Author(s): Vieira, Adneusa Marques ; Vicente, Henrique (Orientador)
Date: 2016
Origin: Repositório Aberto do Instituto Superior Miguel Torga
Subject(s): Rede Social Pessoal - Personal social network; Tipologia de rede - Networks typology; Idosos - Elderly; Fam?lia - Family
Introdu??o: Por tipologias de redes entende-se o agrupamento de redes sociais com carater?sticas e padr?es semelhantes entre si. A forma??o de uma tipologia torna-se relevante, pois permite entender as diferen?as e semelhan?as, estruturais e funcionais, entre os diferentes tipos de rede, bem como identificar os seus pontos fortes e fracos. Objectivos: O presente estudo visa a cria??o de uma tipologia de rede de idosos portugueses, tendo por base a vari?vel composi??o da rede, discriminando redes exclusivamente compostas por familiares daquelas que integram elementos exteriores ao sistema familiar. Os objectivos deste estudo incluem: analisar as diferen?as e/ou semelhan?as entre estes dois tipos de rede no que concerne a vari?veis estruturais e funcionais; analisar as intercess?es entre os dois tipos de rede e vari?veis sociodemogr?ficas; analisar as diferen?as ao n?vel de vari?veis de sa?de e bem-estar entre as redes exclusivamente familiares e as diversificadas. Materiais e M?todos: Para atingir estes objectivos, aplicou-se o Instrumento de An?lise da Rede Social Pessoal - IARSP-Idosos (Guadalupe e Vicente, 2012), o Mental Health Inventory-5 (MHI-5) (Ribeiro, 2001), e o Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS) (Sim?es, 1992) a 567 idosos, com idades compreendidas entre os 65 e os 98 anos (M= 75,53; DP= 7,60), maioritariamente do sexo feminino (63%). Resultados Verificou-se que o tipo de rede apresenta associa??es estatisticamente significativas com as vari?veis sociodemogr?ficas estado civil, p(m)aternidade, zona de resid?ncia, padr?o residencial, e institucionaliza??o. O tipo de rede est? ainda associado a diferentes caracter?sticas estruturais (as redes diversificadas s?o maiores, com maior dispers?o geogr?fica e menor densidade) e diferentes caracter?sticas funcionais (as redes exclusivamente familiares apresentam maiores ?ndices de suporte emocional, material/instrumental e de companhia). Por ?ltimo, os diferentes tipos de rede n?o est?o associados significativamente ?s vari?veis de bem-estar consideradas (sa?de mental e satisfa??o com a vida), embora as pontua??es mais elevadas se verifiquem nas redes exclusivamente familiares. Discuss?o/Conclus?o: A tipologia de rede definida permitiu identificar pontos fortes e fragilidades nas redes exclusivamente familiares e diversificadas, relevantes do ponto de vista da interven??o e investiga??o. Sugerem-se estudos adicionais que adoptem tipologias mais complexas para melhor capturar a diversidade das redes sociais nas fases finais do ciclo vital. / Introduction: The construction of networks typologies consists in grouping social networks with similar patterns and characteristics. The classification of network types becomes relevant because it helps to understand the structural and functional differences and similarities between different types of networks, and identifies their strengths and weaknesses. Objectives: This study aims to create a network typology of Portuguese elders based on the network composition variable, distinguishing networks exclusively composed of family members from those that integrate elements outside the family system. The objectives include: analyze the differences and/or similarities between these two types of networks, regarding its structural and functional dimensions; analyze the intersections between network types and sociodemographic variables; analyze differences in health and well-being variables between exclusively familial networks and diverse family networks. Materials and Methods: To achieve these goals, we applied the Instrumento de An?lise da Rede Social Pessoal - IARSP-Idosos (Guadalupe e Vicente, 2012), the Mental Health Inventory-5 (MHI-5) (Ribeiro, 2001), and the Satisfaction With Life Scale (SWLS) (Sim?es, 1992) to a sample of 567 Portuguese elders, aged between 65 and 98 years (M = 75.53, SD = 7.60), mostly female (63%). Results: It was found that network type has statistically significant associations with the following socio-demographic variables: marital status, p(m)aternity, residential area, cohabitation patterns and institutionalization. Network type is also associated with different structural characteristics (diverse networks are larger, more geographically dispersed and less dense) and different functional characteristics (exclusively familial networks have higher levels of emotional, material/instrumental and companionship support). Finally, different types of network are not significantly associated to the wellbeing variables considered (mental health and life satisfaction), although exclusively familial networks encompass the highest scores. Discussion/Conclusions: The network typology allowed the identification of strengths and weaknesses of exclusively familial networks and diverse networks, relevant from the intervention and research perspective. Additional studies are suggested to adopt more complex typologies, in order to capture the diversity of social networks in the final stages of the life cycle.
