OU Main Page
Adult Sibling Relationships: A Comparison
Across the Late Adolescence to Late
Adulthood Years
Robert B. Stewart, Andrea L. Kozak, Lynn M. Tingley, Jean M. Goddard, Elissa M. Blake and Wendy A. Cassel
Originally presented at the Conference on Human Development
Birmingham, Alabama, April, 1996
Contents
Abstract
The importance of the sibling relationship has been recognized throughout the past decade by developmental psychologists whose collective research efforts extend across the entire life span. It has been estimated that 85% of adults in the United States have at least one sibling and that the sibling relationship is the longest lasting of all familial affiliations. The primary purpose of the present study was to validate the classifications of current sibling relationships provided by the Sibling Type Questionnaire--Now Version by obtaining a description of the nature of the sibling relationship over the adult phases of the life span from a representative sample of adults ranging in age from late adolescence to late adulthood. A multicultural sample of 658 males and females ranging in age from 18 to 86 years was surveyed. Cluster analyses were conducted and respondents were partitioned into five groups (Supportive, Longing, Loyal, Hostile, and Competitive) based on 'Now' descriptions. All respondents completed the Adult Sibling Relationship Questionnaire (ASRQ) to provide a means of assessing the validity of the 'Now' cluster solution by demonstrating the presence of significant differences between the clusters on variables not used in the original analysis. Differences in the nature of sibling relationships associated with each phase of adult life (late adolescence, early adulthood, middle adulthood, and late adulthood) and the impact of relative birth order (oldest with youngest, oldest with middle, middle with middle, and middle with youngest) were also assessed.
Introduction
The importance of the sibling relationship has been recognized throughout the past decade by developmental psychologists whose collective research efforts extend across the entire life-span. The sibling relationship has been described as the most enduring of all familial relationships, with several researchers commenting on the uniqueness of the sibling bond due to the shared genetic and social backgrounds of the siblings and the longevity of their relationship. The degree to which siblings develop a close and influential relationship, as well as the degree to which they exhibit such qualities as warmth, power, emotional and instrumental support, interpersonal conflict, or apathy has been utilized to categorize and describe sibling relationships. Typically a given researcher will focus attention on a limited segment of the life-span, while other researchers, often employing different measurement instruments, attend to other segments of the life-span. The primary purpose of the present study was to obtain a representative sample of adults ranging in age from late adolescence to late adulthood so that a comparable description of the nature and impact of the sibling relation would exist over the adult phases of the life-span.
A sample of 658 adults between the ages of 18 and 86 years of age were interviewed and each completed three standardized scales: [1] the Adult Sibling Relationship Questionnaire (ASRQ) (Lanthier & Stocker, 1993), [2] the "Then" version of the Sibling Type Questionnaire (Stewart, Verbrugge & Beilfuss, 1994) and [3] the "Now" version of the Sibling Type Questionnaire (Stewart, Verbrugge & Beilfuss, 1994). The purpose of the interview was to gather information on their personal profile, family life, and evaluations about their past and current relationship with a target sibling. Internal consistency coefficients (Cronbach alphas) were calculated for each of the instruments utilized. The five subscales of the "Then" questionnaire had coefficients ranging from .79 to .91, and the five subscales of the "Now" questionnaire had values ranging from .74 to .96. The three summary scales of the ASRQ were all internally consistent: Warmth, .98; Conflict, .95, and Rivalry, .86.
The responses to the "Now" version of the Sibling Type Questionnaire were used to provide summary scores on the five dimensions (mutuality, criticism, apathy, competitiveness, and longing) previously identified by Stewart et al (1995). These five factors were then used to cluster subjects into groups with similar characteristics. Clustering of similar cases was accomplished using the pkm package of the BMDP series. Preliminary analyses using pseudo-T2 statistics and previous research reported by Stewart et al. (1975) indicated that the sample should be partitioned into five groups. The five groups derived from the "Now" data, and the percent of cases in each group, are as follows: [1] the Supportive group -- highly mutual, intimate, supportive siblings, N = 192, 29% of sample; [2] the Longing group -- highly mutual, intimate, supportive siblings who now longed for one another, N = 175, 27% of sample; [3] the Loyal group -- highly apathetic siblings who shared very little mutuality or intimacy, N = 127, 19% of sample; [4] the Competitive group -- moderate to high levels of criticism and competition, but with average levels of mutuality and longing, N = 119, 18% of sample, and [5] the Hostile group, extremely high criticism and apathy, with extremely low mutuality, intimacy, and longing, N = 45, 7% of sample. Simplified clustering decisions were derived using upper and lower quartile values to partition subjects into high and low groups on each of the factor scores. These clustering rules matched the results of the original algorithm in 85% of the "Now" cases.
A Comparison Across Four Stages of Life
Robert Havinghurst (1972) developed a theory of ten developmental stages which people must accomplish throughout their lives. Within each stage are developmental tasks that one must achieve in order to move to the next stage. These developmental stages are an interesting tool to use when speculating how relationships might change throughout one's lifetime. This cross-sectional aspect of the overall study used four of the ten Havinghurst's stages to determine if the nature of the sibling relationship varied systematically across four of the ten stages. The four stages studied were late adolescence, early adulthood, middle adulthood, and late adulthood.
The subjects' responses on the ASRQ were analyzed using in a series of MANOVA and ANOVA procedures (p4v package of the BMDP series). Respondent gender, sibling gender, and respondent age group were used as between groups factors with analyses being conducted with four sets of dependent variables: the three summary domain scores derived from the ASRQ, warmth, conflict, and rivalry; the nine subscores of the warmth domain; the four subscores of the conflict domain; and the two subscores of the rivalry domain. The followed effects were detected:
[1] A significant multivariate effect for age group was detected with the warmth measures (F = 2.97, p <.0001). Only three of the subscales significant age group effects: affection; admiration; and, instrumental support. Affection and admiration increased as age group shifted from younger to older groups. Instrumental support decreased as age group shifted from younger to older groups. This suggests that siblings have more affection for each other as they progress from late adolescence to late adulthood, while they decrease their dependence on each other for instrumental support as they move through these four stages.
[2] A significant multivariate effect for age group was detected with the conflict measures (F = 14.15, p < .0001). All four subscales revealed highly significant age group effects. Quarreling, antagonism, competition, and dominance had means that decreased as age group increased. This may imply that siblings tend to fight less as they progress from late adolescence to late adult.
[3] A significant multivariate effect for age group was detected with the rivalry measures (F = 4.05, p <.0001). These data need to be treated cautiously however. Many of the older subjects reported having difficulty with issues focusing on maternal or paternal partiality as they resisted stating anything negative about a deceased parent. Overall, these data suggest that adult sibling relationships become more positive throughout one's lifetime, because conflict decreases as a person ages and warmth measures such as affection and admiration increase.
The Impact of Birth Order on the Nature of Sibling Relationships
Birth order has been a special interest of many in the field of sibling research. In prior research, attributes of individuals in particular positions in the family have been studied, but a comparison of sibling dyads composed of individuals of various birth orders has been overlooked. The sample was partitioned into four different groups based on the birth order of the siblings in the target dyad. This was determined by the respondent and his/her sibling's positions in the family. The four groups were combinations of the oldest and a middle sibling, two middle siblings, a middle and the youngest sibling, and the oldest and the youngest sibling.
