OBJECTIVES: Family members and friends who live nearby may be especially well-positioned to provide social support and companionship for community-residing older adults, but prior research has not examined the distribution and characteristics of local ties in older adults' networks. We hypothesize that local ties are newer, more frequently accessed, and more embedded in the network, and that social disadvantage and neighborhood conditions structure older adults' access to local ties. METHODS: We use egocentric network data from 15,137 alters named by 3,735 older adults in Wave 3 of the National Social Life, Health, and Aging Project (NSHAP). We conduct dyadic analysis to compare characteristics of local and nonlocal ties. Logistic regression models estimate how personal and neighborhood characteristics are associated with naming local kin and local non-kin ties. RESULTS: Nearly half of the older adults named at least one local network tie, and about 60% of these local ties are non-kin. Local ties are newer, frequently accessed, and highly embedded in older adults' networks. Local kin ties are most common among socially disadvantaged older adults. Local non-kin ties are most common among white older adults and those who live in areas with high levels of collective efficacy, although local non-kin ties are also associated with residence in high-poverty neighborhoods. DISCUSSION: Local ties may bring unique benefits for community-residing older adults, but their availability is likely structured by residential mobility, neighborhood context, disparities in resources, and support needs. Future research should consider their implications for health and well-being.
OBJECTIVES: Family members and friends who live nearby may be especially well-positioned to provide social support and companionship for community-residing older adults, but prior research has not examined the distribution and characteristics of local ties in older adults' networks. We hypothesize that local ties are newer, more frequently accessed, and more embedded in the network, and that social disadvantage and neighborhood conditions structure older adults' access to local ties. METHODS: We use egocentric network data from 15,137 alters named by 3,735 older adults in Wave 3 of the National Social Life, Health, and Aging Project (NSHAP). We conduct dyadic analysis to compare characteristics of local and nonlocal ties. Logistic regression models estimate how personal and neighborhood characteristics are associated with naming local kin and local non-kin ties. RESULTS: Nearly half of the older adults named at least one local network tie, and about 60% of these local ties are non-kin. Local ties are newer, frequently accessed, and highly embedded in older adults' networks. Local kin ties are most common among socially disadvantaged older adults. Local non-kin ties are most common among white older adults and those who live in areas with high levels of collective efficacy, although local non-kin ties are also associated with residence in high-poverty neighborhoods. DISCUSSION: Local ties may bring unique benefits for community-residing older adults, but their availability is likely structured by residential mobility, neighborhood context, disparities in resources, and support needs. Future research should consider their implications for health and well-being.