Continuity in Socialization Styles: Typologies of Socialization in the Different Life Stages of Older People

Abstract

The purpose of this research was to identify the socialization styles of the older person (such as authoritative, indulgent, authoritarian, and negligent) in three different roles: (1) nowadays as a grandparent, (2) considering the style used to educate their own children in the past; and (3), considering the socialization style they received when they were children. The sample (317 people over 65 years old with at least one grandchild aged up to 16 years old participated) received the questionnaire on socialization styles in those roles. The results showed the predominance of the indulgent style in their role as grandparents. Almost 80% showed intergenerational continuity between at least two roles, with the exception of those with a neglectful style. Continuity in socialization style is crucial to understanding the dynamics within family relationships, which have highly durable intergenerational ties.

Keywords

grandparents socialization styles intergenerational socialization continuity

Introduction

Socialization is the process through which an individual acquires skills, attitudes, and behaviors appropriate to a community. Socialization agents, such as parents, grandparents, or schoolteachers, exhibit socialization styles that not only affect the acquisition of knowledge, but also how future adults will socialize with their own offspring or grandchildren (Parke et al., 2008).

Grandparents are an important socialization agent to their grandchildren, and they also show a diversity in their socialization styles (Giménez-Serrano et al., 2022a). Those styles can be like the ones they exercised in the past in other family roles, such as a parent, but it can also be the opportunity to behave differently, as a second chance to connect emotionally with their grandchildren (Celdrán & Cannella, 2020). Research on this topic is scarce, although previous research has shown a relationship between grandparents' socialization styles with older adults’ emotional well-being (Giménez-Serrano et al., 2022a). There is also evidence of the relationship between grandparents' socialization styles with the emotional and behavioral problems of their grandchildren, in contexts in which grandparenting plays an important role in caring for grandchildren (He et al., 2023; Li et al., 2019). This research aims to describe the socialization styles of grandparents, as well as their retrospective continuity with previous roles within the family.

The socialization styles of grandparents can be described using two classical dimensions: affection (or warmth) and severity (or strictness). The first dimension refers to the degree of communication and warmth displayed by older adults towards their grandchildren, while the second dimension characterizes the disciplinary behaviors exhibited by grandparents in their interactions with their grandchildren. Maccoby and Martin (1983) described four socialization styles based on those two dimensions: the “authoritative” style (high levels of affection and severity), the “indulgent” style (high levels of affection and low levels of severity), the “authoritarian” style (low levels of affection and high levels of severity), and the “negligent” style (low levels of affection and severity).

Despite the contact with and influence many grandparents have over their grandchildren (Noriega et al., 2017), there is very little research on this topic. Previous research has only focused on a specific group of grandparents, that is, those who performed an auxiliary care role toward their grandchildren. For example, Noriega et al. (2017) reported a more authoritarian role in those auxiliary caregivers in contrast with their perception of permissibility in the parents of those grandchildren. From the grandchildren's perspective, the authoritarian role was also perceived as the most frequent socialization style by preadolescents (Viguer et al., 2010) and adolescent participants (Pratt et al., 2010).

How grandparents show and perform their socialization style could be influenced by a set of variables previously reported to influence grandparenthood (Hank et al., 2018; Reitzes & Mutran, 2004), such as the grandparent's age or gender, geographic distance to their grandchildren, the family line—maternal or paternal—and grandchildren's age. Also, other studies have shown that these forms of involvement in the relationship between grandparents and grandchildren are directly related to cultural factors (Dolbin-MacNab & Yancura, 2017). Again, only a few studies on grandparents’ socialization style have taken the influence of such variables into account. For example, Viguer et al. (2010) noted that grandparents tended to use the authoritative style with their granddaughters and the authoritarian style with their grandsons. Noriega and López (2021) reported that paternal grandparents adopted a more permissive style than maternal grandparents. The same study found a negative relation between grandparents’ age and the presence of an authoritative style.

Among research on socialization styles, an important area of study is intergenerational transmission, that is, whether there is continuity in the socialization style among different members of the family (Bailey et al., 2009; Rothenberg, 2019). For example, some findings supported the hypothesis that indicates congruence between grandparents and grandchildren regarding familial value, quality of life, and ideas regarding aging (Sajjad & Malik, 2022) highlighting the importance of intergenerational transmission.

Traditionally, such studies have focused on whether the socialization style received when a person was a child influences how this person acts toward their own offspring during adulthood, and two main tendencies have been described. The first one attempts to explain the continuity of style based on the principles of social learning, which assumes that parents learn and adjust their behaviors according to the upbringing of their own parents. For example, parents who experience low levels of support and security are more likely to provide low levels of security and support for their own children (Belsky et al., 2009; Neppl et al., 2009). The second tendency is based on discontinuity and suggests that parents mold their parenting style based on their own parent's style, compensating for behaviors and needs that they lived with themselves, especially if their parents were neglectful or authoritarian (Beaton & Doherty, 2007). Overall, empirical studies have shown moderate evidence of socialization style transmission between generations (Madden et al., 2015; Rothenberg, 2019).

