Skip to main content
NCBI home page
The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences logoLink to The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences
. 2019 Sep 26;75(8):1796–1807. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbz121

The Roles of Marital Dissolution and Subsequent Repartnering on Loneliness in Later Life

Matthew R Wright 1,✉, Anna M Hammersmith 2, Susan L Brown 3, I-Fen Lin 3
Editor: Deborah Carr
PMCID: PMC7489102  PMID: 31555823

Abstract

Objectives

Loneliness in later life is associated with poorer health and higher risk of mortality. Our study assesses whether gray divorced adults report higher levels of loneliness than the widowed and whether social support or repartnership offset loneliness.

Method

Using data from the 2010 and 2012 Health and Retirement Study, we estimated ordinary least squares regression models for women (n = 2,362) and men (n = 1,127) to examine differences in loneliness by dissolution pathway (i.e., divorce versus widowhood), accounting for social support and repartnership.

Results

Divorced men were lonelier than their widowed counterparts. Although social support reduced loneliness among men, the difference between the divorced and widowed persisted. Repartnership assuaged men’s loneliness and reduced the variation between divorced and widowed men. Among women, the results did not reveal differences in loneliness for the divorced and widowed although social support and repartnership linked to less loneliness.

Discussion

Later-life marital dissolutions increasingly occur through divorce rather than spousal death. Some older adults go on to form new partnerships. Our findings demonstrate the importance of gerontological research widening the lens beyond widowhood to consider the ramifications of later-life divorce and repartnership for well-being.

Keywords: Cohabitation, Divorce, Remarriage, Well-being, Widowhood

Loneliness is a common experience among older adults in the United States (Carr, Kail, Matz-Costa, & Shavit, 2018; Queen, Stawski, Ryan, & Smith, 2014). Studies typically find widowhood is linked to elevated loneliness (Carr & Pudrovska, 2012; de Jong Gierveld, van Tilburg, & Dykstra, 2006; Savikko, Routasalo, Tilvis, Strandberg, & Pitkala, 2005; Van Baarsen, 2002). However, one-third of marital dissolutions occur through divorce in later life (Brown, Lin, Hammersmith, & Wright, 2018). Over the past two decades, the gray divorce rate, which describes divorces at age 50 and beyond, has doubled (Brown & Lin, 2012). Only 1 in 10 divorces in 1990 included someone aged 50 or older. This share increased to more than one in four by 2010. Despite shifts in dissolution patterns during the second half of life, little is known about the consequences of gray divorce for loneliness and how it compares to widowhood. Divorce can be particularly disruptive to social support networks, whereas widowhood often coincides with receipt of additional social support, foretelling higher levels of loneliness among adults who experience divorce rather than widowhood.

Repartnership after marital dissolution likely plays an important role in later-life loneliness. Many older adults, especially men, form new unions following divorce or widowhood (Brown et al., 2018). Repartnering is associated with less loneliness than remaining unpartnered (de Jong Gierveld, 2003; Dykstra & de Jong Gierveld, 2004; Dykstra & Fokkema, 2007; Wright & Brown, 2017). In addition to relationships with children, friends, and relatives, romantic partnerships are an important source of support for older adults, and partnered persons tend to be more socially connected than their unpartnered counterparts. Higher levels of social interaction and support among partnered persons suggest they may experience less loneliness than the unpartnered (Hawkley & Cacioppo, 2010). Thus, it is likely older adults who repartner following marital dissolution are less lonely than those who remain unpartnered.

Using data from the 2010 and 2012 Health and Retirement Study, we assess whether marital dissolution through divorce versus widowhood is differentially associated with loneliness. Further, we investigate whether social support (e.g., the presence of children, relatives, and friends) can explain differences in loneliness by marital dissolution pathway. We also consider whether repartnering offsets the detrimental consequences of marital dissolution. Finally, we examine whether the associations between dissolution pathway, repartnership, and social support with loneliness vary for women and men. We expect that divorced older adults may have higher levels of loneliness as divorce may strain relationships that provide social support, whereas widowhood is linked to less loneliness as children, friends, and family rally around the surviving spouse (Carr & Pudrovska, 2012; Ha, 2008; Kalmijn, 2007). The results from our study yield new insights on loneliness felt by individuals who experience gray divorce and how it compares to widowhood. It is important to understand whether the consequences of later-life divorce and widowhood differ, as well as the extent to which repartnership contributes to variation in loneliness between marital groups (Brown & Wright, 2017).

Background

Marital dissolution patterns in later life have undergone significant changes in the past several decades. One key shift among older adults has been the decline in dissolution through widowhood and the increase in divorce. Among women aged 65 and older in 1980, 52% were widowed, but that percentage fell to 36% in 2015 (Brown, 2017). A recent study found over one-third of marital dissolutions among those aged 50 and older occurred through divorce (Brown et al., 2018). A number of older adults who experience a marital dissolution in later life, especially men, go on to form new partnerships. Repartnering is more common among divorced older adults than those who are widowed. Among gray divorced women, about 15% remarry and 9% cohabit, whereas just 4% of widowed women remarry and 3% enter a cohabiting relationship. For men, these figures are much higher. Approximately 28% of gray divorced men remarry and another 15% cohabit. Comparatively, about 18% of widowed men remarry and an additional 7% cohabit (Brown et al., 2018).

Dissolution Pathway, Social Support, and Loneliness

Both divorce and widowhood are associated with greater loneliness in later life, as divorced and widowed persons tend to be lonelier than their married counterparts (Carr et al., 2018; de Jong Gierveld et al., 2006; Savikko et al., 2005; van Baarsen, 2002). Spouses serve as a key source of social support and the loss of spousal support is an important factor contributing to higher levels of loneliness among older adults following marital dissolution (Carr & Pudrovska, 2012; de Jong Gierveld et al., 2006). Still, little is known about differences in loneliness between divorced and widowed older adults. Prior studies have not focused specifically on marital dissolution that occurs during later life. Rather, they capture divorce or widowhood at the time of interview, and thus the dissolutions, particularly divorce, could have occurred at younger ages. Differences in social support between widowed and divorced older adults portend variation in loneliness by dissolution pathway.

