Search results

AbstractSocial policy is most effective when evidence‐based. In this research, we scrutinise 11 surveys to produce evidence on the subjective well‐being (SWB) of older migrants in the Netherlands. The descriptive analysis and literature review revealed that the study of the diversity among older migrants is hindered by several factors, including the inclusion of a limited number of distinct migrant groups, their almost exclusive comparison to non‐migrants, and a focus on first‐generation and urban‐based migrants. Different concepts are used for three dimensions of SWB, both migrant‐specific and general. The validity of concepts and measurement instruments is not well examined. By means of multi‐group analysis, we demonstrate that the overarching concept of SWB is multidimensional and cannot be easily used to compare different groups of migrants. In conclusion, we argue that survey data can be used to further refine the concept of SWB, compare differences between and within migrant groups and over time, and ultimately inform social policy better.

The robustness of J. de Jong-Gierveld's loneliness scale (with Van Tilburg, Theor G., Manual of the Loneliness Scale, 1986 [available from the authors]) was examined through analysis of data from 6 Dutch surveys using different modes of data collection (3 using self-administered paper questionnaires, 2 using face-to-face interviews, & 1 using telephone interviews). Among the findings are: collection mode did not affect robustness; questionnaires did not lead to higher item nonresponse; questionnaires & telephone interviews resulted in better interitem homogeneity & person scalability than face-to-face interviews; & absence of an interviewer did not result in greater self-disclosure & higher scale means. The robustness of the scale is discussed as questionable, however, in regard to interitem homogeneity & person scalability. 2 Tables, 50 References. Adapted from the source document.

ABSTRACTAwareness of risk factors for loneliness is a prerequisite for preventive action. Many risk factors for loneliness have been identified. This paper focuses on two: poor health and widowhood. Preventive action by developing a satisfying social network requires time and effort and thus seems appropriate for people unexposed to risk factors,i.e.third agers and non-lonely persons. The third age is the period in old age after retirement, before people's social relationships deteriorate. This paper addresses three questions: Are older adults aware of poor health and widowhood as risk factors for loneliness? Are there differences in awareness between third and fourth agers? Are there differences in awareness between lonely and non-lonely older adults? After being introduced to four vignette persons, 920 respondents from the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam were asked whether they expected these persons to be lonely. Older adults, especially third agers, expected peers exposed to the risk factors to be lonely more often than peers who were unexposed. The results indicate that awareness of loneliness-provoking factors is high among third agers, which is a first step towards taking actions to avoid loneliness. Compared to lonely older adults, non-lonely ones expected peers to be lonely less often, suggesting the latter's lower awareness of the risk factors. The results provide evidence for policy makers and practitioners that combating loneliness might require early action.

This study examined whether grandparents perceive adult grandchildren as frequent and important contacts by analyzing network membership. It additionally examined whether this network membership is related to relationship intensity during childhood. Network membership was assessed in 1992 (397 grandparents, 1,594 adult grandchildren) and at the 2005–2006 follow‐up (155 grandparents, 429 adult grandchildren) from the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam. Relationship intensity during childhood was assessed in 1992. One out of 4 grandparents identified at least 1 adult grandchild in their personal network. Adult grandchildren who had an intense relationship with their grandparents during childhood were more often in grandparents' network than others. An intense relationship during childhood promotes continuation of the relationship into adulthood and might contribute to grandparent's support potential.

Donating blood (components) is considered a "good deed," especially in voluntary, nonremunerated contexts where blood is donated for unknown recipients. For donor and recipient safety, blood banks apply deferral criteria. Deferred donors are less likely to return for future donations. Based on theory (e.g., on emotion, habit, and identity) and practice, several methods have been suggested to encourage return after deferral, yet few of these methods have been tested in rigorous study designs, or in the field. In this study, we therefore investigated whether offering an alternative "good deed" or providing additional information about deferral would increase donor return. Results of a randomized controlled field trial at 10 Dutch blood donation centers showed that offering alternative good deeds after deferral did not significantly increase donor return, while providing additional information did increase whole blood donor return. This suggests that additional information contributes to the continuation of pro-social behavior.

Globally, there are growing concerns about rates and consequences of loneliness, especially among older adults. In response, 2018 saw the launch of a UK loneliness strategy and the first minister for loneliness in the world appointed. In the USA, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine set up a special committee to examine the problem.1 Demographic shifts suggest that the numbers experiencing loneliness are likely to increase. However, it is important to recognise that most older adults are not chronically lonely and loneliness is also experienced by other age groups, especially young adults. Large gaps remain in our understanding of loneliness, rates and drivers of loneliness in different populations, its effect on health and wellbeing, and evidence on effective interventions. We believe loneliness can be defined as a subjective negative experience that results from inadequate meaningful connections, but neither definitions nor assessments of loneliness have achieved wide-scale consensus. The variety of scales and single-item measures of loneliness used to date should be standardised to advance knowledge with an agreed common set of valid measures. Currently, there is inadequate causal evidence of the consequences of loneliness but associations with poor health and wellbeing have been established. The evidence shows associations with depression, anxiety, non-communicable diseases, poor health behaviours, stress, sleep, cognition, and premature mortality (with the evidence especially strong for depression).2 However, further work is required to establish causality between loneliness and specific health outcomes, and vice versa, as well as to investigate social consequences that remain unclear. Structural and cultural changes (eg, technology and social media use) and societal forces (eg, perceptions and expectations around ageing and ageism) and their effect on loneliness also need to be better understood. The evidence base for loneliness interventions is characterised by poorly constructed trials with small samples, a lack of theoretical frameworks, undefined target groups, heterogeneous measures of loneliness, and short follow-up periods. Within this context the charity, voluntary or community sectors, and government are delivering programmes, often with inadequate empirical evidence. Key therapeutic elements of interventions must be identified, as well as their optimal intensity, frequency, and duration. Although inevitably more complex to implement and evaluate, evidence indicates that interventions must be tailored and matched to specific root causes of loneliness. This Correspondence is based on discussions from a meeting in Belfast, held in December, 2018, of international researchers that led to the establishment of an International Loneliness and social Isolation research NetworK (I-LINK) to drive this work. Research, policy, and practice can only benefit from a greater pooling of expertise and knowledge exchange to address this global challenge.