Psychobiological Analysis of Social Surrogacy, Minority Stress and Parasocial Relationships: A Narrative Review

Maria Carolina Pinotti Leite¹; Márcia Helena da Silva Melo¹

1. Universidade de São Paulo (USP), Psychology Institute, São Paulo, SP, Brazil

OPEN ACCESS

PUBLISHED: 30 June 2026

CITATION: Pinotti Leite, MC., and da Silva Melo, MH., 2026. Psychobiological Analysis of Social Surrogacy, Minority Stress and Parasocial Relationships: A Narrative Review. Medical Research Archives, [online] 14(6).

COPYRIGHT: © 2026 European Society of Medicine. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.18103/mra.v14i6.7456

ISSN 2375-1924

Abstract

Human sociality is a fundamental homeostatic requirement rooted in evolutionary fitness. For marginalized populations, institutionalized exclusion and systemic discrimination trigger “minority stress,” a distinct and chronic allostatic load that drives a biological burden known as “weathering”. This sustained physiological strain penetrates the architecture of cellular life, manifesting through neuroendocrine dysregulation of the Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Adrenal axis, elevated pro-inflammatory cytokines like Interleukin-6, and accelerated biological aging marked by Leukocyte Telomere Length attrition. This narrative review proposes an integrative synthesis across social psychology, evolutionary biology, and molecular endocrinology to evaluate the Social Surrogacy Hypothesis as a temporary mechanism to mitigate these weathering effects. The methodological framework synthesizes three core pillars (psychological shielding, concept inhibition, and biological markers of aging) while maintaining a strict taxonomy between episodic Parasocial Interactions and enduring Parasocial Relationships. The synthesis demonstrates that engagement with favored media, where long-term relationships are established, may act as a psychological placeholder or “social snack”. Recalling a favored surrogate can induce concept inhibition, quieting the internal “exclusion alarm”. This cognitive shielding triggers a theoretical downregulation of the Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Adrenal axis, reducing the circulation of neurotoxic glucocorticoids and pro-inflammatory cytokines. Consequently, parasocial relationships offer a temporary biological reprieve that may preserve somatic cell integrity and mitigate premature cellular senescence. However, social surrogacy remains a temporary placeholder rather than a structural solution to discrimination, and direct empirical investigation is required to fully validate this proposed psychobiological pathway.

Keywords

• Social Surrogacy
• Minority Stress
• Parasocial Relationships
• Psychobiology
• Neuroendocrine Dysregulation

1. FOUNDATIONS OF HUMAN SOCIALITY AND THE IMPACT OF SYSTEMATIC ISOLATION

The human drive toward sociality is not a only a preference of temperament but a fundamental homeostatic requirement rooted in evolutionary fitness, serving as a survival drive, essential for maintaining an organism’s physiological and psychological integrity. This universal “need to belong” operates as a powerful motivation that historically ensured collective safety and reproductive success, leaving humans as “monadic free radicals” in a persistent search for dyadic interaction, feeling, most likely, incomplete when alone. When this state is disrupted by isolation or rejection, the resulting affective response (often experienced as psychological pain) signals a threat to well-being, prompting the brain to act as a central hub that evaluates these social stressors and determines effector responses to regain stability. Modern systematic isolation, such as that seen during pandemic lockdowns, has been identified as a strong determinant of poor health, resulting in allostatic load (the physiological wear and tear from chronic adaptive efforts) with impacts on neurological health and mortality with studies comparing it to the levels of high blood pressure, obesity, or smoking.

To temporarily satisfy these belongingness needs when direct social interactions are unavailable, individuals often turn to mechanisms described by the “Social Surrogacy Hypothesis.” Formulated by Derrick, Gabriel, and Hugenberg, this hypothesis posits that people utilize media to create a facsimile of a social context, functioning as a “social snack” during periods of social hunger. Drawing on evolutionary logic, modern technologies (such as favorite TV shows, books, music, and virtual agents) have the potential to directly stimulate the brain’s reward systems, providing immediate gratification and pleasure without the necessity of achieving actual evolutionary gains in a, possible harsh, real-world environment. By providing a “simulacrum of conversational give-and-take,” these surrogates allow the brain to experience a sense of satiety and belonging even without actual interaction. This is possible because the human brain is not wired to distinguish between “real” and “fake” people, when in face of a screen, in its immediate affective and neuroendocrine responses. For instance, in the digital era, streamers using verbal and nonverbal cues like eye gaze can provide a perceived sense of rapport and intimacy. Similarly, engagement with fiction and music allows individuals to identify with characters and engage in nostalgic reminiscence, which has been empirically shown to reduce loneliness and trigger social cognition.