Social support is integral for attenuating loneliness (de Jong Gierveld et al., 2006; Hawkley & Cacioppo, 2010) and can come from many sources including friends, family, and children. Chen and Feeley (2014) found social support from friends reduced loneliness in later life. Friendships can offer means of short-term assistance to older people in times of need, often reducing perceived social isolation and promoting adjustment (Kramrei, Coit, Martin, Fogo & Mahoney, 2007). Friendships also connect older people with a wider social circle, thereby reducing loneliness (de Jong Gierveld et al., 2006). Moreover, family support, including that from relatives and children, involves emotional and instrumental support, which have been tied to less loneliness among U.S. older adults (Hawkley & Kocherginsky, 2018; Pinquart, 2003).

Prior research on marital dissolution and social support suggests that divorce may be more consequential for loneliness than widowhood (Pinquart, 2003), though, to our knowledge, no studies have explicitly examined whether social support explains differences in loneliness between gray divorced and widowed individuals. In general, widow(er)s tend to receive more social support than divorced persons following marital dissolution (Carr & Pudrovska, 2012; Ha, 2008). After spousal death, the surviving spouse often receives steady or increased support from children and friends who rally around them, particularly in the first 6–18 months (Ha, 2008). This support may be linked to less loneliness. Whereas social support from children tends to increase soon after widowhood, divorce is associated with less frequent contact between parents and children (Kalmijn, 2007). Divorced older adults may suffer from weaker support from family and friends, as divorce is often associated with loss of relationships aside from that with the spouse (Crowley, 2018). The divorced may also have to renegotiate relationships with friends, contributing to loneliness (Crowley, 2018). These differences in social support following marital dissolution may contribute to more loneliness among divorced than widowed older adults.

Repartnering, Social Support, and Loneliness

Intimacy, companionship, and support provided by a new partnership presumably help alleviate loneliness (de Jong Gierveld, 2002). Scholars have shown partnered persons are at less risk of loneliness because intimate partners provide emotional resources and support (de Jong Gierveld, 2003; Van Tilburg, Aartsen, & van der Pas, 2015), though repartnering does not entirely offset the effects of prior marital disruption (Dykstra & de Jong Gierveld, 2004; Peters & Liefbroer, 1997). Among older adults, partnered individuals have lower levels of perceived isolation and are less lonely than individuals who are unpartnered, on average (Cornwell & Waite, 2009; de Jong Gierveld et al., 2006). Moreover, relative to those who live alone, partnered adults tend to have larger social networks, which are associated with less loneliness (Pinquart & Sorensen, 2001). Another recent study found older cohabitors tend to report less loneliness than the unpartnered (Wright & Brown, 2017). However, these prior studies do not examine repartnering following gray divorce among contemporary cohorts of older adults. We anticipate divorced and widowed individuals who have repartnered will report less loneliness than their counterparts who remain unpartnered. Moreover, repartnering should be associated with larger gains for the divorced than the widowed particularly because the widowed benefit from increased social support, whereas the divorced do not (Carr & Pudrovska, 2012; Ha, 2008). Repartnering should be especially beneficial for men, who tend to rely on partners for social support (Carr & Pudrovska, 2012; Crowley, 2018; de Jong Gierveld et al., 2006) and are more likely to repartner following marital dissolution (Brown et al., 2018). Indeed, men may pursue new relationships in part to obtain social support from a partner (Carr, 2004).

The Role of Gender

Gender plays an important role in the marital dissolution and repartnering patterns of older adults, as well as in social support and loneliness. In terms of marital dissolution, women are much more likely to become widowed than men, whereas a higher share of men experience divorce (Brown et al., 2018). After a later-life marital dissolution, repartnering through either marriage or cohabitation is much more common among men than women. A recent study reported that around 76% of divorced women and 94% of widowed women were unpartnered. Among men, about 57% of divorced men and 75% of widowed men remained unpartnered (Brown et al., 2018).

Prior research reports that loneliness is higher among unmarried men than women (Pinquart, 2003). Among the divorced, gender differences in loneliness appear to be explained largely by social contacts. However, loneliness still differs by gender for widowed persons even after accounting for social contacts (Pinquart, 2003). Support from children often differs for women and men following marital dissolution. The negative association between divorce and parent–child contact is greater for men than women (Carr & Pudrovska, 2012; Crowley, 2018; Kalmijn, 2007). Following widowhood, social support between parents and children increases, on average, though exchanges between mothers and children appear stronger than those between fathers and children (Carr & Pudrovska, 2012; Kalmijn, 2007). In addition to relationships with children, women often benefit from stronger relationships with friends and family than their male counterparts. Men tend to have social relations that lack emotional depth relative to women and often rely on their wives for social support, whereas women more frequently have larger and varied social networks (Carr & Pudrovska, 2012; Crowley, 2018; de Jong Gierveld et al., 2006). Because of gender differences in marital dissolution, repartnering, loneliness, and social support, we conduct separate analyses for women and men.

The Current Study

Our study sheds new light on loneliness in later life by investigating differences between older adults who experienced a divorce versus widowhood. Given evidence from prior research, we examine three primary hypotheses. First, despite limited research on loneliness among the divorced versus widowed, we expect gray divorce to be associated with greater loneliness than widowhood. Second, we predict this difference is largely driven by social support. Widowed persons may experience less loneliness than divorced individuals because social support following marital dissolution tends to be higher among the widowed than the divorced (Carr & Pudrovska, 2012; Ha, 2008). Moreover, children are an important source of support, and widowed older adults are in more frequent contact with their children than are divorced persons (Kalmijn, 2007). Based on evidence suggesting variation in social support by dissolution pathway, we also expect that social support from friends, relatives, and children will explain differences in loneliness among the divorced and widowed. Moreover, there are important social support differences between older men and women, and, thus, we separate our analyses by gender (Carr & Pudrovska, 2012; Crowley, 2018; de Jong Gierveld et al., 2006, Kalmijn, 2007).

