My iam Gi a din Uni e si y o Gene a
E ic D. Widme Uni e si y o Gene a∗
Ing id A ne Connidis Uni e si y o Wes e n On a io∗∗
Anna-Maija Cas én Uni e si y o Eas e n Finland∗∗∗
Ri a Gou eia Uni e si y o Lisbon∗∗∗∗
Ba ba a Maso i Uni e si y o Applied Sciences and A s o Sou he n Swi ze land∗∗∗∗∗
Ambi alence in La e -Li e Family Ne wo ks:
Beyond In e gene a ional Dyads
NCCR LIVES, Cen e o he In e disciplina y S udy o
Ge on ology and Vulne abili y, Uni e si y o Gene a, 54,
e des Acacias, 1227 Ca ouge, Gene a, Swi ze land.
∗NCCR LIVES, Depa men o Sociology, Uni e si y o
Gene a, Uni Mail, 40 bd du Pon -d’A e, CH-1211 Gene a
4, Swi ze land ([email p o ec ed]).
∗∗ Depa men o Sociology, Uni e si y o Wes e n On a io,
London, On a io N6A5C2, Canada.
∗∗∗ Depa men o Social Sciences, Uni e si y o Eas e n
Finland, PO Box 1627, Kuopio, 70211, Finland.
∗∗∗∗ Ins i u e o Social Sciences, Uni e si y o Lisbon,
A enida P o esso Aníbal Be encou n∘9, Lisboa
1600-189, Po ugal.
∗∗∗∗∗ NCCR LIVES, Cen e o Compe ence on Aging,
Uni e si y o Applied Sciences and A s o Sou he n
Swi ze land, S abile Piazze a, Via Violino 11, 6928
Manno, Swi ze land.
© 2018 The Au ho s. Jou nal o Ma iage and Family pub-
lished by Wiley Pe iodicals, Inc. on behal o Na ional Coun-
cil on Family Rela ions.
This is an open access a icle unde he e ms o he C e-
a i e Commons A ibu ion-NonComme cial License, which
pe mi s use, dis ibu ion and ep oduc ion in any medium,
p o ided he o iginal wo k is p ope ly ci ed and is no used
o comme cial pu poses.
Key Wo ds: ambi alence, con lic , emo ional suppo , amily
ne wo ks, inequali ies, olde adul s.
In la e li e, changing condi ions ela ed o
heal h, pa ne ship, and economic s a us may
igge no only suppo bu also con lic and
ambi alence, wi h he consequen enego ia-
ion o amily ies. The aim o his s udy is
o in es iga e bo h con lic and emo ional sup-
po in he amily ne wo ks o olde adul s,
aking he esea ch beyond he le el o in e -
gene a ional dyads. We used a subsample o
563 elde s (aged 65 yea s and olde ) om he
Swiss Vi e/Leben/Vi e e su ey. Mul iple co -
espondence analysis and in-dep h case s udies
we e used o iden i y he key social condi ions
ha ela e o he p e alence o con lic ed and
suppo i e dyads in amily ne wo ks. Findings
showed ha he balance o con lic and emo-
ional suppo in olde adul s’ amily ne wo ks
a ied acco ding o he composi ion o hei am-
ily ne wo k as well as hei age, heal h, income,
and gende .
Heigh ened a en ion o he concep o ambi a-
lence since he u n o he cen u y challenged
he iew o amily ies as exclusi ely suppo i e
o posi i e and highligh ed con adic ions in
he ies be ween adul child en and hei aging
pa en s (Connidis, 2012, 2015; Connidis &
768 Jou nal o Ma iage and Family 80 (June 2018): 768–784
DOI:10.1111/jom .12469
Ambi alence in La e -Li e Family Ne wo ks 769
McMullin, 2002; Lüsche , 2002, 2005; Lüsche
& Ho , 2013; Lüsche & Pilleme , 1998). The
ambi alence concep emphasizes he coex-
is ence o con lic and suppo as inhe en
pa s o amily dynamics (Connidis, 2012,
2015; Connidis & McMullin, 2002; Lüsche ,
2002, 2005; Lüsche & Ho , 2013; Lüsche &
Pilleme , 1998; Willson, Shuey, Elde , & Wick-
ama, 2006). To da e, he ambi alence esea ch
has been mainly ci cumsc ibed o he dyadic
le el and a ely conside s how ambi alence
in in e gene a ional ela ionships is embedded
in pa e ns o con lic and emo ional suppo
in la ge amily ne wo ks. Using a ep esen a-
i e sample o olde adul s li ing in Gene a,
Swi ze land, his a icle explo es con lic and
emo ional suppo in la e -li e amily ne wo ks,
iden i ies ou pa e ns, and in es iga es how
hose pa e ns a e embedded in he demo-
g aphic, social, and economic condi ions ha
a ec indi iduals and hei amily ies. I goes
beyond in e gene a ional dyads by s udying
ambi alence a he le el o amily ne wo ks and
by making connec ions o b oade social o ces,
pa icula ly social inequali y o s uc u ed social
ela ions. The esul s a e discussed in ela ion o
key issues in social ge on ology, including olde
adul s’ socioemo ional selec i i y (Ca s ensen,
1992) and he unin ended consequences o
amily suppo (Connidis & McMullin, 2002;
Lüsche & Pilleme , 1998; Willson e al., 2006).
Backg ound
Ambi alence Beyond In e gene a ional Dyads
Ambi alence is a mul ile el concep ha empha-
sizes con adic ions a he le els o indi iduals
and ela ionships; social ins i u ions, including
amilies; and socie y, including he wel a e s a e
and he s uc u ed social ela ions o inequali y
based on gende , class, ace o e hnici y, age,
and abili y (Connidis, 2015). Indi iduals s i e
o nego ia e hese mul ile el con adic ions and
he esul ing coexis ence o con lic and emo-
ional suppo in hei a ious pe sonal ela ion-
ships, including ies in he amily ealm. These
nego ia ions occu a he meso le el o amilies,
and hey need o be explo ed a his le el— ha
is, beyond he le el o isola ed dyads.