This topic can be translated into grandparents’ studies to determine whether there is any intrapersonal continuity in the actual socialization style used by a grandparent, by examining how the grandparent acted when their children were young and what socialization style the grandparent received when they were a child themselves. It is not known whether older people keep the socialization style experienced during their childhood when they grow up once they take on the role of ‘parent and subsequently grandparent. The few studies on this sort of continuity have focused on whether how older adults remember their parents’ socialization style is associated with their actual well-being and quality of life (Rothrauff et al., 2009; Zhong et al., 2016).

The present study attempted to address this topic by focusing on the phenomenon of intergenerational continuity in socialization styles, identifying the socialization styles in older people and their continuity between three stages: as grandparents, their memory of being parents of a young child, and their memory of their parents’ style during their own childhood. These three dimensions are crucial to understanding the complexity of the socialization role of older people in families. The objectives of this study were two-fold: first, to determine in a Spanish sample the socialization style of grandparents with grandchildren aged up to 16 years old, and their association with different socio-demographic variables. The second objective was to observe the level of continuity in these styles between three different roles: as a child themselves, when bringing up their own children, and as a grandparent.

Method

Participants

Three hundred and seventeen older adults from urban areas of Spain participated in the study. The following inclusion criteria were used: (1) being at least 65 years old; and (2) having at least one grandchild aged up to 16 years old at the time of the study. Table 1 presents the principal socio-demographic data collected from the participants.

Table 1.

Socio-demographic Profile of Participants.

	Total (N = 317)
Participant's age (M, SD)	70.72 (5.60)
Grandchild's age (M, SD)	8.67 (4.37)
No. of children (M, SD)	2.48 (1.05)
No. of grandchildren (M, SD)	3.53 (2.32)
Gender (% women)	77.7
Gender of grandchildren (% men)	51.8
Family lineage (% maternal)	56.5
Marital status (%)
Married	68.6
Widower	21.6
Divorced	8.9
Single	0.9
Health (%)
Good	55.9
Regular	26.3
Excellent	15.2
Bad	2.5
Health compared to others (%)
Similar	57.6
Better	40.2
Worse	2.2
Educational level (%)
University degree	39.1
High school	31.1
Elementary	24.7
No education	5.1
Employment situation (%)
Retired	70.4
Housework	24.8
Active work	3.9
Unemployed	1.0
Contact with grandchildren (%)
Weekly	36.7
1–3 times a month	35.1
Every day	19.3
1–12 times a year	8.9
Geographical distance from grandchildren (%)
Same neighborhood	30.8
Another province	29.2
Same province	23.1
Another city	10.9
Another country	3.8
Same house	2.2
Grandparent's auxiliary caregiver role (%)
Yes, in the past	41.5
No	29.7
Yes, now	28.8

Measures

A self-administered questionnaire was provided to each participant. The questionnaire included sociodemographic information and several measures of the participants’ socialization styles.

Sociodemographic Information

Participants were asked to answer questions regarding their gender, age, marriage status, number of children, number of grandchildren, employment status, and health status. Each participant was also asked to provide sociodemographic information about a specific grandchild, that is, the one with which they had the most frequent contact and who was younger than 17 years old. This information included: gender, age, family lineage, geographical distance, frequency of contact, and information regarding the auxiliary caregiver role of the participant.

Socialization Styles

The questionnaire and methodology used by García et al. (2018) to assess socialization styles were used in this study, referring to three life stages: (1) when thinking about their role as a grandparent; (2) when thinking about their role as a parent during their children's childhood/adolescence; and (3) lastly when thinking about their own parents when they were a child themselves. Each questionnaire included 19 items with a 4-option Likert answer (1) Hardly ever, (2) Almost never, (3) Sometimes, and (4) Most of the time. This approach allows the evaluation of two dimensions of socialization style, based on the dimension's affection and severity

The initial dimension, affection, is assessed using the “Warmth/Affection Scale” (WAS) (Ali et al., 2015), which consists of 13 items under the affection/warm category. This scale provides insights into how older adults express emotional warmth and engage in communicative interactions with their children and grandchildren. The second aspect, severity(also known as demandingness, severity, or strictness), is gauged through the “Parental Control Scale” (PCS) (Ali et al., 2015), focusing on the severity/strictness dimension with six items. This dimension captures the perception of older individuals regarding the degree of strictness and severity they exert in their interactions with children and grandchildren. The WAS and the PCS offer reliable and valid measures to capture parental socialization in children, but also in adults once parental socialization has ended (Alcaide et al., 2023; Giménez-Serrano et al., 2022b; Rohner & Khaleque, 2003). Additionally, the factor structures for both scales have been confirmed with confirmatory factor analysis, as well as their invariance by age (García et al., 2018).