Third, we predict repartnering after divorce or widowhood is associated with less loneliness than remaining unpartnered (Cornwell & Waite, 2009; de Jong Gierveld, 2003; de Jong Gierveld et al., 2006). Additionally, we anticipate that repartnering has larger benefits for divorced older adults than their widowed counterparts. Moreover, we expect that men benefit more from repartnership than do women (Carr, 2004, Carr & Pudrovska, 2012; Crowley, 2018; de Jong Gierveld et al., 2006).

We also account for marital biography, demographic characteristics, economic resources, and health. Time since the dissolution allows for a period of adjustment, which is negatively associated with loneliness (Lloyd, Sailor, & Carney, 2014) and is positively associated with repartnership (Brown et al., 2018). We also account for dissolving a remarriage versus first marriage. Individuals who were divorced or widowed following a remarriage may have fewer economic, social, and health-related resources than their counterparts who dissolved a first marriage (Carr & Springer, 2010), and such resources are negatively associated with loneliness (Pinquart, 2003; Savikko et al., 2005). Remarriages are more likely to end through divorce than first marriages (Brown & Lin, 2012). Further, those who dissolved a remarriage are more likely than their counterparts who dissolved a first marriage to enter into a subsequent remarriage (Brown et al., 2018).

We control for age, as research suggests loneliness may increase with age as social interactions diminish due to loss of friends and social roles as people grow older (Pinquart, 2003). Other research has shown a nonlinear, u-shaped association between age and loneliness (Pinquart & Sorensen, 2001). Divorce, widowhood, and repartnership typically occur at different ages with divorce and repartnership often occurring earlier in older adulthood and widowhood happening later (Brown & Lin, 2012; de Jong Gierveld, 2004). Non-Whites are more likely to live in multigenerational households than Whites, and thus, may be less lonely than their White counterparts (Coleman & Ganong, 2008). However, non-Whites tend to have fewer economic, social, and health-related resources than do Whites, and since greater resources are negatively associated with loneliness, it is possible non-Whites are lonelier than Whites (Brown, O’Rand, & Adkins, 2012; Franks, Gold, & Fiscella, 2003).

We also include several factors related to socioeconomic status: education, employment, and wealth. Higher socioeconomic status is associated with less loneliness, whereas employment, education, and wealth are positively associated with access to resources, which may reduce social isolation (Pinquart, 2003). Moreover, the widowed and repartnered tend to have a higher socioeconomic status than their divorced counterparts (Lin, Brown, & Hammersmith, 2017; Savikko et al., 2005). We include chronic conditions because prior work has shown that poor physical health is positively related to loneliness (Savikko et al., 2005).

Method

Data came from the 2010 and 2012 Health and Retirement Study (HRS), a nationally representative sample of a continuous cohort of older adults aged 50 and older. The purpose of the HRS is to examine the retirement, finances, relationships, health, and well-being of older people in the United States. To be eligible, respondents must be noninstitutionalized at baseline and live within a household. Respondents are interviewed biennially and every 6 years, the HRS incorporates a new cohort of older adults aged 51–56 to replenish the sample and preserve representativeness. The HRS boasts relatively high response rates, with baseline percentages hovering around 70%–82% and approaching 90% or higher for follow-up interviews. The HRS includes oversamples of Blacks, Hispanics, and Florida residents. We drew upon the Psychosocial Survey from 2010 and 2012. The Psychosocial Survey is a leave-behind questionnaire that queries respondents about their lifestyle and relationships. To reduce respondent burden, the Psychosocial Survey was administered to half the sample every 4 years. By combining 2010 and 2012 data, we were able to analyze a complete set of respondents.

To select our analytic sample, we retained respondents from either the 2010 or 2012 Psychosocial Survey (N = 15,571) who experienced either divorce or widowhood at or after age 50 (n = 3,590). Fewer than 5% of respondents experienced a subsequent dissolution following their first divorce or widowhood at age 50 or older. We classify these respondents based on their first union dissolution at age 50 or older. We also limited the sample to respondents who had a weight value not equal to zero (n = 3,548), and were not missing on six or more items measuring loneliness, yielding a final analytic sample of 3,489.

Measures

Loneliness

Loneliness was constructed by summing 11 items from the Psychosocial Survey derived from the UCLA Loneliness Scale by the HRS (Russell, 1996). The first four questions asked how often the respondent felt: a lack of companionship, left out, isolated, and alone. The next seven questions were reverse coded and queried respondents on whether they had: felt in tune with others, people to talk to, people to turn to, people who understand them, people they felt close to, felt like part of a group, and a lot in common with friends. Response values ranged from 0 = hardly ever, 1 = some of the time, and 2 = often. The Cronbach’s alpha for the items used to measure loneliness was .86. Information was calculated as a sum score if respondents were missing on five or fewer items (Smith, Ryan, Sonnega, & Weir, 2017). Of the respondents who were missing on five or fewer items, 92% answered all loneliness questions. For the 8% missing on at least one loneliness item, we used multiple imputations for the individual loneliness questions prior to constructing the loneliness scale. Loneliness was a continuous measure ranging from 0 to 22 with lower values representing less loneliness and higher values indicating greater loneliness.

Dissolution pathway

Dissolution pathway measured whether the first marital dissolution at age 50 or older was through divorce (coded 1) or widowhood (coded 0).

Repartnership

Repartnership was a series of binary variables that gauged whether the respondent was repartnered through remarriage, cohabitation, or remained unpartnered (reference) at interview.

Marital biography

Time since dissolution was a continuous measure that captured the number of years since the respondent’s dissolution. We included a measure of whether the marriage that dissolved was a remarriage (1 = Yes, 0 = No).

Demographic characteristics

Age was a continuous measure in years ranging from 51 to 101. Age-squared was also included in the analyses to account for possible nonlinearity. Nonwhite indicated whether the respondent was White (coded 0) or Black, Hispanic, or of another racial or ethnic background (coded 1).

Economic resources

Education included the following categories: less than high school, high school diploma (reference category), some college, and college or more. Work status measured whether the respondent was employed (1 = Yes, 0 = No). Wealth was a continuous measure of total non-housing household wealth. Wealth was adjusted to 2017 dollars to account for inflation and those with wealth values beyond the 99th percentile were top-coded to the 99th percentile. Respondents reporting negative or zero wealth were assigned a value of $1. We then took the natural log to account for the skewness of wealth.