Typologies ha e p o en o be a use ul ool o
explo ing ambi alence in in e gene a ional am-
ily dyads as was shown by Eu opean esea ch
(e.g., Fe ing, Michels, Boll, & Filipp, 2009;
an Gaalen & Dyks a, 2006). Lüsche ’s (2002,
2005) heo e ical ypology o ambi alence is one
o e y ew a emp s o cap u e he in e ac ion
be ween suppo and con lic in in e gene a-
ional ies; i includes he ollowing ou ypes
o dis inc ela ional pa e ns: emancipa ion,
solida i y, cap i a ion, and a omiza ion. These
ypes iden i y he a ious ways in which amily
membe s nego ia e ambi alence in in e gene a-
ional ela ionships (Lüsche & Ho , 2013). In
he emancipa ion ype, indi iduals accep con-
lic along wi h coope a ion and suppo and ind
new and mo e e ec i e ways o ela ing. In he
solida i y ype, pa en s and child en emphasize
oge he ness and suppo as ways o a oiding
con lic and open ambi alence. Cap i a ed
pa en –child ies a e s uck in con lic , en angled
in an ongoing ba le o e ambi alence, whe eas
a omized in e gene a ional dyads disengage
o a oid con lic and ambi alence. Lüsche ’s
ypology has con ibu ed o a la ge body o heo-
e ical and empi ical wo k in social ge on ology
(e.g., Connidis, 2015; Ka z & Lowens ein, 2010;
Lang, 2004; Le iecq, Bailey, & Dahlen, 2008;
Phillips, Ogg, & Ray, 2003). Howe e , ela ed
empi ical wo k ocuses on in e gene a ional
dyads.
A key challenge in he s udy o ambi a-
lence in social ge on ology is o explo e he
ou pa e ns o Lüsche ’s (2002, 2005) he-
o e ical ypology a he meso le el o amily
ne wo ks. We he e o e aim o place dyads in
he wide con igu a ion o amily ne wo ks
and o hen ela e amily ne wo k ypes o he
la ge social con ex in which hey a e embed-
ded. Empi ically iden i ying a ious ypes o
amily ne wo ks and hei a ailable esou ces
may e eal a iabili y among amily ypes in
he capaci y o nego ia e ambi alence in ways
ha enhance emo ional suppo in olde adul s’
amilies. To in es iga e ambi alence a he meso
le el o amilies, we anspose Lüsche ’s (2002,
2005) heo e ical ypology in o he amewo k
o social ne wo k analysis, in which dyads a e
conside ed as in e dependen pa s o a ne wo k
whose ea u es accoun o much o wha hap-
pens in any o hem (Wasse man & Faus , 1994).
Such ools ha e been used in social ge on ology
o explo e amily suppo s uc u es (Co nwell,
2009, 2011; Gi a din & Widme , 2015). We
p opose using hese ools o assess he ela i e
dominance o con lic ed and suppo i e dyads
in he o e all dynamics o olde adul s’ amily
ne wo ks (see Table 1).
770 Jou nal o Ma iage and Family
Table 1. T ansposi ion o Lüsche ’s Typology In o he
F amewo k o Social Ne wo k Analysis
P opo ion o con lic ed dyads
P opo ion o
suppo i e dyads La ge Low
La ge Emancipa ion Solida i y
Low Cap i a ion A omiza ion
Taking a social ne wo k analysis pe spec i e,
he nego ia ion o ambi alence a he meso
( amily) le el esul s in ou pa e ns (Widme ,
2016). Family ne wo ks in which emancipa ion
p e ails display a la ge numbe o dyads ha
a e cha ac e ized by bo h con lic and emo ional
suppo . These dyads accep he coexis ence o
emo ional suppo and con lic , and hey ind
ways o ela e e ec i ely. In amily ne wo ks o
he solida i y ype, a majo i y o he dyads a e
suppo i e, and e y ew show con lic . Emo-
ional suppo is ac i ely p omo ed, and con lic
is a oided, in a majo i y o hese amily dyads.
Cap i a ion occu s when many o he dyads in
a amily ne wo k a e bu dened by con lic , wi h
limi ed emo ional suppo ; his si ua ion is mo e
likely o occu when amily membe s mus s ay
oge he due o s ong amily obliga ions and o
limi ed pe sonal esou ces. Finally, a omiza ion
is cha ac e ized by he p esence o ew amily
dyads ha a e ei he suppo i e o con lic ed.
Emo ional suppo migh pe e ou as e du ing
he long e m, and ensions a e esol ed h ough
collec i e emo ional disengagemen , pu ing
olde adul s a isk o loneliness. Iden i ying
such ne wo k pa e ns based on Lüsche ’s (2002,
2005) ypology makes i possible o assess
ambi alence in a a ie y o amily con ex s and
i s connec ion o emo ional suppo .
Composi ion o Family Ne wo ks and O he
Li e Cou se Condi ions o Ambi alence
Family ne wo ks a e di e se in hei compo-
si ion. Some include only a spouse, child en,
and g andchild en, bu o he s include a wide
a ie y o ies such as siblings, dis an kin,
in-laws, s ep- ela i es, and iends (Gi a din &
Widme , 2015; T eas & Ma cum, 2011). Di -
e en amily ies may ha e unequal likelihoods
o being ambi alen . Siblings, in-laws, dis an
kin, s ep- ela i es, and iends ypically ha e
lowe social expec a ions o p o ide emo ional
suppo and o s ay connec ed; hese mo e
olun a y ela ionships a e ins ead based on
a ini y and sha ed in e es s (Campbell, Con-
nidis, & Da ies, 1999; Schne le & Wöhle ,
2014). In cases in which such ies a e p e alen
in a amily ne wo k, one may expec a la ge
p opo ion o suppo i e dyads, whe eas he
ense dyads a e disengaged— he solida i y
ype. In con as , amily ne wo ks composed
o child en and g andchild en a e cha ac e ized
by s ong obliga ions o main ain close emo-
ional connec ions om which amily membe s
canno eadily escape (Finch & Mason, 1993).