For our research, the original questionnaire was adapted both in its temporal formulation and its focus. For example, the item “They were kind to me” when talking about the participant's childhood appeared as “I was kind to them” when talking about the participant's role as a parent and changed to “I am kind to them” when talking about their role as a grandparent. In this research, the alpha coefficients obtained via the second questionnaire about parenting styles were 0.85 for the warmth/affection dimension and 0.87 for the severity/strictness dimension, meaning that the complete scale is 0.82. The alpha coefficient for the socialization style exercised with grandchildren was 0.82 for the severity/strictness dimension and 0.83 for the warmth/affection dimension, giving an alpha coefficient of 0.81.

To identify the four socialization styles (authoritarian, indulgent, authoritative, and neglectful), a median dichotomization procedure was applied (García et al., 2018). The median scores of the subject's gender and age were used. Responses indicating the level of warmth/affection and severity/strictness were dichotomized instead of using the original default. This procedure allowed older persons of different ages and genders to be classified as having one of the four socialization styles, depending on whether the two dimensions assessed were above the median or below the median. The respondent was considered to have an authoritarian style when both dimensions were above the median, a neglectful style when both dimensions were below the median, an authoritarian style when warmth/affection was below the median and severity/strictness was above the median, and finally, an indulgent style when warmth/affection was above the median and severity/strictness was below the median. Table 2 shows how the different socialization styles of the older adults were adjusted for different roles considered in this research.

Table 2.

Procedure for to Identify the Four Socialization Styles.

Socialization styles
Authoritative	Severity/strictness (+high median)	Warmth/affection (+high median)
Neglectful	Severity/strictness (−low median)	Warmth/affection (−low median)
Authoritarian	Severity/strictness (+high median)	Warmth/affection (−high median)
Indulgent	Severity/strictness (−low median)	Warmth/affection (+low median)

Procedure

The sample was recruited from different senior centers in urban areas of Spain and included healthy older adults who regularly attended the centers to participate as volunteers, take classes, or socialize with friends. Once the managers of the centers had agreed to participate in the study, the researchers went to the classes to explain the study and organized talks regarding grandparenting in order to collect the data.

The study protocol was approved by the bioethical committee of the Bioethical of the University of Barcelona (Institutional Review Board, IRB00003099). The participants received research information and signed an informed consent.

Data Analysis

The analysis was conducted in the IBM SPSS statistics program in Windows Version 25. Initially, a descriptive analysis of the frequency of sociodemographic variables was performed. Then, to determine the significant differences between these variables and socialization style and to measure the continuity of style, chi-square tests, and contingency analysis were used. Additionally, nonparametric repeated measures tests (Cochran’s Q test) were performed to observe the difference in variance among the variables.

Results

Typologies of Socialization Styles as Grandparents

The different socialization styles of older adults with a grandparent role were determined first. The most common style in our sample was the indulgent style (45.5%), followed by the authoritative style (30.6%), negligent style (13.3%), and authoritarian style (10.6%). The relationship between the socialization styles exercised with grandchildren with different sociodemographic variables was then analyzed (considering gender and age of the grandchildren, gender and age of the participant, family lineage, frequency of contact, grandparent's caregiver role, and civil status). Of these, only four variables showed a significant association with socialization style: contact frequency, grandparent's caregiver role, participant's marital status, and gender.

Contact With Grandchildren

There was a significant difference between the amount of contact with grandchildren and the style used with them, X² (9, N = 317) = 17.06, p = .048, moderated (Cramer's V = .14), whereby, if the contact between grandchildren and grandparents was “every day” (55.4%), “1–3 times per week” (45.4%), or “weekly” (45.9%) the indulgent style was the most frequently mentioned style. On the other hand, if there was less frequent contact of “1–12 times a year” the style was more likely to be negligent (32%) or authoritarian (32%).

Grandparent Caregiver Role

There was also a significant difference between the caretaker role of grandparents and the socialization style practiced, X² (6, N = 317) = 23.57, p = .001, moderated (Cramer's V = .20). According to the results, if the grandchild was cared for both frequently (59%) and more sporadically (50.5%) it was statistically likely to express an indulgent socialization style. However, if regular caregiving had been in the past, the most frequent style was estimated to be authoritative (36.5%), compared to the other styles.

Marital Status

The results showed a difference between the marital status of grandparents and the style used, X² (9, N = 317) = 17.34, p = .042, moderated (Cramer's V = .014). If the marital status was married (46.1%) or widowed (49.2%), it was statistically more likely to manifest an indulgent style. On the other hand, if the older adult was single (66.7%), the negligent style was more likely, while if the older adult was separated or divorced (46.4%), the authoritative style was more likely.

