Learning Objectives
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
- Describe evolving family and friend relationships in late adulthood and theories that explain them
- Describe romantic relationships in late adulthood
- Identify types and sources of social support in late adulthood
Jay is seventy-four years old and lost his long-term partner a few years ago. At first his grief was overwhelming, and he felt completely lost and alone. But slowly, with support from friends and family, Jay began to heal. He honored his partner’s memory by carrying on their traditions (such as volunteering at the animal shelter and hosting an annual Diwali dinner for neighbors) and found solace in knowing that he and his partner had been blessed with many happy years together. Jay still misses his partner deeply, but the grief no longer threatens to cut him off from a meaningful life.
Think of your current relationships, including friends, family, and others who support you in your goals. Now consider what your social life might look like when you are older. Do you think you’ll have the same types of relationships then as now? Will these relationships serve similar roles? How might marriage and other romantic relationships change? In this section, you'll explore questions like these and learn more about how community resources for helping older adults meet their social and practical needs, and how available and accessible those types of resources are?
Social Changes in Later Life
A social network encompasses everyone with whom you’re socially engaged (Ayalon & Levkovich, 2019) (Figure 16.6). It is usually complex and consists of family, friends, romantic partners, coworkers, competitors, and acquaintances. It also includes professionals such as teachers and doctors who interact with us in the course of their jobs (Portz et al., 2020).
Social networks change over time due to a phenomenon called a social convoy (Antonucci et al., 2019; Kahn & Antonucci, 1980). That is, throughout life, people gain new relationships and end old ones. As an analogy, consider a convoy of truckers traveling cross-country. They may support each other by helping shift lanes, learning faster routes, and sharing information about good places to eat. As this convoy travels, some members may drop out and others may join, and some stay for the entire trip. Social convoys are similar. Overall, however, the size of a social network steadily decreases from early to later adulthood (Wrzus et al., 2013), and in later years, it’s substantially smaller than it was before.
Several theories have attempted to explain how and why social networks change as people age. One of the earliest, disengagement theory, states that as people progress through later life, it’s normal and natural to become increasingly isolated and removed from relationships as they approach death (Cumming & Henry, 1961). This theory is very controversial, mostly because it seems counterintuitive to claim that becoming isolated in late life is a natural, healthy process, when individuals may need more assistance and support to adapt to age-related declines.
In contrast to disengagement theory, activity theory suggests that more social engagement is associated with positive outcomes in older age (Tobin & Neugarten, 1961). In general, research supports activity theory more than disengagement theory in that social engagement is viewed as desirable and associated with better mental health and life satisfaction (Kida et al., 2024; Lu, 2017; Mekonnen et al., 2023; Okun & Ayalon, 2023; Pontinen et al., 2019). However, these opposing theories might both be supported under different circumstances. Some research suggests activity theory may be more applicable to older adults living in places with many options for activities, such as cities with older adult community centers, public transportation, and artistic events, rather than to older adults living in rural settings with fewer recreational and social options. Activity theory may also be more relevant in countries with a high SES, whose people often have longer life expectancy, and there is a general cultural emphasis on living longer and maintaining good health (Asiamah, 2017).
Another hypothesis, Laura Carstensen’s (1992) socioemotional selectivity theory, suggests that in young and middle adulthood, people’s social goals are largely information seeking—that is, getting an education and learning how to be successful in a career. However, as people age, they instead prioritize emotional goals aimed at enjoying life and having positive, meaningful interactions (Carstensen et al., 1999). This is relevant to the issue of social networks because a larger social network may be better for achieving informational goals, given that it provides a large and diverse group of people upon whom you can call. Emotional goals, on the other hand, seem to be better supported by a smaller number of close, meaningful relationships. Data supporting this theory suggest that older adults don’t become socially disengaged but just more selective in their relationships as they choose to nurture the more meaningful ones (Carstensen et al., 1999; Dehkordi et al., 2020).