Such ies may, in u n, c ea e ensions. Thus,
emancipa ion is a likely esul o such amily
ne wo ks, which a e expec ed o include a la ge
p opo ion o suppo i e dyads bu also some
con lic ed and ambi alen dyads.
O he condi ions associa ed wi h he li e
cou se may al e he balance o con lic ed
and emo ionally suppo i e dyads in amily
ne wo ks. Ha ing inancial esou ces, being
young-old, being in good heal h, and ha ing
a pa ne con ibu e o main aining emo ional
suppo h ough mu ual exchanges (Co nwell,
2009, 2011; O e , 2012). These condi ions
a e expec ed o sus ain a la ge p opo ion o
suppo i e dyads in he amily ne wo k and o
hus p omo e he solida i y ype. Howe e , he
a ailabili y o esou ces is also associa ed wi h
ac o s ela ed o ime alloca ion and emo ional
closeness among amily membe s (Taylo &
No is, 2000). Thus, emancipa ion— he coex-
is ence o con lic ed and suppo i e dyads in
amily ne wo ks—may occu when esou ces
a e a ailable; al hough esou ces con ibu e o
suppo exchanges, hey may also aise ensions
ela ed o ai ness and indi idual p e e ences in
esou ce dis ibu ion.
Al e na i ely, ha ing ewe inancial
esou ces, being oldes -old, being in poo
heal h, and ha ing los a pa ne may chal-
lenge he balance o suppo i e dyads in amily
ne wo ks in a o o con lic ed dyads. Olde pa -
en s’ diminished esou ces inc ease hei need
o emo ional suppo and, po en ially, heigh en
he bu den placed on amily membe s—an
ambi alen si ua ion ha has o be nego ia ed
in amily ne wo ks (Connidis, 2012; Connidis
& McMullin, 2002; Lüsche & Pilleme , 1998;
Willson e al., 2006). Such ci cums ances may
exace ba e ension among amily membe s, as
hey ha e o adjus hei needs and expec a ions
ega ding emo ional suppo (Connidis, 2003;
Co nwell, 2009, 2011; Hillcoa -Nallé amby &
Phillips, 2011). This may lead o cap i a ion,
Ambi alence in La e -Li e Family Ne wo ks 771
wi h a la ge p opo ion o dyads wi hin he
amily ne wo k ha a e cha ac e ized by con lic
and limi ed emo ional-suppo , especially when
esou ces (e.g., income and ime) a e sca ce
and when he only po en ially suppo i e amily
membe s a e child en (as in he case o widowed
o di o ced pa en s). A omiza ion is expec ed o
be mos likely when ew o no amily membe s
a e p esen o when a se e e lack o esou ces
makes emo ional-suppo exchanges di icul ,
leading o disengagemen (O e , 2012). No e
ha such condi ions may p omo e gende di e -
ences, as olde women a e mo e likely han olde
men o be widowed, o ha e a lowe income, and
o be in poo unc ional heal h because o hei
gende ed posi ion in socie y and hei longe li e
expec ancy (A be , Da idson, & Ginn, 2003;
Moen, 1996; Willson e al., 2006).
In sum, du ing la e li e, indi iduals may
expe ience a a ie y o economic, amily, and
heal h condi ions ha lead o dis inc and a -
ious balances o con lic and emo ional sup-
po in hei amily ne wo ks. This s udy aims
o unde s and whe he and how he composi-
ion o amily ne wo ks and li e cou se condi-
ions a e associa ed wi h emancipa ion, solida -
i y, cap i a ion, and a omiza ion as pa e ns ha
cha ac e ize ambi alence in olde adul s’ am-
ily ne wo ks. This issue is examined h ough he
p e alence o con lic ed and suppo i e dyads
in amily ne wo ks. We hen obse e whe he
olde adul s’ amily-ne wo k composi ion, a ail-
able esou ces, pa ne ship s a us, age, heal h,
and social posi ion (as indica ed by gende , class,
and ci izenship) accoun o he a ia ions in
such pa e ns wi hin amily con igu a ions. To
his end, we use mul iple co espondence anal-
ysis (MCA) and in-dep h case s udies o explo e
how he in e play o hese condi ions is ela ed
o he balance o con lic and emo ional suppo
in la e -li e amily ne wo ks.
Me hod
Da a and Sample
The da a came om he Vi e/Leben/Vi e e
s udy, which is a la ge, in e disciplina y
su ey on he li e and heal h condi ions o
people aged 65 yea s and olde ; his s udy
was ca ied ou in 2011 and 2012 in i e o
26 can ons in Swi ze land (see O is e al.,
2016). S a i ied by sex and age, he sample o
3,635 communi y-dwelling o ins i u ionalized
pa icipan s was ep esen a i e o he gene al
popula ion aged 65 yea s o olde . Da a we e
collec ed using a sel -assessed ques ionnai e
and an in-home, ace- o- ace in e iew wi h a
s anda dized in e iew schedule. To illus a e
ou indings wi h mo e in-dep h in o ma ion,
we also d ew om a pool o ich li e-his o y
da a based on li e calenda s ha he esponden s
comple ed wi h he help o he in e iewe s.
Gi en he p ac ical issues conce ning da a
a ailabili y, ou analyses ocused on he Gene a
subsample (n=704). We d opped 126 indi-
iduals wi h cogni i e impai men s om he
analysis because hey we e no able o answe
he ques ionnai e on hei own ( esul ing in a
subsample wi h n=578). An addi ional 15 we e
d opped because hey did no answe he ques-
ions abou hei amily ne wo ks. The e o e,
he inal subsample included 563 esponden s.