Gender

There was a statistically significant difference between the variables gender and grandparents’ socialization style, considering the approximate significance, X² (9, N = 317) = 10.10, p = .019, slightly (Cramer's V = .019), with the indulgent style prevailing in the different roles of the older person. Men reported that they are often indulgent (10.27%) and neglectful (4.79%) toward their grandchildren. In contrast, women reported being mostly indulgent (34.93%) and authoritative with their grandchildren (26.37%).

Table 3 shows the percentages of socialization styles reported in the different roles of older people by gender: (1) SSP: socialization style received from their parents; (2) SSC: socialization style exercised with their children; and (3) SSG: socialization style exercised with their grandchildren.

Table 3.

Percentage of Participants Divided by Gender With Different Socialization Styles in the Three Stages Studied (SSP, SSC, and SSG).

	SSP		SSC		SSG
Socialization style	(% Women)	(% Men)	(% Women)	(% Men)	(% Women)	(% Men)
Indulgent	34.47	10.24	36.33	10.38	34.93	10.27
Authoritative	14.33	4.44	24.57	4.15	26.37	3.77
Authoritarian	17.75	3.41	8.65	3.81	7.50	3.42
Neglectful	10.58	4.78	7.61	4.50	8.90	4.79
Total (N = 317)	77.13	22.87	77.16	22.84	77.73	22.25

Abbreviations: SSP: socialization style received from their parents; SSC: socialization style exercised with their children; SSG: socialization style exercised with their grandchildren.

As depicted in Table 3, the indulgent style emerged as the predominant socialization approach. Around 43%–45% of participants would be included in this group in each of the different stages and for both men and women depicted in Table 3, the indulgent style emerged as the predominant socialization approach in different stages of life.

Continuity of Socialization Styles

The frequency of the different socialization styles in the different stages is compared in Table 4. According to the total continuity of the socialization style across generations, slightly more than a third of the participants declared having received and exercised the same socialization style in the three generations: 21.8% (N = 66) referred to the indulgent style, 7.6% (N = 23) in the authoritative style, 4% (N = 12) in the neglectful style and 2% (N = 6) in the authoritarian.

Table 4.

Socialization Style Continuity.

Socialization style continuity
	Percentage valid (%)
Continuity of neglectful styles over three roles	4.0
Continuity of indulgent style over the three roles	21.8
Continuity of authoritarian style over three roles	2.0
Continuity of authoritative style over three roles	7.6
Continuity of indulgent style among SSP and SSC^a	5.3
Continuity of authoritarian style among SSP and SSC^a	1.0
Continuity of authoritative style among SSP and SSC^a	1.7
Continuity of neglectful style among SSC and SSG^b	5.9
Continuity of indulgent style among SSC and SSG^b	12.5
Continuity of authoritarian style among SSC and SSG^b	6.6
Continuity of authoritative style among SSC and SSG^b	10.9
No continuity in socialization styles	20.8
Total	100

Abbreviations: SSP: socialization style received from their parents; SSC: socialization style exercised with their children; SSG: socialization style exercised with their grandchildren.

The socialization style used by parents, that is, the same style experienced as a child (SSP) and used with their own children (SSC).

The socialization style used with their children (SSC) and with their grandchildren (SSG).

There was also partial continuity in the socialization style from the first to the second generation, that is, the socialization style received as a child was the same style that the participant remembered having used as a parent. This continuity was present in three of the socialization styles: 5.3% (N = 16) for the indulgent style, 1.7% (N = 5) for the authoritative style, and 1% (N = 3) for the authoritarian. Those who perceived their parents as neglectful did not describe themselves as neglectful parents. There was also partial continuity in the style from the second to the third generation, that is, the style exercised towards their own children (SSC) and the style that the participants used with their grandchildren (SSG): 12.5% (N = 38) for the indulgent style, 10.9% (N = 33) authoritative style, 6.6% (N = 20) authoritarian style and 5.9% (N = 18) neglectful style.

Overall, 79.3% of the sample presented at least one type of socialization continuity, either over all three stages studied (35.4%), from the first to the second generation (8%), or from the second to the third generation (35.8%). On the contrary, 20.8% did not show any type of intergenerational continuity in style.

Lastly, the SSP, SSC, and SSG variables were submitted to chi-square tests. There was a significant difference between the SSP and SSC variables, X² (9, N = 317) = 23.93, (p = .000), which means that the socialization style exercised by one's own parents was moderately related (Cramer’s V = .25) to the socialization style used with one's own children, that is, probable continuity in socialization style between the first and second generation. There was also a significant difference between the SPC and SPG variables, X² (9, N = 317) = 444.15, (p = .000), meaning that the socialization style used by older adults with their own children (SSC) was strongly related to the socialization style used with their grandchildren (Cramer’s V = .78).

Regarding the authoritative socialization style, significant differences were observed between the variance measures of the socialization tests in the different stages of the older adult, Q (2) = 18.21, p < .00. Older people reported proportions of SSP (17.88%), SSC (27.15%), and SSG (29.47%) showing a trend of increase in the authoritative style during the later stages of life. Furthermore, in the authoritarian style, significant differences were observed, Q (2) = 18.023, p < .00, observing a decrease in the proportions of SSP (20.06%), SSC (11.84%), and SSG (10.19%) showing a tendency toward the decline of this style in the later stages of life.

On the other hand, in the neglectful style, no significant differences were found between their variances, Q (2) = 0318, p > .853. Nor were statistically significant differences found in the indulgent socialization style, Q (2) = 18.121, p > .391. This shows that these two socialization styles (neglectful and indulgent) tend to remain at similar levels in the different stages of the older adult compared to the other two socialization styles (authoritative and authoritarian).

Discussion

The objective of the present study was to identify and analyze the different socialization styles of older people who are grandparents and to describe the continuity of their styles between three family roles. Regarding the first objective, our data showed a predominance of the indulgent socialization style among grandparents. This could be because, although Spanish grandparents spend a lot of time providing auxiliary care for their grandchildren, they are still involved in leisure and recreation activities, which implies the absence of strict rules and limits and the prevalence of affectivity and indulgence (Triadó et al., 2006). These results contrast with findings of previous studies in which grandparents who were auxiliary caregivers most often reported having an authoritative style (Noriega et al., 2017). This contrast is accentuated when theories such as the intergenerational stake theory are considered. That is, the idea that grandparents perceive their relationship with their grandchild as more positive and indulgent because their social networks have reduced over time and those that persist in older adults have invested more (at different levels) to the younger generations, which is why these relationships are reported to have high levels of affection and low levels of control (Spalding & Carpenter, 2019).

It is possible that, in addition to caregiver tasks, other variables could impact each socialization style. In this respect, this study emphasizes the importance of issues such as the frequency of contact between grandparents and grandchildren or the grandparent's marital status. Previous studies have indicated that the greater the frequency of contact, the closer the relationship between grandparents and grandchildren, promoting styles of upbringing where affection and communication are predominated (Ferguson et al., 2004; Rico et al., 2001) which can be classified as indulgent. For example, a study on the relationship between grandparents and grandchildren in different cultures (the United States of America and Mexico) showed that grandchildren in the United States tend to interact with their grandmothers more frequently than grandchildren in Mexico, which translates to greater quality/attachment of the relationship between grandparents and grandchildren (Hayslip et al., 2018).

Regarding marital status, the scarce previous literature has only indicated that a change in the marital status of the grandparents would imply a change in the relationship between family members and the style of socialization. Grandparents who have recently been widowed often suffer from emotional isolation, emotional emptiness, and short-term depression, which would encourage a negligent style. However, this emotional emptiness tends to disappear with the creation of new emotional bonds, encouraging a grandparent–grandchild relationship that leans towards a more indulgent style (Uhlenberg & Hammill, 1998; Xu et al., 2020). It seems that widowed older adults change their socialization styles depending on their age and the length of widowhood. Our results, obtained from a sample in which the majority were married or widowed, showed a moderate difference between marital status and the indulgent style. More studies are needed for a more in-depth investigation of the relationship between marital status and socialization style perceived by grandparents and grandchildren, which could help our understanding of changes in family dynamics.

Also, some studies about gender and socialization style of grandparents support our findings by explaining that grandmothers tend to bond with their grandchildren with an emphasis on emotionality and reciprocity in the relationship, with a predominance of warmth in the relationship, resulting in an indulgent and authoritative socialization style (Hayslip et al., 2018).

These findings align with prior research on family socialization styles, particularly in the context of Spanish familial experiences. In this regard, Spanish parents and grandparents have recounted their exposure to an indulgent educational model, showing its positive effects on their well-being and psychosocial development of both themselves as adults and of their children (Alcaide et al., 2023; García & Gracia, 2009; García et al., 2018; Giménez-Serrano et al., 2022b). This stands in contrast to diverse cultural contexts, including Anglo-Saxon and Asian settings, where alternative socialization patterns have been documented (Gouveia et al., 2003; Pinquart & Kauser, 2018; Triandis, 2001).

In relation to the second objective, more than 35% of participants reported the same socialization style in the three roles analyzed in this study. Those results are like the previous literature that, with the adult population, has found continuity between the socialization style received as a child and that exercised as a parent (Belsky et al., 2012; Kovan et al., 2009; Madden et al., 2015).

