Navigation

Service-Menü

Hauptmenü




Old Age and Autonomy: The Role of Service Systems and Intergenerational Family Solidarity. Primary data of the european study OASIS

Order Dataset

Print View

Researchers

Name
Tesch-Rmer, Clemens
Motel-Klingebiel, Andreas
von Kondratowitz, Hans-Joachim

Top

Dataset Information

Title Old Age and Autonomy: The Role of Service Systems and Intergenerational Family Solidarity. Primary data of the european study OASIS
Original Title Old Age and Autonomy: The Role of Service Systems and Intergenerational Family Solidarity. Primrdaten zur Europischen Studie OASIS
Citation Tesch-Rmer, C., Motel-Klingebiel, A., & von Kondratowitz, H.-J. (2009). Old Age and Autonomy: The Role of Service Systems and Intergenerational Family Solidarity. Primary data of the european study OASIS [Translated Title] (Version 1) [Files on CD-ROM]. Trier: Center for Research Data in Psychology: PsychData of the Leibniz Institute for Psychology Information ZPID. https://doi.org/10.5160/psychdata.thcs01ol03
Language of variable documentation German/English
Responsible for Data Collection Motel-Klingebiel, Andreas;Tesch-Rmer, Clemens;von Kondratowitz, Hans-Joachim
Data Collection Completion Date 2001
Dataset Publication 2009
Dataset ID thcs01ol03
Study Description The OASIS project ("Old Age and Autonomy: The Role of Service Systems and Intergenerational Family Solidarity") analyses the informal and formal provision of help and support to the elderly in a welfare state comparative perspective. The focus of the project is on the relation between intergenerational family help and welfare state support. While the substitution hypothesis states that generous provision of welfare state services crowds out family help to older people, the encouragement hypothesis predicts the crowding in of family help, and the hypothesis of mixed responsibility predicts a combination of help and support by families and services. The OASIS data set is based on an age stratified random sample of the urban population (25-102 years) in Norway, England, Germany, Spain, and Israel (n=6,106). This data set allows the analysis of the interactions between societal micro and macro levels. Results show that total help received by the elderly is more extensive in welfare states with a strong infrastructure of formal services. Moreover, statistical controls for social structure, preferences and familial opportunity structures yield no evidence of any substantial crowding out of family help. These results support the hypothesis of mixed responsibility: In societies with well-developed service infrastructures, help from families and welfare state services act accumulatively; such mixes do not occur in familialistic welfare regimes.
Hypotheses 1. The substitution hypothesis states that generous provision of welfare state services crowds out family help to older people
2. The encouragement hypothesis predicts the crowding in of family help
3. The hypothesis of mixed responsibility predicts a combination of help and support by families and services.
Keyphrase welfare state & family & old age & autonomy & intergenerational support & comparative analysis & primary data
Funding European Commission
Rating -

Top

PSYNDEX Classification and Controlled Terms

Classification Psychosocial & Personality Development
Social Structure & Organization
Health & Mental Health Services
Controlled Terms Aging
Family
Cross Cultural Differences
Intergenerational Relations
Social Support
Welfare Services (Government)
Government
Family Relations
Independence (Personality)
Personality
Data Collection

