INT’L. J. AGING AND HUMAN DEVELOPMENT, VOI. 10(3), 1979-80
YOUNG ADULTS’ RELATIONS WITH THEIR GRANDPARENTS: AN EXPLORATORY STUDY
EDWARD HOFFMAN Massachusetts Mental Health Center Boston, Mas.
ABSTRACT
Some of the major aspects of the relationship between young adult grandchildren and their grandparents were examined. A sample of 269 undergraduate females, each with at least one living grandparent, responded to a survey instrument that assessed their current frequency of interaction and perceived emotional closeness with respect to each living grandparent. Results suggested that the grandparent’s kin position relative to the grandchild was a critical variable, more so than the grandparent’s sex, in influencing the intensity of the bond, Adult grandchildren tended to be significantly closer t o maternal than paternal grandparents, and were significantly closer emotionally to the maternal grandmother than to each of the other grandparents. Also found was a wide variability among young adult grandchildren in their current involvement and emotional attachment to grandparents.
In recent years, attention has turned t o the nature of cross-generational interaction in our society. Yet, there is little information available on one major aspect of such relations: the grandchild-grandparent bond and factors which affect it. Though theoretical viewpoints have been advanced on issues such as the intra-familial dynamics influencing this relationship [1,2] , direct empirical data on the dimensions and importance of t h i s relationship are lacking. As Wood and Robertson concluded in their recent, comprehensive review of the literature: Very few investigators have examined the grandparent-grandchild relationship, particularly as regards its meaning and significance for the grandchild. This lack of attention may reflect an implicit assumption that this relationship has little importance for either grandparents or grandchildren [ 3, p. 2861. 299
8 1979.Baywood Publiahing Co.. Inc.
doi: 10.2190/8PWQ-NDRJ-13FD-2FL6 http://baywood.com
300 I
EDWARDHOFFMAN
Largely from indirect sources such as kinship studies, two distinct and significant factors appear t o emerge concerning the grandchild-grandparent relationship. They are: 1. the grandparent’s own position relative to the grandchild in the family or kin system; and 2. the grandparent’s sex or sexrole. A wide variety of kinship studies has consistently indicated that women play a far more active role in the kinship system than do men [4-9 J . In general, wives are more likely than husbands to visit kin regularly and to rate such kin contact as emotionally important [4,5,6,etc.] Further, these studies suggest that adult daughters tend to be closer than adult sons to their aging parents. Many investigators have also noted a particularly close bond between the adult daughter and her aged mother. As the findings of both Adams [6] and Townsend [8] suggest, this close mother-daughter bond often brings the maternal grandmother, more so than the other grandparents, into a greater involvement in the upbringing or socialization of the grandchild. Such involvement, of course, may range from occasional babysitting, all the way up through a decisive role as mother-surrogate. In this vein, it is interesting to note that all of such active grandmothers described by Townsend were maternally related to their young grandchildren. More direct evidence on the grandchild-grandparent relationship similarly indicates that the grandparent’s kin position relative to the grandchild may significantly affect the intensity of this bond. For example, Kahana and Kahana found that the maternal grandmother was the favorite grandparent of white, suburban children at several developmental stages [lo]. As part of a larger study of kin relations, Robins and Tomanec found that college students were significantly closer to maternal as opposed to paternal grandparents [ l l ] . A second factor which appears to influence the closeness of the grandchildgrandparent bond is related to the sex or sex-role of the grandparent, irrespective of family position. Shanas et al. found in their study of contemporary family life of the elderly in Western countries, the aged male is likely to be more distant with his grown children than is the aged female [7]. Consequently, he might be expected to be more distant or aloof with his own grandchildren as well. In more direct research on this issue, Neugarten and Weinstein found a tendency for grandfathers, as compared with grandmothers, to be more emotionally remote or removed from their grandchildren, and less comfortable with the grandparenthood role [12]. Speaking on precisely this concern, Clark and Anderson observed that:
.
This close relationship between grandfather and grandson does not seem to obtain, probably because the instrumental accomplishments and technical knowledge which elderly men can impart to today’s youth are outdated. This, however, is not as true for the emotional and interrelational concerns of women. Cultural changes in these areas of life come much more slowly and consequently, grandmothers are better able to be useful and give guidance to their granddaughters [ 13, p. 2941.