Health

Chronic conditions summed the number of ailments the respondent had been diagnosed with, including heart disease, stroke, diabetes, hypertension, cancer, psychological disorders, arthritis, and lung disease. Once a respondent was diagnosed with one of these conditions, the HRS coded the respondent as having the ailment in subsequent waves.

Social support

Social support from children was captured by a categorical variable measuring whether the respondent had no children, resident children or children living within 10 miles (reference category), or children living more than 10 miles away. Relatives nearby measured whether the respondent had relatives in their neighborhood (1 = Yes, 0 = No). Friends nearby indicated whether the respondent reported friends in their neighborhood (1 = Yes, 0 = No).

Analytic Strategy

We began by examining mean differences in loneliness between the divorced and widowed who repartnered through cohabitation or remarriage versus remaining unpartnered by gender. Next, we estimated weighted descriptive statistics separately for men and women. Differences between men and women were tested using bivariate regression and logit models. Next, we ran a series of ordinary least squares regression models by gender. The first model included the regression of loneliness on dissolution pathway and all covariates. The second model introduced social support to examine whether social support measures explain differences in loneliness of divorced versus widowed respondents. A Baron and Kenny four-step approach was used to test for mediation. Mediation was not supported (result not shown) and thus, we decided to use regression to model social support. Finally, the third model added repartnership status to investigate whether repartnership mitigates loneliness. All analyses were weighted to correct for unequal probability of selection into the sample using svy in Stata. Missing data on the independent variables were imputed through multiple imputation using ten replicates (Acock, 2005).

Results

Descriptive Results for Men and Women

Table 1 shows the weighted means for loneliness across dissolution pathway and repartnership status by gender. When examining dissolution pathway by repartnership status for men and women, one significant difference emerged. For men who remained unpartnered, divorced men reported higher average loneliness than widowed men. Within dissolution type, we also compared loneliness by repartnership status. Among divorced men, those who had not repartnered reported greater loneliness than their remarried and cohabiting counterparts. Widowed men who had not repartnered were lonelier than the remarried. Among women, divorced women who did not repartner reported more loneliness than their remarried counterparts. Widowed women who did not repartner were lonelier than their counterparts who had remarried or entered cohabitation. For divorced and widowed men and women, there were no differences in loneliness between remarrieds and cohabitors.

Table 1.

Weighted Mean of Loneliness by Repartnership Status and Dissolution Pathway Among Men and Women (n = 3,489)

Men Women
Divorced Widowed Divorced Widowed Total
Repartnership status
 Not repartnered (ref) 7.94 6.85* 6.52 6.16 7.16
 Remarried 5.79 5.12 5.18 4.34 5.60
 Cohabiting 6.42 5.90 5.53 4.73 6.16
 Total 7.07 6.41 6.24 6.05
Unweighted n 522 605 549 1,813
Open in a new tab

Note: Bold coefficients denote significant difference from “not repartnered” within gender and dissolution type at p <.05.

*p < .05 shows differences between dissolution pathways by repartnership separately for men and women.

Table 2 displays the weighted means and percentages for all covariates included in the analyses by gender. Nearly 54% of men experienced a gray divorce, whereas 46% of men were widowed. About a quarter of women reported a gray divorce compared to 76% of women who were widowed. A greater share of men than women had repartnered through either remarriage or cohabitation. Over a quarter of men had remarried relative to about 7% of women and nearly 12% of men had entered a cohabitation compared to less than 4% of women. Women had been divorced or widowed close to 2 years longer than men, on average (11.68 years compared to 9.91 years). About 56% of the divorced or widowed men in the sample dissolved a remarriage relative to 39% of women.

Table 2.

Weighted Means (SDs) and Percentages for Men and Women (n = 3,489)

Men Women
Dissolution pathway
 Divorced 53.61 24.49***
 Widowed 46.39 75.51
Repartnership status
 Remarried 25.73 6.84***
 Cohabiting 11.86 3.91***
 Not repartnered 62.41 89.25***
Marital biography
 Years since dissolution 9.91 (7.9) 11.68 (16.8)***
 Dissolved remarriage 55.68 39.32***
Demographic characteristics
 Age 71.39 (10.9) 75.91 (21.9)***
 Race
  White 80.63 81.93
  Nonwhite 19.37 18.07
Economic resources
 Education
  Less than high school 19.94 23.43
  High school 29.91 37.45**
  Some college 23.32 22.42
  College or more 26.83 16.69***
 Working 26.47 13.36***
 Wealth (natural log) 9.65 (4.29) 9.08 (8.79)*
Health
 Chronic conditions 2.40 (1.5) 2.53 (3.0)+
Social support
 Children
  No children 5.74 4.75
  Resident children or nearby 58.37 67.38***
  Children living more than 10 miles away 35.89 27.87***
 Relatives nearby 22.18 28.13**
 Friends nearby 59.12 67.72***
Weighted percentages 34.46 65.54
Unweighted n 1,127 2,362
Open in a new tab

Note: +p < .10. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Women in the sample were nearly 4 years older than their male counterparts (75.91 years compared to 71.39 years). On average, men reported higher education than women. Fewer than one-third of men had a high school diploma, whereas about 37.5% of women reported the same education level. Over about 26.8% of men had a college degree or more, whereas about 16.7% of women were in this education category. More men than women were employed (26.5% vs 13.4%) and men enjoyed greater wealth than women, on average. Women reported slightly more chronic conditions than men (2.5 compared to 2.4). Finally, women had greater social support than men. Over two-thirds of women had children who were resident or living within 10 miles compared to about 58% of men. More men had children living over 10 miles away than women (36% vs 28%). Over 28% of women had relatives nearby compared to 22.2% of men. Over two-thirds of women reported at least one friend nearby relative to about 59% of men.

Multivariate Results for Men

Table 3 shows the multivariate results for men. Model 1 includes the regression of loneliness on dissolution pathway and all other covariates. Dissolution pathway was positively associated with loneliness such that divorced men reported greater loneliness than widowed men. Older men reported less loneliness than younger men and the curvilinear effect of age suggests this effect tapered off with time. Dissolving a remarriage, being employed, having greater wealth, and having a college education were negatively associated with loneliness for men, whereas chronic conditions were positively related to loneliness.

