IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/geronb/v81y2026i1pgbaf234..html

Resource or crisis? Cognitive functioning after widowhood and why paid work status matters

Author

Listed:
  • Maria Karlene Shawn I Cabaraban
  • Valeria Bordone
  • Daniela Weber

Abstract

ObjectivesThis study investigates the extent to which the experience of widowhood is associated with within-person changes in two key dimensions of cognitive functioning: crystallized and fluid intelligence (measured as memory recall and verbal fluency, respectively). This work enriches the empirical body of knowledge by considering whether paid work status (defined as working, retirement, or homemaking) plays a protective role in gender-specific cognitive changes associated with losing a spouse.MethodsUtilizing six waves of the Survey of Health, Ageing, and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) covering 32,089 men (N = 97,774) and 40,821 women (N = 126,998) aged 50+, two-way fixed-effects regression models were estimated to compare changes in cognitive functioning between being continuously partnered versus experiencing widowhood. We considered important heterogeneities by performing sub-sample analyses by paid work status and gender.ResultsCognitive changes were associated with widowhood, albeit markedly different by gender and across paid work status. The transition to widowhood among men was associated with reduced verbal fluency only if working. Instead, widows performed more poorly, especially in terms of memory recall, but only if they were homemakers at the time of the transition.DiscussionPaid work may serve as a cognitive resource after widowhood. However, the way in which it acts depends on gender, while being retired at the time of widowhood acts as a protection for both men and women.

Suggested Citation

  • Maria Karlene Shawn I Cabaraban & Valeria Bordone & Daniela Weber, 2026. "Resource or crisis? Cognitive functioning after widowhood and why paid work status matters," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 81(1), pages 234.-234..
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:geronb:v:81:y:2026:i:1:p:gbaf234.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/geronb/gbaf234
    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:81:y:2026:i:1:p:gbaf234.. 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.