Leyre Galarraga
Cristina Noriega
Gema Pérez-Rojo
Javier López- 1Department of Psychology and Psychopedagogy, Faculty of Medicine, CEU San Pablo University, Madrid, Spain
- 2Grupo de Investigación Envejecimiento (BUENA VEJEZ), Madrid, Spain
- 3Instituto de Estudios de las Adicciones (IEA-CEU), Madrid, Spain
Introduction: Grandparents are increasingly becoming key figures in the supplementary care of grandchildren. Based on the Resilience Model of Family Stress, Adjustment and Adaptation, the present study aims to analyze the emotional competences that canpl predict higher levels of psychological wellbeing and quality of life in supplementary grandparents caregivers.
Methods: A sample of 270 supplementary grandparents caregivers living in Spain participated. Most participants were women (71.1%), and the mean age was 67.83 years (SD = 6.26). Most participants were occasional caregivers, that is, they care for less than 10 h per week (76.3%). We conducted hierarchical multiple regression analysis, one for psychological wellbeing and the other for quality of life.
Results: The regression model for psychological wellbeing identified that age, management of caregiving stress, self-confidence in the caregiving role, management of work-life balance difficulties and emotional self-regulation explained 32.8% of its variance. The regression model for quality of life showed that age, type of grandparent caregiver, management of caregiving stress, management of work-life balance difficulties and emotional self-regulation explained 31.2% of its variance.
Conclusion: This study focuses on supplementary grandparents caregivers, whereas literature has tended to look at primary grandparents caregivers. The results highlight the role of emotional competences as predictors of supplementary grandparents caregivers’ psychological wellbeing and quality of life, overcoming the usual tendency in the literature to focus on the negative consequences of grandparents caregiving for grandchildren, and emphasizing the competences that grandparents have to cope with this care in a satisfactory way, which, moreover, can be trained.
1 Introduction
Western societies have undergone sociodemographic changes that have favored the development of grandparents’ caregiving role, such as increased life expectancy (Chapman et al., 2017), delay of first birth, decline in fertility (Cisotto et al., 2022), changes in the labor world (Di Gessa et al., 2016), apparition of new family types (Di Gessa et al., 2016), and an increase in the social participation of the older adults (Cisotto et al., 2022). These sociodemographic changes have caused changes in family relationships, becoming grandparents key figures in helping younger generations to reconcile family and work life. This intergenerational help is transmitted, fundamentally, by providing supplementary care to grandchildren (Geurts et al., 2015).
The degree of involvement of grandparents as caregivers of their grandchildren can be understood as a continuum. At one pole, there are the primary grandparents caregivers, those who provide permanent care due to the temporary or total absence of the parents. At the other pole, there are supplementary grandparents caregivers, those who provide care in addition to the parental care, as a way of supporting grandchildren’s parents (Villar et al., 2012).
Taking care of a grandchild occasionally (as a voluntary choice and leisure activity) may not be as demanding as taking on the responsibility of caregiving regularly. For this reason, literature differentiated between occasional (less than 10 h of care per week) and regular supplementary caregivers (10 h of care or more per week) (Wellard, 2011; Noriega et al., 2022).
Zanasi et al. (2023) analyzed the proportion and intensity of supplementary care provided by grandparents in Europe, and determined that 46% of participants had provided occasional care to their grandchildren between 2019 and 2020. The lowest proportion was in Latvia (24%) and the highest in Belgium and Netherlands (60%). Mediterranean countries occupied the middle positions (Spain, 43%; Greece, 38%; and Italy, 37%). Analyzing regular care, they determined that the proportion of grandparents providing it was 25% between 2019 and 2020. The lowest proportion was in Latvia (12%) and the highest in Belgium (39%). Mediterranean countries occupied the middle positions (Italy, 31%; Spain 25%; and Greece, 25%).
The most recent data provided by the Survey on Health, Aging and Retirement in Europe (SHARE; Börsch-Supan, 2022), showed that 60% of grandparents provided supplementary care to their grandchildren. Specifically, 30% of grandparents cared for their grandchildren at least 30 h per month. Considering those who cared regularly (daily care), the Spanish percentage was 12%.
Although the above figures reflect the high percentage of supplementary grandparent caregivers, the literature has focused on primary grandparents caregivers (Villar et al., 2012; Triadó et al., 2014). The Resilience Model of Family Stress, Adjustment and Adaptation (McCubbin, 1993) explains why some families are more resilient than others, having a greater capacity to adapt to family stress. The model analyses the family as a single unit, focusing on three aspects that influence its adjustment and adaptation process: (1) Family demands, the stimuli that pressure the family system to adjust and adapt; (2) family resources, which include those of each family member, those of the family in general, those of the community, and those that arise in response to the family demands; and (3) problem-solving skills, which refer to the strengths that the family has and how it uses them to adjust and adapt to family demand.
Building on research in which this model was used in the study of family coping with health crises, Musil et al. (2006, 2009) applied it to understand the experience of primary grandparents caregivers. Their main hypothesis was that, if family demands were not buffered by grandparents’ resources, their health could be affected. Subsequently, Noriega et al. (2022) applied this model to grandparents who provide supplementary care in Spain. The authors first studied the impact of the amount of care provided on grandparents’ health-related QoL, and then, the protective role of social support and character strengths, finding that both variables mediated the impact of the amount of care provided on grandparents’ health-related quality of life (QoL). Figure 1 shows the application of this model to the present research.
Figure 1. Application of the Resilience Model of Family Stress, Adjustments and Adaption to the present study.
Although there is consensus on the lower psychological impact suffered by grandparents providers of supplementary care versus primary caregivers (Glaser et al., 2014), there are different levels of psychological impact within the group of supplementary caregivers, depending on the intensity of care. The psychological impact of supplementary grandchild care on grandparents has been commonly assessed with two indicators: wellbeing (Villar et al., 2012; Danielsbacka et al., 2019) and QoL (Szabó et al., 2019; Hemmati et al., 2023).
Concerning wellbeing, most studies have analyzed subjective wellbeing (SW), using indicators such as happiness, positive and negative affect, and life satisfaction. Most of these studies agree that moderate levels of caregiving are related to more life satisfaction (Moore and Rosenthal, 2015) and feelings of usefulness (Danielsbacka et al., 2019), as well as lower depressive symptoms (Xu et al., 2017), anxiety and stress, and feelings of loneliness (Tang et al., 2016). Other studies have evidenced that intense levels of caregiving increase grandparents’ risk of depression (Brunello and Rocco, 2016; Komonpaisarn and Loichinger, 2019).
In contrast, the number of studies considering psychological wellbeing (PW) is scarce. It refers to people’s feelings and behaviors aimed at developing their potential and giving meaning to their lives. According to Ryff’s model (1989), PW is composed of six dimensions: self-acceptance (positive attitude toward oneself, accepting qualities and limitations), vital purpose (feeling of direction in life, toward the past and the future), mastery of the environment (competence in managing situations and opportunities), positive relationships (building satisfying and trusting bonds), personal growth (feeling of continuous development, having made use of one’s talents), and autonomy (independence of thought and behavior, with congruence of conduct-personal convictions). This model has been used to study the relationship between Erikson’s (2000) life cycle stages and PW, to analyze the transitions that take place in adulthood (e.g., retirement), as well as to understand the impact of significant life events (e.g., caring for a child with a disability) (Ryff, 2014). Compared to SW, it is more stable over time, so it seems more relevant to know the impact of grandchild care on PW.
Regarding QoL, the World Health Organization (1995) defines it as the expression of how people perceive their attitudes toward life, considering their cultural and value context, concerning their goals, expectations, interests, standards, concerns, and lifestyle. Higgs et al. (2003) and Hyde et al. (2003) developed a model of QoL based on the satisfaction of human needs, based on Maslow (1943). They identified four human needs that would constitute the dimensions of QoL: autonomy (right of people to be independent of the influence of others), control (ability to manage one’s environment), pleasure (development of activities that provide agreeable emotions), and self-fulfillment (using one’s capabilities to develop personal identity).
Researchers found higher scores on psychological and physical dimensions of QoL in grandparents providers of supplementary care, versus non-caregivers or non-grandparents (Tanskanen et al., 2019; Hemmati et al., 2023). Di Gessa et al. (2023) evidenced lower QoL in grandparents who completely stopped caring for their grandchildren during the COVID-19 pandemic, while those who maintained or even increased caregiving increased their QoL. In contrast, Szabó et al. (2019), studying not only supplementary grandparent caregivers, but also older people who cared for children outside their families, found different relationships of caregiving with dimensions of psychosocial quality of life. Caregiving was negatively related to the control and autonomy dimension in men, while caregiving was positively related to the self-fulfillment dimension in women.
With respect to grandparents’ role perception, previous researches in this field have suggested that is not only important the amount of care provided, but also the perception of this care as a source of discomfort or satisfaction, which may also influence their health (González et al., 2015; Xu et al., 2017). In this sense, type of grandparent caregiver, caregiving overload and grandparental role meaning have been related to grandparents’ wellbeing (Hayslip et al., 2003; Triadó et al., 2014).
Related to type of grandparent caregiver and caregiving overload, intensity of caregiving is one of the caregiving variables that has received the most attention in the literature because of its important role in the impact that caregiving can have on grandparents’ health. Literature agrees that caregiving has health benefits for grandparents when it is not intense, whereas it can be detrimental when the intensity is excessively high (Glaser et al., 2014; Burn and Szoeke, 2015). Triadó et al. (2014) evidenced that more hours of care were associated with more perceived difficulties by grandparents, and that these difficulties were negatively associated with role satisfaction. The predictors of the subjective health of grandparents found were age, amount of care provided and perceived difficulties, the latter being the most significant. Consequently, the authors concluded that it is not so much the amount of care provided, but the perception of that care (Triadó et al., 2014). Tang et al. (2016) and Xu et al. (2017) observed a positive relationship between caregiving overload and caregiving pressure (pressure from parents to grandparents to take care of grandchildren) with different indicators of subjective wellbeing (depressive symptoms, anxiety, stress and loneliness). Brunello and Rocco (2016) likewise evidenced an increased risk of depression in grandparents when caregiving for their grandchildren was excessively intense. Regarding PW, studies are scarce, StGeorge and Fletcher (2014) and Villar et al. (2012) reported that involvement in the care of grandchildren favored the understanding of the past, the construction of future purposes, as well as the feeling of being a guide for the new generation, which enhanced the PW of grandparents. About QoL, known studies have compared supplementary grandparents caregivers and non-caregivers grandparents, showing a higher QoL in the first one. However, there are no known studies that have compared QoL between occasional and regular supplementary grandparent caregivers.
In relation to the grandparental role meaning, supplementary caregivers have reported the following meanings of their grandparenthood: love, pleasure, energy, joy, peace, gratitude for being able to care a second time, opportunity to strengthen family ties, contribution to the family, and meaning and purpose in life (Villar et al., 2012; Triadó et al., 2014; Fauziningtyas et al., 2018; Şahin and Şahin, 2020). Thiele and Whelan (2008) found significant positive relationships between four of Kivnick’s (1982, 1983) grandparental meanings (valued older, centrality, immortality, and reinvolvement) and role satisfaction. However, valued older and centrality meanings, with generativity, were the main predictors of role satisfaction. Although there are no known studies that have evaluated the relationship between grandparental role meaning and QoL, the literature shows that the more grandparents identify with their role meaning, the greater their wellbeing, their satisfaction with their grandparental role and the quality of their relationship with their grandchildren (Kivnick, 1982, 1983; Hayslip et al., 2003).
Last of all, emotional competences can be defined as the capacities, knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to understand, express and regulate emotions (Bisquerra and Pérez, 2007). Emotional intelligence is a well-known psychological strength, related to resilience, that favors adaptation in stressful circumstances, thanks to emotional self-awareness, expression, and management (Armstrong et al., 2011). Starting from the existing literature on grandparents supplementary caregivers, as well as from parental competency assessment instruments, García and Martínez-González (2017) proposed that supplementary grandparents caregivers must have the necessary emotional competences to attend to their growing responsibilities in current society. This is the only research, to our knowledge, describing the emotional competences of grandparents, in which four emotional competences were described: management of caregiving stress, self-confidence in the caregiving role, management of work-life balance difficulties, and emotional self-regulation (García and Martínez-González, 2017).
Despite the fact that there are no known studies analyzing the relationship between grandparents’ emotional competences, type of grandparent caregiver, caregiving overload, grandparental role meaning, PW and QoL, there are some intervention studies that shed light on this question. Some authors have developed intervention programs focused on teaching supplementary grandparent caregivers’ different psychological resources, which resemble emotional competences, to improve their health.
