Is Living Alone “Aging Alone”? Solitary Living, Network Types, and Well-Being

Author:

Djundeva Maja1ORCID,Dykstra Pearl A1ORCID,Fokkema Tineke12

Affiliation:

1. Department of Public Administration and Sociology, Erasmus School of Social and Behavioural Sciences, Erasmus University Rotterdam

2. Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute, University of Groningen, The Hague, the Netherlands

Abstract

Abstract Objectives When identifying older adults who may be at risk of being without necessary supports, policy makers and scholars tend to focus on those living alone, neglecting differences within that group. We examine how their social networks contribute to subjective well-being, why some of them fare better and compare their well-being to older adults coresiding with others. Method Data are from the fourth wave of the Survey of Health and Retirement in Europe (N = 53,383). A network typology for older people living alone (N = 10,047) is constructed using a latent class analysis. Using ordinary least squares (OLS) regressions, we examined differences in subjective well-being (life satisfaction, satisfaction with social network, depression) by network type, adding adults coresiding with others (N = 43,336) as comparison group. Results We find four social network types among older adults living alone. The likelihood of having “restricted” and “child-based” networks is greater in Eastern and Southern European countries, whereas the likelihood of having “friend-oriented” networks is greater in Western and Northern European countries. Across countries, only those with “restricted” networks tend to have the poorest well-being. Those with “diverse” networks have even better well-being than coresiding older adults. Discussion Our study shows the importance of drawing distinctions within the group of older adults living alone. Most (two thirds) are not vulnerable and at risk, but fare just as well or even better than peers who coreside with others. Country-level factors shape the opportunities to build satisfactory networks, but subjective well-being depends more strongly on individual resources, including social networks, than country-level factors.

Funder

European Research Council

European Commission

Ministry of Education and Research

Max Planck Society for the Advancement of Science

U.S. National Institute on Aging

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Geriatrics and Gerontology,Gerontology,Clinical Psychology,Social Psychology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3