The mean age in he Gene a subsample was
78 yea s ( ange, 65–101): 40% we e aged 65
o 74, 35% 75 o 84, and 25% we e 85 and
olde . O he esponden s, 49% we e women,
and 66% we e na i e bo n; 61% had an a e age
le el o educa ion (i.e., achie ed a high school
o equi alen deg ee), and 23% had a high le el
o educa ion (i.e., achie ed a leas a uni e si y
deg ee). Rega ding hei las occupa ional s a us
(p io o e i emen ), 30% we e uppe , 27%
we e whi e colla , 14% we e in e media y, 14%
we e blue colla , 9% we e sel -employed, and
6% we e inac i e. O he esponden s, 62% had
an a e age o high income. As o hei pools
o ela i es, 61% we e ma ied o had a pa ne
(ei he cohabi a ing o li ing sepa a ely), 82%
had a leas one li ing child, and 68% had a leas
one li ing sibling. Rega ding sel - a ed heal h,
54% assessed hei heal h as good o e y good,
38% assessed i as ai , and 8% assessed i as bad
o e y bad. A la ge majo i y o he esponden s
(75%) we e in good unc ional heal h ( obus
on he eigh ac i i ies o daily li ing [ADL]
scale), 16% epo ed ha ing di icul ies in one
o mo e o he eigh ADL ca ego ies, and 9%
we e dependen acco ding o he ADL scale.
Few we e ins i u ionalized (7%).
Measu es
Types o amily ne wo ks. D awing on s anda d
name gene a o s o amily ne wo ks (Widme ,
Aeby, & Sapin, 2013), we asked esponden s o
lis a maximum o i e indi iduals whom hey
conside ed signi ican amily membe s a he
ime o he in e iew. A e naming hese amily
772 Jou nal o Ma iage and Family
membe s, he esponden s we e asked o indi-
ca e he ype o ela ionship (e.g., pa ne , sis-
e , o daugh e ) ha hey had wi h each o he
ci ed pe sons. A o al o 14 amily e ms (com-
monly called name in e p e e s) we e iden i ied,
epo ed by a leas 5% o esponden s. To map
he main ypes o amily ne wo ks, we applied
s anda d ac o - and clus e -analy ic p ocedu es
o he amily ne wo ks (Widme , 2016). The
clus e ing app oach is commonly used in social
ge on ology o iden i y social-ne wo k ypes,
based on a ious kinds o social ela ionships
(e.g., amily, iends, neighbo s, and commu-
ni y g oups; Fio i, An onucci, & Co ina, 2006;
Li win, 2001; Wenge , 1991). The iden i ica ion
o amily ne wo ks h ough signi ican amily
membe s is, howe e , a ely conside ed. To his
end, we p oceeded using wo s eps. We i s an
an explo a o y ac o analysis—using p incipal
componen analysis wi h a imax o a ion—on
he 14 amily e ms, plus a esidual ca ego y
in o which he o he e ms we e ga he ed. Fol-
lowing he s anda d p ac ice o ac o analysis
(Tabachnick & Fidell, 1996), we e ained he
six ac o s ha had eigen alues g ea e han 1;
hese explained 55% o he a iance. We hen
inpu hese six ac o s’ sco es in o a hie a -
chical clus e ing analysis based on Euclidean
dis ances and he Wa d clus e ing algo i hm
(Leba , Mo ineau, & Pi on, 2002).
We selec ed a solu ion wi h six clus e s, based
on bo h in e p e abili y and clus e - alidi y
measu es such as he Calinski-Ha abasz and
silhoue e indexes (E e i , Landau, Leese, &
S ahl, 2011). In he i s ype, which we named
conjugal (39%), he esponden s cen e ed on
hei child en and on hei cu en pa ne . The
son amily ne wo k (8%) ocused on biolog-
ical sons, hei pa ne s, and hei child en,
whe eas he daugh e amily ne wo k (11%)
la gely included biological daugh e s and hei
child en. In sibling amily ne wo ks (15%),
he esponden s mainly ci ed hei siblings as
signi ican amily membe s. Those in kinship
amily ne wo ks (8%) included a a ie y o el-
a i es. Finally, hose in spa se amily ne wo ks
(19%) ei he men ioned no signi ican amily
membe o lis ed only a ew iends whom hey
conside ed o be amily membe s.
Pa e ns o con lic and emo ional suppo . A e
lis ing he signi ican amily membe s, a se o
ques ions was asked abou he emo ional suppo
and con lic among he lis ed amily membe s
(Widme e al., 2013). We measu ed he emo-
ional suppo in he dyads using he ollowing
ques ion: “Who would gi e emo ional suppo o
X [i.e., o he esponden and hen o each o he
indi idual in he esponden ’s amily ne wo k,
conside ed one by one] du ing ou ine o mino
oubles?” We mapped he con lic in he dyads
wi h he ollowing ques ion: “Each amily has
i s con lic s and ensions. In you opinion, who
makes X [i.e., he esponden and hen each o he
indi idual in he esponden ’s amily ne wo k,
conside ed one by one] ang y?” Thus, each ocal
pe son could men ion mo e han one membe
in he amily ne wo k who emo ionally suppo s
o annoys each o he o he membe s, including
him- o he sel . In o he wo ds, he esponden s
e alua ed no only hei own ela ionships wi h
each amily membe bu also all he ela ionships
among hei signi ican amily membe s.
Nex , o es ima e emo ional suppo and con-
lic in amily ne wo ks, we assessed he densi y
o emo ional suppo and he densi y o con lic
ac oss all o he amily dyads. These densi y
measu es e e o he p opo ion o suppo i e
and o con lic ed dyads among all he dyads in a
pe sonal o amily ne wo k (Hanneman & Rid-
dle, 2005). A high densi y o emo ional suppo
indica es ha a majo i y o amily dyads could
be easily ac i a ed o emo ional suppo , and
a high densi y o con lic indica es a la ge p o-
po ion o ense dyads. The a iable “pa e ns
o con lic and emo ional suppo ” was ope a-
ionalized by combining he wo densi y mea-
su es in o a single ca ego ical a iable. Fo his
pu pose, we i s dicho omized hese wo mea-
su es: high e sus low densi y o emo ional sup-
po and high e sus low densi y o con lic . Fo
suppo i e ies, we chose he median sco e o
.33 (33%) as he h eshold sepa a ing high and
low densi y o emo ional suppo , as he aw
sco es we e no no mally dis ibu ed. On a e -
age, he esponden s epo ed a much lowe p o-
po ion o ense dyads han o suppo i e dyads,
so we se he h eshold o con lic a .10 (10%),
which means ha he e was ension in one o
e e y 10 possible dyads. Then we combined
hese wo dicho omized densi y measu es in o
a single a iable—pa e ns o con lic and emo-
ional suppo —wi h he ollowing ou le els:
emancipa ion (high densi ies o emo ional sup-
po and con lic ), solida i y (high densi y o
emo ional suppo and low densi y o con lic ),
cap i a ion (low densi y o emo ional suppo
and high densi y o con lic ), and a omiza ion

Ambi alence in La e -Li e Family Ne wo ks 773
(low densi ies o emo ional suppo and con lic ).