Kirby and Sanders (2014) and Leung and Fung (2014) taught grandparents parenting strategies (updating education and parenting tools), team strategies (building pleasant relationships with parents) and coping strategies (emotional management). Zauszniewski et al. (2014) taught grandparents eight cognitive-behavioral tools for coping with adversity, three resources for seeking help from others, and five self-help resources. Strom and Strom (2016) offered their participants the possibility to share experiences about grandparenting and to have tools to become aware of how children’s education had changed. On the one hand, these interventions achieved a reduction in symptoms of depression, anxiety and stress (Kirby and Sanders, 2014; Leung and Fung, 2014; Zauszniewski et al., 2014), and an increase in grandparents’ health-related QoL (Zauszniewski et al., 2014). On the other hand, authors observed an increase in role satisfaction and role meaning (Strom and Strom, 2016) and in self-efficacy (Kirby and Sanders, 2014; Leung and Fung, 2014; Strom and Strom, 2016). Parental self-efficacy refers to parents’ confidence in their ability to overcome parenting challenges and promote their children’s development (Coleman and Karraker, 2000), and has been negatively associated with parental stress (Ayala-Nunes et al., 2014).
Based on the Resiliency Model of Family Stress, Adjustment and Adaptation of McCubbin (1993), this study addresses the following research questions (1) Are there significant differences in PW and QoL by grandparents’ sociodemographic variables?; (2) Are there significant relationships between PW and QoL and grandparents’ emotional competences and grandparents’ role perception?; (3) Do emotional competences, amount of care provided, role meaning and caregiving overload predict PW?; and (4) Do emotional competences, amount of care provided, role meaning and caregiving overload predict QoL? Considering these research questions, we hypothesized that (1) the older the grandparents’ age, the lower the PW and QoL; (2) PW and QoL will be positively related to the four emotional competences and role meaning, and negatively to caregiving overload, and there will be no difference depending on the type of caregiver; (3) higher scores on the four emotional competences, being an occasional grandparent caregiver, higher score on role meaning and lower score on caregiving overload will predict positively PW; and (4) higher scores on the four emotional competences, being an occasional grandparent caregiver, higher score on role meaning and lower score on caregiving overload will predict positively QoL.
2 Methods
2.1 Participants
The inclusion criterion was to be a supplementary grandparent caregiver of, at least, one grandchild under 18. In other words, any grandparent who cared for their grandchildren in an auxiliary way to the parents’ upbringing, as a support figure for the reconciliation of family and work life, could participate in the study. To identify grandparents who were supplementary caregivers, the following item was included: “Have you ever care for your grandchild(ren) in the last 12 months?.” Consequently, the exclusion criteria were both having a pathology that impeded participation in the study and being a primary grandparent caregiver, that is, being the main caregiver of the grandchildren in the absence of the parents.
Participants were 270 supplementary grandparents caregivers living in Spain. Most of the participants were women (71.1%). The mean age was 67.83 years (SD = 6.26), with an age range from 51 to 88 years. Most of the participants were married or cohabiting with their partners (65.9%), had a medium socioeconomic level (58.1%), were retired (73.3%) and had university studies (58.5%).
Most participants were occasional caregivers (76.3%) and cared for their grandchildren weekly (41%). The mean number of grandchildren cared for in the last 12 months was 2.22 (SD = 1.64). The mean age of the grandchildren was 5.73 (SD = 3.83), with an age range from newborn to 18 years. Most participants cared for grandsons and granddaughters (41.1%) and mainly cared for their daughters’ children (64.1%) (Table 1).
Table 1. Sociodemographic characteristics of grandparents and characteristics of caregiving.
2.2 Variables and instruments
2.2.1 Sociodemographic data of grandparents
The following variables were included: sex, age, marital status, socioeconomic status, employment status, and educational level.
2.2.2 Intergenerational data
We analyzed the type of caregiver (occasional caregiver, if they were caring for their grandchildren less than 10 h per week; or regular caregiver, providers of care for 10 or more hours per week), number of grandchildren cared for in the last 12 months, grandchildren’s age, grandchildren’s sex, and family lineage (maternal, paternal, or both).
The type of grandparent caregiver (occasional or regular) has been taken into account in order to control the influence of the intensity of care, since the literature shows that, even if the care is auxiliary, if it is excessively intense, it can affect the grandparent’s health.
2.2.3 Psychological wellbeing
We used the Ryff scale of psychological wellbeing (1989; Spanish brief version validated by Díaz et al., 2006). This instrument includes 29 items organized in 6 dimensions: self-acceptance, positive relationships, autonomy, mastery of the environment, personal growth, and purpose in life. Items are scored from 1 “strongly disagree” to 6 “strongly agree.” An example of an item from the self-acceptance dimension is: “For the most part, I am proud of who I am and the life I lead”; from the positive relationships dimension is: “I know I can trust my friends, and they know they can trust me”; from the autonomy dimension is: “I am concerned about how other people evaluate the choices I have made in my life”; from the mastery of the environment dimension is: “I have been able to build a home and a way of life to my liking”; from the personal growth dimension is: “Overall, over time I feel like I continue to learn about myself”; and from the purpose in life dimension is: “I am an active person in carrying out the projects I proposed for myself.” We used the total score, which showed good reliability (Cronbach’s α = 0.89).
2.2.4 Quality of life
It was applied the QoL questionnaire for older adults (CASP-12; Spanish validation by Pérez-Rojo et al., 2017). This scale was used to study the quality of life through 12 items organized in three dimensions: control and autonomy, pleasure, and self-fulfillment. Items are scored from 1 “often” to 4 “never.” An example of an item from the control and autonomy dimension is: “My age prevents me from doing the things I would like to do”; from the pleasure dimension is: “I look forward to every day”; and from the self-fulfillment dimension is: “I believe my future looks bright.” We used the total score which showed good reliability (Cronbach’s α = 0.87).
2.2.5 Emotional competences
We used the Grandparents’ emotional competences scale (ECEA; García and Martínez-González, 2017). This instrument includes 10 items distributed in 4 dimensions: management of caregiving stress, self-confidence in the caregiving role, management of work-life balance difficulties and emotional self-regulation. Items are scored from 1”never” to 4 “always.” An example of an item from the management of caregiving stress dimension is: “With my grandchild, I have the feeling that I have not achieved everything I had hoped for”; from the self-confidence in the caregiving role dimension is: “I believe that I am a good grandparent and that I fulfill my duties adequately”; from the management of work-life balance difficulties dimension is: “I feel overwhelmed by the circumstances, with no time to take care of my grandchild”; and from the emotional self-regulation dimension is “I know how to relax and control my emotions in front of my.” In our sample, all the subscales showed acceptable reliability (Cronbach’s α = 0.63–0.76).
2.2.6 Grandparenting role meaning
We used the Multidimensional experience of grandparenthood set of inventories (Findler et al., 2013). We applied the dimension of role meaning, which consists of 8 items that range from 1 “completely disagree” to 5 “completely agree.” An example of an item is: “Being a grandparent gives more meaning to my life.” In our sample, this instrument showed acceptable reliability (Cronbach’s α = 0.78).