However, while these surrogates can help individuals “get through” times of loneliness, they generally do not fully satiate long-term belongingness needs in the same way as real social “meals”. Furthermore, social surrogacy can become maladaptive when used to the exclusion of tangible interactions, as prolonged withdrawal from the real social world can eventually deplete an individual’s actual social capital. Consequently, when social needs go entirely unmet, the organism experiences “The Sequelae of Social Rejection,” a damaging process that threatens core needs including belonging, control, meaningful existence, and state self-esteem. Ostracism and social exclusion act as acute stressors that can compromise cognitive health and working memory while motivating individuals to satisfy their threatened affiliative needs quickly to relieve negative affect. For marginalized populations, this exclusion is not merely episodic but manifests as a systemic biological burden that penetrates the very architecture of cellular life. Ultimately, recent research in epigenetics demonstrates that the “stress of chronic defeat” can physically alter the packaging of DNA, such as the repression of the BDNF gene, effectively embedding social exclusion into the long-term biological functioning of the individual.

This biological erosion is primarily governed by the Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Adrenal (HPA) axis, the primary neuroendocrine system responsible for regulating the body’s response to stress by functioning as a complex command-and-control center that integrates the nervous and endocrine systems to maintain homeostasis. The activation of this axis follows a specific biochemical cascade initiated in the brain: when a physical, psychological, or social stressor is perceived, the Paraventricular Nucleus (PVN) of the hypothalamus secretes Corticotropin-Releasing Hormone (CRH) and Vasopressin (AVP). These hormones travel to the anterior pituitary gland, stimulating it to release Adrenocorticotropic Hormone (ACTH) into the bloodstream, which then acts on the adrenal glands (located above the kidneys) to trigger the synthesis and release of glucocorticoids, the primary one in humans being cortisol.

To prevent the system from over-activating, the HPA axis utilizes a tight negative feedback mechanism where rising levels of circulating cortisol signal back to the hypothalamus and pituitary to inhibit the further production of CRH and ACTH, effectively shutting off the stress response once the threat has passed. This regulation relies on two distinct types of receptors: Mineralocorticoid Receptors (MR), which have a high affinity for cortisol and maintain basal (resting) levels and tonic inhibition of the axis, and Glucocorticoid Receptors (GR), which have a lower affinity and are primarily activated during peak stress or high circadian rhythms to facilitate the negative feedback loop. Under normal conditions, cortisol plays a vital, paradoxical role in ensuring short-term survival by mobilizing energy through increased blood glucose (glyconeogenesis) and releasing fatty acids and proteins to fuel the fight-or-flight response. It also acts as a powerful anti-inflammatory agent, suppressing the immune system and reducing pro-inflammatory cytokines to prevent tissue damage, while naturally fluctuating alongside the body’s circadian rhythm (peaking in the early morning to increase alertness) and influencing mood, attention, and memory processing.

However, when stressors are persistent (such as the minority stress and systematic isolation faced by marginalized groups) the HPA axis undergoes severe neuroendocrine dysregulation, leading to a state of chronic allostatic load where the cumulative wear and tear compromises cellular life through a process known as “weathering.” This chronic interpersonal stress can manifest as hyperactivation (upregulation), resulting in prolonged exposure to high cortisol levels that are inherently neurotoxic, damaging the hippocampus, impairing neuroplasticity, and increasing the risk for metabolic syndrome, cardiovascular disease, and severe immune suppression. Over time, this chronic overstrain can cause the system to exhaust itself, leading to hypocortisolism (blunting), where the HPA axis response falls below normal levels, a pattern frequently found in individuals exposed to highly stigmatizing environments during adolescent development, or those suffering from depression and vicarious trauma. This sustained HPA axis dysregulation is also linked to “flattened” diurnal cortisol slopes and serves as a potent predictor of accelerated Leukocyte Telomere Length (LTL) attrition, physically driving premature cellular senescence, genomic instability, and earlier mortality.