YOUNG ADULTS’ RELATIONS WITH GRANDPARENTS
/ 301
Yet, in the absence of systematic empirical data, such generalizations remain of limited utility. The purpose of this study, therefore, was primarily to gather broad, descriptive information with respect to the involvement of young adult grandchildren with their living grandparents. As Robertson has recently noted, despite the growing interest in the three-generational family, little attention has been focused on the importance of grandparents to grandchildren who have themselves reached adulthood status [14]. Such information, too, it was felt, might prove useful in shedding further light on young adults’ attitudes or stereotypes of the aged, since perhaps for many of today’s youth, chief direct experience with the elderly tends to come through contact with their own grandparents. Thus, given the necessarily exploratory nature of this investigation, no formal hypotheses were advanced.
METHOD The data utilized in this study were obtained in the early fall, 1976, from 269 undergraduate females, each with at least one living grandparent. Participants were enrolled at a small private women’s college in central New York. The mean age of participants was 19.4 years, with over 95 per cent between the ages of seventeen and twenty-three. An examination of parental occupations revealed that the vast majority of participants were from middle- to upper-middle class backgrounds, and were predominantly Protestant (5 15) or Catholic (37%), with the remaining 14 per cent largely comprising those who declared no formal religious affiliation. Participants were heterogeneously distributed by demographic background: 23 per cent were from cities of 250,000 or more population, or from suburbs of such cities; 18 per cent were from cities of 25,000 to 250,000; 44 per cent from cities of 25,000 or less; and 15 per cent from farms.
Procedure The data employed in the analysis were secured by means of a selfadministered questionnaire. Items in the instrument were developed to obtain data on several aspects of participants’ current relationship with their grandparents. The four questions included: 1. frequency of direct, face-to-face, interaction throughout the year, with scale categories ranging from at least monthly to less than once a year; 2. the frequency of direct interaction during the grandchild’s summer vacations, with scale categories ranging from daily to less than once a month; 3. the approximate date of the grandchild’s most recent direct interaction with each grandparent, with scale categories ranging from within the past week to over a year ago; and, 4. on a five-point Likert-type scale, how emotionally close does the grandchild perceive herself in regards to each living grandparent, with scale categories from 1 (not at all close) to 5 (extremely close).
302 I EDWARDHOFFMAN
Questionnaire items were also directed towards several characteristics of participants’ living grandparents, including their country of birth, and current age and living situation. Three hundred and fourteen students were initially surveyed, of whom 269 reported at least one living grandparent. The responses of this smaller sample were then coded and subjected to statistical analysis.
R ESU LTS Grandparent Characteristics Table 1 summarizes the personal and social characteristics of participants’ living grandparents. A relatively homogeneoussample is indicated, with the vast majority of grandparents born in North America; the remainder was comprised of about equally small proportions originating from Eastern Europe or Russia, Great Britain or Ireland, Italy, or other Western European nations. In accordance with well-known data on male vs female life expectancies, a higher proportion of female as opposed to male grandparents were still living; similarly, females were more likely than males to have lived to see their grandchild’s sixth birthday. Earlier than this age, it is unlikely that the grandchild would have strong or clear memories of the grandparent, it might be assumed. More surprisingly, this difference in mortality rate was also found with respect to the kin position of the grandparent. A greater proportion of maternal as compared with paternal grandparents had lived through the grandchild’s sixth birthday, with a correspondingly greater proportion of maternal grandparents still living. Paternal grandparents were somewhat older, too, than their maternal counterparts. Consistent with previous data on the elderly (7,8,13], most of the male grandparents were living with their spouses, whereas the majority of the females lived alone or with relatives. It is also interesting to note that none of the 197 grandfathers lived with boarders, perhaps reflecting the somewhat greater economic self-sufficiency of the aged male.
