Literature DB >> 10568246

[Differential indicators of loneliness among elderly. The importance of type of partner relationship, partner history, health, socioeconomic status and social relations].

P A Dykstra1, J de Jong Gierveld.   

Abstract

Using data from the 1992 NESTOR-survey 'Living arrangements and social networks of older adults' (N = 4494), the aim of the present study is to identify specific categories of older adults who are most vulnerable to loneliness. By looking at different types of partner relationships (first, second, and third marriages; consensual unions; partners who are not household members) and at partner histories (never married, ever divorced, ever widowed, remarried), this study elaborates on previous research which has tended to look only at the presence versus the absence of partner relationships. Findings indicate that different types of partner relationships provide differential protection against loneliness. There appears to be a 'shadow of the past' of a previous divorce or widowhood in second and third partnerships, which accounts for generally higher levels of loneliness. Single men tend to be more lonely than single women. Moreover, there are no differences in loneliness between men who have always been single and those previously married. Among single women, differences in partner history are relevant: never married single women tend to be least vulnerable to loneliness. The differences in loneliness between older adults with different types of partner relationships and partner histories are only partially attributable to network and social participation differences. The latter independently contribute to the explanation of loneliness. The role of non-social determinants (health and socioeconomic position) is also examined. The results underscore the socially isolating effects of sensory impairments. Older adults with functional limitations, and those with visual or auditory problems tend to be more lonely, findings which are only partially attributable to differences in the number and quality of social relationships. Socioeconomic circumstances primarily have an indirect influence on loneliness. Those with higher levels of educational attainment and higher incomes tend to have more extensive social networks and are therefore less prone to loneliness.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1999        PMID: 10568246

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Tijdschr Gerontol Geriatr        ISSN: 0167-9228


  8 in total

1.  Older People's Neighborhood Perceptions Are Related to Social and Emotional Loneliness and Mediated by Social Network Type.

Authors:  Christine Stephens; Hannah Phillips
Journal:  Gerontologist       Date:  2022-10-19

2.  Alone in the crowd: the structure and spread of loneliness in a large social network.

Authors:  John T Cacioppo; James H Fowler; Nicholas A Christakis
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  2009-12

Review 3.  Evolutionary mechanisms for loneliness.

Authors:  John T Cacioppo; Stephanie Cacioppo; Dorret I Boomsma
Journal:  Cogn Emot       Date:  2013-09-25

4.  Social Relationships and Health: The Toxic Effects of Perceived Social Isolation.

Authors:  John T Cacioppo; Stephanie Cacioppo
Journal:  Soc Personal Psychol Compass       Date:  2014-02-01

5.  The impact of family structure and disruption on intergenerational emotional exchange in Eastern Europe.

Authors:  Nienke Moor; Aafke Komter
Journal:  Eur J Ageing       Date:  2011-11-05

6.  A behavioral taxonomy of loneliness in humans and rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta).

Authors:  John P Capitanio; Louise C Hawkley; Steven W Cole; John T Cacioppo
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-10-29       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Loneliness and Life Satisfaction Explained by Public-Space Use and Mobility Patterns.

Authors:  Lisanne Bergefurt; Astrid Kemperman; Pauline van den Berg; Aloys Borgers; Peter van der Waerden; Gert Oosterhuis; Marco Hommel
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2019-11-04       Impact factor: 3.390

8.  Polygenic overlap and shared genetic loci between loneliness, severe mental disorders, and cardiovascular disease risk factors suggest shared molecular mechanisms.

Authors:  Linn Rødevand; Shahram Bahrami; Oleksandr Frei; Aihua Lin; Osman Gani; Alexey Shadrin; Olav B Smeland; Kevin S O' Connell; Torbjørn Elvsåshagen; Adriano Winterton; Daniel S Quintana; Guy F L Hindley; Maren C F Werner; Srdjan Djurovic; Anders M Dale; Trine V Lagerberg; Nils Eiel Steen; Ole A Andreassen
Journal:  Transl Psychiatry       Date:  2021-01-05       Impact factor: 6.222

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.