The study explores the perception of continuity in assuming the role of grandparent and finds that grandparents’ socialization style is a continuation of previous roles. This suggests that when grandparents adjust their style of relating to their grandchildren, separate from their role as parents, they may not return to the style they experienced during their own childhood. Instead, grandparents may consider alternative approaches to connecting with their grandchildren. Additionally, research shows that older people tend to use less authoritarian and more indulgent socialization styles in their various roles, which may reflect a broader historical shift in parenting. This study's findings offer new opportunities to investigate the continuity and discontinuity of roles during the aging process. It sheds light on the comparative processes and needs of older individuals who engage in grandparenting but do not identify with any previously experienced family role.

Limitations

It is crucial to acknowledge certain limitations of this study. One constraint is the relatively small sample size, which poses challenges in researching family members’ relationships, particularly when attempting to recruit individuals from families where relationships may be unsatisfactory or even nonexistent among different members. This obstacle hinders the collection of information from participants who employ a negligent style of grandparenting. To enhance the generalizability of the findings, future studies should aim to improve the representativeness of the sample, allowing for a more proportional representation of all four socialization styles within a larger population.

Another limitation is that some subjects in the sample may have answered the surveys while considering their favorite grandchild, which could lead to a positive bias in responses (González & De la Fuente, 2008). The participants were asked to choose a grandchild under the age of 16 with whom they had the most frequent contact, so this may have been, in some cases, one of the grandparents’ favorite grandchildren or one with whom they had the best relationship. Also, another significant limitation of this study is that it is based solely on the participant's memory and their own self-perception of how they were as a child, parent, and a grandparent. This can also cause a significant bias. Nevertheless, the data obtained from this study retains its utility despite these limitations.

Future studies should place more emphasis on this aspect, and the research should be carried out considering the most distant grandchildren or the one with whom they have the worst relationship or introduce some additional questioning instrument to control for this possible bias.

Finally, the cross-sectional and retrospective nature of the study may have introduced positive biases in the autobiographical memory of how people exercised their role as parents or their memory of the socialization style of their own parents (Reed et al., 2014), and thus longitudinal investigations should be performed to further delve into the intergenerational transmission of socialization styles.

Conclusion

Grandparents can have an important impact on the socialization of their grandchildren. Learning more about their socialization styles and how these evolved from past family experiences could help tailor not only educational programs to help grandparents have a better relationship with their grandchildren but also to help grandparents who come from neglected family socialization styles to overcome possible traumas and emotional difficulties. This strategy will not only help older adults to embrace new life perspectives and have a positive impact on their identity and well-being but will also give them new skills to help them relate better to their grandchildren.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: His work was supported by the National Agency for Research and Development Becas Chile Scholarship Program 2022 (PhD degree scholarship to Y. Porras, Folio 72220199).

ORCID iDs

Yoselyn Porras-Mendoza

Montserrat Celdrán

Author Biographies

Yoselyn Porras-Mendoza is PhD candidate in Social Psychology and Organizations at the Department of Cognition, Development and Educational Psychology of the University of Barcelona, Spain. Her interests are intergenerational relationship, grandparent’s role, Transnational Grandparenting, Grandparenthood. She is a member of the research team GiG (Group Research Gerontology) at the University of Barcelona.

Montserrat Celdrán is an associate professor at the Department of Cognition, Development and Educational Psychology of the University of Barcelona, Spain. Member GIG. She has a career in psychogerontology and developmental psychology research and teaching since 2003. Her research interests are focused on active ageing and social participation, volunteerism, grandparenthood, and dementia.

Juan José Zacarés is an associate professor in the Department of Developmental and Educational Psychology at the University of Valencia, Spain. Director of the official master's degree program in Psychogerontology at the University of Valencia. Member of the research team Transicions (GIUV2013-093) at the University of Valencia and the Gerontology Research Group at the University of Barcelona. Areas of interest and specialization: Psychosocial development in adolescence and emerging adulthood, particularly in the development of identity during the transition to adulthood; Psychosocial development in adulthood and aging, with a special focus on the tasks of generativity and integrity (conceptualization, evaluation, and intervention); Developmental optimization processes in vulnerable populations across the lifespan: young people with academic failure, adults engaged in work integration social enterprises, and older adults facing loneliness and exclusion.