Table 3.

Coefficients and (SEs) from the Weighted Ordinary Least Squares Regression of Loneliness on Dissolution Pathway and Repartnership Among Men (n = 1,127)

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
Dissolution pathway
  Divorced (vs widowed) 1.00 (0.48)* 1.01 (0.50)* 0.95 (0.52)+
Repartnership status
  Remarried −1.48 (0.46)**
  Cohabiting −1.49 (0.54)**
  Not repartnered (ref)
Marital characteristics
 Years since dissolution −0.32 (0.24) −0.38 (0.27) −0.17 (0.28)
 Dissolved remarriage −0.70 (0.32)* −0.58 (0.33) −0.05 (0.36)
Demographic characteristics
 Age −4.47 (1.9)* −3.62 (2.0)+ −3.24 (2.1)
 Age-squared 0.28 (0.13)* 0.23 (0.13)+ 0.20 (0.13)
 Race
  White (ref)
  Nonwhite −0.49 (0.45) −0.53 (0.43) −0.45 (0.43)
Economic characteristics
 Education
  Less than high school −0.32 (0.52) −0.33 (0.49) −0.35 (0.50)
  High school (ref)
  Some college −0.51 (0.58) −0.53 (0.43) −0.59 (0.55)
  College or more −0.93 (0.53)* −0.97 (0.45)* −0.90 (0.46)+
 Working −0.96 (0.53)+ −1.00 (0.54) −0.81 (0.53)
 Wealth −0.17 (0.05)** −0.16 (0.05)** −0.14 (0.05)**
Health
 Chronic conditions 0.52 (0.12)*** 0.48 (0.13)*** 0.50 (0.12)***
Social support
 Children
  No children 0.31 (0.85) 0.04 (0.87)
  Resident children or nearby (ref)
  Children living more than 10 miles away 0.03 (0.48) 0.02 (0.47)
 Relatives nearby 0.26 (0.40) 0.21 (0.38)
 Friends nearby −1.42 (0.33)*** −1.56 (0.33)***
Constant 25.45 (7.6)** 22.86 (7.6)** 21.59 (7.8)**
R 2 .09 .11 .12
F-statistic 7.13 9.56 9.24
Open in a new tab

Note: +p < .10. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Model 2 adds social support. The positive relationship between dissolution pathway and loneliness remained significant in this model, suggesting even after controlling for social support, there was still a gap between divorced and widowed men. As for social support, only the measure for friends nearby emerged as significant. Friends nearby linked to less loneliness among men. The covariates remained largely unchanged although dissolving a remarriage was no longer significant and age as well as age-squared were reduced to marginal significance.

Finally, Model 3 adds repartnership. The positive relationship between dissolution pathway and loneliness was diminished to marginal significance (p < .10). Moreover, compared to remaining unpartnered, remarriage or cohabitation were related to significantly less loneliness among men. All other measures in this model remained consistent although age and age-squared were no longer statistically significant and reporting a college degree or more was reduced to marginal significance.

Multivariate Results for Women

Table 4 displays the multivariate results for women. Model 1 shows dissolution pathway was not significantly related to women’s loneliness. As for all other covariates in this model, older age was associated with less loneliness, though the marginally significant age-squared term indicates this effect tapered off with time. Moreover, compared to women with fewer financial resources, wealthier women reported less loneliness and women with more chronic conditions reported greater loneliness.

Table 4.

Coefficients and (SEs) From the Weighted Ordinary Least Squares Regression of Loneliness on Dissolution Pathway and Repartnership Among Women (n = 2,362)

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
Dissolution pathway
  Divorced (vs widowed) −0.05 (0.28) −0.12 (0.28) −0.02 (0.29)
Repartnership status
  Remarried −1.58 (0.49)**
  Cohabiting −1.47 (0.59)*
  Not repartnered (ref)
Marital characteristics
 Years since dissolution −0.08 (0.15) −0.11 (0.15) −0.03 (0.16)
 Dissolved remarriage 0.17 (0.17) 0.17 (0.18) 0.39 (0.19)+
Demographic characteristics
 Age −2.98 (1.4)* −2.57 (1.4)+ −2.71 (1.4)+
 Age-squared 0.17 (0.09)+ 0.15 (0.09) 0.15 (0.09)
 Race
  White (ref)
  Nonwhite −0.02 (0.30) 0.01 (0.29) −0.00 (0.29)
Economic characteristics
 Education
  Less than high school 0.09 (0.34) 0.21 (0.31) 0.18 (0.31)
  High school (ref)
  Some college −0.35 (0.29) −0.33 (0.32) −0.39 (0.31)
  College or more −0.53 (0.33) −0.65 (0.33)+ −0.66 (0.33)+
 Working −0.50 (0.42) −0.57 (0.43) −0.65 (0.42)
 Wealth −0.09 (0.03)** −0.08 (0.03)** −0.07 (0.03)*
Health
 Chronic conditions 0.49 (0.07)*** 0.48 (0.07)*** 0.47 (0.07)***
Social support
 Children
  No children 0.27 (0.51) 0.18 (0.52)
  Resident children or nearby (ref)
  Children living more than 10 miles away 0.54 (0.27)* 0.61 (0.27)*
 Relatives nearby −0.07 (0.24) −0.04 (0.24)
 Friends nearby −1.49 (0.29)*** −1.51 (0.29)***
Constant 18.45 (5.5)** 17.47 (5.4)** 18.21 (5.4)**
R 2 .05 .08 .08
F-statistic 9.84 12.53 12.79
Open in a new tab

Note: +p < .10. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Model 2 includes social support measures. The relationship between dissolution pathway and loneliness remained unchanged. As for social support, having a nonresident child living more than 10 miles away was associated with less loneliness for women, whereas friends living nearby was negatively related to women’s loneliness. The covariates included remain largely unchanged although age was reduced to marginal significance and age-squared was no longer significantly associated with loneliness. Moreover, having a college education became marginally significant, suggesting women with a college degree experienced less loneliness than their counterparts with a high school diploma.