2. MINORITY STRESS AND THE BIOLOGICAL COST OF SYSTEMATIC DISCRIMINATION

Minority Stress” is conceptualized as a qualitatively distinct, chronic, and additive stressor that operates over and above general life stress. According to the framework established by Meyer, this stress stems from social processes, institutions, and structures beyond the individual, rather than from biological or genetic characteristics of the group itself. For marginalized populations, this can represent a persistent allostatic load, the cumulative physiological wear and tear resulting from the chronic overactivity of stress response systems as the body attempts to maintain stability in a hostile environment. This biological impact manifests as a systemic burden that compromises the very architecture of cellular life, a process identified by Livingston as “weathering,” which helps explain why marginalized groups experience earlier onset of chronic diseases and accelerated health declines, representing a “biological tax” imposed by systemic inequality.

A primary indicator of this accelerated biological aging is Leukocyte Telomere Length (LTL), which serves as a marker of systemic replicative history and genomic stability. While telomeres naturally shorten by 50–100 base pairs per mitotic cycle, research by Chae et al. demonstrates that high levels of psychosocial stress significantly accelerate this attrition. Specifically, in a study of African-American men, the interaction between interpersonal discrimination and internalized implicit racial bias was the most potent predictor of shortened LTL, where those holding strong implicit anti-black bias exhibited the shortest telomeres, reflecting premature cellular senescence and predicting earlier mortality. Beyond genomic markers, self-reports of discrimination are associated with elevated levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines, particularly Interleukin-6. This elevation creates a state of chronic systemic inflammation, which serves as a biological precursor to cardiovascular disease, metabolic syndrome, and diabetes. In gay men, this relationship is often moderated by “covering”, the strategic downplaying of one’s identity. Research indicates that individuals who experience high discrimination, but do not engage in covering (exhibiting high authenticity in hostile environments) are likely to display the highest inflammatory markers, suggesting that the cost of resisting social pressure “gets under the skin.” This biological depletion is further driven by neuroendocrine dysregulation, as mentioned before. This is acutely visible in gay men within conservative sociocultural contexts (such as Poland), who exhibit significantly higher total cortisol levels compared to heterosexual men, reflecting a state of constant physiological high-alert.

Despite these systemic burdens, restorative potential exists; engagement with social surrogates, such as favored media characters, may trigger a potential downregulation of the HPA axis. By providing temporary social satiety, these bonds offer a theoretical “biological reprieve” that can hypothetically reduce the circulation of glucocorticoids and cytokines, potentially mitigating accelerated telomere shortening and preserving biological longevity.

3. THE SOCIAL SURROGACY HYPOTHESIS: MEDIA AS A BUFFER FOR BELONGING

The strategic utility of “social surrogates”, including favorite television programs, books, and video games, lies in their capacity to provide what Gardner, Pickett, and Knowles termed a “social snack,” acting as a psychological placeholder that may shield individuals from the immediate pain of isolation and the negative affective states typically triggered by social rejection. By immersing themselves in one-way parasocial relationships (PSR) with media personae, individuals can temporarily satisfy their belongingness goals, essentially allowing the brain to experience social satiety without the immediate need for a reciprocal “social meal.” Providing empirical evidence for this technology-mediated belonging, research by Derrick, Gabriel, and Hugenberg distilled this effect across four core studies, demonstrating that selection is motivated by deficit (as individuals turn to favored programs when lonely), that experimentally activating the need for belonging leads individuals to spend significantly more time “reveling” in descriptions of these programs, that this “reveling” provides psychological shielding by buffering against the erosion of state self-esteem and mood, and finally, that recalling a favored surrogate induces a process of concept inhibition which reduces the cognitive accessibility of rejection-related words, effectively quieting the brain’s “exclusion alarm.”