2.2.7 Caregiving overload
We used the Multidimensional experience of grandparenthood set of inventories (Findler et al., 2013). We applied the dimension of caregiving overload, which consists of 4 items ranging from 1 “completely disagree” to 5 “completely agree.” An example of an item is: “For me, being a grandparent is a real burden.” In our sample, this instrument showed acceptable reliability (Cronbach’s α = 0.74).
2.3 Procedure
First, the project was approved by San Pablo CEU University Ethics Committee (516/21/40). The data for this study were collected between March 2021 and June 2023. The sampling was a convenience sampling. The sample was collected from different organizations, social centers, universities for seniors, and using the snowball sampling technique. Then, participants completed a self-administered questionnaire (in electronic or paper format), which took between 20 and 30 min. Informed consent was obtained from all respondents and the confidentiality of their data was explicitly guaranteed.
2.4 Data analysis
The IBM SPSS version 27 statistical package was used for data analysis.
Firstly, a univariate analysis was carried out to study the differences in PW and QoL as a function of the sociodemographic variables of the grandparents. Mann–Whitney U tests was used with the variable sex, Spearman correlations with age, and Kruskal Wallis tests with marital status, socioeconomic status, employment status and educational level. After performing the latter tests, in those where significant differences were observed, Mann–Whitney U tests was performed to see between which levels of the variables the differences were found.
Secondly, the relationships of the dependent variables (PW and QoL) with the grandparents’ emotional competences and grandparents’ role perception variables were studied using Mann–Whitney U tests (for the variable type of caregiver) and Spearman correlations (for the rest of the variables).
Thirdly, the variables showing statistically significant relationships with PW and QoL were included in Hierarchical multiple regression analysis.
3 Results
Based on the Resilience Model of Family Stress, Adjustment and Adaptation (McCubbin, 1993) we studied the relationships between grandparents’ sociodemographic variables, grandparents’ role perception and grandparents’ emotional competences with two health indicators (PW and QoL).
3.1 Relationship of psychological wellbeing and quality of life with grandparents’ sociodemographic variables and intergenerational data
Concerning PW, a statistically significant relationship was found with age (r = −0.24, p < 0.001). Regarding sex, statistically significant differences were found, with the mean score being higher for women. Statistically significant differences were found in employment status (Table 2). Mann–Whitney tests were performed to analyses between which levels of the employment status variable the differences were found. First, statistically significant differences (U = 1,457; p < 0.001) were found between employee (M = 158.04) and retired (M = 106.86). Second, statistically significant differences (U = 1,042.5; p < 0.005) were found between self-employed (M = 141.34) and retired (M = 104.77). No statistically significant differences were found according to marital status, socioeconomic status, and educational level, number of grandchildren cared, and grandchildren’s age.
Table 2. Differences in psychological wellbeing according to sex and employment status.
About QoL, a statistically significant relationship was found with age (r = −0.24, p < 0.001). Statistically significant differences were found in socioeconomic status, employment status, and educational level (Table 3). Mann–Whitney tests were performed to analyses between which levels of the variables the differences were found.
Table 3. Differences in quality of life according to socioeconomic status, employment status and educational level.
Regarding socioeconomic status, first, statistically significant differences (U = 780; p < 0.005) were found between medium-low (M = 40.29) and medium-high (M = 59.36). Second, statistically significant differences (U = 4,356.5; p < 0.005) were found between medium (M = 106.5) and medium-high (M = 130.26).
About employment status, first, statistically significant differences (U = 132; p < 0.005) were found between employee (M = 25.11) and home care (M = 16.75). Second, statistically significant differences (U = 1793; p ≤ 0.005) were found between employee (M = 145.57) and retired (M = 108.56). Third, statistically significant differences (U = 1,050; p ≤ 0.005) were found between self-employed (M = 140.88) and retired (M = 104.8).
In relation to educational level, statistically significant differences (U = 1871; p < 0.005) were found between primary education (M = 73.7) and university education (M = 100.66).
No statistically significant differences were found according to sex and marital status.
3.2 Relationship of psychological wellbeing and quality of life with grandparents’ role perception and grandparents’ emotional competences
The correlations between PW, QoL, grandparents’ role perception, and grandparents’ emotional competences are shown in Table 4.
Table 4. Correlations between psychological wellbeing, quality of life, grandparents’ emotional competences and grandparents’ role perception.
Regarding the type of grandparent caregiver, statistically significant differences were only found in QoL (U = 5,187; p ≤ 0.01), with the mean score being higher for occasional caregivers (M = 141.89).
3.3 Role of statistically significant variables in psychological wellbeing
Hierarchical multiple linear regression was used to explain the influence of all variables previously described as statistically significant on grandparents’ PW. Following the Resilience Model of Family Stress, Adjustment and Adaptation (McCubbin, 1993) we included three blocks: (1) sociodemographic variables (age and sex); (2) grandparents’ role perception (grandparenting role meaning and caregiving overload); and (3) emotional competences (management of caregiving stress, self-confidence in the caregiving role, management of work-life balance difficulties and emotional self-regulation).
The final model (Table 5) identified five predictors of PW (age, management of caregiving stress, self-confidence in the caregiving role, management of work-life balance difficulties, and emotional self-regulation), which explain 32.8% of the variance of PW (R2 = 0.328; adjusted R2 = 0.308; F(8,261) = 15.954).
Table 5. Hierarchical multiple linear regression model of psychological wellbeing.
On the one hand, management of caregiving stress, self-confidence in the caregiving role, management of work-life balance difficulties and emotional self-regulation explained PW with a positive relationship, that is, higher scores on these variables predicted higher scores on PW. On the other hand, age explained PW with a negative relationship, that is, higher score on this variable predicted a lower score on PW.
3.4 Role of statistically significant variables in quality of life
Hierarchical multiple linear regression was used to explain the influence of all variables previously described as statistically significant on grandparents’ QoL. Following the Resilience Model of Family Stress, Adjustment and Adaptation (McCubbin, 1993), we included three blocks: (1) sociodemographic variables (age); (2) variables related to the grandparents’ role perception (type of grandparent caregiver, grandparenting role meaning and caregiving overload); and (3) emotional competences (management of caregiving stress, self-confidence in the caregiving role, management of work-life balance difficulties and emotional self-regulation).
The final model (Table 6) identified five predictors (age, type of grandparent caregiver, management of caregiving stress, management of work-life balance difficulties, and emotional self-regulation), which explain 31.2% of the variance of QoL (R2 = 0.312; adjusted R2 = 0.291; F(8,261) = 14.801).
