Gender Differences in the Impact of Intergenerational Support on Depressive Symptoms among Older Adults in Korea
Abstract
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Design and Population
2.2. Assessments and Measurements
2.3. Statistical Analyses
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Li, S.; Song, L.; Feldman, M.W. Intergenerational support and subjective health of older people in rural China; A gender-based longitudinal study. Australas J. Age 2009, 28, 81–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Guo, M.; Chi, I.; Silverstein, M. Intergenerational support and depression among Chinese older adults; do gender and widowhood make a difference? Age Soc. 2017, 37, 695–724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, J.; Jordan, L.P. Intergenerational support and life satisfaction of young-, old- and oldest-old adults in China. Ag. Ment. Health 2018, 22, 412–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krause, N. Social support, stress, and well-being among older adults. J. Gerontol. 1986, 41, 512–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Silverstein, M.; Cong, Z.; Li, S. Intergenerational transfers and living arrangements of older people in rural China: Consequences for psychological well-being. J. Gerontol. B Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 2006, 61, S256–S266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Umberson, D. Relationships between adult children and their parents; psychological consequences for both generations. J. Marriag. Fam. 1992, 54, 664–674. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Brown, S.L.; Nesse, R.M.; Vinokur, A.D.; Smith, D.M. Providing social support may be more beneficial than receiving it: Results from a prospective study of mortality. Psychol. Sci. 2003, 14, 320–327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, H.K.; Hisata, M.; Kai, I.; Lee, S.K. Social support exchange and quality of life among the Korean elderly. J. Cross Cult. Gerontol. 2000, 15, 331–347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krause, N.; Herzog, A.R.; Baker, E. Providing support to others and well-being in later life. J. Gerontol. 1992, 47, 300–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Antonucci, T.C.; Akiyama, H. An examination of sex differences in social support among older men and women. Sex Role 1987, 17, 737–749. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ingersoll-Dayton, B.; Antonucci, T.C. Reciprocal and nonreciprocal social support: Contrasting sides of intimate relationships. J. Gerontol. 1988, 43, S65–S73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Lowenstein, A.; Daatland, S.O. Filial norms and family support in a comparative cross-national context: Evidence from the OASIS study. Ag. Soc. 2006, 26, 203–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lowenstein, A.; Katz, R. Reciprocity in parent-child exchange and life satisfaction among the elderly; a cross-national perspective. J. Soc. Issues 2007, 63, 865–883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yoon, H.S. The impact of intergenerational support exchange to the psychological well-being of older parents. J. Korea Gerontol. Soc. 2003, 23, 15–28. [Google Scholar]
- Pensions at a Glance 2015; OECD and G20 Indicators. Available online: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/pension_glance-2015-en.pdf?expires=1590676710&id=id&accname=guest&checksum=B86368776CD964BD5A22FEB00823D4B2 (accessed on 28 May 2020).
- Old-age Income Security System in Korea and Future Policy Issues. Available online: https://www.kihasa.re.kr/web/publication/newbooks_pdsissue/view.do?pageIndex=18&keyField=&key=&menuId=46&tid=71&bid=200&division=&ano=33 (accessed on 28 May 2020).