Family ne wo ks wi h he emancipa ion ype
(23%) had high densi ies o bo h emo ional sup-
po and con lic —on a e age, 57% o dyads
we e pe cei ed as suppo i e, and 33% we e
con lic o ien ed. Among amily ne wo ks show-
ing solida i y (31%), he dyads we e, on a e -
age, 58% suppo i e and only 2% ense. Family
ne wo ks wi h he cap i a ion ype (9%) had a
densi y o con lic (20%) ha was simila o he
densi y o emo ional suppo (21%), which di -
e s om he emancipa ion ype, in which sup-
po i e dyads we e clea ly dominan . Fo amily
ne wo ks wi h he a omiza ion ype (37%), he e
was a e y low densi y o bo h emo ional sup-
po and con lic , as only 11% o he dyads we e
suppo i e and 2% we e con lic ed.
Pool o a ailable ela i es. The esponden s
we e asked o epo whe he hey had a pa -
ne (ei he cohabi a ing o li ing sepa a ely)
a he ime o he in e iew (0 =“no pa ne ,”
1=“ha e a pa ne ”), had a leas one li ing
child (0 =“no child en,” 1 =“ha e child en”),
and had a leas one li ing sibling (0 =“no b o h-
e so sis e s,”1=“ha e b o he s o sis e s”).
Age. We di ided ocal indi iduals by age
in o one o he ollowing h ee g oups:
aged 65 o 74 yea s (“young-old”), 75 o
84 yea s (“old-old”), and 85 yea s and olde
(“oldes -old”; Suzman & Riley, 1985).
Heal h. To measu e heal h, we ocused on unc-
ional heal h a he han on mo e gene al heal h
indica o s such as sel - a ed heal h because he
loss o au onomy in old age ep esen s one o
he mos challenging condi ions o bo h he
olde adul s and hei amily membe s. Such a
si ua ion wi hin a amily ne wo k may igge
he p o ision o a ious o ms o suppo as well
as ension. In addi ion, we pe o med he same
analysis wi h sel - a ed heal h and ob ained
simila esul s (no shown). To assess unc-
ional heal h, we asked esponden s how much
di icul y (0 =“no di icul y,” 1 =“able wi h
di icul y,” 2 =“unable o pe o m”) hey had
in pe o ming i e basic ac i i ies—washing,
d essing and und essing, ea ing and cu ing ood,
mo ing in and ou o bed, and mo ing a ound
indoo s (Ka z, Fo d, Moskowi z, Jackson, & Ja -
ee, 1963). We also asked hem abou hei di i-
cul y in pe o ming he ollowing h ee mobili y
ac ions: going up and down s ai s, mo ing
a ound ou side, and walking a leas 200 me e s
(Rosow & B eslau, 1966). These eigh i ems
had a eliabili y le el (C onbach’s 𝛼)o .91.We
c ea ed he ollowing h ee unc ional-heal h
ca ego ies: ADL- obus (able o pe o m all
eigh ac i i ies alone), ADL wi h di icul y
(ha ing di icul y pe o ming one o mo e o he
ac i i ies alone), and ADL-dependen (ha ing
one o mo e ADL incapaci ies and needing
someone’s help o pe o m hem).
Social posi ion in socie y. We used income
(1 =“low,” 2 =“a e age,” 3 =“high”), gende
(0 =“ emale,” 1 =“male”), and ci izenship
(wi h place o bi h as a p oxy; 0 =“na i e-
bo n,” 1 =“ o eign-bo n”) o measu e social
posi ion in Swiss socie y. We adjus ed incomes
o household size, wi h a alue o 1 o he
household head and 0.5 o each addi ional
household membe (A kinson, Rainwa e , &
Smeeding, 1995; Gab iel, O is, S ude , &
Bae iswyl, 2015).
Da a Analysis
To assess he associa ions ha he ou pa e ns
o con lic and emo ional suppo had wi h he
ypes o amily ne wo ks and wi h he o he
li e cou se condi ions (e.g., he pool o a ail-
able ela i es, age, heal h, income, gende , and
ci izenship), we compu ed an MCA—using he
Fac oMineR package in R (Lê, Josse, & Hus-
son, 2008). This enabled us o obse e how
he in e play o hese di e en a iables was
associa ed wi h emancipa ion, solida i y, cap i-
a ion, and a omiza ion. MCA is a nonlinea
mul i a ia e analysis me hod o ep esen ing
he unde lying s uc u es in a se o obse a ions,
as desc ibed by a se o ca ego ical a iables
(Abdi & Valen in, 2007; A olio e al., 2013).
MCA elies on an assump ion o in e depen-
dence a he han on a causali y p inciple, so i
is an ideal app oach when a ious ac o s in e -
ac in a bidi ec ional o ci cula way. In sum,
his explo a o y me hod p o ides a be e unde -
s anding o how he esponse ca ego ies a e
in e ela ed and, he e o e, enables he iden i i-
ca ion o pa e ns. To his end, MCA ex ac s he
main dimensions ha s uc u e he ela ionship
be ween he esponse ca ego ies. In MCA, he
i s wo o h ee ex ac ed dimensions explain as
much a iance as possible, and hey a e usually
su icien o syn hesize he mos impo an in o -
ma ion con ained in he con ingency ables, all
774 Jou nal o Ma iage and Family
Table 2. Disc imina ion Measu es o Va iables in
Dimensions a e Ro a ion
Va iables
Dimension 1
loading
Dimension 2
loading
Ac i e
Gende .25 .01
Income .33 .02
Ci izenship .01 .01
Ha ing a pa ne .49 .04
Ha ing a leas one li ing
child
.02 .56
Ha ing a leas one li ing
sibling
.13 .10
Family ne wo ks .25 .75
Pa e ns o con lic and
emo ional suppo
.12 .17
S a us o unc ional heal h .30 .00
Passi e
Age – –
% o explained ine ia 12.61% 8.40%
No e. As a passi e a iable, age has no con ibu ed o he
cons i u ion o axes. N=476.
while emaining pa simonious (Desbois, 2008).