However, some research indicates that in more Western cultures, increasing age is associated with a stable number of emotionally close relationships but a decline in the number of less important, peripheral relationships, while in Eastern cultures, the number of emotionally close relationships increases with age, and there’s a smaller decrease in the number of peripheral relationships (Fung, 2013).
Types of Relationships
Family relationships tend to be highly meaningful across the lifespan. While overall or “global” social networks grow smaller across adulthood, family social networks remain stable in size from adolescence throughout older age (Wrzus et al., 2013) (Figure 16.7). Consistent with socioemotional selectivity theory, it appears that the shrinking of social networks in later years is largely due to having fewer distant friends and acquaintances and the decrease in network size is less the result of changes in family relationships. People may maintain family relationships because they are more likely to fulfill emotional goals, while distant friends and acquaintances mainly serve informational goals. Thus, family relationships may play a relatively larger role in older adults’ lives than in those of younger age groups.
While family networks may remain stable, the roles people play in them shift. The role of grandparent typically begins in middle adulthood (AARP, 2018) and extends well into later life. Grandparents tend to report high levels of satisfaction and fulfillment from interacting with their grandchildren and lower levels when such contact is limited (Kaganas & Piper 2020; Peterson, 1999). However, not having grandchildren doesn’t appear to be associated with lower life satisfaction or happiness (Di Gessa et al., 2020), suggesting that becoming a grandparent is not essential to experiencing fulfillment in later life.
Another shifting role in family relationships is that of kinkeeper, someone who assumes the responsibility of keeping family members connected. Does someone in your family tend to organize family events, maintain family traditions, and/or communicate family news to other members? If so, that person could be considered your family’s kinkeeper (Figure 16.8). Kinkeepers tend to be in the later part of middle adulthood or older age, most commonly between ages fifty and sixty-nine years. They’re also much more likely to be women than men (Hornstra & Ivanova, 2023; Rosenthal, 1985).
Some research finds cultural variations in both the role and the characteristics of kinkeepers. Kinkeepers in immigrant families tend to be the oldest family members, and they also maintain cultural traditions and connections with family from their native country. For example, one research participant, a seventy-two-year-old Filipino grandmother, made the following statement to her granddaughter:
I think my role is to be an older generation who will try to maintain the identity of the family. I notice that my kids are busy, that at times they can’t spend time with their own kids to spread Filipino identity. You guys are so Americanized. That's why I keep talking about the Philippines with you. . . . I bring the Filipino dessert called Tupig. . . . I also bring my Santo Niño [Christ] figurine. I have it out on top of the nightstand where anyone could see it, especially you and your brother. In a way, I’m trying to preserve our Catholic identity. (Treas & Mazumdar, 2004, p. 115)
Sibling relationships are also connected to both kinkeeping and family life. Several lines of research indicate that siblings play an important role in helping each other deal with declines and problems in later life. Siblings tend to decrease their amount of contact and communication in early adulthood; after that, contact remains relatively stable until around age seventy years, when siblings increase the amount of help and assistance they provide each other (White, 2001). This increase often happens when a sibling assumes the family kinkeeping role following the death of parents, although it isn’t always maintained over long periods of time (Kalmijn & Leopold, 2019). Whether the connection among siblings strengthens after the death of parents may depend on what the relationship was like before. Siblings who previously had strained or contentious relationships may drift even further apart after their parents die (Greif & Wooley, 2015). However, sibling conflict also tends to decrease in older years, although there’s no single cause of this effect, and it’s unclear whether it’s connected to the increase in assistance (Gilligan et al., 2020).
Romantic Relationships in Late Adulthood
Romantic relationships are another important part of our social lives. While not everyone forms long-term romantic relationships, they’re a common part of life for many adults. However, in later years, these relationships often change due to either death or divorce. While these events can happen at any point in the relationship, they have important implications for successful aging.