Model 3 adds repartnership status. Similar to men, women’s repartnership through remarriage or cohabitation was linked to less loneliness compared to remaining unpartnered. The statistical significance of all other covariates in the model remained relatively unchanged, although dissolving a remarriage versus a first marriage was marginally related to greater loneliness among women.

We conducted several supplemental analyses (results available upon request). In the models for men and women, we tested whether the coefficients for remarriage and cohabitation differed significantly from one another. Across each model, we found no significant differences between the coefficients for remarriage and cohabitation, indicating remarriage and cohabitation function similarly when considering loneliness. We also tested whether dissolution pathway and repartnership status modified one another. This test did not achieve statistical significance for men or women, suggesting dissolution and repartnership operate independently. We also examined whether the relationship between dissolution pathway or repartnership status varied by social support. These tests were not significant, indicating that the effects of social support on loneliness did not differ by dissolution pathway or repartnership status. Finally, as men and women tend to experience differences in receipt of social support in later life (Carr & Pudrovska, 2012; Crowley, 2018; de Jong Gierveld et al., 2006, Kalmijn, 2007), we tested interactions between gender and dissolution pathway as well as repartnership in a full model that included both men and women. Neither yielded significant gender differences in the relationship between loneliness and dissolution pathway or repartnership.

Discussion

Many older people are lonely (Carr et al., 2018; Queen et al., 2014). Although prior work indicates widowhood is positively associated with loneliness (Savikko et al., 2005), it is unclear whether the consequences of gray divorce mirror those of widowhood. Yet, later-life marital dissolution often occurs through divorce, particularly among men (Brown et al., 2018), underscoring the importance of examining both of these marital dissolution pathways. Indeed, our study demonstrates the value of distinguishing between divorce and widowhood. Our first research aim examined differences in loneliness between divorced and widowed men and women in later life. Divorced men were lonelier, on average, than their widowed counterparts. Divorced and widowed women reported comparable levels of loneliness.

Our second hypothesis considered social support from friends, relatives, and children. Spouses are a critical source of social support, and the absence of a spouse or partner is positively associated with loneliness. However, research has shown that other sources of support may attenuate loneliness (Hawkley & Cacioppo, 2010; Hawkley & Kocherginsky, 2018; de Jong Gierveld et al., 2006; Kramrei et al., 2007; Pinquart, 2003). Contrary to expectations, the gap in loneliness between divorced and widowed men remained after accounting for social support. The fact that divorced men remained lonelier than their widowed counterparts after controlling for social support is consistent with literature that suggests that men face a social support deficit (Carr & Pudrovska, 2012; Crowley, 2018; Kalmijn, 2007). Moreover, social support from children, relatives, and friends nearby did not uniformly link to loneliness. Friends nearby were associated with lower levels of loneliness among men and women, which is consistent with prior literature indicating friendships are one of the most important social ties to combat social isolation (Caserta, Utz, Lund, Swenson, & de Vries, 2014; Chen & Feeley, 2014). Resident children or children within 10 miles relative to children who lived more than 10 miles away was associated with less loneliness for women, but not for men. Women tend to maintain stronger ties with children over the life course than men (Carr & Pudrovska, 2012; Crowley, 2018), which may explain why women benefit from having children nearby whereas men do not.

The third aim of this study focused on repartnership. The loss of a spouse or partner through widowhood or divorce suggests the loss of a potential avenue of social support. However, repartnering may provide many of the same benefits as the former partnership (de Jong Gierveld, 2003; Van Tilburg et al., 2015). Indeed, we found the difference in loneliness between divorced and widowed men was reduced to marginal significance when accounting for repartnership. Moreover, repartnership was linked to significantly less loneliness among both men and women. Lastly, we found no difference between repartnering through remarriage or cohabitation. This is consistent with recent work showing cohabitation resembles marriage in later life, especially when considering the psychological well-being of older people (King & Scott, 2005; Wright & Brown, 2017). These findings also align with prior work that suggests having a spouse or partner provides additional emotional and social support resources (de Jong Gierveld, 2003; Van Tilburg et al., 2015) and the presence of a spouse or partner may expand one’s social networks (Pinquart & Sorensen, 2001), thereby alleviating loneliness. Of course, it is possible that those who were less lonely were more likely to repartner, but we could not examine this as questions about loneliness have only been asked after repartnership for many HRS respondents. Future studies using longitudinal data should explore this possibility. Still, gaining a spouse or a partner presumably provides older adults with important social resources, as romantic partners are crucial sources of support in later life (Carstensen, Fung, & Charles, 2003; Chen & Feeley, 2014).

Despite the contributions of this study to the literature, it is not without limitations. First, since this study relies on cross-sectional data, we were unable to draw causal inferences about the relationships among dissolution pathway, repartnership, social support, and loneliness. Future researchers should use longitudinal data to examine loneliness prior to and following marital dissolution and repartnership. Second, we were unable to account for selection into divorce, widowhood, or repartnership. Healthier individuals are more likely to stay married, reducing their likelihood of divorce or widowhood. Similarly, those with better health and greater resources are more likely to repartner, and thus, should be less lonely (Brown et al., 2018). Third, we were not able to capture non-coresidential repartnerships through dating or Living Apart Together (LAT) relationships. Such partnerships are on the rise among older adults and may offer benefits for well-being in comparison to remaining unpartnered (Brown & Shinohara, 2013; Connidis, Borell, & Karlsson, 2017). We also only have a crude measure of social support: presence of friends and relatives nearby. Ideally, we would be able to examine the intensity of contact or social network density, but these measures were not available. Finally, high levels of resilience prior to marital dissolution appear to buffer the negative effects of widowhood on depressive symptoms, especially among men (King, Carr, & Taylor, 2019). Although measures tapping resilience are available in the HRS Psychosocial Survey, we were unable to include them as many of our respondents experienced marital dissolution prior to the initiation of the Psychosocial Survey. Future research should consider the role psychological resilience may play in differences between gray divorced and widowed older adults.