To iden i y hese s uc u ing dimensions, one
elies on disc imina ion measu es: he a ios o
co ela ions be ween he a iables conside ed in
MCA and he chosen dimensions. These mea-
su es indica e he con ibu ion o each a iable in
he de ini ion o each dimension; la ge disc im-
ina ion measu es indica e s onge con ibu ions
o he dimension’s de ini ion (see Table 2; A o-
lio e al., 2013).
All o he esponse ca ego ies can be plo -
ed along he wo dimensions (axes in he plo )
o he MCA. The in e p e a ion o he esul s
is based on he p oximi ies and he dis ances
be ween he esponse ca ego ies in he plo ;
hose ha a e close o one ano he p esen simi-
la pa e ns o esponses, and hose ha a e dis-
an ha e dissimila pa e ns (Abdi & Valen in,
2007; A olio e al., 2013). To be e iden i y
which g oups o esponse ca ego ies we e mo e
clea ly associa ed wi h one o he wo main
dimensions, we o a ed hem, as he esponse
ca ego ies a e be e aligned along he main
dimensions a e o a ion (Sa acco, Cha en , &
Kuen z, 2010). We inpu all a iables excep age
as ac i e (di ec ly con ibu ing o he cons i u-
ion o he MCA’s axes) and inpu age as a pas-
si e a iable (G eenac e & Blasius, 2006)— ha
is, we p ojec ed age a pos e io i in he al eady
exis ing plo , bu i did no con ibu e o he
axes’ de ini ions. This is because we unde s ood
age as a p oxy o he aging p ocess, o he
psychological de elopmen , and o a a ie y
o social p ocesses s emming om changes in
social oles, s a uses, heal h, gene a ional expe-
iences and iden i y, and s ages in he li e cycle,
a he han as a causal mechanism pe se (Se -
e s en & Godlewski, 2016; Se e s en & Maye ,
1997). We conduc ed all analyses in R (R De el-
opmen Co e Team, 2011).
Resul s
Resul s o he Mul iple Co espondence
Analysis
Table 2 displays he disc imina ion measu es
o he a iables ( he a ios o co ela ions)
in he wo i s ex ac ed dimensions ha had
eigen alues g ea e han 1, as well as each
dimension’s pe cen ages o explained ine ia
(i.e., a iance) a e o a ion. These wo cho-
sen dimensions syn hesized he mos impo -
an in o ma ion o all he ac i e a iables. As
shown in Table 2, a iables measu ing pa ne -
ship (.49), income (.33), unc ional heal h s a us
(.30), and gende (.25) s ongly con ibu ed o
he cons i u ion o Dimension 1. Types o am-
ily ne wo ks (.75) and pa en hood (.56) s ongly
con ibu ed o he cons i u ion o Dimension 2.
In sum, he a ailabili y o a ious esou ces,
ha ing a leas on li ing child, and he compo-
si ion o amily ne wo ks we e he main con-
ibu o s o he wo-dimensional MCA space. To
es each a iable’s goodness o i , we compu ed
con idence ellipses o each esponse ca ego y
(Husson, Josse, Lê, & Maze , 2017). Con idence
ellipses desc ibe he dis ibu ions o he cen e
o g a i y o each esponse ca ego y and can
hus be used o deduce a con idence egion o
each ca ego y ia boo s apping. These analyses
e ealed ha all he selec ed a iables’ esponse
ca ego ies we e signi ican ly dis inc om each
o he , as hei ellipses did no o e lap, wi h
he excep ions o he daugh e and son am-
ily ne wo ks—which we e loca ed in he same
quad an (see Figu e 1)—and coun y o bi h.
Figu e 1 shows ha he i s dimension (ho -
izon al axis) disc imina ed among indi iduals
based on he a ailabili y o esou ces such as
income, pa ne ship, gende , age, unc ional
heal h, and ha ing a leas one li ing sibling.
P ecisely, he esponse ca ego ies ha indica ed
an ad an ageous posi ion in socie y (high o
Ambi alence in La e -Li e Family Ne wo ks 775
Figu e 1. P ojec ion o he Fi s Two Dimensions o he Mul iple Co espondence Analysis, A e Ro a ion.
a e age income, male, na i e bo n), a la ge
pool o ela i es (ha e a pa ne , ha e b o he s
o sis e s, and ha e child en), young-old age,
and good unc ional heal h (ADL- obus ) we e
loca ed in he nega i e coo dina es o he ho i-
zon al axis. On he o he hand, hose e lec ing
a low social posi ion (low income, emale,
and o eign bo n), a small pool o a ailable
ela i es (no pa ne , no b o he s o sis e s, and
no child en), oldes -old age, and poo unc ional
heal h (ADL wi h di icul y o ADL-dependen )
we e posi ioned in he posi i e coo dina es o
he ho izon al axis. The esou ces dimension
cap u ed 13% o he o al a iance.
Rega ding he second dimension ( e ical
axis), Figu e 1 e eals he s ong disc imina-
o y powe o pa en hood. Indeed, his axis
di e en ia ed indi iduals who had child en (in
he posi i e coo dina es o he e ical axis) om
hose who did no (in he nega i e coo dina es
o he e ical axis), and hei esul ing amily
ne wo ks. Figu e 1 shows ha he no child en
ca ego y and he amily ne wo ks ocused on
amily membe s o he han child en—such
as he sibling, kinship, and spa se amily
ne wo ks—we e posi ioned on he nega i e side
o he e ical axis, whe eas he ha ing child en
ca ego y and he amily ne wo ks cen e ed p i-
ma ily on li ing child en—such as he conjugal,
daugh e , and son amily ne wo ks—we e p o-
jec ed on he posi i e side o he e ical axis.