References

Alcaide

García

O. F.

Queiroz

García

(2023). Adjustment and maladjustment to later life: Evidence about early experiences in the family. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1059458. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1059458

Ali

Khaleque

Rohner

R. P.

(2015). Pancultural gender differences in the relation between perceived parental acceptance and psychological adjustment of children and adult offspring. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 46(8), 1059–1080. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022115597754

Bailey

J. A.

Hill

K. G.

Oesterle

Hawkins

J. D.

(2009). Parenting practices and problem behavior across three generations: Monitoring, harsh discipline, and drug use in the intergenerational transmission of externalizing behavior. Developmental Psychology, 45(5), 1214–1226. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0016129

Beaton

Doherty

(2007). Fathers’ family of origin relationships and attitudes about father involvement from pregnancy through first year postpartum. Fathering: A Journal of Theory, Research, and Practice About Men as Fathers, 5(3), 236–245. https://doi.org/10.3149/fth.0503.236

Belsky

Conger

Capaldi

D. M.

(2009). The intergenerational transmission of parenting: Introduction to the special section. Developmental Psychology, 45(5), 1201–1204. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016245

Belsky

Hancox

R. J.

Sligo

Poulton

(2012). Does being an older parent attenuate the intergenerational transmission of parenting? Developmental Psychology, 48(6), 1570–1574. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027599

Celdrán

Cannella

(2020). Grandparenting. In Gu

Dupre

(Eds.), Encyclopedia of gerontology and population aging (pp. 2215–2219). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-69892-2_507-1

Dolbin-MacNab

M. L.

Yancura

L. A.

(2017). International perspectives on grandparents raising grandchildren: Contextual considerations for advancing global discourse. International Journal of Aging & Human Development, 86(1), 3–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091415016689565

Ferguson

Douglas

Lowe

Murch

Robinson

(2004). What do we already know about grandparents?. In Bristol:Policy Press Grandparenting in divorced families (pp. 9–20). En Policy Press eBooks. https://doi.org/10.1332/policypress/9781861344984.003.0002

10.

García

Gracia

(2009). Is always authoritative the optimum parenting style? Evidence from Spanish families. Adolescence, 44(173), 101–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadohealth.2008.12.001

11.

García

O. F.

Serra

Zacarés

J. J.

García

(2018). Parenting styles and short-and long-term socialization outcomes: A study among Spanish adolescents and older adults. Psychosocial Intervention, 27(3), 153–161. https://doi.org/10.5093/pi2018a21

12.

Giménez-Serrano

Alcaide

Reyes

Zacarés

J. J.

Celdrán

(2022a). Beyond parenting socialization years: The relationship between parenting dimensions and grandparenting functioning. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(8), 4528. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19084528

13.

Giménez-Serrano

García

O. F.

(2022b) Parenting styles and its relations with personal and social adjustment beyond adolescence: Is the current evidence enough? European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 19(5), 749–769. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2021.1952863

14.

González

De la Fuente

(2008). Relevancia psico-socioeducativa de las relaciones generacionales abuelo-nieto [Psycho-socio-educational relevance of generational grandfather-grandson relationships]. Revista Española de Pedagogía, 239, 103–118. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=2595623

15.

Gouveia

V. V.

Andrade

J. M. D.

Milfont

T. L.

Queiroga

Santos

W. S. D.

(2003). Dimensões normativas do individualismo e coletivismo: É suficiente a dicotomia pessoal vs. social? [Normative dimensions of the indivivualism and collectivism: Is the dichotomy personal vs. social sufficient?]. Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica, 16(2), 223–234. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0102-79722003000200002

16.

Hank

Cavrini

Di Gessa

Tomassini

(2018). What do we know about grandparents? Insights from current quantitative data and identification of future data needs. European Journal of Ageing, 15(3), 225–235. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-018-0468-1

17.

Hayslip

Toledo

R. M.

Henderson

C. E.

Rodriguez

Vela

(2018). Cross-cultural differences in the experience of grandparent–grandchild relationships and related psychosocial outcomes. International Journal of Aging & Human Development, 89(2), 151–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091415018769468

18.

Liu

Luo

(2023). Emotional warmth and rejection parenting styles of grandparents/great grandparents and the social-emotional development of grandchildren/great grandchildren. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(2), 1568. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20021568

19.

Kovan

N. M.

Chung

A. L.

Sroufe

L. A.

(2009). The intergenerational continuity of observed early parenting: A prospective, longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 45(5), 1205–1213. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0016542

20.

Cui

Kok

H. T.

Deatrick

Liu

(2019). The relationship between parenting styles practiced by grandparents and children’s emotional and behavioral problems. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 28, 1899–1913. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-019-01415-7

21.

Maccoby

E. E.

Martin

J. A.

(1983). Socialization in the context of the family: Parent–child interaction. In Mussen

P. H.

(Ed.), Handbook of child psychology (pp. 1–101). Wiley.

22.

Madden

Domoney

Aumayer

Sethna

Iles

Hubbard

Giannakakis

Psychogiou

Ramchandani

(2015). Intergenerational transmission of parenting: Findings from a UK longitudinal study. The European Journal of Public Health, 25, 1030–1035. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckv093

23.

