Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-cfpbc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T13:44:04.182Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Gender and Marital-History Differences in Emotional and Social Loneliness among Dutch Older Adults*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 March 2010

Pearl A. Dykstra  and
Jenny de Jong Gierveld
Pearl A. Dykstra*
Affiliation:
Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute (NIDI), The Hague
Jenny de Jong Gierveld
Affiliation:
Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute (NIDI), The Hague Netherlands Institute for Advanced Study in the Humanities and Social Sciences (NIAS), Wassenaar
*
Requests for offprints should be sent to: / Les demandes de tirés-à-part doivent être adressées à : Pearl A. Dykstra, NIDI, Postbox 11650, 2502 AR Den Haag, The Netherlands. (dykstra@nidi.nl)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this study, Weiss's (1973) theorizing about the sources of emotional and social loneliness is elaborated – with notions about the asymmetric gratifications derived from marriage, about the conflicting loyalties that result from remarriage, and about selection into marriage – in order to reach an understanding of gender differences in loneliness, both in and outside of marriage. First and subsequent marriages are considered, as well as marital disruptions and never marrying. The data (N = 3737) are from the 1992 Dutch survey on older adults' living arrangements and social networks (NESTOR-LSN). Marital-history differences emerge, not only for emotional loneliness, but also (and contrary to Weiss's theoretical conceptualizations) for social loneliness. The marital-history differences in emotional and social loneliness are greater among men than women. For men, the marriage bond appears not only to be more central to emotional well-being than is the case for women but also to play a pivotal role in their involvement with others. Marital history offers the best explanation for differences in emotional loneliness among men, but social embeddedness characteristics also account for differences in emotional loneliness among women. Apparently, whereas men are more likely to find an intimate attachment in marriage, women also find protection from emotional loneliness in other close ties. The marital-history differences in social loneliness are largely mediated by social embeddedness characteristics, partly in different ways for men and women. Involvement in activities outside the home serves as the context for sociability for men, whereas parenthood plays a more important role in women's social engagements.

Résumé

Dans cette étude, l'auteur développe la théorie émise par Weiss en 1973 sur les sources de la solitude affective et sociale; il étudie les gratifications asymétriques tirées du mariage, les conflits de loyauté liés au remariage et le choix d'un conjoint, pour comprendre les différences qui existent entre les femmes et les hommes face à la solitude dans le mariage et hors du mariage. Il examine les premiers mariages et remariages, ainsi que les perturbations matrimoniales et le célibat. Les données (N = 3737) sont tirées d'un sondage effectué aux Pays-Bas en 1992 sur les conditions de logement et les réseaux sociaux des aînés (NESTOR-LSN). Les antécédents conjugaux influent non seulement sur la solitude affective, mais aussi (au contraire de ce qu'indiquent les conceptualisations théoriques de Weiss) sur la solitude sociale. Les antécédents conjugaux influent davantage sur la solitude affective et sociale des hommes que des femmes. Être marié semble plus essentiel au bien-être affectif des hommes et joue un rôle central dans leurs rapports avec les autres. Les antécédents conjugaux expliquent le mieux les différences notées chez les hommes face à la solitude affective, et l'intégration sociale les différences relevées chez les femmes sur ce plan. Il semblerait que les hommes soient plus enclins à trouver un attachement intime dans le mariage, et que les femmes se protègent de la solitude affective en entretenant des liens étroits avec d'autres personnes. L'impact des antécédents conjugaux face à la solitude sociale dépendent pour une large part de l'intégration sociale, et s'expriment, en partie, de façon différente chez les hommes et chez les femmes. La sociabilité des hommes consiste à participer à des activités en dehors du foyer, tandis que celle des femmes passe davantage par leur rôle de mère.