- Silverstein, M.; Bengtson, V.L. Intergenerational solidarity and the structure of adult child-parent relationships in American families. Am. J. Sociol. 1997, 103, 429–460. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ofstedal, M.B.; Reidy, E.; Knodel, J. Gender differences in economic support and well-being of older Asians. J. Cross Cult. Gerontol. 2004, 19, 165–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Reevy, G.M.; Maslach, C. Use of social support; gender and personality differences. Sex Role 2001, 44, 437–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fiori, K.; Denckla, C. Social support and mental health in middle-aged men and women; a multimensional approach. J. Ag. Health 2012, 24, 407–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Denton, M.; Prus, S.; Walters, V. Gender differences in health; a Canadian study of the psychosocial, structural and behavioral determinants of health. Soc. Sci. Med. 2004, 58, 2585–2600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Simon, R.W. Gender, multiple roles, role meaning, and mental health. J. Health Soc. Behav. 1995, 36, 182–194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koh, B. Confucianism in contemporary Korea. In Confucian Traditions in East Asian Modernity; Wei-Ming, T., Ed.; Havard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1996; p. 193. [Google Scholar]
- Kim, K. The reproduction of Confucian culture in contemporary Korea: An anthropological study. In Confucian Traditions in East Asian Modernity; Wei-Ming, T., Ed.; Havard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1996; p. 193. [Google Scholar]
- Speare, A.; Avery, R.; Lawton, L. Disability, residential mobility, and changes in living arrangements. J. Gerontol. Soc. Sci. 1991, 46, S133–S142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Won, C.W.; Rho, Y.G.; Sunwoo, D.; Lee, Y.S. The validity and reliability of Korean instrumental activities of daily living scale (K-IADL). J. Korean Geriatr. Soc. 2002, 6, 273–280. [Google Scholar]
- Mohamad, N.; Alavi, K.; Mohamad, M.S.; Mohamad Aun, N.S. Intergenerational support and intergenerational social support among elderly – a short review in Malaysian context. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2016, 219, 513–519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Ruth, K. Intergenerational family relations and subjective wee-being in old age: A cross-national study. Eur. J. Ag. 2009, 6, 79–90. [Google Scholar]
- Yesavage, J.A.; Sheikh, J.I. Geriatric depression scale (GDS). Clin. Gerontol. 1986, 5, 165–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bae, J.N.; Cho, M.J. Development of the Korean version of the Geriatric Depression Scale and its short form among elderly psychiatric patients. J. Psychosom. Res. 2004, 57, 297–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, J.M.; Prince, M.J.; Shin, I.S.; Yoon, J.S. Validity of Korean form of Geriatric Depression Scale (KGDS) among cognitively impaired Korean elderly and development of a 15-item short version (KGDS-15). Int. J. Method Psychiatr. Res. 2001, 10, 204–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Allison, P.D. Comparing logit and probit coefficients across groups. Sociol. Method Res. 1999, 28, 186–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Silverstein, M.; Gans, D.; Yang, F.M. Intergenerational support to aging parents; the role of norms and needs. J. Fam. Issues 2006, 27, 1068–1084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- OECD. Social Expenditure—Aggregated Data. Available online: https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=SOCX_AGG (accessed on 1 February 2020).
- Lin, J.P.; Yi, C.C. A comparative analysis of intergenerational relations in East Asia. Int. Sociol. 2013, 28, 297–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Changes in Double Care Burden in Korean Families with Middle-Aged and Older Heads. Available online: http://repository.kihasa.re.kr:8080/handle/201002/31314 (accessed on 1 February 2020).
- Blackstone, A. Gender Roles and Society. In Human Ecology: An Encyclopedia of Children, Families, Communities, and Environments; Julia, R.M., Richard, M.L., Lawrence, B.S., Eds.; ABC-CLIO: Santa Barbara, CA, USA, 2003; pp. 335–338. [Google Scholar]
- Silverstein, M.; Chen, X.; Heller, K. Too much of a good thing? Intergenerational social support and the psychological well-being of older parents. J. Marriag. Fam. 1996, 58, 970–982. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lee, D. The evolution of family policy in South Korea: From Confucian familism to Neo-familism. Asian Soc. Work Policy Rev. 2018, 12, 46–53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Korean Women’s Development Institute. Policies for Poverty of Elderly Women. Available online: https://www.kihasa.re.kr/web/publication/research/view.do?keyField=writer&division=001&ano=1660&menuId=44&tid=71&bid=12&key=%EC%9E%A5%EB%AF%B8%ED%98%9C (accessed on 1 February 2020).
- 2018 National Pension for the Older Adults. Available online: http://kosis.kr/statHtml/statHtml.do?orgId=322&tblId=DT_32202_B006 (accessed on 1 February 2020).
- Bai, X.; Guo, Y.; Fu, Y.-Y. Self-image and intergenerational relationships as correlates of life satisfaction in Chinese older adult: Will gender make a difference? Ag. Soc. 2018, 38, 1502–1519. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, J.; Zhao, X. Family functioning and social support for older patients with depression in an urban area of Shanghai, China. Arch. Gerontol. Geriatr. 2012, 55, 574–579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kim, I.K.; Kim, C.S. Patterns of family support and the quality of life of the elderly. Soc. Indic. Res. 2003, 62–63, 437–454. [Google Scholar]
- Pillemer, K.; Munsch, C.L.; Fuller-Rowell, T.; Riffin, C.; Suitor, J.J. Ambivalence toward adult children: Differences between mother and fathers. J. Marriag. Fam. 2012, 74, 1101–1113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gur-Yaish, N.; Zisberg, A.; Sinoff, G.; Shadmi, E. Effects of instrumental and psychological support on levels of depressive symptoms for hospitalized older adults. Ag. Ment. Health 2013, 17, 646–653. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zunzunegui, M.V.; Beland, F.; Otero, A. Support from children, living arrangements, self-rated health and depressive symptoms of older people in Spain. Int. J. Epidemiol. 2001, 30, 1090–1099. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Djundeva, M.; Mills, M.; Wittek, R.; Steverink, N. Receiving Instrumental Support in Late Parent-Child Relationships and Parental Depression. J. Gerontol. B Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 2015, 70, 981–994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Krause, N. Social support and feelings of personal control in later life. In Sourcebook of Social Support; Plenum Press: New York, NY, USA, 1997; pp. 335–368. [Google Scholar]
- Ladika, J.N.; Ladika, S.B. Adult children helping older parents. Res. Ag. 2001, 23, 429–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Older Men | Older Women | P | All | Prevalence of Depressive Symptoms (% or Mean ± SD) | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Older Men | Older Women | P | All | ||||||||
N | Weighted % | N | Weighted % | N | Weighted % | ||||||
N= | 3592 | 3939 | 7531 | 12.5 | 16.5 | p < 0.001 | 14.6 | ||||
2.96 ± 3.45 | 3.54 ± 3.73 | 3.27 ± 3.62 | |||||||||
Emotional support exchange | ** | ** | ** | ||||||||
No exchange | 1082 | 30.3 | 755 | 19.1 | p < 0.01 | 1837 | 24.3 | 18.4 | 25.4 | p < 0.001 | 21.3 |
Receiving support only | 316 | 8.8 | 389 | 10.3 | 705 | 9.6 | 14.0 | 25.1 | 20.3 | ||
Providing support only | 112 | 3.1 | 98 | 2.4 | 210 | 2.7 | 10.1 | 21.9 | 15.5 | ||
Mutual support | 2082 | 57.8 | 2697 | 68.2 | 4779 | 63.4 | 9.2 | 12.5 | 11.1 | ||
Instrumental support exchange | |||||||||||
No exchange | 1838 | 51.4 | 1584 | 40.7 | p < 0.01 | 3422 | 45.7 | 12.5 | 17.7 | p < 0.001 | 14.8 |
Receiving support only | 1142 | 31.7 | 1121 | 29.3 | 2263 | 30.5 | 12.8 | 15.7 | 14.3 | ||
Providing support only | 171 | 4.7 | 306 | 7.3 | 477 | 6.1 | 8.1 | 14.0 | 11.9 | ||
Mutual support | 441 | 12.1 | 928 | 22.6 | 1369 | 17.7 | 13.2 | 16.7 | 15.5 | ||