Long-term romantic relationships have many benefits, including companionship, financial resources, and assistance with the tasks of daily life. Overall, marital satisfaction in older age tends to be relatively high compared to that of other age groups. However, in later life it is affected by contentment with the marriage earlier in life (Anderson et al., 2010) and the level of support the partners provide each other (Bennett, 2005; Landis et al., 2013). Research shows that support from a spouse predicts marital satisfaction in older age. Spousal support could play an important role in compensating for age-related losses, such as declining cognitive ability (Berg et al. 2011). For example, the close familiarity between long-term married partners can result in improved performance on collaborative tasks (Kimbler & Margrett, 2009).
Some research suggests that LGBTQ+ couples may fare better than heterosexual couples when it comes to partner support. In one study, gay and lesbian couples across adulthood (including older adults) reported receiving more support from their partner, which accounted for higher levels of relationship satisfaction and fewer thoughts about ending the relationship than among heterosexual couples (Ellis & Davis, 2017) (Figure 16.9). The value of support may be especially relevant for this population. Members of the current older LBGTQ+ community are more likely than younger members to have experienced discrimination and possibly rejection from their family. Despite these challenges, or maybe because of them, many older LGBTQ+ individuals fostered meaningful social connections and support networks consisting of romantic partners and “chosen” family (Allen & Lavender-Stott, 2020).
While marriages that endure tend to be relatively satisfying, research has also considered what happens when they end. Divorce rates in the United States have steadily decreased overall in recent years (CDC, 2021), but they have been climbing among those fifty years of age and older (Brown & Lin, 2012; Raley & Sweeney, 2020). The reasons are unclear but may be related to longer life expectancy and demographic shifts resulting in more single older adults in the population. For example, a sixty-five-year-old who expects to live well into their eighties may reassess their goals, identity, and lifestyle, and thus leave a relationship they were unhappy with. Another possibility is that the baby boomers who contributed to the increase in divorce rates during the 1980s and 1990s are carrying these tendencies into older age.
Link to Learning
Follow this link to read about a woman who experienced a divorce in older age and her subsequent journey to redefine her life, goals, and roles.
While divorce among older adults is on the rise, the most common cause for the end of a long-term relationship in later life is widowhood. Among those seventy-five years old and older, 58 percent of women and 28 percent of men have experienced widowhood (Mayol-Garcia et al., 2021). The consequences of ending long-term relationships, regardless of cause, vary by gender, at least in heterosexual couples. For example, men tend to suffer more than women emotionally, both in the short term and for several years afterward. However, women are more likely than men to experience financial hardship, particularly after a divorce (Butrica & Smith, 2012; Streeter, 2020).
This disparity is likely a result of gender inequity in pay over a lifetime, combined with a tendency for older cohorts to adhere more closely to traditional gender roles, so that men often generated the income for the family unit. Also, due to gender differences in life expectancy combined with the tendency for married men to be older than their female spouses, women may experience longer durations of widowhood and corresponding declines in their retirement accounts (Streeter, 2020). However, the percentage of widows living in poverty appears to be declining, possibly because more recent cohorts of older women achieved greater education and more participation in the workforce (Munnell et al., 2020).
Regardless of how long-term relationships end, some older adults are interested in pursuing new relationships (Figure 16.10). However, there are some important differences. Following divorce and widowhood, heterosexual older women are more likely than men to express views against remarriage, while men tend to be more eager to remarry (Crowley, 2019; Davidson, 2002). This pattern has also been shown in online dating research. Older women using dating platforms are more likely to indicate a desire for companionship but are more likely to be averse to remarriage. Older men, on the other hand, are more likely to explicitly indicate they are interested in marriage (McWilliams & Barrett, 2014).
In the past, this trend was attributed to the smaller pool of available partners for straight women due to gender differences in longevity. More recent research, however, suggests more complex contributing factors: specifically, gender roles that put the burden of daily tasks such as cooking and cleaning on women (men want someone to help them with these things), and the fact that women are more likely to be the ones who maintain social connections for the couple (Crowley, 2019; Davidson, 2002).