Crucially, a fundamental boundary condition exists in the distinction between social surrogacy and mere escapism; according to the Social Surrogacy Hypothesis, the restorative power of media is not a universal byproduct of consumption but is strictly contingent upon the existence of established parasocial bonds with favored personae or narratives. Consequently, watching “whatever is on television” serves merely as a distraction or a way to “zone out,” failing to address an underlying social deficit because random media lacks the symbolic connection required for the brain to register a state of social connection, whereas favored programs allow the individual to immerse themselves in a recognizable “social world” where familiar characters provide the intimacy and comfort necessary to restore social homeostasis.

In the digital era, while Parasocial Interactions (PSI) provide episodic feelings of intimacy during exposure, it is the long-term PSR that potentially offers significant clinical and biological utility for vulnerable populations (such as LGB adolescents facing a “relational void” due to heteronormative stigma or the elderly facing physical isolation) by serving as compensatory functional alternatives for identity development and social support. From a psychobiological perspective, these surrogates may act as a “biological shield” by triggering a downregulation of the Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Adrenal (HPA) axis, providing a restorative reprieve from the chronic activation of stress response systems. However, it must be emphasized that social surrogacy remains a temporary “psychological placeholder” or an “emergency kit” that does not remove the systemic sources of discrimination, and it can even become maladaptive when used to the exclusion of tangible interactions, as prolonged withdrawal from the real social world can eventually deplete an individual’s actual social capital. Ultimately, for surrogacy to maintain its protective function, it must be utilized as an adaptive supplement to help individuals navigate a world where traditional social structures are increasingly disrupted.

4. PARASOCIAL INTERACTION AND RELATIONSHIPS IN THE DIGITAL AGE

The evolution of parasocial phenomena has transitioned significantly from the “personae” of the 1950s, originally limited to news anchors and show masters, to the pervasive digital influencers and streamers of the current era. In analyzing this shift, it is strategical to understand the primary differences regarding the temporal nature and the depth of the socioemotional connection between Parasocial Interaction (PSI) and Parasocial Relationships (PSR). PSI is defined as an episodic, short-term, and illusionary experience of reciprocity that occurs strictly during media exposure. It operates as a brief engagement where a performer uses cues like eye gaze, bodily address, or verbal inclusion to create a “simulacrum of conversational give-and-take,” causing the user to respond emotionally or out loud as if in a real conversation despite remaining anonymous. Conversely, a PSR represents an enduring socioemotional bond that persists across multiple viewing sessions and well beyond the immediate period of exposure. These one-sided, intimate connections remain stable over time and psychologically function like real-life social relationships, satisfying fundamental attachment needs and providing companionship. While the two concepts are distinct, they intimately interplay, as repeated episodic PSIs can strengthen and lead to the development of a long-term PSR.

This conceptualization has further shifted in the digital era to address the “interactivity problem,” as modern digital platforms now allow for mass personal communication and asynchronous responses. Jarzyna notes that the digital age and the COVID-19 quarantine created “externally imposed social deficits” where individuals increasingly relied on these one-sided connections to replenish their sense of belonging. To account for this interactive context, Hartmann identifies three subjective criteria required for an interaction to be considered a digital PSI: a perceived feeling of reciprocity, a sense of personal address, and an experience of intimacy, even when these qualities are objectively absent. This updated framework recognizes that while modern influencers or streamers may occasionally respond to individual followers, the relationship remains predominantly asymmetrical and non-dialectical, as the sheer volume of followers makes true reciprocity impossible for the majority. Mula-Márquez et al. further emphasize that these enduring bonds serve as a “safe platform” for identity construction and social rehearsal.

