Perceptions of Fairness of Support Between Older Parents and Adult Children

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This study offers valuable insights into the complex dynamics of support exchange between older parents and adult children. The use of a multi-actor approach is commendable, as it allows for a nuanced understanding of the perspectives of both parties involved. The use of distributive justice and intergenerational ambivalence theories are also appropriate strengths of the manuscript. However, I will outline below some areas of improvement that would additionally strengthen the manuscript.

 

• Reorganize the Introduction: Please add to the introduction section by:
• Clearly stating the research gap and the study's objective.  
• Linking these to the theoretical framework and methodology.  
• Highlighting the unique contributions of the study.  
  
  
• Elaborate on the Selection Process: The manuscript mentions that the 40 dyads were selected as a subsample from a larger population. Provide more details about the larger study and the criteria used to select this subsample. Explain how the selection process might have influenced the representativeness of the sample.  
  
  
• Address the Error Statements: The manuscript says "Error! Reference source not found” in several places.  There is apparently a problem with citation software being used that needs to be addressed.
  
  
• Improve Table 1: Table 1 does not include many details regarding the participants. What is their race, ethnicity, SES, employment status, etc.?  

• Strengthen the Conclusion: The conclusion should be more impactful. Summarize the key findings concisely and highlight their implications for research and practice.
  
  
• Thoroughly Proofread the Manuscript: There are some minor grammatical and typographical errors throughout the manuscript. Carefully proofread the manuscript before submitting it for publication.

 

Overall, I believe that this manuscript has the potential to make a valuable contribution to the field. However, the authors should carefully consider the suggestions outlined above to enhance the clarity, coherence, and impact of their work. I recommend that the authors revise the manuscript accordingly before submitting it for publication.

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This is an original manuscript.

The study specifically investigates the fairness of upward support (provided by adult children to their parents) and downward support (provided by parents to their children), focusing on the expectations, motivations, and perceptions of fairness within parent-child dyads.

While intergenerational support has been widely studied, this research takes a multi-actor approach, directly comparing perceptions of fairness between older parents and their adult children. Its focus on fairness in support expectations aligns closely with policy discussions surrounding caregiving, gender roles, and family responsibilities, making it particularly relevant to sociologists, policymakers, and healthcare professionals. The study’s originality and timely relevance position it as a significant contribution to the literature on intergenerational support and caregiving.

Much of the existing research on intergenerational support tends to focus on either the caregiver (adult children) or the care recipient (older parents), often overlooking the dyadic interaction between the two. This study addresses that gap by employing a multi-actor approach that examines both perspectives simultaneously. By concentrating on the dyadic nature of support, applying theoretical frameworks in innovative ways, and exploring cultural nuances in perceptions of fairness, the study effectively addresses key gaps in the field. However, it also highlights the need for future research to broaden its scope and improve generalisability.

This study makes several significant contributions to the subject area, distinguishing it from other published works. Unlike many studies that focus solely on either the caregiver (adult children) or the care recipient (older parents), this research adopts a dyadic approach, comparing and contrasting both perspectives. It highlights the complexity and ambivalence inherent in intergenerational relationships, moving beyond the conventional solidarity-conflict dichotomy. By examining the influence of cultural norms and gender roles on caregiving expectations, the study provides valuable insights into how caregiving responsibilities are distributed within families. Furthermore, its findings address the challenges of balancing informal family support with formal caregiving systems, offering a deeper understanding of these dynamics.

The authors employ a robust qualitative methodology; however, there are areas where improvements and additional controls could enhance the study's rigour and overall robustness. Below are specific recommendations for improving the methodology and implementing further controls:

Methodological Improvements

Sampling and Generalisability:

Broaden the sample to include a wider range of family structures, such as stepfamilies, foster families, and families with fractured relationships.

Address the overrepresentation of women by actively recruiting more male participants to ensure a balanced perspective.

Additional Variables and Controls:

Incorporate controls for the following factors: Health and dependency status of parents. Geographic proximity between parents and children. Socioeconomic factors, including income, education, and employment status.

These controls would allow for a more comprehensive analysis of the variability in perceptions of fairness.

Analytical and Theoretical Enhancements

Gender Dynamics:

Expand the analysis of gender-specific caregiving roles and expectations, particularly in light of the sample's gender imbalance.

Provide a more nuanced discussion of how caregiving expectations and perceptions of fairness differ between male and female participants.

Cultural and Policy Contexts:

Reflect on how the findings might apply in different cultural or policy contexts. Discuss how variations in family structures, social norms, and welfare systems influence caregiving dynamics.

Intergenerational Ambivalence:

Elaborate on the concept of intergenerational ambivalence by incorporating more detailed examples from the data that illustrate conflicting emotions or tensions in support relationships.

By addressing these areas, the study would not only strengthen its methodological and analytical framework but also enhance its relevance and applicability to broader contexts.

Data and Method: Consider providing additional details on the selection criteria and demographic characteristics of the participants.

Discussion and conclusion: The conclusion could be strengthened by linking the results of the study to implications for practice, such as implications for policy-makers or healthcare providers working with ageing populations.

It could enrich the manuscript by presenting suggestions for future research.

The conclusions are broadly consistent with the evidence and arguments presented in the study and effectively address the main research question. Below is an analysis of why this is the case:

The study’s conclusions effectively summarise the key findings, including the identification of mechanisms influencing perceptions of fairness (equity, equality, and need) and their relevance to both upward and downward support exchanges.

The evidence from interviews substantiates the argument that intergenerational support is shaped by a complex interplay of factors, such as reciprocity, emotional bonds, and perceived obligations.

The application of the concept of intergenerational ambivalence provides a compelling explanation of the emotional complexity and mixed feelings inherent in caregiving dynamics. This is reinforced by data that reveal both gratitude and guilt in support relationships.

The conclusions underscore the importance of examining both child and parent perspectives, highlighting areas of agreement and conflict within dyads. This aligns with the multi-actor methodology employed in the study and supports its overall objectives.

The conclusions are well-supported by the study's evidence and arguments, successfully addressing the main research question by providing valuable insights into perceptions of fairness in intergenerational support. Minor improvements, such as a more explicit acknowledgment of sample limitations and the inclusion of actionable policy recommendations, could further enhance the conclusions' relevance and impact.

 

The references in the study are appropriate and demonstrate a strong foundation for the research. The references are highly appropriate for the study, as they cover key theories, recent empirical studies, and relevant interdisciplinary perspectives. Minor additions, such as more cross-cultural and gender-specific studies, could further enhance the depth and applicability of the research.

 

The tables and figures in the study play an important role in summarizing complex data and supporting the analysis.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf