Types of multidimensional vulnerability and well-being among the retired in the U.S

Abstract

Background

An extensive study investigated the risk factors for low well-being in post-retirement. Most previous studies have taken a unidimensional perspective, focusing on single factors such as financial status, physical health, and mental health.

Objective

Drawing on the vulnerability framework, we first identify and describe the empirical subgroups of vulnerability among retirees in the United States across four major domains of later life: material, physical, social, and mental vulnerability. Then, we investigate the association between vulnerability profiles and well-being.

Method

The sample included 3,158 retirees aged 65+ who participated in the Health and Retirement Study (HRS). Latent class analysis was utilized to identify the heterogeneous subgroups of vulnerability, and then a series of OLS regression analyses was conducted to examine the relationship between patterns of vulnerability and well-being.

Results

Five vulnerability patterns were identified: material vulnerable (12%), health & social vulnerable (14%), material, health & social vulnerable (6%), least vulnerable (34%), and social vulnerable (35%). The health & social vulnerable group had the strongest negative influence on well-being among all subgroups. As the largest subgroup, the social vulnerable group’s negative influence on well-being stood out, with a stronger effect than that of material privation experienced by those in the material vulnerable group.

Conclusion

By empirically identifying subgroups of differential vulnerability patterns among retirees, this study showed that post-retirement vulnerability reflects complex interactions among multiple disadvantages. Findings of this study enhance understanding of the disparities in well-being within the retired population, pointing to the possibility of targeted policy and program development.

Keywords:

• Retirement
• vulnerability
• well-being
• Latent Class Analysis (LCA)

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

The authors received no specific funding for this work.