This tendency has also been found cross-culturally. A recent study of widowed older adults in Denmark compared Denmark natives to various immigrant populations living in Denmark. In both groups, older widowed men were more likely to remarry, although this gender difference was more pronounced among immigrant older adults (Liversage, 2021) (Figure 16.10). Specific cultural values may influence remarriage patterns; for example, the patriarchal nature of Indian culture regards remarriage as more acceptable for widowers than widows (Perkins et al., 2016), but Iranian culture views remarriage in late adulthood as immoral, regardless of gender (Osmani et al., 2017). There has been less research on remarriage rates among older gay and lesbian couples, but some data suggest that older lesbian women are nearly twice as likely to remarry after divorce or widowhood than are older gay men (Heley & Hewitt, 2022).
Social and Community Support
The term social support refers to the assistance people get from others. It includes instrumental social support, which is practical or tangible help that addresses a specific problem such as needing transportation or wanting advice. Emotional social support, on the other hand, doesn’t focus on helping fix a practical problem but is intended to help a person feel better, such as listening to them vent frustrations or sending funny memes (Jolly et al., 2020).
People get social support from many sources. Informal social support is assistance from friends, family, and neighbors. Formal social support comes from either paid professionals or volunteers who are affiliated with an organization, government entity, or service provider, such as home health aides, social workers, and religious institutions (Shunhua et al., 2020).
Intersections and Contexts
The Impact of Gender, Race, and Ethnicity on Use of Social Support
Gender, race, and ethnicity may affect the extent to which individuals rely on formal and informal social support. For example, older women tend to have several informal social support sources including family and friends. Older men, on the other hand, tend to rely on their spouse for informal and emotional support (Gurung et al., 2003). This may be the reason men struggle emotionally more than women after the death of a spouse (Streeter, 2020). Older men may also resist using formal social support services (Ilinca et al., 2022), likely due to traditional gender norms that discourage men from asking for help or depending on others. Older men without a spouse are therefore at higher risk of not having their emotional or instrumental needs met due to a social support deficit. Perhaps this helps explain why older men are more eager to remarry than are older women.
Research has demonstrated that many formal support services, such as nursing homes, aren’t used equally across racial and ethnic groups. Despite data suggesting they may have greater health-care needs, Black and Hispanic older adults have historically underutilized nursing homes (Thomeer et al., 2015). However, these trends seem to vary over time.
Given this data, it’s not surprising that Black, Hispanic, and Asian American families are more likely than White families to use family support to care for aging relatives and devote more time to providing this care (Cohen et al., 2019; Fabius et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2021; Pandya, 2005). Both a lack of access and cultural preferences are likely responsible for these differences. For example, some cultural factors, such as the Hispanic cultural value of familismo (a cultural emphasis on the importance of family), may discourage seeking formal assistance. Non-White families also tend to lack financial resources that would allow them to pay for formal services (Cohen et al., 2019; Fabius et al., 2020; Liu et al., 2021). Combined, this research suggests that Black and Hispanic older adults may be more likely to use formal social support to assist with financial hardship in older age, while White older adults may be more likely to use formal social support to deal with informal support deficits.
Many older adults are independent, though age-related declines in health, cognitive ability, and/or physical ability increase their need for support. While friends and family are obvious sources for helping us feel better emotionally, they also frequently provide instrumental support in a variety of areas such as transportation, home maintenance, and shopping (Kent et al., 2020). Instrumental support may also come from formal sources. Some sources of this help, such as health-care providers, are essential, well known, and used by all age groups. Other types, such as services that provide transportation or deliver meals to older adults, are more specific to the needs of older adults (Lu et al., 2020; Shiba et al., 2016). Still other types of formal social support, such as community centers, civic clubs, and religious organizations, provide emotional support by enabling older adults to socialize and participate in enjoyable activities (Dickson & Wills, 2022).