Ultimately, this study makes an important contribution to literature on loneliness in later life. Gerontological research on loneliness has largely retained a focus on widowhood (Savikko et al., 2005; van Baarsen, 2002). Yet, it is important to also examine gray divorce as the divorce rate among older adults has risen (Brown & Lin, 2012; Lin & Brown, 2012). Today, nearly half of marital dissolutions among older men are divorces (Brown et al., 2018). These trends suggest that researchers can no longer ignore the role of late-life divorce in studies of well-being. Our work helps fill the gap in the existing literature by being the first empirical study to compare loneliness among a contemporary cohort of gray divorced older adults and their widowed counterparts. In particular, we found that divorced men are lonelier than their widowed counterparts, net of social support and other covariates. Repartnership accounts for part of the difference in loneliness between divorced and widowed men, but not all of it.

It is critical for social science researchers to determine the characteristics of older people who may be at risk of loneliness, especially as lonely older adults often report poorer self-rated health and have a higher risk of mortality than those who are not lonely (Luo, Hawkley, Waite, & Cacioppo, 2012). Our study identifies older, divorced men who remain unpartnered as particularly vulnerable to loneliness. Thus, they are likely more vulnerable to the other negative consequences associated with loneliness, such as poorer health. Although some men who divorce in later life will eventually repartner, many of them will not (Brown et al., 2018). However, there are interventions that can be employed to assuage loneliness apart from repartnership. For instance, researchers have made great strides to establish ways to combat loneliness, including the use of technology, group interventions, enhancing and maintaining social networks, as well as addressing maladaptive social cognition (Hagan, Manktelow, Taylor, & Mallett, 2014; Masi, Chen, Hawkley, & Cacioppo, 2011). By recognizing older people who are most prone to loneliness—such as divorced, unpartnered older men—practitioners can implement current interventions as well as devise new targeted policies or programs to combat loneliness and help older adults feel more integrated in their communities.

Funding

This research was supported by a grant to S. L. Brown and I.-F. Lin from the National Institute on Aging (R15AG047588). Additional support was provided by the Center for Family and Demographic Research, Bowling Green State University, which has core funding from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (P2CHD050959).

Acknowledgments

The four authors jointly conceived of the study. M. R. Wright and A. M. Hammersmith performed the analyses with input from S. L. Brown and I.-F. Lin. Wright and A. M. Hammersmith wrote the initial manuscript draft. All four authors participated in revisions of the initial draft.

