where neighbors recognize you? Do you regularly share an activity that is enjoyable on its own? The answers can identify opportunities, but the goal is not maximum variety. It is a life in which different needs are not all placed on one person or one relationship.

Implications for moving to a new city

Relocation may leave close relationships strong but geographically distant, while local acquaintance ties have to start from scratch. A neighborhood class or shared project can build that everyday layer without replacing old friends. Repeated encounters create openings; friendship still depends on mutual trust, compatibility and choice. The PNAS result makes it reasonable to take ordinary contacts seriously while remaining modest about what any one study proves.

Diversity without an impossible social calendar

A diverse social portfolio need not mean spending every evening networking. Consider four ordinary interactions: talking with a colleague after a meeting, getting to know a neighbor while taking out the bins, keeping a monthly appointment with an old friend and participating in a weekly art group. Those relationships offer different kinds of contact and may place different demands on you. Some are intimate; others provide recognition, practical help or a sense that you belong somewhere. A varied week can include both close friends and people you know only a little.

The challenge is not to maximize the number of names in a phone. It is to notice whether your social world depends entirely on one setting, such as work, which can disappear after a move or job change. A small, recurring activity outside that setting can broaden your opportunities without asking you to abandon existing relationships. The study's statistical relationship with well-being cannot tell any one reader which mix of contacts is ideal, and it should not be interpreted as a prescription for constant social activity.

One useful personal check is to imagine your typical week without work-related contact. Which interactions would remain? Some people have rich lives with a small number of close relationships; others prefer a broader pattern of lighter connections. Neither is inferior by default. What matters is whether your relationships meet needs for choice, comfort, support and belonging. If every connection is tied to one institution, a move may disrupt more of your social world at once. A recurring neighborhood activity can create a separate setting without obliging you to turn every acquaintance into a close friend.

Sources and verification

Relational diversity in social portfolios predicts well-being — Collins et al. (2022)

References are provided to support the specific research or public context discussed above. Correlation does not establish causation, and no meeting or app can guarantee friendship.