Neppl

T. K.

Conger

R. D.

Scaramella

L. V.

Ontai

L. L.

(2009). Intergenerational continuity in parenting behavior: Mediating pathways and child effects. Developmental Psychology, 45(5), 1241–1256. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/a0014850

24.

Noriega

López

(2021). Fortalezas y estilos educativos en abuelos con nietos de 6 a 12 años [Strengths and educational styles in grandparents with grandchildren from 6 to 12 years old]. Revista INFAD de Psicología. International Journal of Developmental and Educational Psychology, 2(2), 121–134. https://doi.org/10.17060/ijodaep.2021.n2.v2.2217

25.

Noriega

López

Domínguez

Velasco

(2017). Perceptions of grandparents who provide auxiliary care: Value transmission and child-rearing practices. Child & Family Social Work, 22(3), 1227–1236. https://doi.org/10.1111/cfs.12339

26.

Parke

R. D.

Leidy

M. S.

Schofield

T. J.

Miller

M. A.

Morris

K. L.

(2008). Socialization. In Haith

M. M.

Benson

J. B.

(Eds.), Encyclopedia of infant and early childhood development (pp. 224–235). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012370877-9.00152-3.

27.

Pinquart

Kauser

(2018). Do the associations of parenting styles with behavior problems and academic achievement vary by culture? Results from a meta-analysis. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 24(1), 75–100. https://doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000149

28.

Pratt

M. W.

Norris

J. E.

Lawford

Arnold

M. L.

(2010). What he said to me stuck: Adolescents’ narratives of grandparents and their identity development in emerging adulthood. In McLean

K. C.

Pasupathi

(Eds.), Narrative development in adolescence (pp. 93–112). Springer.

29.

Reed

A. E.

Chan

Mikels

J. A.

(2014). Meta-analysis of the age-related positivity effect: Age differences in preferences for positive over negative information. Psychology and Aging, 29, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035194

30.

Reitzes

D. C.

Mutran

E. J.

(2004). Grandparenthood: Factors influencing frequency of grandparent–grandchildren contact and grandparent role satisfaction. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 59(1), S9–S16. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/59.1.S9

31.

Rico

Serra

Viguer

Meléndez

(2001). Las relaciones abuelos-nietos al final del milenio: La visión de los niños [Grandparent–grandchild relationships at the end of the millennium: The vision of children.]. Geriátrika, 16(9), 33–40. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=8383062

32.

Rohner

R. P.

Khaleque

(2003). Reliability and validity of the parental control scale: A meta-analysis of cross-cultural and intracultural studies. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 34, 643–649. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022103255650

33.

Rothenberg

W. A.

(2019). Intergenerational continuity in parenting: A review and theoretical integration. Marriage & Family Review, 55(8), 701–736. https://doi.org/10.1080/01494929.2019.1589618

34.

Rothrauff

T. C

Cooney

T. M

J. S

(2009). Remembered Parenting Styles and Adjustment in Middle and Late Adulthood. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 64B(1), 137–146. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbn008

35.

Sajjad

Malik

J. A.

(2022). Dyadic associations between grandparent–grandchild familial values and successful aging: Mediating role of quality of life. The International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 96(4), 471–487. https://doi.org/10.1177/00914150221106089

36.

Spalding

Carpenter

(2019). Examining the intergenerational stake hypothesis in grandparent–grandchild dyads. The International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 89(2), 172–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091415018780008

37.

Triadó

Villar

Solé

José Osuna

Celdrán

(2006). Percepciones cruzadas entre abuelos y nietos en una muestra de díadas: una aproximación cualitativa [Cross-perceptions between grandparents and grandchildren in a sample of dyads: a qualitative approach]. Revista Española de Geriatría y Gerontología, 41(2), 100–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0211-139x(06)72933-x

38.

Triandis

H. C.

(2001). Individualism-collectivism and personality. Journal of Personality, 69(6), 907–924. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.696169

39.

Uhlenberg

Hammill

B. G.

(1998). Frequency of grandparent contact with grandchild sets: Six factors that make a difference. The Gerontologist, 38(3), 276–285. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/38.3.276

40.

Viguer

Meléndez

J. C.

Valencia

Cantero

M. J.

Navarro

(2010). Grandparent-grandchild relationships from the children’s perspective: Shared activities and socialization style. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 13, 708–717. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1138741600002377

41.

Schimmele

C. M.

(2020). Widowhood and depression: A longitudinal study of older persons in rural China. Aging & Mental Health, 24(6), 914–922. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2019.1571016

42.

Zhong, X., Wu, D., Nie, X., Xia, J., Li, M., Lei, F., Lim, H. A., Kua, E. H., & Mahendran, R. (2016). Parenting style, resilience, and mental health of community-dwelling elderly adults in China. BMC Geriatrics, 16(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-016-0308-0