Caring support exchange | |||||||||||
No exchange | 2596 | 72.5 | 2406 | 61.1 | p < 0.01 | 5002 | 66.4 | 12.0 | 16.5 | 0.031 | 14.2 |
Receiving support only | 767 | 21.2 | 1157 | 29.7 | 1924 | 25.7 | 14.3 | 16.6 | 15.7 | ||
Providing support only | 39 | 1.1 | 64 | 1.6 | 103 | 1.3 | 9.8 | 22.7 | 17.9 | ||
Mutual support | 190 | 5.2 | 312 | 7.7 | 502 | 6.5 | 12.7 | 14.7 | 13.9 | ||
Financial support exchange | ** | ** | ** | ||||||||
No exchange | 272 | 4.5 | 205 | 3.0 | p < 0.01 | 477 | 3.7 | 33.7 | 32.6 | 0.011 | 33.2 |
Receiving support only | 2199 | 60.1 | 2663 | 66.3 | 4862 | 63.4 | 14.4 | 17.9 | 16.3 | ||
Providing support only | 41 | 1.4 | 32 | 0.9 | 73 | 1.2 | 8.7 | 24.2 | 15.4 | ||
Mutual support | 1080 | 34.0 | 1039 | 29.7 | 2119 | 31.7 | 6.5 | 11.4 | 8.9 | ||
Age (Mean ± SD) | 72.94 ± 5.87 | 72.24 ± 5.63 | 72.57 ± 5.76 | ** | ** | ** | |||||
65–74 | 2271 | 63.4 | 2714 | 67.2 | p < 0.01 | 4985 | 65.5 | 11.1 | 14.8 | 0.176 | 13.1 |
74–85 | 1165 | 32.7 | 1100 | 29.5 | 2265 | 31 | 15.4 | 20.8 | 18.1 | ||
85 and over | 156 | 3.9 | 125 | 3.3 | 281 | 3.5 | 11.6 | 16.0 | 13.6 | ||
Place of residence | ** | ** | |||||||||
Urban | 2367 | 68.0 | 2663 | 70.4 | 0.127 | 5031 | 69.2 | 13.1 | 16.7 | 0.784 | 15.1 |
Rural | 1225 | 32.0 | 1276 | 29.6 | 2500 | 30.8 | 10.9 | 15.6 | 13.4 | ||
Education | ** | ** | ** | ||||||||
High school and over | 1451 | 40.1 | 753 | 18.5 | p < 0.01 | 2204 | 28.6 | 9.0 | 10.0 | p < 0.001 | 9.3 |
Middle school | 778 | 21.7 | 662 | 16.5 | 1440 | 18.9 | 12.0 | 11.5 | 11.7 | ||
Primary school and less | 1363 | 38.2 | 2524 | 64.9 | 3887 | 52.4 | 16.7 | 19.8 | 18.7 | ||
Equivalent household income | ** | ** | ** | ||||||||
1st 33.3% (highest) | 1451 | 40.1 | 1346 | 32.6 | p <0.001 | 2797 | 36.1 | 7.1 | 10.2 | 0.753 | 8.6 |
2nd 33.3% | 1192 | 33.2 | 1364 | 34.6 | 2556 | 34.0 | 12.5 | 16.0 | 14.4 | ||
3rd 33.3% | 949 | 26.7 | 1229 | 32.7 | 2178 | 29.9 | 20.8 | 24.0 | 22.6 | ||
Living arrangements | ** | ** | ** | ||||||||
Living alone | 335 | 10.5 | 1167 | 32.6 | p < 0.001 | 1502 | 22.3 | 16.1 | 13.2 | p < 0.001 | 13.8 |
Living with partner only | 2345 | 64.7 | 1687 | 41.4 | 4032 | 52.3 | 5.0 | 7.0 | 5.9 | ||
Living with adult-children | 782 | 21.3 | 955 | 22.9 | 1737 | 22.1 | 7.0 | 10.6 | 9.0 | ||
Living with others | 130 | 3.5 | 129 | 3.1 | 259 | 3.3 | 7.7 | 11.6 | 9.7 | ||
Number of chronic diseases | ** | ** | ** | ||||||||
None | 590 | 16.5 | 374 | 9.4 | p < 0.001 | 964 | 12.7 | 7.3 | 3.5 | p < 0.001 | 5.8 |
One | 808 | 22.4 | 621 | 15.7 | 1429 | 18.8 | 7.3 | 7.2 | 7.2 | ||
Two and over | 2194 | 61.1 | 2944 | 74.9 | 5138 | 68.5 | 15.9 | 20.1 | 18.3 | ||
Number of friends in close contact | ** | ** | ** | ||||||||
None | 1430 | 39.7 | 1413 | 35.9 | p < 0.001 | 2843 | 37.6 | 18.2 | 25.3 | 0.066 | 21.7 |
One | 622 | 17.4 | 847 | 21.6 | 1468 | 19.7 | 11.3 | 16.2 | 14.1 | ||
Two and over | 1540 | 42.9 | 1679 | 42.5 | 3219 | 42.7 | 7.8 | 9.3 | 8.6 | ||
Number of siblings and relatives in close contact | ** | ** | ** | ||||||||
None | 1962 | 54.6 | 1811 | 46.2 | p < 0.001 | 3773 | 50.1 | 16.0 | 22.8 | 0.105 | 19.2 |