However, these pervasive digital connections are not without risks and can trigger the Relative Deprivation Effect. This occurs when users engage in social comparison with the embellished and often unattainable lifestyles portrayed by influencers, fostering a subjective feeling that one is “not getting what one deserves” in comparison to perceived peers, which can result in decreased self-esteem or even significant social unrest, as historically documented during the Arab Spring. Furthermore, when digital surrogacy is used to the exclusion of tangible interactions, it becomes maladaptive, since prolonged withdrawal from the real social world can eventually deplete an individual’s actual social capital. Conversely, for vulnerable populations facing internal social deficits, parasocial phenomena can yield essential positive outcomes. For the elderly facing physical isolation or health decline, these relationships provide a vital sense of companionship and mitigate depression, particularly during periods like the COVID-19 quarantine when technology-assisted socialization was recommended to combat mental decline and loneliness. Similarly, for individuals on the autism spectrum, PSI offers a safe platform for social rehearsal and identity formation, allowing them to explore social roles without the overwhelming demand or risk of real-time reciprocity, while also providing a sense of social participation for individuals with Down’s Syndrome. Finally, for LGB (lesbian, gay and bisexual) adolescents facing a “relational void” due to heteronormative stigma, established parasocial bonds serve as compensatory functional alternatives for social support. Because these youth often lack real-life LGB peers or role models, they use PSRs with liked characters (who frequently share their experiences of overcoming adversity) to rehearse their own social roles and develop a deeper understanding of their identities.

Ultimately, from a psychobiological standpoint, this review highlights that while fleeting PSIs provide momentary feelings of intimacy during exposure, it is the enduring PSR that offers significant clinical and biological utility. The specific “symbolic connection” required to register true social satiety in the brain is generally anchored in long-term PSRs rather than passive or random media interactions. For marginalized or isolated populations, these established PSRs may act as a “biological shield” while being a “social snack” against the chronic allostatic load of isolation, thereby highlighting the diverse potential of the parasocial to maintain biological and psychological integrity.

Methods

This study utilizes a narrative review methodology to synthesize theoretical and empirical evidence across three distinct scientific domains: social psychology, evolutionary biology, and molecular endocrinology. A narrative approach was strategically selected to facilitate the construction of an integrative conceptual bridge where direct, empirical co-evaluations of media-driven parasocial bonds and specific cellular biological markers are currently constrained or emerging in the literature. To ensure academic rigor and minimize selection bias within the framework of a non-systematic review, the methodological execution was divided into three structured phases:

1. LITERATURE RETRIEVAL AND SELECTION CRITERIA

The literature search was conducted across international electronic databases, including PubMed, PsycINFO, and Google Scholar, focusing on peer-reviewed articles, foundational theoretical frameworks, and recent empirical updates up to 2024. The identification of relevant literature was guided by two primary operational axes:

• The Biological Cost of Stigma: Priority was given to empirical clinical studies tracking objective neuroendocrine and genomic markers of chronic stress. Specifically, literature isolating Leukocyte Telomere Length attrition, pro-inflammatory cytokine elevation, and patterns of Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Adrenal (HPA) axis dysregulation (including hyperactivation, blunting, and flattened diurnal cortisol slopes) was selected.
• The Psychology of Technology-Mediated Belonging: The search targeted validated models within media psychology, explicitly the Social Surrogacy Hypothesis and its foundational behavioral paradigms.

2. CONCEPTUAL DISTILLATION AND BOUNDARY MAPPING

To establish an analytical framework, a conceptual categorization was enforced during data extraction. A rigorous distinction was maintained between Parasocial Interaction (PSI), defined as the episodic, short-term illusion of reciprocity during immediate media exposure, and Parasocial Relationships (PSR), defined as the enduring, cross-situational socioemotional bonds that persist beyond exposure. This baseline distinction was critical to evaluating long-term systemic homeostasis. The analysis mapped specific boundary conditions, isolating the “favored” status of media as a mandatory prerequisite for triggering social satiety in the central nervous system, thereby separating targeted social surrogacy from passive, non-restorative media consumption or mere escapism.

3. SYNTHESIS MATRIX

The final methodological phase involved structuring the narrative synthesis around a multi-tiered conceptual matrix designed to bridge psychological experiences with biological outcomes. The integration was built upon three interdependent pillars: Psychological Shielding (buffering state self-esteem and mood against acute relational threats), Concept Inhibition (evaluating cognitive evidence regarding the reduction of rejection-related thoughts upon surrogate activation), and Biological Reprieve (constructing the theoretical mechanism whereby psychological deceleration translates into a quantifiable downregulation of upstream HPA stress signaling and preservation of cellular integrity).

