| Literature DB >> 35886556 |
Tonggang Zeng1, Yongchun Yang1,2, Shan Man1.
Abstract
Over the past 40 years, the implementation of the family planning policy in China has led to the creation of many only-child families. In the process of modernization and urbanization, it is critical to focus on the intergenerational relationships in only-child families and their associational mechanism on the life satisfaction of middle-aged and elderly parents, which has crucial implications for them staying active and healthy aging. Using the survey data from Chengdu, China, this study analyzed the characteristics of only-child parents' life satisfaction and family intergenerational relationships, and explored the associational mechanism of family intergenerational relationships on only-child parents' life satisfaction in urban families, as well as the possible moderating role of gender. The results indicate that there are gender differences in the life satisfaction of only-child parents in urban families, and men are more satisfied than women. Moreover, parents of sons and daughters differ in life satisfaction from the dual-gender perspective. Parents of daughters are likely to have higher life satisfaction, especially mothers. The only-child families have not moved toward nucleation in urban families, and intergenerational members maintain close contact and provide frequent mutual support to achieve individual and family development. There are significant gender differences in structural, associational, affectual, and functional solidarity among only-child. This study confirms that there are differences in the associational mechanism of family intergenerational relationships on life satisfaction in different dimensions. Affectual solidarity is the most influential factor of life satisfaction. In terms of normative and consensual solidarity, gender plays a moderating role. For men, normative and consensual solidarity is beneficial for improving life satisfaction, but it has an insignificant effect on women. The effects of structural solidarity, association solidarity, and functional solidarity are not significant.Entities:
Keywords: aging; family intergenerational relationships; gender; life satisfaction; only-child
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35886556 PMCID: PMC9322977 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19148704
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Demographic characteristics.
| Demographic Characteristics | Variable Assignment | Mean (Standard Deviation) |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | Male = 1; female = 0 | 0.444 (0.497) |
| Age | Aged 60 and above = 1; Under the age of 60 = 0 | 0.289 (0.454) |
| Years of education | Primary school and below = 6; middle school = 9; high school/vocational school = 12; two-/three-year college/associate degree = 15; four-year college/bachelor’s degree and above = 16 | 9.176 (2.626) |
| Marital status | Married = 1; not married = 0 | 0.909 (0.288) |
| Hukou | Non-agricultural hukou = 1; agricultural hukou = 0 | 0.547 (0.498) |
| Health self-assessment | Very good = 5; good = 4; fair = 3; poor = 2; very poor = 1 | 3.397 (1.032) |
| Household income | Less than 100,000 CNY = 1; 100,000~200,000 CNY = 2; 200,000 CNY and above = 3 | 1.637 (0.635) |
| Activity participation | Continuous variable | 3.485 (2.056) |
Measurement indicators of intergenerational relations under the intergenerational solidarity theory.
| Dimension | Item | Option |
|---|---|---|
| Structural solidarity | What is the living distance between you and your children? | 7 = live together; 6 = in the same community; 5 = on the same street; 4 = in the same district; 3 = in the same city; 2 = in the same province; 1 = in a different province |
| How long is your trip to where your children live? | 7 = live together; 6 = within 30 min; 5 = within 1 h; 4 = within 2 h; 3 = within 3 h; 2 = within 4 h; 1 = 4 h and above | |
| Association solidarity | How often do you and your children see each other? | 7 = almost every day; 6 = 3–4 times a week; 5 = 1–2 times a week; 4 = 1–2 times a month; 3 = several times a year; 2 = once a year; 1 = almost never |
| How often do you and your child communicate with each other by phone, online, and video? | 7 = almost every day; 6 = 3–4 times a week; 5 = 1–2 times a week; 4 = 1–2 times a month; 3 = several times a year; 2 = once a year; 1 = almost never | |
| Affectual | Do you feel emotionally close to your children? | 5 = very close; 4 = somewhat close; 3 = uncertain; 2 = not very close; 1 = very unapproachable |
| Do you think you get along well with your children? | 5 = very good; 4 = somewhat good; 3 = uncertain; 2 = not very good; 1 = very bad | |
| Do you think your children are willing to listen when you want to share your thoughts or difficulties with your children? | 5 = very willing; 4 = somewhat willing; 3 = uncertain; 2 = not very willing; 1 = very reluctant | |
| Normative solidarity | Do you think your children are filial? | 5 = very filial; 4 = somewhat filial; 3 = uncertain; 2 = somewhat unfilial; 1 = very unfilial |
| Consensual solidarity | Do you think you have similarities with your children in terms of values, attitudes, and beliefs? | 5 = strongly agree; 4 = somewhat agree; 3 = uncertain; 2 = disagree; 1 = strongly disagree |
| Functional solidarity | What is the net flow of the intergenerational economy? | 3 = child flow to parents; 2 = no obvious flow; 1 = parents flow to child |
| What is the net flow of intergenerational labor services? | 3 = child flow to parents; 2 = no obvious flow; 1 = parents flow to child |
Gender test of family intergenerational relationships.