Top

Research Method Description

Research Method Description Questionnaire Data
Classification of Data Collection Fully Standardized Survey Instrument (provides question formulation and answer options)
Research Instrument The international OASIS questionnaire was drawn up in an intensive cooperation of all research teams participating in the OASIS study. The research teams decided to choose, wherever possible, instruments that were already well established and tested in several countries, cultures and research contexts. The number of instruments was reduced to those that emerge directly from the conceptual model. Shortened versions of research instruments, if existing, were preferred over long versions. The OASIS questionnaires used in the five countries all consist of two main parts: The standardised international survey instrument and some nation specific add-ins. The survey instrument contains questions in 15 research areas: Socio-demographic data, House and environment, Occupational activity and socio-economic status, Health and functional ability, Help and services, Children, Parents, Other family members, Social relationships, Norms and values, Preferences, Coping, Quality of life, Income, Miscellaneous. The main instruments included in the OASIS questionnaire are: the scale on physical functioning taken from the SF 36 Health Survey instrument (Ware & Sherbourne, 1992; Gladman, 1998); The Family Solidarity and Conflict scales (Mangen et al., 1988); Intergenerational Ambivalence (Luescher et al., 1999); Flexible Goal Adjustment scale (Brandstdter & Renner, 1990); Filial Responsibility Scales (Lee et al., 1994), The WHOQOL Quality of Life scale (WHOQOL Group, 1994a, WHOQOL Group, 1994b, WHOQOL Group, 1998a; World Health Organization, 1996; World Health Organization, 1998b), the PANAS - Positive and Negative Affect scale (Watson et al., 1988), as well as scales developed especially for the project like the Help and Use of Services.
Data Collection Method Data collection in the presence of an experimenter
- Individual Administration
- Paper and Pencil
Time Points single measurement
Survey Time Period -
Characteristics -
Population The survey sample was drawn as a representative, stratified sample of the urban population of age 25 and older living in private households in the participating countries (Norway, England, Germany, Spain, Israel). People of age 75 and older were overrepresented in the survey sample to have a sufficient number of cases also for age-specific analyses. To adjust for this post-stratification weights were applied. Parameters for the entire population are presented. In Norway and Israel all three available urban areas were included. In Spain all urban units with 100,000 and more inhabitants were researched, while in England and Germany a selection of such urban areas was made (England: selection of six major regions with 120 wards which were considered as representative for the English urban areas, Germany: random selection of 31 urban regions within 16 states).
Experimental Pool Individuals
Sample Stratified, systematic sample
Subject Recruitment Sampling strategies in respect to participants differed in the participating countries. The goal was to optimise the sampling according to national best practice (Spain, Israel: random route procedure, German: random sampling based on municipality registries; Norway: mixture of random route and register sampling; England: use of electoral registers combined with the Monica coding system).
Sample Size 6106 individuals
Return/Drop Out -
Gender Distribution Depending on country (n per country approximately 1,200): Percentage of female subjects:
Norway: 59,6%
England: 68,3 %
Germany: 69,2 %
Spain: 65,5 %
Israel:54,1 %
Age Distribution 25-102 years
Special Groups -
Country Norway, England, Germany, Spain, Israel
Region -
City -
Variables Subject ID
Demographics (Interview start,-end, countries, sex, year of birth, marital status, questions concerning living together with others)
House and Environment
Socioeconomic Status (schooling, vocational training, occupation, partners occupation)
Health and functional ability
SF 36 Health Survey Instrument
Help and Use of Services (home care, transport|shopping, personal care) from family, social services or other, frequency
Intergenerational Family Solidarity and Conflict scales (children: number, sex, adopted, age, marital status, children, occupation, distance, contact, help given, help received, conflicts)
Intergenerational Family Solidarity and Conflict scales (parents: age, marital status, living together, occupation, distance, contact, conflicts, help given, help received)
Intergenerational Family Solidarity and Conflict scales (siblings, grandchildren, grandparents: number, distance, contact, help given, help received)
Intergenerational Ambivalence
Social network (friends, club membership)
Attitudes towards the Family-Welfare State Balance
Filial Responsibility Scale
Attitudes towards Financing of Long-term Care
Preferences for Care and Housing
Flexible Goal Adjustment scale
PANAS - Positive and Negative Affect scale
The WHOQOL-BREF Quality of Life Scale short version
Satisfaction with support from family
Satisfaction with financial situation
General Satisfaction with Life
Feelings of Loneliness
Income
National/regional origin
Religion
Political Orientation
Questions concerning age, family generations

Top

Data Status

Data Status Complete Data Set
Original Records Questionnaire filled out by either the subject or the experimenter containing closed and/or open answers
Transformation Data from the subjects were coded and then immediately transferred into a machine-readable form