Dimensions of Adult Grandchild-Grandparent Involvement Overall frequencies were computed with reference to grandchildren’s current involvement with their grandparents, as measured on each of the three separate frequency dimensions: 1. extent of direct, face-to-face, yearly interaction; 2 . extent of such interaction during the grandchild’s summer vacations; and 3. the temporal proximity of the grandchild’s most recent interaction with each living grandparent. Information concerning participants’ childhood relations with their grandparents was also collected, but will not be discussed in the present paper.
YOUNG ADULT’S RELATIONS W I T H GRANDPARENTS / 303
Table 1. Grandparent Characteristicsa Grandparent Characteristic
Maternal Maternal Paternal Paternal Grandmother Grandfather Grandmother Grandfather
Mortality Deceased before grandchild was age 6 Deceased after grandchild was age 6 Currently alive Total N =
19.3
29.6
18.5
39.2
24.2 61.5 (314)
36.9 33.5 (314)
30.0 51.5 (313)
31.2 29.6 (311)
Nationality US/Canadian born E. Europe or Russia Great Britain or I reland Italy W. Europe Other Total N =
77.4 3.0
71.0 5.3
69.2 7.0
67.3 6.3
4.3 5.6 6.6 3.1 (305)
3.6 7.0 9.9 3.2 (303)
6.3 5.6 9.6 2.3 (302)
7.3 6.3 10.0 2.8 (300)
Current Age Under 65 66-75 76 and over Total N =
20.4 44.0 35.6 (191)
15.4 51.9 32.7 (1041
12.6 44.0 43.4 ( 159)
5.4 52.2 42.4 ( 92)
Current Living Situation Alone 36.6 With spouse 42.9 With relative 16.8 With boarder 1.1 In nursing home 2.6 Total N = (191)
11.4 76.2 9.5 0.0 2.9 ( 105)
35.2 37.7 18.2 4.4 4.4 (159)
18.9 72.2 6.7 0.0 2.2 ( 90)
All figures are percentages per grandparent.
As Table 2 indicates, wide variability among grandchildren was found with regard to each of the measures of the current relationship. Results of these three dimensions also revealed that for a sizable minority of participants (comprising about 20 per cent of those with maternal and about 25 per cent to 30 per cent of those with paternal grandparents), current interaction was minimal, occuring less than twice a year. Also provided in Table 2 are the frequencies of distribution for participants’ responses on the five-point, Likert-
304 /
EDWARDHOFFMAN
Table 2. Adult Grandchild Interaction and Perceived Emotional Closeness with Each Living Grandparenta Grandparent Maternal Grandmother
Maternal Grandfather
Paternal Grandmother
Paternal Grandfather
T h r o u g h o u t Year Monthly or m o r e Every 2 m o n t h s Every 3 4 months Every 6 m o n t h s Once p e r year Less than once per year
42.0 58.6 72.0 80.8 90.7 100%
38.1 60.0 71.4 81.O 100%
29.8 44.7 59.6 75.2 82.6 100%
30.8 42.9 60.4 70.3 80.2 100%
Total N =
(193)
(104)
(160)
( 87)
D u r i n g S's Summer Vacations Daily Several times p e r week Weekly Several times per month Once p e r month Less than once p e r month
13.0 28.6 38.0 54.2 70.3 100%
9.7 23.3 36.9 53.4 71.8 100%
6.3 13.1 21.9 38.1 56.3 100%
15.2 25.0 28.3 43.5 59.8 100%
Total N =
(191)
(100)
(158)
( 89)
Last T i m e Seen W i t h i n last week W i t h i n last month W i t h i n last 3 m o n t h s W i t h i n last 6 months W i t h i n last 9-12 m o n t h s Over a year ago
12.5 41.2 76.1 83.9 90.6 100%
10.5 37.2 77.2 82.9 87.6 100%
10.0 28.8 63.1 74.4 83.1 100%
11.0 26.4 62.6 71.4 82.4 100%
Total N =
(191)
(104)
(158)
(
Perceived E m o t i o n a l Closeness Not a t all close Somewhat close Moderately close Q u i t e close E x t r e m e l y close
5.7 14.6 22.4 31.3 26.0
10.5 17.1 18.1 31.4 22.9
24.4 15.0 26.9 21.9 11.9
25.3 24.2 23.1 17.6 9.9
Total N =
(191)
(104)
(158)
( 87)
Measure of Interaction
86.7
I
87)
a Percentages in the three frequency measures are cumulative in regard to each living grandparent. Percentages in the Perceived E m o t i o n a l Closeness measure are given as a frequency distribution.