References

  1. Acock A. C. (2005). Working with missing values. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 1012–1028. doi:10.1111/j.1741- 3737.2005.00191.x [Google Scholar]
  2. Brown S. L. (2017). Families in America. Berkeley: University of California Press. [Google Scholar]
  3. Brown S. L., & Lin I.-F (2012). The gray divorce revolution: Rising divorce among middle-aged and older adults, 1990-2010. The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 67, 731–741. doi:10.1093/geronb/gbs089 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Brown S. L., Lin I.-F., Hammersmith A. M., & Wright M. R (2018). Later life marital dissolution and repartnership status: A national portrait. The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 73, 1032–1042. doi:10.1093/geronb/gbw051 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Brown T. H., O’Rand A. M., & Adkins D. E (2012). Race-ethnicity and health trajectories: Tests of three hypotheses across multiple groups and health outcomes. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 53, 359–377. doi:10.1177/0022146512455333 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Brown S. L., & Shinohara S. K (2013). Dating relationships in older adulthood: A national portrait. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 75, 1194–1202. doi:10.1111/jomf.12065 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Brown S. L., & Wright M. R (2017). Marriage, cohabitation, and divorce in later life. Innovation in Aging, 1, 1–11. doi:10.1093/geroni/igx015 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Carr D. (2004). The desire to date and remarry among older widows and widowers. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 1051–1068. doi:10.1111/j.0022-2445.2004.00078.x [Google Scholar]
  9. Carr D. C., Kail B. L., Matz-Costa C., & Shavit Y. Z (2018). Does becoming a volunteer attenuate loneliness among recently widowed older adults? The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 73, 501–510. doi:10.1093/geronb/gbx092 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Carr D., & Pudrovska T (2012). Divorce and widowhood in later life. In Blieszner R. & Hilkevitch Bedford V. (Eds.), Handbook of families and aging (pp. 489–514). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, LLC. [Google Scholar]
  11. Carr D., & Springer K. W (2010). Advances in families and health research in the 21st century. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 743–761. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00728.x [Google Scholar]
  12. Carstensen L. L., Fung H. H., & Charles S. T (2003). Socioemotional selectivity theory and the regulation of emotion in the second half of life. Motivation and Emotion, 27, 103–123. doi:10.1023/A:1024569803230 [Google Scholar]
  13. Caserta M., Utz R., Lund D., Swenson K. L., & de Vries B (2014). Coping processes among bereaved spouses. Death Studies, 38, 145–155. doi:10.1080/07481187.2012.738767 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Chen Y., & Feeley T. H (2014). Social support, social strain, loneliness, and well-being among older adults. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 31, 141–161. doi:10.1177/0265407513488728 [Google Scholar]
  15. Coleman M., & Ganong L (2008). Normative beliefs about sharing housing with an older family member. International Journal of Aging & Human Development, 66, 49–72. doi:10.2190/AG.66.1.c [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Connidis I. A., Borell K., & Karlsson S. G (2017). Ambivalence and living apart together in later life: A critical research proposal. Journal of Marriage and Family, 79, 1404–1418. doi:10.1111/jomf.12417 [Google Scholar]
  17. Cornwell E. Y., & Waite L. J (2009). Social disconnectedness, perceived isolation, and health among older adults. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 50, 31–48. doi:10.1177/002214650905000103 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Crowley J. E. (2018). Gray divorce: What we lose and gain from mid-life splits. Oakland: University of California Press. [Google Scholar]
  19. de Jong Gierveld J. (2002). The dilemma of repartnering: Considerations of older men and women entering new intimate relationships in later life. Ageing International, 27, 61–78. doi:10.1007/s12126-002-1015-z [Google Scholar]
  20. de Jong Gierveld J. (2003). Social networks and social well-being of older men and women living along. In Arber S., Davidson K., & Ginn J. (Eds.), Gender and ageing: Changing roles and relationships (pp. 95–110). Maidenhead, PA: Open University Press. [Google Scholar]
  21. de Jong Gierveld J. (2004). Remarriage, unmarried cohabitation, living apart together: Partner relationships following bereavement or divorce. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 236–243. doi:10.1111/j.0022-2445.2004.00015.x [Google Scholar]
  22. de Jong Gierveld J., van Tilburg T. G., & Dykstra P. A (2006). Loneliness and social isolation. In Perlman D. & Vangelisti A. L. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of personal relationships (pp. 485–500). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781316417867 [Google Scholar]
  23. Dykstra P. A., & de Jong Gierveld J (2004). Gender and marital-history differences in emotional and social loneliness among Dutch older adults. Canadian Journal on Aging = La revue Canadienne du Vieillissement, 23, 141–155. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Dykstra P. A., & Fokkema T (2007). Social and emotional loneliness among divorced and married men and women: Comparing the deficit and cognitive perspective. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 29, 1–12. doi:10:1080.01973530701330843 [Google Scholar]
  25. Franks P., Gold M. R., & Fiscella K (2003). Sociodemographics, self-rated health, and mortality in the US. Social Science & Medicine (1982), 56, 2505–2514. doi:10.1016/s0277-9536(02)00281-2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Ha J.-H. (2008). Changes in support from confidants, children, and friends following widowhood. Journal of Marriage and Family, 70, 306–318. doi:10.1111/j.1741-3737.2008.00483.x [Google Scholar]
  27. Hagan R., Manktelow R., Taylor B. J., & Mallett J (2014). Reducing loneliness amongst older people: A systematic search and narrative review. Aging & Mental Health, 18, 683–693. doi:10.1080/13607863.2013.875122 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Hawkley L. C., & Cacioppo J. T (2010). Loneliness matters: A theoretical and empirical review of consequences and mechanisms. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 40, 218–227. doi:10.1007/s12160-010-9210-8 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Hawkley L. C., & Kocherginsky M (2018). Transitions in loneliness among older adults: A 5-year follow-up in the National Social Life, Health, and Aging Project. Research on Aging, 40, 365–387. doi:10.1177/0164027517698965 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Kalmijn M. (2007). Gender differences in the effects of divorce, widowhood, and remarriage on intergenerational support: Does marriage protect fathers? Social Forces, 85, 1079–1104. doi:10.1353/sof.2007.0043 [Google Scholar]
  31. King B. M., Carr D. C., & Taylor M. G. (2019). Depressive symptoms and the buffering effect of resilience on widowhood by gender. The Gerontologist, 59, 1122–1130. doi:10.1093/geront/gny115 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. King V., & Scott M. E (2005). A comparison of cohabiting relationships among older and younger adults. Journal of Marriage and Family, 67, 271–285. doi:10.1111/j.0022-2445.2005.00115.x [Google Scholar]
  33. Kramrei E., Coit C., Martin S., Fogo W., & Mahoney A (2007). Post-divorce adjustment and social relationships. Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, 46, 145–166. doi:10.1300/J087v46n03_09 [Google Scholar]
  34. Lin I.-F., & Brown S. L (2012). Unmarried Boomers confront old age: A national portrait. The Gerontologist, 52, 153–165. doi:10.1093/geront/gnr141 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Lin I.-F., Brown S. L., & Hammersmith A. M (2017). Marital biography, social security receipt, and poverty. Research on Aging, 39, 86–110. doi:10.1177/0164027516656139 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Lloyd G. M., Sailor J. L., & Carney W (2014). A phenomenological study of postdivorce adjustment in midlife. Journal of Divorce and Remarriage, 55, 441–450. doi:10.1080/10502556.2014.931757. [Google Scholar]
  37. Luo Y., Hawkley L. C., Waite L. J., & Cacioppo J. T (2012). Loneliness, health, and mortality in old age: A national longitudinal study. Social Science & Medicine (1982), 74, 907–914. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.11.028 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Masi C. M., Chen H. Y., Hawkley L. C., & Cacioppo J. T (2011). A meta-analysis of interventions to reduce loneliness. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15, 219–266. doi:10.1177/1088868310377394 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Peters A., & Liefbroer A. C (1997). Beyond marital status: Partnership history and well-being in old age. Journal of Marriage and Family, 59, 687–699. doi:10.2307/353954 [Google Scholar]
  40. Pinquart M. (2003). Loneliness in married, widowed, divorced, and never-married older adults. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 20, 31–53. doi:10.1177/02654075030201002 [Google Scholar]
  41. Pinquart M., & Sorensen S (2001). Influences on loneliness in older adults: A meta-analysis. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 23, 245–266. doi:10.1207/153248301753225702 [Google Scholar]
  42. Queen T. L., Stawski R. S., Ryan L. H., & Smith J (2014). Loneliness in a day: Activity engagement, time alone, and experienced emotions. Psychology and Aging, 29, 297–305. doi:10.1037/a0036889 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Russell D. W. (1996). UCLA Loneliness Scale (version 3): Reliability, validity, and factor structure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 66, 20–40. doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa6601_2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Savikko N., Routasalo P., Tilvis R. S., Strandberg T. E., & Pitkala K. H (2005). Predictors and subjective causes of loneliness in an aged population. Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics, 41, 223–233. doi:10.1016/j.archger.2005.03.002 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Smith J., Ryan L., Sonnega A., & Weir D. (2017, July). Psychosocial and lifestyle questionnaire 2006–2016 Retrieved from https://hrs.isr.umich.edu/sites/default/ files/biblio/HRS%202006–2016%20SAQ%20Documentation_07.06.17.pdf
  46. Van Baarsen B. (2002). Theories on coping with loss: The impact of social support and self-esteem on adjustment to emotional and social loneliness following a partner’s death in later life. The Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 57, S33–S42. doi:10.1093/geronb/57.1.s33 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Van Tilburg T. G., Aartsen M. J., & van der Pas S (2015). Loneliness after divorce: A cohort comparison among Dutch young-old adults. European Sociological Review, 31, 243–252. doi:10.1093/esr/jcu086 [Google Scholar]
  48. Wright M. R., & Brown S. L (2017). Psychological well-being among older adults: The role of partnership status. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 79, 833–849. doi:10.1111/jomf.12375 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences are provided here courtesy of Oxford University Press

RESOURCES