Author
Listed:
- Colette J Brown
- Karen S Rook
- Susan T Charles
- Karen L Fingerman
Abstract
ObjectivesRelationships that elicit both positive and negative emotions, known as ambivalent ties, are often linked to adverse health outcomes in later life. Their negative health impacts, however, may depend on how older adults appraise different emotional experiences (e.g., viewing relationship “ups and downs” as useful or meaningful). This study examined whether bivalent affect valuation (BAV; the extent to which people appraise both positive and negative emotions as valuable) moderates the link between ambivalent ties and health-related limitations in daily activities.MethodsCommunity-dwelling older adults (N = 250, older adults aged 65–89years) completed an in-person interview assessing their social ties and sociodemographic factors, followed by a self-administered questionnaire assessing their valuation of positive and negative emotions, and 5–6 days of momentary assessments examining their social encounters (every 3 h) and health-related limitations each day (at bedtime).ResultsOverall, greater exposure to ambivalent ties was associated with more health-related limitations across all days in the study period. Among older adults with greater BAV, however, greater exposure to ambivalent ties on a given day was associated with fewer health-related limitations that day compared to days with less exposure to ambivalent ties. Sensitivity analyses revealed that this effect was likely due to valuing negative affect, specifically.DiscussionThese findings highlight the importance of considering how older adults’ valuation of their emotions, particularly their negative emotions, might influence the health-related toll of ambivalent ties.
Suggested Citation
Colette J Brown & Karen S Rook & Susan T Charles & Karen L Fingerman, 2025.
"The advantages of seeing the silver lining: how valuing emotions moderates the link between ambivalent ties and daily health,"
The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 80(9), pages 124.-124..
Handle:
RePEc:oup:geronb:v:80:y:2025:i:9:p:gbaf124.
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to
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:80:y:2025:i:9:p:gbaf124.. 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.