Within-family patterns of intergenerational emotional closeness and psychological well-being of older parents in China

Abstract

Objectives: There may be a substantial difference in the intergenerational emotional closeness among offspring in a multi-child family, both regarding the overall level as well as the extent to which older parents differentiate emotional closeness between their children. This study addressed different within-family patterns based on the average level and differentiation of older parent–child emotional closeness. It also examined the associations between these distinct patterns and the psychological well-being of older parents in China.

Method: We derived a final sample of 4247 older parents (aged 60+) with 14,461 children from the baseline wave (2010) of the China Family Panel Studies. A latent profile analysis was applied to classify within-family patterns based on two indicators: within-family mean level and differentiation of parent–child emotional closeness among offspring. Ordered logistic regression and ordinary least square (OLS) regression were used to investigate the associations between these patterns and older adults’ life satisfaction and depression, respectively.

Results: Two family patterns of parent–child emotional closeness were identified: tight-knit (91.50%) and highly ambivalent (8.50%). Compared with the former, older parents having highly ambivalent relationships across multiple offspring tended to have lower life satisfaction and higher levels of depression.

Conclusion: This study highlighted the importance of capturing different within-family dynamics of intergenerational emotional closeness in Chinese families. It also pointed out the negative effects of collective ambivalence for older adults’ psychological well-being.

Keywords:

• Intergenerational relationship
• emotional closeness
• multi-child family
• older parents
• psychological well-being

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the public dataset – China Family Panel Studies (CFPS), funded by 985 Program of Peking University and carried out by the Institute of Social Science Survey of Peking University.

Disclosure statement

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

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the National Social Science Foundation of China (grant number 19CSH034).