YOUNG ADULTS RELATIONS WITH GRANDPARENTS / 305
type perceived emotional closeness scale, as it was felt that mean values (maternal grandmother: % = 4.57; maternal grandfather: % = 4.39; paternal grandmother: x’= 3.82; paternal grandfather: % = 3.63) alone would present a less complete picture.
Significance of Grandparent‘s Kin Position and Sex Throughout these four dimensions of grandchild involvement, the data strongly suggested that the grandchildren had greater contact and were emotionally closer to maternal as compared with paternal grandparents. This trend seemed especially pronounced in regard to the maternal grandmother. Statistical tests, therefore, were conducted in order to assess the importance of the grandparent’s kin position and sex, as two separate factors which might significantly affect the intensity of the grandchild-grandparent relationship. For the three measures of frequency of interaction, based on the ordinal nature of the data, Wilcoxon tests were carried out in pair-wise comparisons of living grandparents per grandchild. Thus, there were six grandparent pairs in all. For the perceived emotional closeness measure, one-way repeatedmeasures analyses of variance were computed for each of these six pair categories. Not surprisingly, the data strongly indicated that the grandchildren interacted equally frequently with living grandparents of the same marital dyad; on each of the three dimensions, equal frequencies were found for 86 per cent to 99 per cent of participants with regard to either grandparent couple. Thus, Wilcoxon tests were not computed for the two grandparent couples. Table 3 summarizes the results of these statistical tests. As indicated, grandchildren’s relations with their grandparents were strongly influenced by the grandparent’s kin position relative to theirs. The sex of the grandparent, however, did not appear as critical a factor in affecting the intensity of the relationship. The participants were significantly closer to the maternal as opposed to paternal grandmother on three of the four dimensions (interaction during the grandchild’s summer vacations: z = 2.37, p < .01; most recent interaction: z = 1.89, p < .03;and perceived emotional closeness: F = 18.58, df = 1/102, p < .001). A compelling trend in the same direction was also exhibited in regard to the extent of yearly interaction (z = 1.63, p < .06). Cutting across the sex as well as kin position of the grandparent, it was found that grandchildren were also significantly closer to the maternal grandfather than the paternal grandmother on three of the four dimensions (yearly interaction: z = 1.8 1, p < .05; summer vacations of grandchild: z = 1.98, p < .03; and perceived emotional closeness: F = 5.29, df = 1/51, p < .025). Perhaps because of the smaller proportion of living paternal grandfathers, kinship differences related to this grandparent were not as pronounced. Nevertheless, as compared to the paternal grandfather, grandchildren were
306 I ED WA R D H O FF M AN
Table 3. Significance of Grandparent's Kin Position and Sex as Variables Affectinq Adult Grandchild's Involvement
Living Grandparent Per Subject
Yearly Summer Interaction Interaction
Perceived Most Recent Emotional Interaction Closeness
- - - - - - - - - Wilcoxon z scores - - - - - - - -
ANOVA df F values
Maternal grandmother vs maternal grandfather 92.8% (N = 84) agreement
90.5%
86.9%
agreement
agreement
df = 1/83 F = 6.00d
Maternal grandmother vs paternal grandmother z = 1.63 (N = 103) p < .06
z = 2.37 p .01
z = 1.89 p < .03
df = 11102 F = 18.58=
Maternal grandmother vs paternal grandfather z = 1.53 p .07 (N = 60)
z = 1.25 N.S
z = 1.08 N.S.
df = 1/58a F = 31 .27e
Maternal grandfather vs paternal grandmother z = 1.81a (N = 51) p .05
z = 1.98a p < .03
z = .02 N.S.
df = 1/50 F = 5.1gd
Maternal grandfather vs maternal grandmother z = 1.10 N.S. (N = 37)
z = 1.41a p < .08
z = .34 N.S.
df = 1/36 F = 4.90'
Paternal grandmother vs paternal grandfather (N = 62)
96.8%
96.8%
93.6%
agreement
agreement
aqreement
df = 1/59' F = .43
YOUNG ADULTS’ RELATIONS WITH THEIR GRANDPARENTS: AN EXPLORATORY STUDY
EDWARD HOFFMAN Massachusetts Mental Health Center Boston, Mas.