The pa en al-s a us dimension explained 8% o
he o al a iance.
As Figu e 1 shows, he ou pa e ns o
con lic and emo ional suppo we e di e en ly
p ojec ed on he ou quad an s o he g aph.
776 Jou nal o Ma iage and Family
Based on he coo dina es o he esponse ca -
ego ies in he bidimensional space, he main
p o iles associa ed wi h he ou pa e ns o con-
lic and emo ional suppo became iden i iable.
Emancipa ion was in he i s quad an . This
pa e n was associa ed wi h conjugal amily
ne wo ks; wi h being in he male, na i e-bo n,
young-old, and ADL- obus ca ego ies; and wi h
ha ing an a e age o high income. Cap i a ion
was in he second quad an , in close connec ion
wi h he inclusion o child en—bu wi h he
no-pa ne ca ego y—and wi h daugh e and
son amily ne wo ks, bo h ocused on chil-
d en and g andchild en. In e ms o esou ces,
hese esponden s had low social posi ions (low
income, emale, and o eign bo n), we e in he
oldes -old g oup and had poo unc ional heal h
(ADL wi h di icul y o ADL-dependen ). Soli-
da i y was posi ioned in he hi d quad an . This
pa e n was connec ed wi h ha ing b o he s o
sis e s, ha ing a pa ne , ha ing an a e age o
high income, and being in he male, young-old,
and ADL- obus g oups. Solida i y was also
associa ed wi h a lack o child en, as i was
posi ioned on he nega i e side o he e ical
axis, in he same a ea as he sibling amily
ne wo ks. Finally, a omiza ion was p ojec ed in
he ou h quad an . This pa e n was associa ed
wi h an absence o child en and wi h amily
ne wo ks ha we e cen e ed p ima ily on kin, on
a ew iends, o on no one, as in he spa se and
kinship amily ne wo ks. A omiza ion was also
ela ed o he lack o a ious esou ces, as i was
connec ed wi h being in he oldes -old, ADL
wi h di icul y o ADL-dependen , and emale
g oups, and wi h ha ing no pa ne and a low
income.
Insigh s F om he Case S udies
To illus a e he ways in which he pa e ns o
con lic and emo ional suppo we e embedded
in s uc u al condi ions, we p o ide ou case
s udies ha we e selec ed on he basis o he
quan i a i e esul s o bo h he ace- o- ace
in e iews (wi h s anda dized in e iew sched-
ules) and he li e-his o y da a.
Emancipa ion in a conjugal amily ne wo k. The
ocal indi idual, a man in his 90s, was li ing
wi h his wi e in his own house a he ime o
he in e iew. A e a ca ee as an in e na ional
ci il se an , he was well o , in good unc ional
heal h, and had wo sons, bo h o whom li ed
nea by. His olde son was ma ied and had h ee
child en, whe eas he younge one was single
and childless. His amily belonged o he con-
jugal ype, as he epo ed his wi e and wo sons
as he only signi ican amily membe s. The sup-
po i e dyads in his amily we e qui e dense
and ecip ocal. As shown in Figu e 2a, his wi e
was cen al in p o iding emo ional suppo , as
she ga e suppo o all he amily membe s bu
ecei ed suppo only om he ocal pe son ( he
a ows poin o suppo p o ide s). The ocal
indi idual exchanged emo ional suppo wi h
his wi e and wi h he younge son. The olde
son was less in eg a ed in he emo ional sup-
po exchanges, as he p o ided no suppo and
Figu e 2. Emancipa ion in a Conjugal Family Ne wo k.
The dynamic o emo ional suppo ;
densi y = .50; ecip oci y = .50
The dynamic o con lic ;
densi y = .33; ecip oci y = .33
(a) (b)
Ambi alence in La e -Li e Family Ne wo ks 783
Lang, F. R. (2004). The ilial ask in midli e: Ambi a-
lence and he quali y o adul child en’s ela ion-
ships wi h hei olde pa en s. In K. Pilleme & K.
Lüsche (Eds.), In e gene a ional ambi alences:
New pe spec i es on pa en –child ela ions in la e
li e (pp. 183–206). Ox o d, England: Else ie .
h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/S1530-3535(03)04008-1
Lê, S., Josse, J., & Husson, F. (2008). Fac oMineR:
An R package o mul i a ia e analysis. Jou nal
o S a is ical So wa e,25, 1–18. h ps://doi.o g/10
.18637/jss. 025.i01
Leba , L., Mo ineau, A., & Pi on, M. (2002). S a is-
ique explo a oi e mul idimensionnelle [Mul idi-
mensional explo a o y s a is ics] (3 d ed.). Pa is:
Dunod.
Le iecq, B. L., Bailey, S. J., & Dahlen, P. (2008).
Ambi alence and coping among cus odial g and-
pa en s. In B. Hayslip, J . & P. Kaminski (Eds.),
Pa en ing he cus odial g andchild. Implica-
ions o clinical p ac ice (pp. 3–16). New Yo k:
Sp inge .
Li win, H. (2001). Social ne wo k ype and mo ale in
old age. The Ge on ologis ,41, 516–524. h ps://
doi.o g/10.1093/ge on /41.4.516
Lüsche , K. (2002). In e gene a ional ambi alence:
Fu he s eps in heo y and esea ch. Jou nal o
Ma iage and Family, 64, 585–593. h ps://doi
.o g/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2002.00585.x
Lüsche , K. (2005). Looking a ambi alences: The
con ibu ion o a “new-old” iew o in e gene a-
ional ela ions o he s udy o he li e cou se. In
R. Le y, P. Ghisle a, J.-M. Le Go , D. Spini,
&E.D.Widme (Eds.),Towa ds an in e disci-
plina y pe spec i e on he li e cou se. Ad ances in
li e cou se esea ch (Vol. 10, pp. 93–128). Ox o d,
England: Else ie . h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/S1040-
2608(05)10003-3
Lüsche , K., & Ho , A. (2013). In e gene a ional
ambi alence: Beyond solida i y and con lic . In I.
Albe & D. Fe ing (Eds.), In e gene a ional ela-
ions: Eu opean pe spec i es in amily and socie y
(pp. 39–63). B is ol, England: Policy P ess.
