| Literature DB >> 35729889 |
Haowei Wang1, Kyungmin Kim2, Jeffrey A Burr3, Karen L Fingerman4.
Abstract
Using two waves of data from the Family Exchanges Study (2008 and 2013), this study examined changes in financial problems before and after the Great Recession and investigated the implications for adults' depressive symptoms and relationship quality with parents. Participants in established adulthood (N = 170, age 30-46 in 2013) provided information about their financial difficulties and depressive symptoms, as well as negative relationship quality with each parent (parent-child tie; N = 316) at baseline and 5 years later. Results showed that a growing number of participants experienced financial problems between the two waves, rising from 16 to 72% of participants. Moreover, 14% of participants indicated continuing financial problems and 33% reported decreased income over the 5 year observation period. Financial problems at baseline, continuing financial problems across the observation period, and decreased income over time were associated with participants' increased depressive symptoms, after controlling for their baseline depressive symptoms. Results from multilevel models also revealed that adult participants had more strained relationships with their parents if they experienced more financial problems at the follow-up interview. The harmful effect of financial problems on relationship quality with parents was partially explained by adult participants' depressive symptoms. Findings of this study highlight the important role of financial hardship for persons in established adulthood and their intergenerational ties.Entities:
Keywords: Depression; Economic recession; Established adulthood; Intergenerational relations; Psychological distress
Year: 2022 PMID: 35729889 PMCID: PMC9187927 DOI: 10.1007/s10804-022-09409-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Adult Dev ISSN: 1068-0667
Sample characteristics before and after the Great Recession
| Variables | Baseline (2008) | Follow-up (2013) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ( | ( | |||
| Age | 29.58 | (3.97) | 34.58 | (3.97) |
| Female, % | 62 | 62 | ||
| Student, % | 12 | 8 | ||
| Racial/ethnic minority, % | 37 | 37 | ||
| Married/remarried, % | 35 | 54 | ||
| Having at least one child, % | 45 | 64 | ||
| Working for pay, % | 91 | 68 | ||
| Coresiding with any parent, % | 24 | 14 | ||
| Negative relationship quality with parentsa | 2.00 | (0.74) | 2.01 | (0.75) |
| Female, % | 52 | 52 | ||
| Coresiding with offspring, % | 27 | 13 | ||
| Negative relationship quality with offspringa | 2.22 | (1.03) | 2.15 | (0.99) |
| Any financial problem, % | 16 | 72 | ||
| Total financial problemsb | – | 1.99 | (1.86) | |
| Change in financial problems | ||||
| Never | – | 25 | ||
| Onset | – | 58 | ||
| Stopped | – | 3 | ||
| Continued | – | 14 | ||
| Change in income, % | ||||
| Higher | – | 51 | ||
| Same | – | 16 | ||
| Lower | – | 33 | ||
| 1.56 | (0.67) | 1.70 | (0.84) | |
Established adult N = 170
Parent–child tie N = 316
aMean scores of 2 items (rated 1 = not at all to 5 = a great deal)
bSum of 6 financial problems (1 = yes and 0 = no)
cMean scores of 5 items (rated from 1 = not at all to 5 = extremely)
Linear regression model results for established adults’ depressive symptoms after the Great Recession
| Variables | Model 1: Financial problems | Model 2: Change in financial problems | Model 3: Change in income | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ( | ( | ( | ||||
| Any financial problems (Baseline) | 0.53** | (0.17) | – | – | – | – |