ABSTRACT
Some of the major aspects of the relationship between young adult grandchildren and their grandparents were examined. A sample of 269 undergraduate females, each with at least one living grandparent, responded to a survey instrument that assessed their current frequency of interaction and perceived emotional closeness with respect to each living grandparent. Results suggested that the grandparent’s kin position relative to the grandchild was a critical variable, more so than the grandparent’s sex, in influencing the intensity of the bond, Adult grandchildren tended to be significantly closer t o maternal than paternal grandparents, and were significantly closer emotionally to the maternal grandmother than to each of the other grandparents. Also found was a wide variability among young adult grandchildren in their current involvement and emotional attachment to grandparents.
In recent years, attention has turned t o the nature of cross-generational interaction in our society. Yet, there is little information available on one major aspect of such relations: the grandchild-grandparent bond and factors which affect it. Though theoretical viewpoints have been advanced on issues such as the intra-familial dynamics influencing this relationship [1,2] , direct empirical data on the dimensions and importance of t h i s relationship are lacking. As Wood and Robertson concluded in their recent, comprehensive review of the literature: Very few investigators have examined the grandparent-grandchild relationship, particularly as regards its meaning and significance for the grandchild. This lack of attention may reflect an implicit assumption that this relationship has little importance for either grandparents or grandchildren [ 3, p. 2861. 299
8 1979.Baywood Publiahing Co.. Inc.
doi: 10.2190/8PWQ-NDRJ-13FD-2FL6 http://baywood.com
300 I
EDWARDHOFFMAN
Largely from indirect sources such as kinship studies, two distinct and significant factors appear t o emerge concerning the grandchild-grandparent relationship. They are: 1. the grandparent’s own position relative to the grandchild in the family or kin system; and 2. the grandparent’s sex or sexrole. A wide variety of kinship studies has consistently indicated that women play a far more active role in the kinship system than do men [4-9 J . In general, wives are more likely than husbands to visit kin regularly and to rate such kin contact as emotionally important [4,5,6,etc.] Further, these studies suggest that adult daughters tend to be closer than adult sons to their aging parents. Many investigators have also noted a particularly close bond between the adult daughter and her aged mother. As the findings of both Adams [6] and Townsend [8] suggest, this close mother-daughter bond often brings the maternal grandmother, more so than the other grandparents, into a greater involvement in the upbringing or socialization of the grandchild. Such involvement, of course, may range from occasional babysitting, all the way up through a decisive role as mother-surrogate. In this vein, it is interesting to note that all of such active grandmothers described by Townsend were maternally related to their young grandchildren. More direct evidence on the grandchild-grandparent relationship similarly indicates that the grandparent’s kin position relative to the grandchild may significantly affect the intensity of this bond. For example, Kahana and Kahana found that the maternal grandmother was the favorite grandparent of white, suburban children at several developmental stages [lo]. As part of a larger study of kin relations, Robins and Tomanec found that college students were significantly closer to maternal as opposed to paternal grandparents [ l l ] . A second factor which appears to influence the closeness of the grandchildgrandparent bond is related to the sex or sex-role of the grandparent, irrespective of family position. Shanas et al. found in their study of contemporary family life of the elderly in Western countries, the aged male is likely to be more distant with his grown children than is the aged female [7]. Consequently, he might be expected to be more distant or aloof with his own grandchildren as well. In more direct research on this issue, Neugarten and Weinstein found a tendency for grandfathers, as compared with grandmothers, to be more emotionally remote or removed from their grandchildren, and less comfortable with the grandparenthood role [12]. Speaking on precisely this concern, Clark and Anderson observed that:
.
This close relationship between grandfather and grandson does not seem to obtain, probably because the instrumental accomplishments and technical knowledge which elderly men can impart to today’s youth are outdated. This, however, is not as true for the emotional and interrelational concerns of women. Cultural changes in these areas of life come much more slowly and consequently, grandmothers are better able to be useful and give guidance to their granddaughters [ 13, p. 2941.