Table 6. Hierarchical multiple linear regression model of quality of life.
On the one hand, management of caregiving stress, management of work-life balance difficulties, and emotional self-regulation regulation explained QoL with a positive relationship, that is, higher scores on these variables predicted a higher score on QoL. The type of grandparent caregiver also explained QoL with a positive relationship, which meant that being occasional caregivers predicted a higher QoL score. On the other hand, age explained QoL with a negative relationship, that is, a higher age predicted a lower score on QoL.
4 Discussion
The present study provides new data on how grandparents’ sociodemographic variables, grandparents’ role perception and grandparents’ emotional competences predict two health indicators (PW and QoL). Specifically, PW was predicted by age, management of caregiving stress, self-confidence in the caregiving role, management of work-life balance difficulties and emotional self-regulation, while QoL was predicted by age, type of grandparent caregiver, management of caregiving stress, management of work-life balance difficulties and emotional self-regulation.
Concerning the relationship between age and PW, the results in the literature are varied. Our results are in line with Noriega et al. (2020), who found a negative relationship between age and personal growth, one of the dimensions of PW. In contrast, other authors have found a positive relationship between the frequency of caregiving and the meaning of life in older grandparents (over 80), as well as a negative relationship in younger grandparents (under 60) (Danielsbacka et al., 2019). Other authors, assessing SW, have found less depressive symptomatology in older grandparents (over 60) when they are moderately involved in the care of grandchildren, while they found no significant differences in younger grandparents (between 45 and 59) (Zeng et al., 2020). These differences may be due, firstly, to the different assessment scales used in the studies and, secondly, to the culture background of each study. While some participants also were Spanish (Noriega et al., 2020), other were Chinese (Zeng et al., 2020), and, in the case of Danielsbacka et al. (2019), the study include different European countries, between which there may be differences.
Regarding the relationship between age and QoL, different authors exposed negative relationships between supplementary grandparents caregivers’ QoL and their age in line with our study. Younger grandparents scored higher on the physical and psychological dimensions of health-related QoL (Yalcin et al., 2018; Noriega et al., 2022). As for psychosocial QoL, lower scores had been found in control and autonomy dimensions in younger grandparents (Szabó et al., 2019). According to Yalcin et al. (2018), one explanation could be the fewer physical and psychological resources available for caregiving as the person’s age advances.
Secondly, one of the variables related to grandparents’ role perception (type of grandparent caregiver) also act as predictors of QoL. Literature agrees that grandchild caregiving can have negative consequences for grandparents if it becomes too intense. Glaser et al. (2014) exposed that moderate grandchild caregiving was related to higher psychosocial QoL for grandparents. Yalcin et al. (2018) found higher levels of health-related QoL in occasional supplementary caregivers versus primary caregivers. Our results are congruent with these findings, as being an occasional caregiver has been shown to positively predict QoL.
In last place, the role of emotional competences in grandparents’ PW is unknown. However, as have been mentioned, different intervention studies have focused on teaching supplementary grandparent caregivers’ psychological resources to improve their health (Kirby and Sanders, 2014; Zauszniewski et al., 2014). Our results are consistent with this, as all the emotional competences, which are similar to the strategies taught in those intervention programs, predicted positively PW. The same was true for QoL, except in the case of self-confidence in the caregiving role.
Regarding emotional self-regulation, authors have found relationships between emotional intelligence (EI) and wellbeing in both middle and older adults. Whitmoyer et al. (2024) found positive relationships between two emotional strategies (positive reappraisal and situation selection) and SW (balance between pleasant and unpleasant emotions). Delhom et al. (2017) found significant relationships between EI (attention to feelings, emotional clarity, and repair and regulation of the emotions) and PW dimensions. Concretely, self-acceptance, personal growth and purpose in life were related to the three dimensions of EI (attention, clarity, and repair); autonomy and environmental mastery were only related to clarity and repair; and positive relations with others were not related to any of them. As for QoL, positive relationships between EI and the psychological dimension of health-related QoL were found in middle and older adults (Wilson and Saklofske, 2018). Concretely, Quattropani et al. (2022) found a positive relationship between this dimension and suppression abilities, i.e., the ability to reduce or suppress unpleasant emotions.
Studies on the predictive role of the competences management of caregiving stress and management of work-life balance difficulties on the PW and QoL of supplementary grandparents are unknown. Even though supplementary care of grandchildren is related to a lower psychological and physical impact than, for example, that of custodial grandparents (Triadó et al., 2014), it has been shown that the impact also depends on the intensity of care. In general, the literature agrees that grandparent caregiving has positive consequences for grandparents when it is not intense and can become negative if it is intense (Burn and Szoeke, 2015). Studying supplementary grandparents caregivers, Triadó et al. (2014) evidenced as the main predictor of their subjective health the perceived difficulties in caring for their grandchildren. This research is in line with ours, in which higher scores in the management of caregiver stress and of work-life balance difficulties predicted higher scores in PW and QoL. Given the caregiving situation in which the participants find themselves, having tools to manage the stress associated with caregiving and reconcile the caregiving role with the other roles they play, could favors the levels of PW and QoL.
Studies assessing grandparents’ self-confidence are still unknown, nor is there much research on the relationship between self-confidence and wellbeing. A concept close to self-confidence is self-efficacy, that is, the self-perception of one’s ability to perform a task adequately. Self-efficacy is influenced by pleasant and unpleasant emotions, experiences of success and failure, and positive or negative feedback received from the environment (Bandura, 1977). Together with perceived satisfaction, the feeling of self-efficacy makes up the concept of parental competence (Albanese et al., 2019; Milkie and Nomaguchi, 2020). While parental competence refers to the knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to adequately perform the parenting role (Masten and Curtis, 2000), parental self-efficacy refers to parents’ confidence in their ability to overcome parenting challenges and promote their children’s development (Coleman and Karraker, 2000). Although studies analyzing the relationship between parental self-efficacy and wellbeing are scarce, some authors have found negative relationships between parental self-efficacy and some indicators of SW, such as depressive symptoms and negative affect (Teti and Gelfand, 1991; Coleman and Karraker, 1998), as well as with postnatal depression (Haslam et al., 2006). Also, it has been negatively associated with parental stress (Ayala-Nunes et al., 2014). Moreover, positive relationships have been found between parental self-efficacy and role satisfaction (Coleman and Karraker, 2000), and positive parenting practices, such as open and trusting communication or being supportive and responsive (Salo et al., 2022). Although there is no literature available on the relationship between grandparents’ self-efficacy and PW, these data seem to agree with our results, as grandparents’ self-confidence was found to be a predictor of PW.
