Background: Findings from existing research exploring whether positive social exchanges can help to offset (or ‘buffer’ against) the harmful effects of negative social exchanges on mental health have been inconsistent. This could be because the existing research is characterized by different approaches to studying various contexts of ‘cross-domain’ and ‘within-domain’ buffering, and/or because the nature of buffering effects varies according to sociodemographic characteristics that underlie different aspects of social network structure and function. Objective: The purpose of this study was to examine whether the buffering effects of global perceptions of positive exchanges on the link between global negative exchanges and mental health varied as a function of age and gender. Method: We used a series of regressions in a sample of 556 Australian older adults (ages 55–94) to test for three-way interactions among gender, positive social exchanges, and negative social exchanges, as well as age and positive and negative social exchanges, in predicting mental health, controlling for years of education, partner status, and physical functioning. Results: We found that positive exchanges buffered against negative exchanges for younger old adults, but not for older old adults, and for women, but not for men. Conclusions: Our findings are interpreted in light of research on individual differences in coping responses and interpersonal goals among late middle-aged and older adults. Our findings are in line with gerontological theories (e.g. socioemotional selectivity theory), and imply that an intervention aimed at using positive social exchanges as a means of coping with negative social exchanges might be more successful among particular populations (i.e. women, ‘younger’ old adults).

Keywords:
Social relations, Social support, Mental health, Socioemotional selectivity theory
1.
Antonucci TC, Akiyama H: An examination of sex differences in social support among older men and women. Sex Roles 1987;17:737–749.
2.
Cohen S, Wills TA: Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis. Psychol Bull 1985;98:310–357.
3.
House JS, Landis KR, Umberson D: Social relationships and health. Science 1988;241:540–545.
4.
Pagel M, Erdly W, Becker J: Social networks: we get by with (and in spite of) a little help from our friends. J Pers Soc Psychol 1987;53:793–804.
5.
Finch J, Okun M, Pool G, Ruehlman L: A comparison of the influence of conflictual and supportive social interactions on psychological distress. J Pers 1999;67:581–621.
6.
Rook KS: Promoting social bonding: strategies for helping the lonely and socially isolated. Am Psychol 1984;39:1389–1407.
7.
Newsom JT, Mahan TL, Rook KS, Krause N: Stable negative social exchanges and health. Health Psychol 2008;27:78–86.
8.
Schuster TL, Kessler RC, Aseltine RH Jr: Supportive interactions, negative interactions, and depressed mood. Am J Community Psychol 1990;18:423–438.
9.
Lepore SJ: Social conflict, social support, and psychological distress: evidence of cross-domain buffering effects. J Pers Soc Psychol 1992;63:857–867.
10.
Okun MA, Keith VM: Effects of positive and negative social exchanges with various sources on depressive symptoms in younger and older adults. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 1998;53:4–20.
11.
Antonucci TC, Jackson J: Social support, interpersonal efficacy, and health: a life course perspective; in Carstensen LL, Edelstein BA (eds): Handbook of Clinical Gerontology. New York, Pergamon, 1987, pp 291–311.
12.
Bertera E: Mental health in U.S. adults: the role of positive social support and social negativity in personal relationships. J Soc Pers Relat 2005;22:33–48.
13.
Birditt KS, Fingerman KL, Almeida DM: Age differences in exposure and reactions to interpersonal tensions: a daily diary study. Psychol Aging 2005;20:330–340.
14.
Fiori KL, Smith J, Antonucci TC: Social network types among older adults: a multidimensional approach. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 2007;62:322–330.
15.
Rook KS: Positive and negative social exchanges: weighing their effects in later life. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 1997;52:167–169.
16.
Newsom JT, Rook KS, Nishishiba M, Sorkin DH, Mahan TL: Understanding the relative importance of positive and negative social exchanges: examining specific domains and appraisals. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 2005;60:304–309.
17.
Rook KS: Parallels in the study of social support and social strain. J Soc Clin Psychol 1990;9:118–132.
18.
Orth-Gomer K, Wamala SP, Horsten M, Schenck-Gustafsson K, Schneiderman N, Mittleman MA: Marital stress worsens prognosis in women with coronary heart disease: The Stockholm Female Coronary Risk Study. JAMA 2000;284:3008–3014.
19.
Uchino BN, Cacioppo JT, Kiecolt-Glaser JK: The relationship between social support and physiological processes: a review with emphasis on underlying mechanisms and implications for health. Psychol Bull 1996;119:488–531.
20.
Seeman TE, Berkman LF, Charpentier PA, Blazer DG: Behavioral and psychosocial predictors of physical performance: MacArthur studies of successful aging. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 1995;50:177–183.
21.
Newsom JT, Nishishiba M, Morgan DL, Rook KS: The relative importance of three domains of positive and negative social exchanges: a longitudinal model with comparable measures. Psychol Aging 2003;18:746–754.