| Child Categories | Structural | Association | Affectual | Normative | Consensual | Functional |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sons | 4.384 ± 2.565 | 5.206 ± 1.268 | 3.946 ± 0.669 | 4.095 ± 0.775 | 3.493 ± 0.958 | 1.962 ± 0.542 |
| Daughters | 3.779 ± 2.025 | 4.939 ± 1.198 | 4.176 ± 0.564 | 4.188 ± 0.707 | 3.477 ± 0.739 | 2.216 ± 0.485 |
| T test | 2.652 ** | 2.187 * | −3.735 *** | −1.264 | 0.186 | −4.969 *** |
| Range | 1~7 | 1~7 | 1~5 | 1~5 | 1~5 | 1~3 |
All data are expressed as means ± SD in the first and second row of this table; * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.
Results of regression model.
| Variables | Model 1 All Sample | Model 2 Male | Model 3 Female | Moderating Effect Test of Gender | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coefficient | Robust Standard Error | Coefficient | Robust Standard Error | Coefficient | Robust Standard Error | ||
| Core independent variable | |||||||
| Structural solidarity | −0.008 | 0.034 | −0.026 | 0.061 | 0.020 | 0.043 | −0.046 |
| Association solidarity | 0.050 | 0.066 | 0.041 | 0.123 | 0.034 | 0.074 | 0.007 |
| Affectual solidarity | 0.403 *** | 0.097 | 0.266 ** | 0.125 | 0.529 *** | 0.129 | −0.263 * |
| Normative solidarity | 0.153 ** | 0.072 | 0.271 ** | 0.128 | 0.056 | 0.087 | 0.215 * |
| Consensual solidarity | 0.064 | 0.045 | 0.181 ** | 0.072 | 0.032 | 0.067 | 0.149 ** |
| Functional solidarity | 0.042 | 0.071 | −0.147 | 0.105 | 0.056 | 0.111 | −0.203 * |
| Control variable | |||||||
| Personal characteristics | |||||||
| Gender (reference group: female) | 0.230 *** | 0.068 | |||||
| Age (reference group: under the age of 60) | 0.057 | 0.080 | −0.103 | 0.129 | 0.152 | 0.100 | |
| Years of education | 0.011 | 0.020 | 0.021 | 0.029 | −0.008 | 0.028 | |
| Marital status (reference group: not married) | 0.197 | 0.157 | −0.014 | 0.256 | 0.250 | 0.177 | |
| Hukou (reference group: agricultural hukou) | 0.189 ** | 0.089 | −0.070 | 0.127 | 0.398 *** | 0.127 | |
| Health self-assessment | 0.127 *** | 0.041 | 0.107 * | 0.062 | 0.132 *** | 0.047 | |
| Household income (reference group: less than 100,000 CNY) | |||||||
| 100,000~200,000 CNY | 0.154 * | 0.088 | 0.146 | 0.158 | 0.063 | 0.099 | |
| 200,000 CNY and above | 0.176 | 0.135 | 0.164 | 0.209 | 0.025 | 0.197 | |
| Activity participation | 0.039 ** | 0.019 | 0.021 | 0.029 | 0.069 *** | 0.026 | |
| Child characteristics | |||||||
| Child’s gender (reference group: female) | −0.137 * | 0.070 | −0.060 | 0.113 | −0.208 ** | 0.096 | |
| Child’s years of education | 0.036 ** | 0.018 | −0.002 | 0.030 | 0.068 *** | 0.020 | |
| Child’s household income (reference group: 100,000~200,000 CNY) | |||||||
| Less than 100,000 CNY | −0.252 ** | 0.108 | −0.628 *** | 0.171 | −0.097 | 0.139 | |
| 200,000~300,000 CNY) | 0.142 * | 0.074 | 0.131 | 0.133 | 0.203 ** | 0.098 | |
| 300,000 CNY and above | 0.091 | 0.150 | −0.024 | 0.210 | 0.251 | 0.258 | |
| Number of children | −0.131 | 0.083 | −0.261 ** | 0.114 | 0.003 | 0.113 | |
| Community characteristics | |||||||
| Community environmental assessment | 0.151 *** | 0.037 | 0.163 ** | 0.067 | 0.131 *** | 0.043 | |
| Constant | 0.145 | 0.382 | 1.672 ** | 0.786 | −0.526 | 0.440 | |
| F-value | 50.03 | 16.28 | 42.33 | ||||
| P-value | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.000 | ||||
| R-squared | 0.635 | 0.640 | 0.694 | ||||
* p < 0.1; ** p < 0.05; *** p < 0.01.