Several limitations of the present investigation should be mentioned, so that they can be considered for future research. Firstly, this study included a non-probability sample. It is likely that a large majority of the grandparents who participated in this study had a satisfactory experience with their role as supplementary grandparents caregivers, as it is difficult for those with more negative experiences to participate in this type of study. Therefore, it is important to keep in mind that the results may be biased. Secondly, the sample included a greater number of occasional versus regular grandparents caregivers. For future research, it would be appropriate to have similar groups, so that the different experiences of each group can be analyzed. Thirdly, this is a cross-sectional study, so we cannot know whether our results will be stable over time. In the future, longitudinal studies should be developed to further explore this issue. Finally, the results are from Spanish grandparents, so caution should be exercised in generalizing these results, considering cultural differences.
Despite these limitations, our study provides useful information on the role of emotional competences and the grandparents’ perception of their role as predictors of grandparents’ PW and QoL. This is a novel study for several reasons. First, it focuses on PW and psychosocial QoL, whereas most of the literature on grandparent supplementary caregivers deals with subjective wellbeing and health-related QoL. Second, it provides insights into the role of grandparents as supplementary caregivers, an increasingly socially relevant issue, whereas research has tended to focus on grandparents as primary caregivers. Third, in contrast to the usual tendency to focus on the negative consequences that caring for grandchildren may have for grandparents, this study emphasizes the competences that grandparents may have to cope with their role as caregivers. Fifth and finally, related to the above, knowing which emotional competences predict grandparents caregivers’ PW and QoL is key to guiding the development of psychoeducational intervention programs to help them cope adequately with their caregiving role.
In relation to the last mentioned aspect, Spain is characterized by strong family values and, at the same time, few family support policies, which favors the expectation that grandparents help their children in the care of their grandchildren, as a way of compensating for the shortcomings of the system (Gauthier, 1996; Hank and Buber, 2009). Consequently, it would be appropriate to develop psychoeducational programs that include both grandparents and parents, offering them tools to face this reality in a satisfactory way. Taking into account this sociocultural context, it would be appropriate to work on: (1) the non-interference rule, so that grandparents understand what their role as auxiliary caregivers is, respecting the upbringing chosen by the parents; (2) grandparents’ rights, so that they are able to establish their limits and be able to continue developing the rest of their vital areas; (3) communication strategies, to facilitate the adjustment of expectations between grandparents and parents; (4) grandchild care skills, given the large percentage of Spanish grandparents who regularly care for their grandchildren; and finally (5) it would be interesting that future programs include information and tools for grandparents to be updated in new technologies, as this is one of the main generation gaps between grandparents and grandchildren today, being undeniable that the fact that grandparents have these skills can favor closer relationships with their grandchildren.
Data availability statement
The datasets presented in this study can be found in online repositories. The names of the repository/repositories and accession number(s) can be found at: https://osf.io/unjr4/?view_only=6610a675552b4b59bdbc4e66885143a4.
Ethics statement
The studies involving humans were approved by Comité de Ética de Investigación de la Universidad San Pablo-CEU. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.
Author contributions
LG: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. CN: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Investigation, Methodology, Supervision, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. GP-R: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. JL: Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.
Funding
The author(s) declare that financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This work was supported by San Pablo CEU University Foundation (grant number FUSP-PID-22-039).
Acknowledgments
We thank to all the institutions involved in this study: Universidad de Oviedo, Universidad de Albacete, Universitas Senioribus CEU, Universidad Politécnica de Valencia, UNED Sénior, Universidad Miguel Hernández, Universidad de Murcia, Universidad Pontificia de Salamanca, Universidad de Barcelona, Colegio Edith Stein, Colegio CEU San Pablo Montepríncipe, Colegio CEU San Pablo Sanchinarro, EmancipaTIC and Ayuntamiento de Valdemorillo City Council.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
Albanese, A. M., Russo, G. R., and Geller, P. A. (2019). The role of parental self-efficacy in parent and child well-being: a systematic review of associated outcomes. Child Care Health Dev. 45, 333–363. doi: 10.1111/cch.12661
Armstrong, A. R., Galligan, R. F., and Critchley, C. R. (2011). Emotional intelligence and psychological resilience to negative life events. Personal. Individ. Differ. 51, 331–336. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2011.03.025
Ayala-Nunes, L., Lemos, I., and Nunes, C. (2014). Predictores del estrés parental en madres de familias en riesgo psicosocial. Univ. Psychol. 13, 529–539. doi: 10.11144/Javeriana.UPSY13-2.pepm
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol. Rev. 84, 191–215. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
Bisquerra, R., and Pérez, N. (2007). Las competencias emocionales. Educación 21, 61–82. doi: 10.5944/educxx1.1.10.297
Börsch-Supan, A. (2022). Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE) wave 6. Release version: 8.0.0. SHARE-ERIC. Data set. Available at: https://share-eric.eu/data/data-documentation/waves-overview/wave-6
Brunello, G., and Rocco, L. (2016). Is childcare bad for the mental health of grandparents? Evidence from SHARE. IZA Discussion Paper Series. 10022. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2803854
Burn, K., and Szoeke, C. (2015). Is grandparenting a form of social engagement that benefits cognition in ageing? Maturitas 80, 122–125. doi: 10.1016/j.maturitas.2014.10.017
Chapman, S. N., Lahdenperä, M., Pettay, J. E., and Lummaa, V. (2017). Changes in length of grandparenthood in Finland 1790-1959. Finn. Yearb. Popul. Res. 52, 3–13. doi: 10.23979/fypr.65346
Cisotto, E., Meli, E., and Cavrini, G. (2022). Grandparents in Italy: trends and changes in the demography of grandparenthood from 1998 to 2016. Genus 78, 1–22. doi: 10.1186/s41118-022-00153-x
Coleman, P., and Karraker, K. H. (1998). Self-efficacy and parenting quality: findings and future applications. Dev. Rev. 18, 47–85. doi: 10.1006/drev.1997.0448
Coleman, P. K., and Karraker, K. H. (2000). Parenting self-efficacy among mothers of school-age children: conceptualization, measurement, and correlates. Family Relat. Interdis. J. Appl. Family Stud. 49, 13–24. doi: 10.1111/j.1741-3729.2000.00013.x
Danielsbacka, M., Tanskanen, A. O., Coall, D. A., and Jokela, M. (2019). Grandparental childcare, health and well-being in Europe: a within-individual investigation of longitudinal data. Soc. Sci. Med. 230, 194–203. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.03.031
Delhom, I., Gutiérrez, M., Lucas-Molina, B., and Meléndez, J. C. (2017). Emotional intelligence in older adults: psychometrics properties of the TMMS-24 and relationship with psychological well-being and life satisfaction. Int. Psychogeriatr. 29, 1327–1334. doi: 10.1017/S1041610217000722
Di Gessa, G., Bordone, V., and Arpino, B. (2023). Changes in grandparental childcare during the pandemic and mental health: evidence from England. J. Gerontol. Ser. B Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 78, 319–329. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbac104
Di Gessa, G., Glaser, K., Price, D., Ribe, E., and Tinker, A. (2016). What drives national differences in intensive grandparental childcare in Europe? J. Gerontol. Ser. B Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 71, 141–153. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbv007
Díaz, D., Rodríguez-Carvajal, R., Blanco, A., Moreno-Jiménez, B., Gallardo, I., Valle, C., et al. (2006). Adaptación española de las escalas de bienestar psicológico de Ryff. Psicothema 18, 572–577
Fauziningtyas, R., Indarwati, R., Alfriani, D., Haryanto, J., Ulfiana, E., Efendi, F., et al. (2018). The experiences of grandparents raising grandchildren in Indonesia. Work. Older People 23, 17–26. doi: 10.1108/WWOP-10-2018-0019
Findler, L., Taubman-Ben-Ari, O., Nuttman-Shwartz, O., and Lazar, R. (2013). Construction and validation of the multidimensional experience of grandparenthood set of inventories. Soc. Work. Res. 37, 237–253. doi: 10.1093/swr/svt025
García, V., and Martínez-González, R. A. (2017). Escala de Competencias Emocionales de Abuelos y Abuelas (ECEA). Rev. Iberoam. Diagn. Eval. 49, 107–120. doi: 10.21865/RIDEP49.4.09
Gauthier, A. H. (1996). The state and the family: A comparative analysis of family policies in industrialized countries. Clarendon Press.
