IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/geronb/v75y2020i10p2219-2229..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perceptions of Closeness in Adult Parent–Child Dyads: Asymmetry in the Context of Family Complexity

Author

Listed:
  • Kirsten van Houdt
  • Matthijs Kalmijn
  • Katya Ivanova
  • J Jill Suitor

Abstract

ObjectivesMulti-actor data show that parents’ and adult children’s evaluations of their relation do not necessarily match. We studied disagreement in parent- and child-reported closeness, comparing parent–child dyads involving separated parents, non-separated parents, and stepparents to shed new light on today’s diverse landscape of adult parent–child relations.MethodUsing data from the Parents and Children in the Netherlands (OKiN) survey, we analyzed closeness in parent–child dyads (N = 4,602) comparing (step)parents’ and their adult children’s (aged 25–45) reports. To distinguish directional disagreement (i.e., differences in child- and parent-reported means) from nondirectional disagreement (i.e., the association between child- and parent-reported measures), while accounting for absolute levels of closeness, we estimated log-linear models.ResultsAll types of parents tend to report higher levels of closeness than their children. Whereas parental overreport is more prevalent among biological father–child dyads than among biological mother–child dyads, we found no differences between biological dyads and stepdyads. The association between children’s and parents’ reports is higher among dyads involving stepmothers or married mothers than among those involving separated mothers and (step)fathers.DiscussionThe intergenerational stake (i.e., parental overreport) is not unique to biological parent–child relations. Instead, patterns of disagreement seem most strongly stratified by gender.

Suggested Citation

  • Kirsten van Houdt & Matthijs Kalmijn & Katya Ivanova & J Jill Suitor, 2020. "Perceptions of Closeness in Adult Parent–Child Dyads: Asymmetry in the Context of Family Complexity," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 75(10), pages 2219-2229.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:geronb:v:75:y:2020:i:10:p:2219-2229.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/geronb/gbaa122
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:75:y:2020:i:10:p:2219-2229.. 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.