Keywords

agingemotional lonelinesssocial lonelinessgendermarital historysocial networkvieillissementsolitude affectivesolitude socialesexeantécédents conjugauxréseau social
Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement , Volume 23 , Special Issue/Numéro special 2: Social Isolation and Loneliness/Isolement social et solitude , Summer/Été 2004 , pp. 141 - 155
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association on Gerontology 2004

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

This study is based on data collected in the context of “Living Arrangements and Social Networks of Older Adults” (NESTOR-LSN), a research program conducted at the department of Sociology and Social Gerontology of the Vrije Universiteit in Amsterdam and the Netherlands Interdisciplinary Demographic Institute (NIDI) in The Hague. The program was funded by NESTOR, the Netherlands Program for Research on Ageing, with subsidies from the Ministry of Health, Welfare and Sports and the Ministry of Education, Culture and Sciences. This manuscript was written while the first author was a fellow at the Netherlands Institute for Advanced Study in the Humanities and Social Sciences (NIAS).

References

Antonucci, T.C. (1994). A life-span view of women's social relations. In Turner, B.F. & Troll, L. (Eds.), Women growing older: Psychological perspectives (pp. 239–269). London: Sage.Google Scholar
Antonucci, T.C., & Akiyama, H. (1987). An examination of sex differences in social support among older men and women. Sex Roles, 17, 737–749.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, G.S. (1991). A treatise on the family (Enlarged ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernard, J. (1972). The future of marriage. New York: Bantam Books.Google Scholar
Broese van Groenou, M.I. (1991). Gescheiden Netwerken: De Relaties met Vrienden en Verwanten na Echtscheiding [Separate networks: The relationships with friends and kin after divorce]. Unpublished dissertation, Universiteit Utrecht.Google Scholar
Broese van Groenou, M.I., van Tilburg, T.G., de Leeuw, E., & Liefbroer, A.C. (1995). Appendix: Data collection. In Knipscheer, C.P.M., de Jong Gierveld, J., van Tilburg, T.G., & Dykstra, P.A. (Eds.), Living arrangements and social networks of older adults (pp. 185–197). Amsterdam: VU University Press.Google Scholar
Chipperfield, J.G., & Havens, B. (2001). Gender differences in the relationship between marital status transitions and life satisfaction in later life. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 56B, P176–P186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chodorow, N. (1978). The reproduction of mothering: Psychoanalysis and the sociology of gender. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Heer, W. (1992). International survey on non-response. Netherlands Central Bureau of Statistics.Google Scholar
de Jong Gierveld, J. (1969). De Ongehuwden [The unmarried]. Alphen aan den Rijn: Samson.Google Scholar
de Jong Gierveld, J. (1998). A review of loneliness: Concept and definitions, determinants and consequences. Reviews in Clinical Gerontology, 8, 73–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Jong Gierveld, J. (2001, June). Older adults' strategies following bereavement and divorce: Starting a new partnership? Paper presented at the Europenan Population Conference, Helsinki.Google Scholar
de Jong Gierveld, J., & Dykstra, P.A. (1994). Life transitions and the network of personal relationships: Theoretical and methodological issues. In Perlman, D. & Jones, W.H. (Eds.), Advances in personal relationships (Vol. 4, pp. 195–227). London: Kingsley.Google Scholar
de Jong Gierveld, J., & Kamphuis, F. (1985). The development of a Rasch-type loneliness scale. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9, 289–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Jong Gierveld, J., & van Tilburg, T.G. (1995). Social relationships, integration, and loneliness. In Knipscheer, C.P.M., de Jong Gierveld, J., van Tilburg, T.G., & Dykstra, P.A. (Eds.), Living arrangements and social networks of older adults (pp. 155–172). Amsterdam: VU University Press.Google Scholar