| Total financial problemsa (Follow-up) | 0.07* | (0.03) | – | – | – | – |
| Change in financial problems (Ref = Never) | ||||||
| Onset | – | – | – 0.04 | (0.15) | – | – |
| Stopped | – | – | – 0.20 | (0.36) | – | – |
| Continued | – | – | 0.71 | (0.21) | – | – |
| Change in income (Ref = Higher) | ||||||
| Lower | – | – | – | – | 0.55*** | (0.15) |
| Same | – | – | – | – | 0.21 | (0.18) |
| Control variables (Baseline) | ||||||
| Age | 0.02 | (0.02) | 0.02 | (0.02) | 0.02 | (0.02) |
| Female | 0.00 | (0.12) | – 0.02 | (0.12) | 0.01 | (0.12) |
| Student | 0.23 | (0.22) | 0.25 | (0.22) | 0.26 | (0.23) |
| Re/married | – 0.20 | (0.13) | – 0.23† | (0.13) | – 0.09 | (0.14) |
| Having at least one child | – 0.10 | (0.15) | – 0.09 | (0.15) | – 0.03 | (0.15) |
| Racial/ethnic minority | – 0.24† | (0.14) | – 0.24† | (0.14) | – 0.08 | (0.14) |
| Working for pay | – 0.14 | (0.13) | – 0.17 | (0.13) | 0.04 | (0.14) |
| Depressive symptomsb | 0.36*** | (0.09) | 0.35*** | (0.09) | 0.42*** | (0.09) |
| Intercept | 1.77*** | (0.23) | 1.84*** | (0.26) | 1.35*** | (0.25) |
| Adjusted | .20 | .21 | .20 | |||
Established adult offspring N = 170
Ref reference category
†p < .10, *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001
aSum of 6 financial problems (1 = yes and 0 = no)
bMean scores of 5 items (rated from 1 = not at all to 5 = extremely)
Multilevel model results for negative relationship quality with parents after the Great Recession
| Variables | Financial problems | Change in financial problems | Change in income | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1a | Model 1b | Model 2a | Model 2b | Model 3a | Model 3b | |
| Intercept | 0.71** | 0.71** | 0.54* | 0.54* | 0.47* | 0.53* |
| Any financial problem (Baseline) | 0.19 | 0.13 | – | – | – | – |
| Total financial problemsa (Follow-up) | 0.06* | 0.06* | – | – | – | – |
| Change in financial problems (Ref = Never) | ||||||
| Onset | – | – | 0.18 | 0.18 | – | – |
| Stopped | – | – | 0.37 | 0.38 | – | – |
| Continued | – | – | 0.38* | 0.29 | – | – |
| Chang in income (Ref = Higher) | ||||||
| Lower | – | – | – | – | 0.30* | 0.28† |
| Same | – | – | – | – | 0.20 | 0.14 |
| Negative relationship quality (Baseline) | 0.53*** | 0.52*** | 0.54*** | 0.53*** | 0.55*** | 0.54*** |
| Depressive symptomsb (Follow-up) | – | 0.09 | – | 0.12† | – | 0.12† |
| Offspring characteristics | ||||||
| Age | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 |
| Female | – 0.02 | – 0.02 | – 0.02 | – 0.02 | 0.00 | – 0.02 |
| Student | – 0.07 | – 0.08 | – 0.05 | – 0.07 | – 0.10 | – 0.11 |
| Re/married | 0.07 | 0.08 | 0.07 | 0.09 | 0.12 | 0.13 |
| Having at least one child | – 0.18 | – 0.15 | – 0.20 | – 0.16 | – 0.18 | – 0.14 |
| Racial/ethnic minority | – 0.09 | – 0.06 | – 0.09 | – 0.05 | – 0.02 | 0.00 |
| Working for pay | 0.05 | 0.07 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.08 | 0.09 |
| Parent characteristics | ||||||
| Female | 0.15† | 0.15* | 0.15† | 0.16† | 0.15† | 0.15† |
| Coresiding | 0.34* | 0.32* | 0.35* | 0.31† | 0.39* | 0.35* |
| Intercept Variance (level 2: offspring) | 0.14** | 0.13* | 0.14** | 0.14* | 0.14* | 0.13* |
| Residual Varirance | 0.45*** | 0.46*** | 0.46*** | 0.46*** | 0.45*** | 0.46*** |
| − 2 Log Likelihood | 741.46 | 743.21 | 726.70 | 727.19 | 726.62 | 727.03 |
Established adult offspring N = 170
Parent–child tie N = 316
Ref reference category
†p < .10, *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001
aSum of 6 financial problems (1 = yes and 0 = no)
bMean scores of 5 items (rated from 1 = not at all to 5 = extremely)