YOUNG ADULTS’ RELATIONS WITH GRANDPARENTS
/ 301
Yet, in the absence of systematic empirical data, such generalizations remain of limited utility. The purpose of this study, therefore, was primarily to gather broad, descriptive information with respect to the involvement of young adult grandchildren with their living grandparents. As Robertson has recently noted, despite the growing interest in the three-generational family, little attention has been focused on the importance of grandparents to grandchildren who have themselves reached adulthood status [14]. Such information, too, it was felt, might prove useful in shedding further light on young adults’ attitudes or stereotypes of the aged, since perhaps for many of today’s youth, chief direct experience with the elderly tends to come through contact with their own grandparents. Thus, given the necessarily exploratory nature of this investigation, no formal hypotheses were advanced.
METHOD The data utilized in this study were obtained in the early fall, 1976, from 269 undergraduate females, each with at least one living grandparent. Participants were enrolled at a small private women’s college in central New York. The mean age of participants was 19.4 years, with over 95 per cent between the ages of seventeen and twenty-three. An examination of parental occupations revealed that the vast majority of participants were from middle- to upper-middle class backgrounds, and were predominantly Protestant (5 15) or Catholic (37%), with the remaining 14 per cent largely comprising those who declared no formal religious affiliation. Participants were heterogeneously distributed by demographic background: 23 per cent were from cities of 250,000 or more population, or from suburbs of such cities; 18 per cent were from cities of 25,000 to 250,000; 44 per cent from cities of 25,000 or less; and 15 per cent from farms.
Procedure The data employed in the analysis were secured by means of a selfadministered questionnaire. Items in the instrument were developed to obtain data on several aspects of participants’ current relationship with their grandparents. The four questions included: 1. frequency of direct, face-to-face, interaction throughout the year, with scale categories ranging from at least monthly to less than once a year; 2. the frequency of direct interaction during the grandchild’s summer vacations, with scale categories ranging from daily to less than once a month; 3. the approximate date of the grandchild’s most recent direct interaction with each grandparent, with scale categories ranging from within the past week to over a year ago; and, 4. on a five-point Likert-type scale, how emotionally close does the grandchild perceive herself in regards to each living grandparent, with scale categories from 1 (not at all close) to 5 (extremely close).
302 I EDWARDHOFFMAN
Questionnaire items were also directed towards several characteristics of participants’ living grandparents, including their country of birth, and current age and living situation. Three hundred and fourteen students were initially surveyed, of whom 269 reported at least one living grandparent. The responses of this smaller sample were then coded and subjected to statistical analysis.
R ESU LTS Grandparent Characteristics Table 1 summarizes the personal and social characteristics of participants’ living grandparents. A relatively homogeneoussample is indicated, with the vast majority of grandparents born in North America; the remainder was comprised of about equally small proportions originating from Eastern Europe or Russia, Great Britain or Ireland, Italy, or other Western European nations. In accordance with well-known data on male vs female life expectancies, a higher proportion of female as opposed to male grandparents were still living; similarly, females were more likely than males to have lived to see their grandchild’s sixth birthday. Earlier than this age, it is unlikely that the grandchild would have strong or clear memories of the grandparent, it might be assumed. More surprisingly, this difference in mortality rate was also found with respect to the kin position of the grandparent. A greater proportion of maternal as compared with paternal grandparents had lived through the grandchild’s sixth birthday, with a correspondingly greater proportion of maternal grandparents still living. Paternal grandparents were somewhat older, too, than their maternal counterparts. Consistent with previous data on the elderly (7,8,13], most of the male grandparents were living with their spouses, whereas the majority of the females lived alone or with relatives. It is also interesting to note that none of the 197 grandfathers lived with boarders, perhaps reflecting the somewhat greater economic self-sufficiency of the aged male.
Dimensions of Adult Grandchild-Grandparent Involvement Overall frequencies were computed with reference to grandchildren’s current involvement with their grandparents, as measured on each of the three separate frequency dimensions: 1. extent of direct, face-to-face, yearly interaction; 2 . extent of such interaction during the grandchild’s summer vacations; and 3. the temporal proximity of the grandchild’s most recent interaction with each living grandparent. Information concerning participants’ childhood relations with their grandparents was also collected, but will not be discussed in the present paper.