Geurts, T., Van Tilburg, T., Poortman, A. R., and Dykstra, P. A. (2015). Childcare by grandparents: changes between 1992 and 2006. Ageing Soc. 35, 1318–1334. doi: 10.1017/S0144686X14000270
Glaser, K., Di Gessa, G., and Tinker, A. (2014). Grandparenting in Europe: the health and wellbeing of grandparents caring for grandchildren: the role of cumulative advantage/disadvantage. London: Grandparents Plus.
González, J., De la Fuente, R., and González, J. (2015). Abuelo y nieto, vínculo simbólico. En S. Rivas (Coord.), Generaciones conectadas: beneficios educativos derivados de la relación entre nietos y abuelos (105–122). Madrid: Ediciones Pirámide.
Hank, K., and Buber, I. (2009). Grandparents caring for grandchildren: Findings from the 2004 Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe. Journal of Family Issues, 30, 53–73. doi: 10.1177/0192513X08322627
Haslam, D., Pakenham, K., and Smith, A. (2006). Social support and postpartum depressive symptomatology: the mediating role of maternal self-efficacy. Infant Ment. Health J. 27, 276–291. doi: 10.1002/imhj.20092
Hayslip, B., Henderson, C. E., and Shore, R. J. (2003). The structure of grandparental role meaning. J. Adult Dev. 10, 1–11. doi: 10.1023/A:1020708402212
Hemmati, H., Golestani, A., Hashemi, M., Tabatabaeichehr, M., and Mortazavi, H. (2023). Comparison of the quality of life of physically active and inactive grandmothers caring and non-caring for grandchildren: a cross-sectional study. Ethiop. J. Health Sci. 33, 291–300. doi: 10.4314/ejhs.v33i2.14
Higgs, P., Hyde, M., Wiggins, R., and Blane, D. (2003). Researching quality of life in early old age: the importance of the sociological dimension. Soc. Policy Adm. 37, 239–252. doi: 10.1111/1467-9515.00336
Hyde, M., Wiggins, R. D., Higgs, P., and Blane, D. B. (2003). A measure of quality of life in early old age: the theory, development and properties of a needs satisfaction model (CASP-19). Aging Ment. Health 7, 186–194. doi: 10.1080/1360786031000101157
Kirby, J. N., and Sanders, M. R. (2014). A randomized controlled trial evaluating a parenting program designed specifically for grandparents. Behav. Res. Ther. 52, 35–44. doi: 10.1016/j.brat.2013.11.002
Kivnick, H. Q. (1983). Dimensions of grandparenthood meaning: deductive conceptualization and empirical derivation. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 44, 1056–1068. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.44.5.1056
Komonpaisarn, T., and Loichinger, E. (2019). Providing regular care for grandchildren in Thailand: an analysis of the impact on grandparents’ health. Soc. Sci. Med. 229, 117–125. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2018.05.031
Leung, C., and Fung, B. (2014). Non-custodial grandparent caregiving in Chinese families: implications for family dynamics. J. Children Serv. 9, 307–318. doi: 10.1108/JCS-04-2014-0026
Masten, A. S., and Curtis, W. J. (2000). Integrating competence and psychopathology: pathways toward a comprehensive science of adaption in development. Dev. Psychopathol. 12, 529–550. doi: 10.1017/s095457940000314x
McCubbin, M. A. (1993). “Family stress theory and the development of nursing knowledge about family adaptation” in The nursing of families. eds. S. L. Feetham, S. B. Meister, J. M. Bell, and C. L. Gillis (New Bury Park: Sage), 46–58.