Lüsche , K., & Pilleme , K. (1998). In e gene a ional
ambi alence: A new app oach o he s udy o
pa en –child ela ions in la e li e. Jou nal o Ma -
iage and he Family,60, 413–425. h ps://doi.o g/
10.2307/353858
Moen, P. (1996). Gende , age, and he li e cou se. In
R. H. Bins ock, L. K. Geo ge, V. W. Ma shall, G. C.
Mye s,&J.H.Schulz(Eds.),Handbook o aging
and he social sciences (4 h ed., pp. 171–187). San
Diego, CA: Academic P ess.
O e , S. (2012). The bu den o ecip oci y: P o-
cesses o exclusion and wi hd awal om pe sonal
ne wo ks among low-income amilies. Cu en
Sociology,60, 788–805. h ps://doi.o g/10.1177/
0011392112454754
O is, M., Guicha d, E., Nicole , M., Gab iel, R.,
Tholomie , A., Monno , C., ...Joye,D.(2016).
Rep esen a ion o ulne abili y and he elde ly: A
o al su ey e o pe spec i e on he VLV su ey. In
M. O is, C. Robe s, D. Joye, & M. E ns -S aehli
(Eds.), Su eying human ulne abili ies ac oss he
li e cou se (pp. 27–64). Be lin, Ge many: Sp inge .
h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/978-3-319-24157-9_2
Phillips, J., Ogg, J., & Ray, M. (2003). Explo ing
con lic and ambi alence. In A. Lowens ein & J.
Ogg (Eds.), The p ojec OASIS: Old age and au on-
omy: The ole o se ice sys ems and in e gene a-
ional amily solida i y, inal epo (pp. 193–226).
Hai a, Is ael: Cen e o Resea ch and S udy o
Aging.
R De elopmen Co e Team. (2011). R: A lan-
guage and en i onmen o s a is ical compu ing.
Re ie ed om h p://www.R-p ojec .o g/
STATNET
Rosow, I., & B eslau, N. (1966). A Gu man heal h
scale o he aged. Jou nal o Ge on ology,21,
556–559. h ps://doi.o g/10.1093/ge onj/21.4.556
Sa acco, J., Cha en , M., & Kuen z, V. (2010).
Ro a ion in mul iple co espondence analysis:
A plana o a ion i e a i e p ocedu e. Wo king
Pape s o GREThA,2010, 1–19. Re ie ed om
h p://cahie sdug e ha.u-bo deaux4. /2010/2010-
04.pd
Schne le , S., & Wöhle , T. (2014). On he suppo -
ing ole o iendship o pa en s and non-pa en s
in la e li e. A compa a i e analysis using da a
om he h ee wa es o he Ge man aging su ey.
In M. Löw (Ed.), Viel al und Zusammenhal :
Ve handlungen des 36. Kong esses de Deu schen
Gesellscha ü Soziologie in Bochum 2012
[Di e si y and Cohesion: Nego ia ions o he 36 h
Cong ess o he Ge man Sociological Associa ion
in Bochum 2012] (pp. 1–26). F ank u , Ge many:
Campus.
Se e s en, R. A., J ., & Godlewski, B. (2016). Con-
cep s and heo ies o age and aging. In V. L. Beng -
son & R. A. Se e s en, J . (Eds.), Handbook o
heo ies o aging (3 d ed., pp. 9–25), New Yo k:
Sp inge .
Se e s en, R. A., J ., & Maye , K. U. (1997). The
measu emen o age, age s uc u ing, and he li e
cou se. Annual Re iew o Sociology,23, 233–261.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1146/annu e .soc.23.1.233
Sil e s ein, M., Beng son, V. L., & Law on, L. (1997).
In e gene a ional solida i y and he s uc u e o
adul child–pa en ela ionships in Ame ican
amilies. Ame ican Jou nal o Sociology,103,
429–460. h ps://doi.o g/10.1086/231213
Suzman, R., & Riley, M. W. (1985). In oducing he
“oldes old.” The Milbank Memo ial Fund Qua -
e ly:Heal h and Socie y,63, 175–186. h ps://doi
.o g/10.2307/3349879.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using
mul i a ia e s a is ics (3 d ed.). New Yo k: Ha pe
Collins.

784 Jou nal o Ma iage and Family
Taylo , J. E., & No is, J. E. (2000). Sibling ela-
ionships, ai ness, and con lic o e ans e o he
a m. Family Rela ions,49, 277–283. h ps://doi
.o g/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2000.00277.x
T eas, J., & Ma cum, C. S. (2011). Di e si y and am-
ily ela ions in an aging socie y. In R. A. Se e s en,
J .&J.L.Angel(Eds.),Handbook o sociology o
aging (pp. 131–141). New Yo k: Sp inge . h ps://
doi.o g/10.1007/978-1-4419-7374-0_9
Van Gaalen, R. I., & Dyks a, P. A. (2006). Solida -
i y and con lic be ween adul child en and pa -
en s: A la en class analysis. Jou nal o Ma iage
and Family,68, 947–960. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/
j.1741-3737.2006.00306.x
Wasse man, S., & Faus , K. (1994). Social ne wo k
analysis: Me hods and applica ions. Camb idge,
England: Camb idge Uni e si y P ess.
Wenge , G. C. (1991). A ne wo k ypology: F om
heo y o p ac ice. Jou nal o Aging S ud-
ies,5, 147–162. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/0890-
4065(91)90003-B
Widme , E. D. (2016). Family con igu a ions: A s uc-
u al app oach o amily di e si y.NewYo k:
Rou ledge.
Widme , E. D., Aeby, G., & Sapin, M. (2013). Col-
lec ing amily ne wo k da a. In e na ional Re iew
o Sociology,23, 27–46. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/
03906701.2013.771049
Willson, A. E., Shuey, K. M., Elde , G. H. J .,
& Wick ama, K. A. S. (2006). Ambi alence in
mo he –adul child ela ions: A dyadic analysis.
Social Psychology Qua e ly,69, 235–252. h ps://
doi.o g/10.1177/019027250606900302