Stronger feelings of loneliness among Moroccan and Turkish older adults in the Netherlands: in search for an explanation

Abstract

The prevalence of loneliness among Turkish-Dutch and Moroccan-Dutch older adults is higher than among Dutch older adults of non-migrant origin. Three explanations may account for this difference: (1) differential item functioning might result in scores that vary in intensity and in meaning across categories; (2) the position of migrants is much more vulnerable than that of non-migrants; (3) the lack of protective factors has more severe consequences for older migrants. The Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam interviewed 176 persons born in Morocco and 235 born in Turkey, aged 55-66 and living in urban areas. They are compared with a matched sample of 292 Dutch persons. The psychometric properties of the loneliness scale are satisfying, although there is some differential item functioning. Older migrants have more frequent social contacts but are at a disadvantage in other domains. Taking into account differences in social participation, satisfaction with income, mastery and depressive symptoms, the difference between older migrants' and non-migrants' loneliness is reduced by more than half. Protective factors are equally important for older migrants and non-migrants. Exceptions are marriage (less protective for Moroccans), frequent contact with children/children-in-law (mostly for Turks), a higher educational level (protects Moroccans and Turks) and better physical functioning (less for Turks). Being an older migrant and belonging to a minority might further contribute to feelings of loneliness. Interventions can be directed at stimulating social contact, but also at aspects like enhancing the appreciation of their social status and avoiding negative interpretations of a situation.

Loneliness in mid-life and older adults from ethnic minority communities in England and Wales: measure validation and prevalence estimates

“…Consistent with other studies, there does not seem to be a support for a solely measure artefact explanation. Fokkema and Naderi ( 2013 ) and Van Tilburg and Fokkema ( 2020 ) suggest that disproportionate exposure loneliness vulnerability factors may explain high levels of loneliness in minority communities. We explored this explanation using six established vulnerability factors selected to make direct comparison with the work of De Jong Gierveld and Van Tilburg ( 2010 ).…”

“…The emphasis in this paper is upon measure validation, but the authors report high levels of loneliness for Turkish participants (24%) compared with Moroccan (12%), Surinamese (13%) or Dutch (6%). Van Tilburg and Fokkema ( 2020 ) used the Longitudinal Ageing Study Amsterdam to consider two different explanations for the higher levels of loneliness observed among older Turkish and Moroccan migrants living in The Netherlands compared to Dutch-born peers. The two explanations investigated were: (a) differential exposure to loneliness vulnerability factors or (b) measurement artefact resultant from variations in how loneliness was understood and experienced.…”

Women bear a burden: gender differences in health of older migrants from Turkey

“…background or belonging to an ethnic minority must be considered a vulnerable group. They show poorer health than their male counterparts in terms of SRH, functional limitations, comorbidities, depressive symptoms, and well-being (Carnein et al 2015;Cramm and Niboer 2018;Todorova et al 2013;Yancu 2011).…”

What protects older Romanians in Switzerland from loneliness? A life-course perspective

“…Quantitative studies show that older migrants are lonelier than their native-born peers, partly because of general risk factors like lower socio-economic status and poorer health Fokkema and Naderi, 2013;Victor et al 2012;van Tilburg and Fokkema 2020). Qualitative studies explore migrant-specific factors that can increase the likelihood of feeling lonely: moving to another country with a different culture in terms of values and norms, a different language, experiencing ethnic discrimination and social isolation, missing the country of birth and those left behind, and so on (Cela and Fokkema 2017;Park et al 2019;Torensma 2014).…”