Top

Description of the Provided Data

Description Primary data file
File Name thcs01ol03_pd.txt
Data Content 6106 subjects, 795 variables
Data Points 6106*795= 4854270 data points
Variables Subject ID (1) Demographics (Interview start,-end, countries, sex, year of birth, marital status, questions concerning living together with others)(25) House and Environment (14) Socioeconomic Status (schooling, vocational training, occupation, partners occupation) (24) Health and functional ability (2) SF 36 Health Survey Instrument (11) Help and Use of Services (home care, transport|shopping, personal care) from family, social services or other, frequency (93) Intergenerational Family Solidarity and Conflict scales (children: number, sex, adopted, age, marital status, children, occupation, distance, contact, help given, help received, conflicts) (361) Intergenerational Family Solidarity and Conflict scales (parents: age, marital status, living together, occupation, distance, contact, conflicts, help given, help received)(121) Intergenerational Family Solidarity and Conflict scales (siblings, grandchildren, grandparents: number, distance, contact, help given, help received)(29) Intergenerational Ambivalence (6) Social network (friends, club membership) (4) Attitudes towards the Family-Welfare State Balance (4) Filial Responsibility Scale (5) Attitudes towards Financing of Long-term Care (5) Preferences for Care and Housing (21) Flexible Goal Adjustment scale (5) PANAS - Positive and Negative Affect scale (10) The WHOQOL-BREF Quality of Life Scale short version (26) Satisfaction with support from family (1) Satisfaction with financial situation (1) General Satisfaction with Life (1) Feelings of Loneliness (1) Income (6) National/regional origin (10) Religion (3) Political Orientation (1) Questions concerning age, family generations (4) Post stratification weights (1)
MD5 Hash e9d8fbc209e9bfac750aea1aafc543bc
  

Top

Description of Additional Materials

Description File Name
English codebook of primary data file thcs01ol03_pd.txt thcs01ol03_kb_e.txt
German codebook of primary data file thcs01ol03_pd.txt thcs01ol03_kb_d.txt

Top

Publications Directly Related to the Dataset

Publications Directly Related to the Dataset
Motel-Klingebiel, A., Kondratowitz, H.-J. & Tesch-Rmer, C. (2004). Social inequality in old age - comparative views on quality of life of older people. European Journal of Ageing, 1, 6-14.
Motel-Klingebiel, A., Tesch-Roemer, C., & Kondratowitz, H.-J. v. (2005). Welfare states do not crowd out the family: Evidence for mixed responsibility from comparative analyses. Ageing & Society, 25, 863-882.
Motel-Klingebiel, Andreas (2007): Quality of life in old age, inequality and welfare state reform. Empirical comparisons between Norway, Germany and England. In: Mollenkopf, H.; Walker, A. (Hrsg.): Quality of life in old age. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Motel-Klingebiel, Andreas; Tesch-Roemer, Clemens (2006): Familie im Wohlfahrtsstaat. Zwischen Verdrngung und gemischter Verantwortung. Zeitschrift fr Familienforschung, 18, 290-314.
Tesch-Rmer, C. (2004). Universal Accommodation? Cross-cultural notes on Brandtstdter's developmental theory of action. In W. Greve, K. Rothermund & D. Wentura (Eds.), The adaptive self: Personal continuity and intentional self-development. Gttingen: Hogrefe.
Tesch-Rmer, C., Motel-Klingebiel, A. & Kondratowitz, H.-J. v. (2007). Kultur- und gesellschaftsvergleichende Forschung: Ertrge fr die Gerontologie. In H.W. Wahl & H. Mollenkopf (Hrsg.), Alternsforschung am Beginn des 21. Jahrhunderts. Alterns- und Lebenslaufkonzeptionen im deutschsprachigen Raum. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.Datensatz 0197362
Tesch-Rmer, C., Motel-Klingebiel, A. & Kondratowitz, H.-J.v. (2002). Die Bedeutung der Familie fr die Lebensqualitt alter Menschen im Gesellschafts- und Kulturvergleich. Zeitschrift fr Gerontologie und Geriatrie, 35, 335-342.Datensatz 0157021