YOUNG ADULT’S RELATIONS W I T H GRANDPARENTS / 303
Table 1. Grandparent Characteristicsa Grandparent Characteristic
Maternal Maternal Paternal Paternal Grandmother Grandfather Grandmother Grandfather
Mortality Deceased before grandchild was age 6 Deceased after grandchild was age 6 Currently alive Total N =
19.3
29.6
18.5
39.2
24.2 61.5 (314)
36.9 33.5 (314)
30.0 51.5 (313)
31.2 29.6 (311)
Nationality US/Canadian born E. Europe or Russia Great Britain or I reland Italy W. Europe Other Total N =
77.4 3.0
71.0 5.3
69.2 7.0
67.3 6.3
4.3 5.6 6.6 3.1 (305)
3.6 7.0 9.9 3.2 (303)
6.3 5.6 9.6 2.3 (302)
7.3 6.3 10.0 2.8 (300)
Current Age Under 65 66-75 76 and over Total N =
20.4 44.0 35.6 (191)
15.4 51.9 32.7 (1041
12.6 44.0 43.4 ( 159)
5.4 52.2 42.4 ( 92)
Current Living Situation Alone 36.6 With spouse 42.9 With relative 16.8 With boarder 1.1 In nursing home 2.6 Total N = (191)
11.4 76.2 9.5 0.0 2.9 ( 105)
35.2 37.7 18.2 4.4 4.4 (159)
18.9 72.2 6.7 0.0 2.2 ( 90)
All figures are percentages per grandparent.
As Table 2 indicates, wide variability among grandchildren was found with regard to each of the measures of the current relationship. Results of these three dimensions also revealed that for a sizable minority of participants (comprising about 20 per cent of those with maternal and about 25 per cent to 30 per cent of those with paternal grandparents), current interaction was minimal, occuring less than twice a year. Also provided in Table 2 are the frequencies of distribution for participants’ responses on the five-point, Likert-
304 /
EDWARDHOFFMAN
Table 2. Adult Grandchild Interaction and Perceived Emotional Closeness with Each Living Grandparenta Grandparent Maternal Grandmother
Maternal Grandfather
Paternal Grandmother
Paternal Grandfather
T h r o u g h o u t Year Monthly or m o r e Every 2 m o n t h s Every 3 4 months Every 6 m o n t h s Once p e r year Less than once per year
42.0 58.6 72.0 80.8 90.7 100%
38.1 60.0 71.4 81.O 100%
29.8 44.7 59.6 75.2 82.6 100%
30.8 42.9 60.4 70.3 80.2 100%
Total N =
(193)
(104)
(160)
( 87)
D u r i n g S's Summer Vacations Daily Several times p e r week Weekly Several times per month Once p e r month Less than once p e r month
13.0 28.6 38.0 54.2 70.3 100%
9.7 23.3 36.9 53.4 71.8 100%
6.3 13.1 21.9 38.1 56.3 100%
15.2 25.0 28.3 43.5 59.8 100%
Total N =
(191)
(100)
(158)
( 89)
Last T i m e Seen W i t h i n last week W i t h i n last month W i t h i n last 3 m o n t h s W i t h i n last 6 months W i t h i n last 9-12 m o n t h s Over a year ago
12.5 41.2 76.1 83.9 90.6 100%
10.5 37.2 77.2 82.9 87.6 100%
10.0 28.8 63.1 74.4 83.1 100%
11.0 26.4 62.6 71.4 82.4 100%
Total N =
(191)
(104)
(158)
(
Perceived E m o t i o n a l Closeness Not a t all close Somewhat close Moderately close Q u i t e close E x t r e m e l y close
5.7 14.6 22.4 31.3 26.0
10.5 17.1 18.1 31.4 22.9
24.4 15.0 26.9 21.9 11.9
25.3 24.2 23.1 17.6 9.9
Total N =
(191)
(104)
(158)
( 87)
Measure of Interaction
86.7
I
87)
a Percentages in the three frequency measures are cumulative in regard to each living grandparent. Percentages in the Perceived E m o t i o n a l Closeness measure are given as a frequency distribution.
