IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/geronb/v74y2019i3p465-473..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Elder Mistreatment Among Chinese American Families: Do Acculturation and Traditionalism Matter?

Author

Listed:
  • Xiang Gao
  • Fei Sun
  • David R Hodge

Abstract

ObjectivesThis study examined the effect of acculturation and Chinese traditionalism on elder mistreatment (EM) among Chinese American older adults.MethodWe used a mixed method design in this 2-phase cross-sectional exploratory study conducted in the Phoenix metropolitan area. In Phase I, we conducted four focus groups to develop a culturally relevant EM assessment tool. In Phase II, we administered a survey incorporating this tool to 266 community-dwelling Chinese American older adults aged 60 and older. Acculturation was measured using the Marin acculturation scale. Traditionalism was measured with questions drawn from the Traditionality–Modernity subscale of the Chinese Personality Assessment Inventory (CPAI-2).ResultsThe prevalence rates of elder abuse and elder neglect are 8.3% and 5.3%, respectively. Higher levels of acculturation and depression are positively associated with the occurrence of elder abuse (odds ratio [OR] = 1.06). Traditionalism is not significantly related to elder abuse or elder neglect.DiscussionThe results suggest that promoting traditional Chinese beliefs may not necessarily prevent EM among members of this population. Rather, EM prevention efforts might focus on building “bi-cultural†identities among both older adults and their adult children. Future research could explore the effect of intergenerational acculturation discrepancies on EM among members of this population.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiang Gao & Fei Sun & David R Hodge, 2019. "Elder Mistreatment Among Chinese American Families: Do Acculturation and Traditionalism Matter?," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 74(3), pages 465-473.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:geronb:v:74:y:2019:i:3:p:465-473.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/geronb/gbw154
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:geronb:v:74:y:2019:i:3:p:465-473.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/psychsocgerontology .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.