Milkie, M. A., and Nomaguchi, K. (2020). Parenthood and well-being: a decade in review. J. Marriage Fam. 82, 198–223. doi: 10.1111/jomf.12646
Moore, S. M., and Rosenthal, D. A. (2015). Personal growth, grandmother engagement and satisfaction among non-custodial grandmothers. Aging Ment. Health 19, 136–143. doi: 10.1080/13607863.2014.920302
Musil, C. M., Warner, C. B., Zauszniewski, J. A., Jeanblanc, A. B., and Kercher, K. (2006). Grandmothers, caregiving, and family functioning. J. Gerontol. 61, S89–S98. doi: 10.1093/geronb/61.2.s89
Musil, C. M., Warner, C. B., Zauszniewski, J. A., Wykle, M., and Standing, T. (2009). Grandmother caregiving, family stress and strain, and depressive symptoms. West. J. Nurs. Res. 31, 389–408. doi: 10.1177/0193945908328262
Noriega, C., Velasco, C., and López, J. (2020). Perceptions of grandparents’ generativity and personal growth in supplementary care providers of middle-aged grandchildren. J. Soc. Pers. Relat. 37, 1114–1135. doi: 10.1177/0265407519886661
Noriega, C., Velasco, C., Pérez-Rojo, G., and López, J. (2022). Character strengths and social support as protective factors between grandparents’ caregiving and health-related quality of life. J. Child Fam. Stud. 31, 2505–2517. doi: 10.1007/s10826-021-02187-9
Pérez-Rojo, G., Martín, N., Noriega, C., and López, J. (2017). Psychometric properties of the CASP-12 in a Spanish older community dwelling sample. Aging Ment. Health 22, 700–708. doi: 10.1080/13607863.2017.1292208
Quattropani, M. C., Lenzo, V., Sardella, A., and Bonanno, G. A. (2022). Expressive flexibility and health-related quality of life: the predictive role of enhancement and suppression abilities and relationships with trait emotional intelligence. Scand. J. Psychol. 63, 698–704. doi: 10.1111/sjop.12849
Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 57, 1069–1081. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.57.6.1069
Ryff, C. D. (2014). Psychological well-being revisited: advances in the science and practice of eudaimonia. Psychother. Psychosom. 83, 10–28. doi: 10.1159/000353263
Şahin, F. T., and Şahin, B. K. (2020). Turkish grandmothers’ experiences of caring for their grandchildren: a qualitative study. Early Child Dev. Care 190, 284–295. doi: 10.1080/03004430.2018.1469487
Salo, A. E., Junttila, N., and Vauras, M. (2022). Parental self-efficacy and intra-and extra-familial relationships. J. Child Fam. Stud. 31, 2714–2729. doi: 10.1007/s10826-022-02380-4
StGeorge, J. M., and Fletcher, R. J. (2014). Men’s experiences of grandfatherhood: a welcome surprise. Int. J. Aging Hum. Dev. 78, 351–378. doi: 10.2190/AG.78.4.c
Strom, R. D., and Strom, P. S. (2016). Grandparent education and intergenerational assessment of learning. Educ. Gerontol. 42, 25–36. doi: 10.1080/03601277.2015.1059148
Szabó, A., Neely, E., and Stephens, C. (2019). The psychosocial benefits of providing non-kin childcare in older adults: a longitudinal study with older New Zealanders. J. Health Psychol. 26, 1926–1938. doi: 10.1177/1359105319893011
Tang, F., Xu, L., Chi, I., and Dong, X. (2016). Psychological well-being of older Chinese-American grandparents caring for grandchildren. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 64, 2356–2361. doi: 10.1111/jgs.14455
Tanskanen, A. O., Danielsbacka, M., Coall, D. A., and Jokela, M. (2019). Transition to grandparenthood and subjective well-being in older Europeans: a within-person investigation using longitudinal data. Evol. Psychol. 17, 1–12. doi: 10.1177/1474704919875948
Teti, D. M., and Gelfand, D. M. (1991). Behavioral competence among mothers of infants in the first year: the mediational role of maternal self-efficacy. Child Dev. 62, 918–929. doi: 10.2307/1131143
Thiele, D. M., and Whelan, T. A. (2008). The relationship between grandparent satisfaction, meaning and generativity. Int. J. Aging Hum. Dev. 66, 21–48. doi: 10.2190/AG.66.1.b
Triadó, C., Villar, F., Celdrán, M., and Solé, C. (2014). Grandparents who provide supplementary care for their grandchildren: satisfaction, difficulties, and impact on their health and well-being. J. Intergenerational Relatsh. 12, 113–127. doi: 10.1080/15350770.2014.901102
Villar, F., Celdrán, M., and Triadó, C. (2012). Grandmothers offering regular auxiliary care for their grandchildren: an expression of generativity in later life? J. Women Aging 24, 292–312. doi: 10.1080/08952841.2012.708576
Wellard, S. (2011). Doing it all? Grandparents, childcare and employment: an analysis of British social attitudes survey data from 1998 and 2009. London: Grandparents Plus.
Whitmoyer, P., Fisher, M. E., Duraney, E. J., Manzler, C., Isaacowitz, D. M., Andridge, R., et al. (2024). Age differences in emotion regulation strategy use and flexibility in daily life. Aging Ment. Health 28, 1–14. doi: 10.1080/13607863.2023.2256245
Wilson, C. A., and Saklofske, D. H. (2018). The relationship between trait emotional intelligence, resiliency, and mental health in older adults: the mediating role of savouring. Aging Ment. Health 22, 646–654. doi: 10.1080/13607863.2017.1292207
World Health Organization (1995). The World Health Organization quality of life assessment (WHOQOL): position paper from the World Health Organization. Soc. Sci. Med. 41, 1403–1409. doi: 10.1016/0277-9536(95)00112-k
Xu, L., Tang, F., Li, L. W., and Dong, X. Q. (2017). Grandparent caregiving and psychological well-being among Chinese American older adults: the roles of caregiving burden and pressure. J. Gerontol. Ser. A Biol. Med. Sci. 72, S56–S62. doi: 10.1093/gerona/glw186
Yalcin, B. M., Pirdal, H., Karakoc, E. V., Sahin, E. M., Ozturk, O., and Unal, M. (2018). General health perception, depression and quality of life in geriatric grandmothers providing care for grandchildren. Arch. Gerontol. Geriatr. 79, 108–115. doi: 10.1016/j.archger.2018.08.009
Zanasi, F., Arpino, B., Bordone, V., and Hank, K. (2023). The prevalence of grandparental childcare in Europe: a research update. Eur. J. Ageing 20, 37–39. doi: 10.1007/s10433-023-00785-8
Zauszniewski, J. A., Musil, C. M., Burant, C. J., and Au, T. (2014). Resourcefulness training for grandmothers: preliminary evidence of effectiveness. Res. Nurs. Health 37, 42–52. doi: 10.1002/nur.21574
Keywords: grandparents caregivers, grandparenthood, caregiving, psychological wellbeing, quality of life, emotional competences, role meaning, caregiving overload
Citation: Galarraga L, Noriega C, Pérez-Rojo G and López J (2024) Emotional competences as predictors of psychological wellbeing and quality of life of supplementary grandparents caregivers. Front. Psychol. 15:1411634. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1411634
Edited by:
David Facal, University of Santiago de Compostela, SpainReviewed by:
Esther Sitges Maciá, Miguel Hernández University of Elche, SpainHui Jing Lu, Hong Kong Polytechnic University,Hong Kong SAR, China
Rosa Marina Afonso, University of Beira Interior, Portugal
Copyright © 2024 Galarraga, Noriega, Pérez-Rojo and López. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Leyre Galarraga, bGV5cmUuZ2FsYXJyYWdhY3Jpc3RvYmFsQGNldS5lcw==