What does research tell us about the importance of social support? Older adults without such support, particularly emotional support, experience loneliness. In one recent study, around one-third reported sometimes dealing with loneliness, while 5 percent reported feeling lonely most of the time (Berg-Weger & Morley, 2020). A meta-analysis of studies from the United States and several European countries indicated that loneliness tends to increase in late life, particularly for people of low SES (Graham et al., 2024). Loneliness in later life has been correlated with a variety of health problems, such as heart disease, mental health problems, dementia, weight gain, substance use, and reduced physical activity (Berg‐Weger & Morley, 2020), suggesting a possible bidirectional or cyclical relationship between loneliness and health.
Older adults were especially vulnerable to increases in loneliness and social isolation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Older adults have a higher likelihood of living alone and faced a greater threat from the virus than younger people. This made them more isolated, which, in turn, also contributed to reduced health and quality of life. This was especially true for those of low SES and those in institutional settings such as nursing homes. Still, research has been mixed, suggesting that many older adults coped well during this social isolation (Kasar & Karaman, 2021; Müller et al., 2021).
Link to Learning
While precautions like social distancing likely saved older adults’ lives in the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic, the resulting isolation had consequences. The toll that social isolation had on many older adults is described in this news report.
References
Allen, K. R., & Lavender-Stott, E. S. (2020). The families of LGBTQ older adults: Theoretical approaches to creative family connections in the context of marginalization, social‐historical change, and resilience. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 12(2), 200–219. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12370
Anderson, J. L., Van Ryzin, M. J., & Doherty, W. J. (2010). Developmental trajectories of marital happiness in continuously married individuals: A group-based modeling approach. Journal of Family Psychology, 24(5), 587–596. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020928
Antonucci, T. C., Ajrouch, K. J., & Webster, N. (2019). Convoys of social relations: Cohort similarities and differences over 25 years. Psychology and Aging, 34(8), 1158–1169. https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000375
Asiamah, N. (2017). Social engagement and physical activity: Commentary on why the activity and disengagement theories of ageing may both be valid. Cogent Medicine, 4(1), 1289664. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331205x.2017.1289664
Ayalon, L., & Levkovich, I. (2019). A systematic review of research on social networks of older adults. Gerontologist, 59(3), e164–e176. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnx218
Bennett, K. M. (2005). Psychological wellbeing in later life: 5The longitudinal effects of marriage, widowhood and marital status change. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 20(3), 280–284. https://doi.org/10.1002/gps.1280
Berg, C. A., Schindler, I., Smith, T. W., Skinner, M., & Beveridge, R. M. (2011). Perceptions of the cognitive compensation and interpersonal enjoyment functions of collaboration among middle-aged and older married couples. Psychology and Aging, 26(1), 167–173. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021124
Berg-Weger, M., & Morley, J. E. (2020). Loneliness in old age: An unaddressed health problem. The Journal of Nutrition, Health and Aging, 24(3), 243–245. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12603-020-1323-6
Brown, S. J., & Lin, I-F. (2012). The gray divorce revolution: Rising divorce among middle-aged and older adults, 1990–2010. The Journals of Gerontology Series B, 67(6), 731–741. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbs089
Butrica, B. A., & Smith, K. E. (2012). The retirement prospects of divorced women. Social Security Bulletin, 72(1), 11–22. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22550718
Carstensen, L. L. (1992). Social and emotional patterns in adulthood: Support for socioemotional selectivity theory. Psychology and Aging, 7(3), 331–338. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.7.3.331
Carstensen, L. L., Isaacowitz, D. M., & Charles, S. T. (1999). Taking time seriously: A theory of socioemotional selectivity. American Psychologist, 54(3), 165–181. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.54.3.165
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021). Provisional number of marriages and marriage rate: United States, 2000–2021. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/marriage-divorce/national-marriage-divorce-rates-00-21.pdf
Cohen, S. A., Sabik, N. J., Cook, S. K., Azzoli, A. B., & Mendez-Luck, C. A. (2019). Differences within differences: Gender inequalities in caregiving intensity vary by race and ethnicity in informal caregivers. Journal of Cross-Cultural Gerontology, 34, 245–263. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10823-019-09381-9
Crowley, J. E. (2019). “Once bitten, twice shy? Gender differences in the remarriage decision after a gray divorce.” Sociological Inquiry, 89(1), 150–176. https://doi.org/10.1111/soin.12253
Cumming, E., & Henry, W. E. (1961). Growing old: The process of disengagement. Basic Books.