Theoretical Framework

The theoretical foundation of this study integrates three distinct conceptual domains to propose a compensatory model of social homeostasis: “The Social Surrogacy Hypothesis”, “Minority Stress and Weathering” and “The Proposed Bridge”. The framework proposes that Parasocial Relationships (PSR), due to their enduring and established nature, act as a “biological shield” or “emergency kit”. By triggering a downregulation of the HPA axis, these relationships may provide a temporary reprieve from the state of high biological alert, potentially mitigating cellular senescence.

Data Analysis

Integrating evidence from social psychology, evolutionary biology, and molecular endocrinology, this comprehensive synthesis evaluates how technology-mediated belonging can function as a biological regulatory mechanism that addresses the pathology of isolation, the Social Surrogacy Hypothesis, and the systemic impacts of minority stress. Human sociality is not a mere preference of temperament but a fundamental homeostatic requirement rooted in evolutionary fitness. This universal “need to belong” operates as a powerful motivation that historically ensured collective safety and reproductive success, leaving humans as “monadic free radicals” in a persistent search for dyadic interaction, feeling fundamentally incomplete when alone. When this state is disrupted by isolation or rejection, the resulting affective response, often experienced as psychological pain, signals an acute threat to the organism’s well-being, prompting the brain to act as a central hub that evaluates these social stressors and determines effector responses to regain stability.

Modern systematic isolation, such as that seen during pandemic lockdowns, acts as an acute stressor that creates a “relational void” and often leads to the phenomenon of the “pandemic brain”. This condition is characterized by cognitive deficits that compromise working memory, concentration, and information processing. Such persistent adaptive efforts result in allostatic load (the cumulative physiological wear and tear from chronic stress response overactivity) which leads to structural and functional deterioration of the organism. Ultimately, the impact of chronic social isolation on neurological health and mortality has been found to be comparable to established risk factors such as high blood pressure, obesity, or smoking.

To temporarily satisfy these fundamental belongingness needs when direct social interactions are unavailable, individuals tend to strategically turn to mechanisms described by the “Social Surrogacy Hypothesis.” This hypothesis posits that people utilize media to create a facsimile or simulacrum of a social context, functioning as a “social snack” during periods of social hunger. Drawing on evolutionary logic, modern technologies (such as favorite TV shows, books, music, and virtual agents) have the potential to directly stimulate the brain’s reward systems, providing immediate gratification and pleasure. This technology-mediated belonging offers a symbolic connection that fulfills belongingness goals while bypassing the immediate risks of real-world interaction, such as potential rejection or social anxiety.

Foundational research has distilled this phenomenon into four core manifestations of need fulfillment: (1) Selection Motivated by Deficit, where individuals report turning to favored programs specifically when feeling lonely to achieve a measurable reduction in that loneliness; (2) Belongingness Arousal, where experimentally activating a relational threat drives individuals to spend significantly more time immersed or “reveling” in descriptions of favored media; (3) Psychological Shielding, which acts as a vital buffer against “The Sequelae of Social Rejection” by protecting state self-esteem and mood from eroding; and (4) Concept Inhibition, where recalling a favored surrogate reduces the cognitive accessibility of rejection-related thoughts, effectively quieting the brain’s internal “exclusion alarm”.

A critical boundary condition for this effect remains the distinction between social surrogacy and mere escapism. The restorative power of media is not a universal byproduct of consumption but is strictly contingent upon the “favored” status of the media and the existence of established Parasocial Relationships (PSRs) with specific personae or narratives. Consequently, passive consumption, or watching “whatever is on television,” serves merely as a distraction or a way to “zone out,” failing to address an underlying social deficit because random media lacks the symbolic connection required for the brain to register a state of social connection. The long-term, enduring PSR may offer significant clinical and biological utility, satisfying fundamental attachment needs and serving as a “safe platform” for identity construction and social rehearsal.

