A national portrait of the well-being of remarried and previously married cohabiting older adults.

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q3 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Christopher A Julian, Susan L Brown
{"title":"A national portrait of the well-being of remarried and previously married cohabiting older adults.","authors":"Christopher A Julian, Susan L Brown","doi":"10.1080/13607863.2024.2438834","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Mounting evidence signals that cohabitation operates as an alternative to remarriage in later life. However, others have maintained that cohabitation is an incomplete institution marked by less favorable outcomes than remarriage. We appraise these two frameworks by examining the well-being of remarried and previously married cohabiting older adults.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Drawing on the 2010-2020 Health and Retirement Study, we assessed whether remarried and previously married cohabiting older adults differed in their depressive symptoms and loneliness. We also tested whether the association between relationship quality and well-being varied by union type.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among women, cohabitors reported higher levels of depressive symptoms than their remarried counterparts. In contrast, union type was not appreciably associated with men's depressive symptoms. Meanwhile, among men, cohabitors reported less loneliness, on average, than did those in remarriages. No corresponding union-type differential emerged among women. Additionally, the association between relationship quality and psychological well-being did not differ by union type for both men and women.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study largely aligns with the notion that cohabitation functions as an alternative to remarriage in later life. The growth of cohabitation among older adults, coupled with its distinct purpose during this life stage, underscores the importance of advancing this nascent line of inquiry into its role in older adults' well-being.</p>","PeriodicalId":55546,"journal":{"name":"Aging & Mental Health","volume":" ","pages":"1-12"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aging & Mental Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2024.2438834","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Mounting evidence signals that cohabitation operates as an alternative to remarriage in later life. However, others have maintained that cohabitation is an incomplete institution marked by less favorable outcomes than remarriage. We appraise these two frameworks by examining the well-being of remarried and previously married cohabiting older adults.

Method: Drawing on the 2010-2020 Health and Retirement Study, we assessed whether remarried and previously married cohabiting older adults differed in their depressive symptoms and loneliness. We also tested whether the association between relationship quality and well-being varied by union type.

Results: Among women, cohabitors reported higher levels of depressive symptoms than their remarried counterparts. In contrast, union type was not appreciably associated with men's depressive symptoms. Meanwhile, among men, cohabitors reported less loneliness, on average, than did those in remarriages. No corresponding union-type differential emerged among women. Additionally, the association between relationship quality and psychological well-being did not differ by union type for both men and women.

Conclusion: Our study largely aligns with the notion that cohabitation functions as an alternative to remarriage in later life. The growth of cohabitation among older adults, coupled with its distinct purpose during this life stage, underscores the importance of advancing this nascent line of inquiry into its role in older adults' well-being.

再婚和曾经结过婚的同居老年人的全国幸福画像。
目的:越来越多的证据表明,同居是晚年再婚的一种选择。然而,其他人坚持认为同居是一种不完整的制度,其结果不如再婚好。我们通过检查再婚和以前结婚的同居老年人的幸福来评估这两个框架。方法:根据2010-2020年健康与退休研究,我们评估再婚和已婚同居老年人在抑郁症状和孤独感方面是否存在差异。我们还测试了关系质量和幸福感之间的联系是否因结合类型而异。结果:在女性中,同居者报告的抑郁症状水平高于再婚者。相比之下,结合类型与男性的抑郁症状没有明显的联系。与此同时,在男性中,同居者报告的孤独感平均比再婚者要少。在女性中没有出现相应的联合型差异。此外,两性关系质量与心理健康之间的关系并没有因结合类型而异。结论:我们的研究在很大程度上与同居作为晚年再婚的一种选择的观念相一致。老年人中同居的增长,加上其在这个生命阶段的独特目的,强调了推进这一新兴调查线在老年人幸福中的作用的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Aging & Mental Health
Aging & Mental Health 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
2.90%
发文量
176
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Aging & Mental Health provides a leading international forum for the rapidly expanding field which investigates the relationship between the aging process and mental health. The journal addresses the mental changes associated with normal and abnormal or pathological aging, as well as the psychological and psychiatric problems of the aging population. The journal also has a strong commitment to interdisciplinary and innovative approaches that explore new topics and methods. Aging & Mental Health covers the biological, psychological and social aspects of aging as they relate to mental health. In particular it encourages an integrated approach for examining various biopsychosocial processes and etiological factors associated with psychological changes in the elderly. It also emphasizes the various strategies, therapies and services which may be directed at improving the mental health of the elderly and their families. In this way the journal promotes a strong alliance among the theoretical, experimental and applied sciences across a range of issues affecting mental health and aging. The emphasis of the journal is on rigorous quantitative, and qualitative, research and, high quality innovative studies on emerging topics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信