The subjects' responses on the ASRQ were analyzed using in a series of MANOVA and ANOVA procedures (p4v package of the BMDP series). Respondent gender, sibling gender, and birth order group were used as between groups factors with analyses being conducted with four sets of dependent variables: the three summary domain scores derived from the ASRQ, warmth, conflict, and rivalry; the nine subscores of the warmth domain; the four subscores of the conflict domain; and the two subscores of the rivalry domain. The following effects were detected:
[1] A significant multivariate effect for the birth order factor was detected with the conflict measures (F = 2.53, p <.01). All four subscales revealed highly significant univariate birth order effects. Tukey Honest Significant Difference post hoc tests were calculated for the means of all the subscales of conflict. With respect to quarreling, the middle-middle dyad was significantly different from the other three groups in that less quarreling was reported for group. Like quarreling, antagonism was significantly lower in the middle-middle dyad compared to the other types of dyads. Dyads including an oldest sibling were reported to involve significantly more competition than those including middle siblings. Finally, with respect to dominance, analyses indicated that the middle-middle dyad involved significantly less of this behavior than did the oldest-middle or oldest-youngest dyad.
[2] A significant multivariate effect for the birth order factor was detected with the rivalry measures (F = 2.62, p < .05). Both subscales of this domain revealed significant univariate birth order effects. Post hoc tests revealed that maternal partiality is greater among dyads involving middle born children, and lowest among oldest-youngest dyads. Father partiality was found to be greatest with oldest-middle dyads, and not significantly different among the three other types of sibling dyads.
[3] A number of significant multivariate and univariate effects were detected involving respondent gender effects, sibling gender effects, and the interaction between respondent and sibling gender. Briefly, these effects indicated that females were warmer toward their siblings than were males, that female target siblings received more warmth than did male target siblings, and that male respondents reported more competition with their siblings than did their female counterparts, especially if the target sibling was also a male.
Unraveling the Typologies of Adult Sibling Relationships
Resent research on sibling relationships (Stewart, Verbrugge & Beilfuss, 1994) has identified five different types of sibling dyads based on the subjects' description of either their past evaluation or their current sibling relationship. The subjects in this study were asked to describe their current relationship with one of their siblings. The procedures used to determine sibling type were described in the second presentation of this poster/symposium. Briefly, the current sample of 658 subjects replicated the work reported by Stewart et al. (1994) in that five types of current sibling relationships were revealed: 1) a Supportive and Intimate group, 2) a Longing group who once were Intimate, 3) a Close and Competitive group, 4) a Loyal group, and 5) a Hostile group.
The subjects' responses on the ASRQ were analyzed using in a series of MANOVA and ANOVA procedures (p4v package of the BMDP series). Respondent gender, sibling gender, and sibling type were used as between groups factors with analyses being conducted with four sets of dependent variables: the three summary domain scores derived from the ASRQ, warmth, conflict, and rivalry; the nine subscores of the warmth domain; the four subscores of the conflict domain; and the two subscores of the rivalry domain. The follows effects were detected:
[1] A significant multivariate effect for the sibling type factor was detected with the warmth measures (F = 21.57, p < .0001), and the conflict measures (F = 45.13, p < .0001). All nine subscales of the warmth domain and all four subscales of the conflict domain revealed highly significant univariate sibling type effects.
[2] Subjects classified as Competitive described their relationship as one exhibiting competition and dominance as well as a high degree of warmth. Affection, admiration, acceptance, and contact were especially characteristic of this type of sibling relationship. Subjects classified as Hostile described their relationship as one of much quarreling and antagonism. This relationship can be further characterized as being one exhibiting primarily conflict, as every measure of warmth was lower or relatively absent. Even though the Competitive group reported some degree of conflict (i.e., dominance and competition in particular), these subjects reported a great deal of warmth as well. The Hostile was much more of a conflicting relationship with a high degree of antagonism and quarreling. Subjects classified as Longing described their relationship with being high in emotional support, acceptance,affection, intimacy, and similarity, but not high in contact. Subjects classified as Supportive described their relationship in such as way as to provide the highest levels of all the warmth measures. They felt a high degree of admiration, acceptance, affection as well as similarity, intimacy, emotional support, instrumental support and contact. Conflict was exceptionally low in this group. Subjects classified as Loyal described their relationship in a way that leads them to be characterized as more distant. This group was relatively low on both warmth and conflict measures.
Created by R. Stewart, 2/27/97