DiTomasso, E., & Spinner, B. (1993). The development and initial validation of the social and emotional loneliness scale for adults (SELSA). Personality and Individual Differences, 14, 127–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dykstra, P.A. (1993). The differential availability of relationships and the provision and effectiveness of support to older adults. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 10, 355–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dykstra, P.A. (1995). Loneliness among the never and formerly married: The importance of supportive friendships and a desire for independence. Journals of Gerontology Social Sciences, 50b, S321–S329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dykstra, P.A. (2004). Diversity in partnership histories: Implications for older adults' social integration. In Phillipson, C., Allan, G., & Morgan, D. (Eds.), Social networks and social exclusion (pp. 117–141). London: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Essex, M.J., & Nam, S. (1987). Marital status and loneliness among older women: The differential importance of close family and friends. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 49, 93–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gove, W.R., & Shin, H.-C. (1989). The psychological well-being of divorced and widowed men and women: An empirical analysis. Journal of Family Issues, 10, 122–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gove, W.R., Style, C.B. & Hughes, M. (1990). The effect of marriage on the well-being of older adults: A theoretical analysis. Journal of Family Issues, 11, 4–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gubrium, J.F. (1974). Marital desolation and the evaluation of everyday life in old age. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 36, 107–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henry, C.S., & Lovelace, S.G. (1995). Family resources and adolescent family life satisfaction in remarried family households. Journal of Family Issues, 16, 765–786.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hochschild, A.R. (1983). The managed heart. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Knipscheer, C.P.M., de Jong Gierveld, J., van Tilburg, T.G., & Dykstra, P.A. (Eds.). (1995). Living arrangements and social networks of older adults. Amsterdam: VU University Press.Google Scholar
Liefbroer, A.C., & Dykstra, P.A. (2000). Levenslopen in Verandering: Een Studie naar Ontwikkelingen in de Levenslopen van Nederlanders Geboren tussen 1900 en 1970 [Changing lives: Developments in the life courses of the Dutch 1900–1970 birth cohorts] (WRR Voorstudies en Achtergronden V107 [Netherlands Scientific Council for Government Policy (WRR) Preliminary and Background Studies V107]). Den Haag: Sdu Uitgevers.Google Scholar
Lowenthal, M.F., & Haven, C. (1968). Interaction and adaptation: Intimacy as a critical variable. American Sociological Review, 33, 20–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Milardo, R.M. (1987). Changes in social networks following divorce: A review. Journal of Family Issues, 8, 78–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neugarten, B.L. (1969). Continuities and discontinuities of psychological issues into adult life. Human Development, 12, 121–130.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Parsons, T. (1955). The American family: Its relation to personality and social structure. In Parsons, T. & Bales, R.F. (Eds.), Family, socialization, and interaction process (pp. 3–21). Glencoe, IL: Free Press.Google Scholar
Perlman, D. (1987). Further reflections on the present state of loneliness research. In Hojat, M. & Crandall, R. (Eds.), Loneliness: Theory, research and applications. [Special Issue]. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 2, 17–26.Google Scholar
Peters, A., & Liefbroer, A.C. (1997). Beyond marital status: Partner history and well-being in old age. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 59, 687–699.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rands, M. (1988). Changes in social networks following separation and divorce. In Milardo, R.M. (Ed.), Families and social networks (pp. 127–146). London: Sage.Google Scholar
Rosenthal, C. (1985). Kinkeeping in the familial division of labor. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 47, 965–974.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rubin, L.B. (1983). Intimate strangers. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Schiepers, J.M. (1988). Huishoudensequivalentiefactoren volgens de Budgetverdelings-methode [Family equivalence scales using the budget distribution methods]. Sociaal-Economische Maandstatistiek, 2 (Suppl.), 28–36.Google Scholar
Stevens, N.L. (1989). Well-being in widowhood: A question of balance. Unpublished dissertation, Katholieke Universiteit Nijmegen.Google Scholar
Thomson, L., & Walker, A.J. (1989). Gender in families: Women and men in marriage, work and parenthood. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 51, 845–871.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Tilburg, T. (1995). Delineation of the social network and differences in network size. In Knipscheer, C.P.M., de Jong Gierveld, J., van Tilburg, T.G., & Dykstra, P.A. (Eds.), Living arrangements and social networks of older adults (pp. 83–96). Amsterdam: VU University Press.Google Scholar
Weiss, R.S. (1973). Loneliness: The experience of emotional and social isolation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar