The Relative Contribution of Ethnicity Versus Socioeconomic Status in Explaining Differences in Disability and Receipt of Informal Care
Sharon L. Tennstedt, Bei‐Hung Chang
Abstract
Sharon L. Tennstedt, Bei‐Hung Chang
Abstract
Data from a comparative study of 1975 African American, Puerto Rican, and non-Hispanic White persons age 60 and older in a large Northeastern city were used to investigate the relative contribution of ethnicity and socioeconomic status (SES) to explaining differences in the need for and receipt of informal care. It was hypothesized that differences in disability would be related largely to SES, whereas ethnicity would account for most of the differences in the amount of informal care. The results of a path analysis argue in favor of a cultural rather than a socioeconomic explanation for between-group differences. SES had no direct effect on disability when controlling for ethnicity. Ethnicity did explain between-group differences in the amount of care. Even when controlling for disability, elders in the two minority groups received more informal care than did older White persons. The findings illuminate the important role played by ethnicity in explaining an older person's need for and receipt of long-term care assistance.
OpenAlex reports 94 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Data from a comparative study of 1975 African American, Puerto Rican, and non-Hispanic White persons age 60 and older in a large Northeastern city were used to investigate the relative contribution of ethnicity and socioeconomic status (SES) to explaining differences in the need for and receipt of informal care. It was hypothesized that differences in disability would be related largely to SES, whereas ethnicity would account for most of the differences in the amount of informal care. The results of a path analysis argue in favor of a cultural rather than a socioeconomic explanation for between-group differences. SES had no direct effect on disability when controlling for ethnicity. Ethnicity did explain between-group differences in the amount of care. Even when controlling for disability, elders in the two minority groups received more informal care than did older White persons. The findings illuminate the important role played by ethnicity in explaining an older person's need for and receipt of long-term care assistance.
Key concepts: Receipt, Ethnic group, Socioeconomic status, White (mutation), Gerontology, Psychology, Demography, Medicine