Davidson, K. (2002). Gender differences in new partnership choices and constraints for older widows and widowers. Ageing International, 27, 43–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12126-002-1014-0
Dehkordi, F. R., Eslami, A. A., Alavijeh, F. Z., & Matlabi, H. (2020). Gerotranscendence and active aging: The lived experience. Journal of Religion, Spirituality & Aging, 33(3), 271–297. https://doi.org/10.1080/15528030.2020.1770662
Di Gessa, G., Bordone, V., & Arpino, B. (2020). Becoming a grandparent and its effect on well-being: The role of order of transitions, time, and gender. The Journals of Gerontology Series B, 75(10), 2250–2262. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbz135
Dickinson, A., & Wills, W. (2022). Meals on wheels services and the food security of older people. Health & Social Care in the Community, 30(6), e6699–e6707. https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc.14092
Ellis, L., & Davis, M. H. A. (2017). Intimate partner support: A comparison of gay, lesbian, and heterosexual relationships. Personal Relationships, 24(2), 350–369. https://doi.org/10.1111/pere.12186
Fabius, C. D., Wolff, J. L., & Kasper, J. D. (2020). Race differences in characteristics and experiences of Black and white caregivers of older Americans. The Gerontologist, 60(7), 1244–1253. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnaa042
Fabbre, V. D., & Gaveras, E. (2020). The manifestation of multilevel stigma in the lived experiences of transgender and gender nonconforming older adults. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 90(3), 350–360. https://doi.org/10.1037/ort0000440
Fung, H. H. (2013). Aging in culture. The Gerontologist, 53(3), 369–377. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnt024
Gilligan, M., Stocker, C. M., & Conger, K. J. (2020). Sibling relationships in adulthood: Research findings and new frontiers. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 12(3), 305–320. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12385
Graham, E. K., Beck, E. D., Jackson, K., Yoneda, T., McGhee, C., Pieramici, L., Atherton, O. E., Luo, J., Willroth, E. C., Steptoe, A., Mroczek, D. K., & Ong, A. D. (2024). Do we become more lonely with age? A coordinated data analysis of nine longitudinal studies. Psychological Science, 35(6), 579-596. https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976241242037
Greif, G. L., & Woolley, M. E. (2015). Patterns in adult sibling relationships after the death of one or both parents. Journal of Social Work in End-of-life & Palliative Care, 11(1), 74–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/15524256.2015.1021435
Gurung, R. A. R., Taylor, S. E., & Seeman, T. E. (2003). Accounting for changes in social support among married older adults: Insights from the MacArthur studies of successful aging. Psychology and Aging, 18(3), 487–496. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.18.3.487
Heley, E., & Hewitt, B. (2022). Same-sex marriage and remarriage in Australia, 2018–2020. Australian Population Studies, 6(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.37970/aps.v6i1.96
Hornstra, M., & Ivanova, K. (2023). Kinkeeping across families: The central role of mothers and stepmothers in the facilitation of adult intergenerational ties. Sex Roles, 88, 367–382. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-023-01352-2
Ilinca, S., Rodrigues, R. R., Fors, S., Zólyomi, E., Jull, J., Rehnberg, J., Vafaei, A., & Phillips, S. D. (2022). Gender differences in access to community-based care: A longitudinal analysis of widowhood and living arrangements. European Journal of Ageing, 19, 1339–1350. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-022-00717-y
Jolly, P. M., Kong, D. T., & Kim, K. Y. (2020). Social support at work: An integrative review. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 42(2), 229–251. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.2485
Kaganas, F., & Piper, C. (2020). Grandparent contact: Another presumption? Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law, 42(2), 176–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/09649069.2020.1751932
Kahn, R. L., & Antonucci, T. C. (1980) Convoys over the life course: Attachment, roles and social support. In P. B. Baltes & O. G. Brim Jr. (Eds.), Life-span development and behavior (pp. 253–267). Academic Press.
Kalmijn, M., & Leopold, T. (2019). Changing sibling relationships after parents’ death: The role of solidarity and kinkeeping. Journal of Marriage and Family, 81(1), 99–114. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12509
Kasar, K. S., & Karaman, E. (2021). Life in lockdown: Social isolation, loneliness and quality of life in the elderly during the COVID-19 pandemic: A scoping review. Geriatric Nursing, 42(5), 1222–1229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gerinurse.2021.03.010
Kent, E. E., Mollica, M. A., Dionne-Odom, J. N., Ferrer, R. A., Jensen, R. E., Ornstein, K. A., & Smith, A. W. (2020). Effect of instrumental support on distress among family caregivers: Findings from a nationally representative study. Palliative & Supportive Care, 18(5), 519–527. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1478951520000036
Kida, H., Niimura, H., Eguchi, Y., Suzuki, K., Shikimoto, R., Bun, S., Takayama, M., & Mimura, M. (2024). Relationship between life satisfaction and psychological characteristics among community-dwelling oldest-old: Focusing on Erikson's developmental stages and the big five personality traits. American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 32(6), 724–735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jagp.2023.12.018
Kimbler, K. J., & Margrett, J. A. (2009). Older adults’ interactive behaviors during collaboration on everyday problems: Linking process and outcome. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 33(6), 531–542. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025409343754
Landis, M., Peter-Wight, M., Martin, M., & Bodenmann, G. (2013). Dyadic coping and marital satisfaction of older spouses in long-term marriage. GeroPsych, 26(1), 39–47. https://doi.org/10.1024/1662-9647/a000077
Liu, C., Badana, A. N. S., Burgdorf, J., Fabius, C. D., Roth, D. L., & Haley, W. E. (2021). Systematic review and meta-analysis of racial and ethnic differences in dementia caregivers' well-being. The Gerontologist, 61(5), e228–e243. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnaa028
Liversage, A. (2021). Remarriage among older immigrants and their host country peers—a countrywide study. Migration Letters, 18(3), 349–360.