For vulnerable populations facing internal social deficits or “relational voids,” these established bonds are likely to function as compensatory functional alternatives for identity development and social support. For the elderly facing physical isolation or health decline, PSRs provide a vital sense of companionship that mitigates depression and cognitive decline, particularly during periods of forced isolation. For individuals on the autism spectrum or with Down’s Syndrome, these relationships offer a secure environment for social participation and rehearsal, allowing them to explore social dynamics without the overwhelming cognitive demands or immediate risks of real-time reciprocity. Similarly, for LGB adolescents facing a relational void due to heteronormative stigma, PSRs with liked characters who share experiences of overcoming adversity allow them to safely rehearse social roles and develop a deeper understanding of their own identities. However, these digital connections are not without risks; they can trigger the Relative Deprivation Effect when users engage in upward social comparison with the unattainable lifestyles portrayed by influencers, resulting in decreased self-esteem. Furthermore, when digital surrogacy is used to the exclusion of tangible interactions, it becomes maladaptive, as prolonged withdrawal from the real social world can eventually deplete an individual’s actual social capital.

In conclusion, human sociality is established as a fundamental homeostatic requirement rooted in evolutionary fitness, which is as essential for maintaining an organism’s physiological and psychological integrity. When this vital need is disrupted by systematic isolation or rejection, the resulting allostatic load, the physiological wear and tear from chronic adaptive efforts, leading to likely damaged health. For marginalized populations, suffering from systematic chronic stress, this biological burden manifests as “weathering”. To mitigate these deleterious effects, individuals turn to technology-mediated mechanisms described by the Social Surrogacy Hypothesis, utilizing media to create a facsimile of a social context. These “social snacks” provide a simulacrum of social satiety, allowing the brain’s reward systems to experience a sense of belonging without the immediate necessity of a reciprocal “social meal”. This restorative power is particularly potent because the human brain is largely ill-evolved to distinguish between real-world and televised personae in its primary neuroendocrine responses, allowing favored media characters to function as psychological placeholders that shield individuals from the immediate pain of isolation.

Ultimately, the established Parasocial Relationship can function as a “biological shield” that offers significant clinical utility for vulnerable and isolated populations. These enduring one-sided bonds may trigger a downregulation of the Hypothalamic-Pituitary-Adrenal (HPA) axis, providing a restorative reprieve that reduces the circulation of neurotoxic glucocorticoids and pro-inflammatory cytokines. By mitigating telomere attrition and preserving cellular integrity, PSRs serve as a modern evolutionary survival mechanism, helping individuals maintain biological, psychological and psychological integrity.

