IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/netsci/v8y2020i2p271-289_8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Roles of egos’ and siblings’ perceptions of maternal favoritism in adult children’s depressive symptoms: A within-family network approach

Author

Listed:
  • Suitor, J. Jill
  • Gilligan, Megan
  • Rurka, Marissa
  • Hou, Yifei

Abstract

It is well documented that intergenerational ties play important roles in adults’ well-being. However, most studies focus on the impact of individuals’ own perceptions of their ties without considering whether family members’ assessments of these ties affect well-being. We address this question using data from 296 adult children nested within 95 later-life families in which all offspring were interviewed. Applying a mixed-method within-family approach, we explored whether the effect of perceived maternal favoritism on depressive symptoms was increased when siblings shared ego’s perceptions. Multilevel regression analyses revealed that ego’s own perceptions predicted depressive symptoms, but only among daughters. Siblings’ perceptions that egos were most close to mothers did not affect the well-being of daughters or sons. Qualitative analyses suggested that differential effects of perceived favoritism by gender reflected differences in the meaning sons and daughters associated with being favored children. Favored daughters were more likely than favored sons to report that they were emotional caregivers to their mothers; this pattern was especially strong when siblings reinforced egos’ perceptions of being “best suited” for this role. These findings emphasize the salience of egos’ own perceptions, relative to those of family network members, in shaping role embracement and psychological well-being, especially among women.

Suggested Citation

  • Suitor, J. Jill & Gilligan, Megan & Rurka, Marissa & Hou, Yifei, 2020. "Roles of egos’ and siblings’ perceptions of maternal favoritism in adult children’s depressive symptoms: A within-family network approach," Network Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(2), pages 271-289, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:netsci:v:8:y:2020:i:2:p:271-289_8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S2050124219000316/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    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:cup:netsci:v:8:y:2020:i:2:p:271-289_8. 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/nws .

    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.