One | 845 | 23.6 | 1174 | 29.9 | 2019 | 26.9 | 10.3 | 12.8 | 11.7 | ||
Two and over | 785 | 21.9 | 954 | 23.9 | 1739 | 23.0 | 6.4 | 9.2 | 7.9 | ||
Social participation | ** | ** | ** | ||||||||
Yes | 2950 | 81.4 | 3467 | 87.7 | p < 0.001 | 6417 | 84.8 | 10.4 | 14.6 | p < 0.001 | 12.7 |
No | 642 | 18.6 | 472 | 12.3 | 1114 | 15.2 | 21.8 | 30.1 | 25.3 | ||
Working status | ** | ** | ** | ||||||||
Yes | 1526 | 42.6 | 1160 | 29.9 | p < 0.001 | 2686 | 35.8 | 7.1 | 11.7 | 0.257 | 9.1 |
No | 2066 | 57.4 | 2779 | 70.1 | 4845 | 64.2 | 16.6 | 18.5 | 17.7 |
Older Men | Older Women | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 | |
Emotional support exchange | ||||||||
No exchange | 1.49 (1.17–1.90) ** | 1.87 (1.50–2.34) ** | ||||||
Receiving support only | 1.17 (0.81–1.69) | 1.78 (1.36–2.33) ** | ||||||
Providing support only | 1.34 (0.68–2.65) | 1.96 (1.14–3.36) ** | ||||||
Mutual support (reference) | 1 | 1 | ||||||
Instrumental support exchange | ||||||||
No exchange | 0.76 (0.49–1.16) | 0.95 (0.67–1.34) | ||||||
Receiving support only | 0.84 (0.55–1.29) | 0.75 (0.52–1.08) | ||||||
Providing support only | 0.58 (0.31–1.10) | 1.14 (0.80–1.66) | ||||||
Mutual support | 1 | 1 | ||||||
Caring support exchange | ||||||||
No exchange | 0.71 (0.44–1.16) | 1.25 (0.86–1.82) | ||||||
Receiving support only | 0.84 (0.50–1.40) | 1.07 (0.73–1.57) | ||||||
Providing support only | 0.65 (0.20–2.14) | 1.61 (0.79–3.28) | ||||||
Mutual support | 1 | 1 | ||||||
Financial support exchange † | ||||||||
No exchange | 3.83 (2.34–6.24) ** | 1.73 (1.06–2.83) * | ||||||
Receiving support only | 1.81 (1.36–2.42) ** | 1.19 (0.95–1.48) | ||||||
Providing support only | 1.10 (0.32–3.79) | 2.82 (1.21–6.56) * | ||||||
Mutual support | 1 | 1 | ||||||
Adjusted R2 | 0.155 | 0.152 | 0.151 | 0.166 | 0.185 | 0.171 | 0.171 | 0.173 |
Hosmer & Lemeshow (p-value) | 0.992 | 0.977 | 0.988 | 0.805 | 0.964 | 0.329 | 0.482 | 0.873 |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Choi, K.; Jeon, G.-S.; Jang, K.-S. Gender Differences in the Impact of Intergenerational Support on Depressive Symptoms among Older Adults in Korea. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 4380. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17124380
Choi K, Jeon G-S, Jang K-S. Gender Differences in the Impact of Intergenerational Support on Depressive Symptoms among Older Adults in Korea. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020; 17(12):4380. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17124380
Chicago/Turabian StyleChoi, Kyungwon, Gyeong-Suk Jeon, and Kwang-Sim Jang. 2020. "Gender Differences in the Impact of Intergenerational Support on Depressive Symptoms among Older Adults in Korea" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17, no. 12: 4380. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17124380
APA StyleChoi, K., Jeon, G.-S., & Jang, K.-S. (2020). Gender Differences in the Impact of Intergenerational Support on Depressive Symptoms among Older Adults in Korea. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(12), 4380. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17124380