Top

Utilized Test Methods

Utilized Test Methods
Brandstdter, J. & Renner, G. (1990). Tenacious goal pursuit and flexible goal adjustment: Explication and age-related analysis of assimilative and accommodative strategies of coping. Psychology and Aging, 5,1,58-67.Datensatz 0046616
Gladman, J.R.F. (1998). Assessing health status with the SF-36.Age and Ageing, 27,3.
Lee, G.R., Netzer, J.K., & Coward, R.T. (1994). Filial responsibility expectations and patterns of intergenerational assistance. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 56, 559-565.
Luescher, K., Bohmer, S., Lettke, F., & Pajung-Bilger, B. (1999). Intergenerational relationships in the Konstanz region. Survey of selected families. University of Konstanz, social science faculty, research center "Society and family".
Mangen, D.J., Bengtson, V.L., & Landry, Jr.P.H. (1988). Measurement of intergenerational relations. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Ware, J.E., & Sherbourne, C.D. (1992). The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). Medical Care, 30, 6, 473-483).
Watson, D., Clark, L.A., & Tellegan, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS-Scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063-1070.
WHOQOL Group. (1994a). Development of the WHOQOL: Rationale and current status. International Journal of Mental Health, 23(24-56).
WHOQOL Group. (1994b). The development of the World Health Organization quality of life assessment instrument (WHOQOL). In J. Orley & W. Kuyken (Eds.), Quality of life assessments: International perspectives (pp. 41-57). Berlin: Springer.
WHOQOL Group. (1998a). Development of The World Health Organization WHOQOL-Bref Quality of Life Assessment. Psychological Medicine, 28, 551-558.
WHOQOL Group. (1998b). The World Health Organization Quality of Life Assessment (WHOQOL): Development and General Psychometric Properties. Social Science and Medicine, 46, 1569-1585.
World Health Organization. (1996). WHOQOL-Bref - Introduction, Administration, Scoring and Generic Version of the Assessment. Field Trial Version, December 1996. Genf: World Health Organization - Programme on Mental Health.

Top

Further Reading

Further Reading
Daatland, Svein Olav; Motel-Klingebiel, Andreas (2007): Separating the local and the general in cross-cultural aging research. In: Wahl, Hans-Werner; Tesch-Rmer, Clemens; Hoff, Andreas (Hrsg.): New Dynamics in Old Age: Individual, Environmental and Societal Perspectives. Amityville, New York: Baywood.Datensatz 0194177
Hoff, A. & Tesch-Rmer, C. (2006). Family relations and ageing substantial changes since the middle of the last century? In H.-W. Wahl, C. Tesch-Rmer & A. Hoff (Eds.), New dynamics in old age: individual, environmental and societal perspectives. Amityville, NY: Baywood Publishing.
Kondratowitz, H.-J.v., Tesch-Rmer, C. & Motel-Klingebiel, A. (2002). Establishing systems of care in Germany: a long and winding road. Ageing Clinical and Experimental Research, 14, 239-246 (Special Issue on Systems of Care).
Tesch-Rmer, C. & Kondratowitz, H.-J.v. (2006). Comparative ageing research: a flourishing field in need of theoretical cultivation. European Journal of Ageing, 3, 155-167.Datensatz 0191453
Tesch-Rmer, C. & Kondratowitz, H.-J.v. (2007). Entwicklung ber die Lebensspanne im kulturellen und gesellschaftlichen Kontext. In J. Brandtstdter und U. Lindenberger (Hrsg.), Entwicklungspsychologie des Erwachsenenalters. Ein Lehrbuch. Gttingen: Hogrefe.Datensatz 0188008

Top

Order Dataset


Address

Leibniz Institute for Psychology Information
Universitätsring 15,
Center for Research Data in Psychology
54296 Trier, Germany
Phone: +49 (0)651 201-2062
Fax: +49 (0)651 201-2071


Directions to ZPID


Kontakt und Funktionen