Intergenerational ambivalence: beyond solidarity and conflict1

Luescher, Kurt; Hoff, Andreas

doi:10.1332/policypress/9781447300984.003.0004

Cited by 18 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous studies have shown that especially times of change, be it at the societal level or family life transitions, are prone to the experience of ambivalences (Kasearu, Raid, & Kutsar, 2018;Lüscher & Hoff, 2013). In fact, such situations might entail changes in priorities, preferences, values and norms which may remain unclear, at least for a while.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Close relations with high support exchange might be particularly prone to the experience of ambivalences, and times of transition have been identified as especially susceptible. Although considered as an inherent part in intergenerational relations, this does not mean that all relations are ambivalent all the time (Lüscher & Hoff, 2013). Intergenerational relations should not be considered as static but as dynamic, since an ambivalent relationship might, for instance, evolve into a harmonious or tense relation and vice versa (Ferring, Michels, Boll, & Filipp, 2009;Hogerbrugge & Silverstein, 2014).…”

Section: Intergenerational Ambivalencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Characteristics and Determinants of Intergenerational Financial Transfers Within Families Using Mixed Care for Elderly People

Albert

Ferring²

2018

Drustvena istrazivanja

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Starting from Bengtson's solidarity paradigm, we will investigate the role of internalized family norms in intergenerational support as well as experienced ambivalence from the adult child perspective. We assume that internalized family norms are an important determinant of relationship regulation as they have an impact both on the selection of specific behavior as well as on its evaluation. As a consequence, own and others' behavior should be most positively evaluated if it is in line with internalized norms and values. In contrast, if intergenerational solidarity and support exchange do not converge with internalized norms and expectations, ambivalence might be experienced. These assumptions are examined in a sample of N = 131 middle-aged adults living in Luxembourg and Germany. Findings showed that normative aspects of intergenerational solidarity were less important compared to affective aspects when predicting support exchange between adult children and their parents; however, family values had a moderating role in the relation between support exchange and ambivalence. Results are discussed with respect to the centrality of values in implicitly and explicitly guiding support behavior within families.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Intergenerational Ambivalencementioning

confidence: 99%

Characteristics and Determinants of Intergenerational Financial Transfers Within Families Using Mixed Care for Elderly People

Albert

Ferring²

2018

Drustvena istrazivanja

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This intersection creates four types of intergenerational ambivalence that capture how family members experience and cope with ambivalence (Lüscher, ). In the first type, solidarity , family members conceal “ambivalence by stressing common feelings, orientations and goals of belonging and togetherness” (Lüscher & Hoff, , p. 43). Those classified in the captivation type engage in “a continuous struggle over ambivalence” (p. 44) in which relationships are maintained reluctantly.…”

Section: Moving Forwardmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Lüscher and Hoff () considered emancipation the optimal form of managing ambivalence in relationships because accepting the reality of ambivalence creates the potential for making change and being creative about family ties. The merits of acknowledging rather than denying ambivalence at the macro level were developed by Muller (; see also Muller, ) in his discussion of disability and the law.…”

Section: Meso‐ and Macro‐level Responses To Ambivalencementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Exploring Ambivalence in Family Ties: Progress and Prospects

Connidis

2015

J of Marriage and Family

135

158

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The 2002 exchange on ambivalence in the Journal of Marriage and Family (Vol. 64, No. 3), published under the editorship of Alexis Walker, prompted an impressive array of research on family ties, in particular intergenerational relationships. Following a discussion of the concept's theoretical underpinnings, the author argues that advancing the concept of ambivalence rests on realizing its multilevel potential by addressing the interplay of shifting contradictions experienced by individuals and in relationships and embedded in social institutions and in macro‐level arrangements and processes. She considers progress and limitations in a critical review of predominant applications of ambivalence and then investigates research that advances ambivalence as a bridging concept across multiple levels of analysis. Work on atypical family ties, dependency, contradictory cultural expectations due to migration and social change, families and the welfare state, and on climate change and disability promotes the multilevel potential of ambivalence and points to ways to advance its promise in theory and practice.

show abstract

Ambivalence

Connidis¹

2021

The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concept of ambivalence is used extensively in the study of family ties and aging. Ambivalence connects contradictions at the micro‐ (mixed feelings, sentiments, and actions toward individuals and in relationships), meso‐ (social institutions), and macro‐ (structured social relations, social inequality) levels of analysis, focusing attention on the dynamics of negotiating ambivalence. Current conceptions of ambivalence, often referred to as structured ambivalence , highlight the reciprocal influences of individual agency, social institutional arrangements, and socially structured inequality as sources both of ambivalence and of pathways for redressing that ambivalence. Ambivalence in close relationships is associated with contradictory social arrangements in social institutions, such as work and family, in which the inequality of structured social relations based on age, class, gender, race, and ability are embedded. Applying the concept of ambivalence helps to relate meso‐ and macrolevel ideas of life‐course, feminist, and critical approaches to the negotiation of interpersonal relationships.

show abstract

Intergenerational ambivalence: beyond solidarity and conflict1

Cited by 18 publications

References 0 publications

Characteristics and Determinants of Intergenerational Financial Transfers Within Families Using Mixed Care for Elderly People

Characteristics and Determinants of Intergenerational Financial Transfers Within Families Using Mixed Care for Elderly People

Exploring Ambivalence in Family Ties: Progress and Prospects

Ambivalence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About