References

1. Derrick JL, Gabriel S, Hugenberg K. Social surrogacy: how favored television programs provide the experience of belonging. J Exp Soc Psychol. 2009;45(2):352-362. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2008.12.003
2. Gabriel S, Valenti J, Young AF. Social surrogates, social motivations, and everyday activities: the case for a strong, subtle, and sneaky social self. In: Olson JM, Zanna MP, eds. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. Vol 53. Academic Press; 2016:189-243.
3. Salomaa AC, Livingston NA, Bryant WT, et al. A bottom-up approach to developing a unified trauma-minority stress model for transgender and gender diverse people. Psychol Trauma. 2023;15(4):618-627. doi:10.1037/tra0001373
4. Galatzer-Levy IR, Huang SH, Bonanno GA. Trajectories of resilience and dysfunction following potential trauma: a review and statistical evaluation. Clin Psychol Rev. 2018;63:41-55. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2018.05.008
5. Mello MF, Faria AA, Mello AF, Carpenter LL, Tyrka AR, Price LH. Maus-tratos na infância e psicopatologia no adulto: caminhos para a disfunção do eixo hipotálamo-pituitária-adrenal. Rev Bras Psiquiatr. 2009;31(Supl II):S13-S18.
6. Marchette RCN. Resiliência e vulnerabilidade ao estresse social e suas implicações neurobiológicas [tese]. Florianópolis, SC: Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina; 2017.
7. Krämer NC, Lucas G, Schmitt L, Gratch J. Social cues in human-computer interaction: Influence of agent’s social category and user’s isolation on social responses and belongingness. Int J Hum Comput Stud. 2018;109:112-121. doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2017.09.001
8. Coelho VC, Oliveira MER. Estresse e Ansiedade: Mecanismos Neurobiológicos, Exaustão Adrenal e Implicações Clínicas. In: Bem-estar e Qualidade de Vida: Prevenção, Intervenção e Inovações. Vol 8. Capítulo 07.
9. Sousa LH. Isolamento social, estresse e memória: os impactos da pandemia de COVID-19 no cérebro adulto [Trabalho de Conclusão de Curso]. Teresina, PI: Universidade Estadual do Piauí; 2024.
10. Schäfer K, Eerola T. How listening to music and engagement with other media provide a sense of belonging: An exploratory study. Music Sci. 2018;1:1-15. doi:10.1177/2059204318764506
11. Koutsogeorgou E, Chiesi AM, Leonardi M. Social capital components and social support of persons with multiple sclerosis: a systematic review of the literature from 2000 to 2018. Disabil Rehabil. 2021;43(21):2251-2264. doi:10.1080/09638288.2019.1597182
12. Chan SH, Poon KT. Live stream social surrogacy and its consequences. Psychology of Popular Media. Published online December 2, 2024. doi:10.1037/ppm0000570
13. Pinker S. How the Mind Works. WW Norton & Company; 1997.
14. Hartmann T. Parasocial interaction, parasocial relationships, and well-being. In: Reinecke L, Oliver MB, eds. The Routledge Handbook of Media Use and Well-Being. Routledge; 2017:131-144.
15. Schiappa E, Gregg PB, Hewes DE. The parasocial contact hypothesis. Commun Monogr. 2005;72(1):92-115. doi:10.1080/0363775052000342544
16. Chrousos GP. Stress and disorders of the stress system. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2009;5:374-381.
17. Kloet ER, Joëls M, Holsboer F. Stress and the brain: from adaptation to disease. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2005;6(6):463-475.
18. McEwen BS. Central effects of stress hormones in health and disease: understanding the protective and damaging effects of stress and stress mediators. Eur J Pharmacol. 2008;583(2-3):174-185. doi:10.1016/j.ejphar.2007.11.071
19. Silva EC. Efeitos do estresse crônico em áreas do cérebro. Rev Eletr Estácio Recife. 2015;1(1).
20. Graeff FG. Ansiedade, medo e pânico. Rev Bras Psiquiatr. 2007;29(Supl I):S3-S11.
21. Araldi-Favassa CT, Armiliato N, Kalinine I. Aspectos fisiológicos e psicológicos do estresse. Rev Psicol UnC. 2005;2(2):84-92.
22. Mello AF, Juruena MF, Pariante CM, et al. Eixo hipotálamo-pituitária-adrenal, função dos receptores de glicocorticóides e sua importância na depressão. Rev Bras Psiquiatr. 2007;29(Supl I):S27-S34.
23. Mijas M, Blukacz M, Koziara K, et al. Dysregulated by stigma: Cortisol responses to repeated psychosocial stress in gay and heterosexual men. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2021;131:105325. doi:10.1016/j.psyneuen.2021.105325
24. Flentje A, Heck NC, Brennan JM, Meyer IH. The relationship between minority stress and biological outcomes: a systematic review. J Behav Med. 2020;43(5):673-694. doi:10.1007/s10865-019-00120-6
25. Meyer IH. Prejudice, social stress, and mental health in lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations: conceptual issues and research evidence. Psychol Bull. 2003;129(5):674-697. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.5.674
26. Livingston NA. Trauma, minority stress, and disproportionate health burden among LGBTQ+ people. PTSD Res Q. 2023;34(4).
27. Chae DH, Nuru-Jeter AM, Adler NE, et al. Discrimination, racial bias, and telomere length in African-American men. Am J Prev Med. 2014;46(2):103-111. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2013.10.020
28. Castro GD, Susin C, Vettore MV, et al. Estresse e doença periodontal. R Fac Odontol Porto Alegre. 2002;43(2):52-59.