Lu, L. (2017). Creating well-being among older people: An Eastern perspective. In C. L. Cooper & J. C. Quick (Eds.), The handbook of stress and health: A guide to research and practice (1st ed., pp. 388–399). Wiley Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118993811.ch23
Lu, S., Yupan, W., Mao, Z., & Liang, X. (2020). Association of formal and informal social support with health-related quality of life among Chinese rural elders. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(4), 1351. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17041351
Mayol-Garcia, Y., Gurrentz, B., & Kreider, R. M. (2021). Number, timing, and duration of marriages and divorces: 2016. U. S. Census Bureau. https://www.census.gov/content/dam/Census/library/publications/2021/demo/p70-167.pdf
McWilliams, S., & Barrett, A. E. (2014). Online dating in middle and later life: Gendered expectations and experiences. Journal of Family Issues, 35(3), 411–436. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513x12468437
Mekonnen, H. S., Lindgren, H., Geda, B., Azale, T., & Erlandsson, K. (2023). Being an elderly person living in metropolitan cities of northwestern Ethiopia: A descriptive phenomenological study. Clinical Interventions in Aging, 18, 205–218. https://doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S389305
Müller, F., Röhr, S., Reininghaus, U., & Riedel‐Heller, S. G. (2021). Social isolation and loneliness during COVID-19 lockdown: Associations with depressive .symptoms in the German old-age population. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(7), 3615. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18073615
Munnell, A. H., Sanzenbacher, G., & Zulkarnain, A. (2020). What factors explain the decline in widowed women’s poverty? Demography, 57(5), 1881–1902. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-020-00915-2
Okun, S., & Ayalon, L. (2023). The paradox of subjective age: Age(ing) in the self-presentation of older adults. International Psychogeriatrics, 35(10), 566-575. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1041610222000667
Osmani, N., Matlabi, H., & Rezaei, M. (2017). Barriers to remarriage among older people: Viewpoints of widows and widowers. Journal of Divorce & Remarriage, 59(1), 51–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/10502556.2017.1375331
Pandya, S. (2005). Racial and ethnic differences among older adults in long-term care service use. AARP Public Policy Institute. https://www.aarp.org/home-garden/livable-communities/info-2005/fs119_ltc.ht
Perkins, J. M., Lee, H.-Y., James, K. S., Oh, J., Krishna, A., Heo, J., Lee, J.-K., & Subramanian, S. V. (2016). Marital status, widowhood duration, gender and health outcomes: A cross-sectional study among older adults in India. BMC Public Health, 16(1), 1032. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-016-3682-9
Peterson, C. C. (1999). Grandfathers’ and grandmothers’ satisfaction with the grandparenting role: Seeking new answers to old questions. International Journal of Aging & Human Development, 49(1), 61–78. https://doi.org/10.2190/gudm-6ce3-17wf-7n96
Pontinen, H. M., Medvene, L. J., & Gerstenkorn, J. (2019). Possible selves of older adults entering a life plan community. Educational Gerontology, 45(3), 201–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/03601277.2019.1601400
Portz, J. D., Elsbernd, K., Plys, E., Ford, K. L., Zhang, X., Gore, M. O., Moore, S. L., Zhou, S., & Bull, S. (2020). Elements of social convoy theory in mobile health for palliative care: Scoping review. JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 8(1), e16060. https://doi.org/10.2196/16060
Raley, R. K., & Sweeney, M. M. (2020). Divorce, repartnering, and stepfamilies: A decade in review. Journal of Marriage and Family, 82(1), 81–99. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12651
Rosenthal, C. J. (1985). Kinkeeping in the familial division of labor. Journal of Marriage and Family, 47(4), 965–974. https://doi.org/10.2307/352340
Shiba, K., Kondo, N., & Kondo, K. (2016). Informal and formal social support and caregiver burden: The AGES caregiver survey. Journal of Epidemiology, 26(12), 622–628. https://doi.org/10.2188/jea.je20150263
Streeter, J. L. (2020). Gender differences in widowhood in the short-run and long-run: Financial, emotional, and mental wellbeing. The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, 17, 100258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeoa.2020.100258
Thomeer, M. B., Mudrazija, S., & Angel, J. L. (2015). How and why does nursing home use differ by race and ethnicity? The Journals of Gerontology Series B. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbv056
Tobin, S. S., & Neugarten, B. L. (1961). Life satisfaction and social interaction in the aging. Journal of Gerontology, 16(4), 344–346. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronj/16.4.344
Treas, J. & Mazumdar, S. (2004). Kinkeeping and caregiving: Contributions of older people in immigrant families. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 35(1), 105–122. https://www.jstor.org/stable/41603919
Wrzus, C., Hänel, M., Wagner, J., & Neyer, F. J. (2013). Social network changes and life events across the life span: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 139(1), 53–80. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028601
White, L. T. (2001). Sibling relationships over the life course: A panel analysis. Journal of Marriage and Family, 63(2), 555–568. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2001.00555.x