YOUNG ADULTS RELATIONS WITH GRANDPARENTS / 305
type perceived emotional closeness scale, as it was felt that mean values (maternal grandmother: % = 4.57; maternal grandfather: % = 4.39; paternal grandmother: x’= 3.82; paternal grandfather: % = 3.63) alone would present a less complete picture.
Significance of Grandparent‘s Kin Position and Sex Throughout these four dimensions of grandchild involvement, the data strongly suggested that the grandchildren had greater contact and were emotionally closer to maternal as compared with paternal grandparents. This trend seemed especially pronounced in regard to the maternal grandmother. Statistical tests, therefore, were conducted in order to assess the importance of the grandparent’s kin position and sex, as two separate factors which might significantly affect the intensity of the grandchild-grandparent relationship. For the three measures of frequency of interaction, based on the ordinal nature of the data, Wilcoxon tests were carried out in pair-wise comparisons of living grandparents per grandchild. Thus, there were six grandparent pairs in all. For the perceived emotional closeness measure, one-way repeatedmeasures analyses of variance were computed for each of these six pair categories. Not surprisingly, the data strongly indicated that the grandchildren interacted equally frequently with living grandparents of the same marital dyad; on each of the three dimensions, equal frequencies were found for 86 per cent to 99 per cent of participants with regard to either grandparent couple. Thus, Wilcoxon tests were not computed for the two grandparent couples. Table 3 summarizes the results of these statistical tests. As indicated, grandchildren’s relations with their grandparents were strongly influenced by the grandparent’s kin position relative to theirs. The sex of the grandparent, however, did not appear as critical a factor in affecting the intensity of the relationship. The participants were significantly closer to the maternal as opposed to paternal grandmother on three of the four dimensions (interaction during the grandchild’s summer vacations: z = 2.37, p < .01; most recent interaction: z = 1.89, p < .03;and perceived emotional closeness: F = 18.58, df = 1/102, p < .001). A compelling trend in the same direction was also exhibited in regard to the extent of yearly interaction (z = 1.63, p < .06). Cutting across the sex as well as kin position of the grandparent, it was found that grandchildren were also significantly closer to the maternal grandfather than the paternal grandmother on three of the four dimensions (yearly interaction: z = 1.8 1, p < .05; summer vacations of grandchild: z = 1.98, p < .03; and perceived emotional closeness: F = 5.29, df = 1/51, p < .025). Perhaps because of the smaller proportion of living paternal grandfathers, kinship differences related to this grandparent were not as pronounced. Nevertheless, as compared to the paternal grandfather, grandchildren were
306 I ED WA R D H O FF M AN
Table 3. Significance of Grandparent's Kin Position and Sex as Variables Affectinq Adult Grandchild's Involvement
Living Grandparent Per Subject
Yearly Summer Interaction Interaction
Perceived Most Recent Emotional Interaction Closeness
- - - - - - - - - Wilcoxon z scores - - - - - - - -
ANOVA df F values
Maternal grandmother vs maternal grandfather 92.8% (N = 84) agreement
90.5%
86.9%
agreement
agreement
df = 1/83 F = 6.00d
Maternal grandmother vs paternal grandmother z = 1.63 (N = 103) p < .06
z = 2.37 p .01
z = 1.89 p < .03
df = 11102 F = 18.58=
Maternal grandmother vs paternal grandfather z = 1.53 p .07 (N = 60)
z = 1.25 N.S
z = 1.08 N.S.
df = 1/58a F = 31 .27e
Maternal grandfather vs paternal grandmother z = 1.81a (N = 51) p .05
z = 1.98a p < .03
z = .02 N.S.
df = 1/50 F = 5.1gd
Maternal grandfather vs maternal grandmother z = 1.10 N.S. (N = 37)
z = 1.41a p < .08
z = .34 N.S.
df = 1/36 F = 4.90'
Paternal grandmother vs paternal grandfather (N = 62)
96.8%
96.8%
93.6%
agreement
agreement
aqreement
df = 1/59' F = .43