22.
Kiecolt-Glaser JK, Malarkey WB, Chee MA, Newton T, Cacioppo JT, Mao HY, Glaser R: Negative behavior during marital conflict is associated with immunological down-regulation. Psychosom Med 1993;55:395–409.
23.
Cohen S, Tyrrell DAJ, Smith AP: Psychological stress and susceptibility to the common cold. N Engl J Med 1991;325:606–612.
24.
Coyne JC, Downey G: Social factors and psychopathology: stress, social support, and coping processes. Annu Rev Psychol 1991;42:401–425.
25.
Cohen S: Social relationships and health. Am Psychol 2004;59:676–684.
26.
Sorkin D, Rook KS: Dealing with negative social exchanges in later life: coping responses, goals, and effectiveness. Psychol Aging 2006;21:715–725.
27.
Lazarus RS, Folkman S: Stress, Appraisal, and Coping. New York, Springer, 1984.
28.
Lakey B, Tardiff TA, Drew JB: Negative social interactions: assessment and relations to social support, cognition, and psychological distress. J Soc Clin Psychol 1994;13:42–62.
29.
Taylor SE, Klein LC, Lewis BP, Gruenewald TL, Gurung RA, Updegraff JA: Biobehavioral responses to stress in females: tend-and-befriend, not fight-or-flight. Psychol Rev 2000;107:411–29.
30.
Wethington E, Kessler RC: Perceived support, received support, and adjustment to stressful life events. J Health Soc Behav 1986;27:78–89.
31.
Thoits P: Stress, coping, and social support processes: where are we? What next? J Health Soc Behav 1995;35:53–79.
32.
Walen HR, Lachman ME: Social support and strain from partner, family, and friends: costs and benefits for men and women in adulthood. J Soc Pers Relat 2000;17:5–30.
33.
Carstensen LL: Social and emotional patterns in adulthood: support for socioemotional selectivity theory. Psychol Aging 1992;7:331–338.
34.
Birditt K, Fingerman K: Do age differences in close and problematic family ties reflect the pool of available relatives? J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 2003;58:80–87.
35.
Blanchard-Fields F: Everyday problem solving and emotion: an adult developmental perspective. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 2007;16:26–31.
36.
Krause N: Social support; in Binstock RH (ed): Handbook of Aging and the Social Sciences, ed 5. San Diego, Academic Press, 2001, pp 272–311.
37.
Wenger GC: Social networks and gerontology. Rev Clin Gerontol 1996;6:285–293.
38.
Kessler RC, Essex M: Marital status and depression: the importance of coping resources. Soc Forces 1982;61:484–507.
39.
Kiecolt-Glaser JK, Newton TL: Marriage and health: his and hers. Psychol Bull 2001;127:472–503.
40.
van Tilburg T, van Groenou MB: Network and health changes among older Dutch adults. J Soc Issues 2002;58:697–713.
41.
Unger JB, McAvay G, Bruce ML, Berkman L, Seeman T: Variation in the impact of social network characteristics on physical functioning in elderly persons: MacArthur studies of successful aging. J Gerontol Series B 1999;54:S245–S251.
42.
Blazer D, Burchett B, Service C, George LK: The association of age and depression among the elderly: an epidemiologic exploration. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 1991;46:M210–M215.
43.
Smith J, Borchelt M, Maier H, Jopp D: Health and well-being in the young old and oldest old. J Soc Issues 2002;58:715–732.
44.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS): Age by Sex, Census Tables, Census of Population and Housing 2006, Cat. No. 2068.0. Canberra, Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2007.
45.
Pilkington PD, Windsor TD, Crisp DA: Volunteering and subjective well-being in mid-life and older adults: the role of supportive social networks. J Gerontol Series B 2012;67:249–260.
46.
Lusas N, Windsor TD, Caldwell TM, Rodgers B: Psychological distress in non-drinkers: associations with previous heavy drinking and current social relationships. Alcohol Alcohol 2009;45:95–102.
47.
Hays RD: R36 H.S.I. RAND 36 – 36 Health Status Inventory. Orlando, The Psychological Corporation/Harcourt Brace & Company, 1998.
48.
Ware JE, Sherbourne CD: The MOS 36-Itcm Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 1992;30:473–483.
49.
Aiken LS, West SG: Multiple Regression: Testing and Interpreting Interactions. Newbury Park, Sage, 1991.
50.
Maxwell SE, Delaney HD: Designing Experiments and Analyzing Data: A Model Comparison Perspective. Mahwah, Lawrence Erlbaum, 2004.
51.
Swain SO: Men’s friendships with women: intimacy, sexual boundaries, and the informant role; in Peter M (ed): Men’s Friendships: Research on Men and Masculinities. Newbury Park, Sage, 1992, vol 2, pp 153–171.
© 2012 S. Karger AG, Basel
2012
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.