Research has shown that people tend to perceive the national and regional groups to which they belong as temporally persistent. In this paper we conducted two studies to investigate that the family may also be perceived as having different degrees of continuity through time, and that those perceptions have implications on family identity and psychological well-being. In the first study (N = 149; with a mean age of 23, SD = 5.7), we found that perceived family continuity was positively correlated with several family related variables (e.g., family functioning, perceived family entitativity) and with psychological well-being. Our second study (N = 152; with a mean age of 40.80, SD = 12.68), replicated and extended previous findings by showing that perceived family continuity was also positively related to generative concern. Furthermore, we tested a model which revealed that perceived family continuity had a positive influence on family identification, which in turn enhanced psychological well-being. It is argued that these findings confirm the necessity to treat the continuity of the family group and the implications of family identity on well-being.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArbuckleJ. L. (2003). Amos 5.0: Update to the Amos user's guide.Chicago: SmallWaters Corporation.
2.
BanduraA. (2011). A social cognitive perspective on positive psychology. Revista de Psicología Social, 26, 7–20.
3.
BarnettR. (2004). Women and multiple roles: Myths and reality. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 12, 158–164.
4.
ChandlerM. J.LalondeC. E.SokolB. W.HallettD. (2003). Personal persistence, identity development and suicide: A study of native and non-native North American adolescents. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 68, 1–130.
5.
ChandlerM. J.ProulxT. (2008). Personal persistence and persistent peoples: Continuities in the lives of individual and whole cultural communities. InSaniF. (Ed.), Self continuity: Individual and collective perspectives (pp. 213–226). New York: Psychology Press.
6.
DíazD.Rodriguez-CarvajalR.BlancoA. MORENO-JIMENEZ. B.GallardoI.ValleC.Van DierendonckD. (2006). Spanish adaptation of the Psychological Well-being Scales. Psicothema, 18, 572–577.
7.
DoosjeB.EllemersN.SpearsR. (1995). Perceived intragroup variability as a function of group status and identification. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31, 410–436.
8.
EpsteinN. B.BaldwinL. M.BishopD. S. (1983). The McMaster family assessment device. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 9, 171–180.
9.
FivushR.BohanekJ. G.DukeM. (2008). The intergenerational self: Subjective perspective and family history. InSaniF. (Ed.), Self continuity: Individual and collective perspectives (pp. 131–143). New York: Psychology Press.
10.
FivushR.NelsonK. (2006). Parent-child reminiscing locates the self in the past. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 24, 235–251.
11.
HaslamA. (2000). Psychology in organizations. The social identity approach.London: Sage Publications.
12.
HaslamC.HolmeA.HaslamA.IyerA.JettenJ.WilliamsW. H. (2008). Maintaining group memberships: Social identity continuity predicts well-being after stroke. Neuropsychological Rehabilitation, 18, 671–691.
13.
HaslamA.JettenJ.PostmesT.HaslamC. (2009). Social identity, health and well-being: An emerging agenda for applied psychology. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 58, 1–23.
14.
HerreraM.SaniF.BoweM. (2010). Percepción de continuidad e identificación grupal: implicaciones para el bienestar social. Revista de Psicología Social, 25, 203–214.
15.
HoggM. A. (1996). Intragroup processes, group structure and social identity. InRobinsonW. P. (Ed.), Social groups and identities: Developing the legacy of Henri Tajfel. (pp. 65–93). Oxford: Butterworth Heineman.
16.
JettenJ.HaslamC.HaslamA. (Eds.) (in press). The social cure: Identity, health, and well-being.New York: Psychology Press.
KellasJ. K. (2005). Family ties: Communicating identity through jointly told family stories. Communication Monographs, 72, 365–389.
19.
KerpelmanJ. L.SchvaneveldtP. L. (1999). Young adults' anticipated identity importance of career, marital, and parental roles: Comparisons of men and women with different role balance orientations. Sex Roles, 41, 189–217.
20.
KeyesC. L.RyffC. D. (1998). Generativity in adult lives: Social structural contours and quality of life consequences. InMcadamsD. P.de St. AubinE. (Ed.), Generativity and adult development: How and why we care for the next generation (pp. 227–263). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
21.
KingD. A.WynneL. C. (2004). The emergence of “family integrity” in later life. Family Process, 43, 7–21.
22.
KlineR. B. (1998). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling.New York: Guilford Press.
23.
LampinenJ. M.OdegardT. N.LedingJ. K. (2004). Diachronic disunity. InBeikeD. R.LampinenJ. M.BehrendD. A. (Ed.), The self and memory (pp. 227–253). New York: Psychology Press.
24.
MaccallumR. C.AustinJ. T. (2000). Applications of structural equation modelling in psychological research. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 201–226.
25.
McadamsD. P.DeSTAubinE. (1992). A theory of generativity and its assessment through self-report, behavioral acts, and narrative themes in autobiography. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 1003–1015.
26.
MooreC.LemmonK. (Eds.) (2001). The self in time: Developmental perspectives.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
27.
PrattM. W.FieseB. H. (2004). Family stories and the life course: Across time and generations.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
28.
ReicherS.HopkinsN. (2001). Self and Nation.London: Sage.
29.
RosenzweigR.ThelenD. (1998). The presence of the past: Popular uses of history in American life.New York: Columbia university Press.
30.
RyffC. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 1069–1081.
SaniF. (in press). Group identification, social relationships and health. In JettenJ.HaslamC.HaslamA. S. (Ed.), The social cure: Identity, health, and well-being.New York: Psychology Press.
33.
SaniF.BoweM.HerreraM. (2008a). Perceived collective continuity: Seeing groups as temporally enduring entities. InSaniF. (Ed.), Self continuity: Individual and collective perspectives (pp. 159–172). New York: Psychology Press.
34.
SaniF.BoweM.HerreraM. (2008b). Perceived collective continuity and social well-being: Exploring the connections. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 365–374.
35.
SaniF.BoweM.HerreraM.MannaC.CossaT.MiaoX.ZhouY. (2007). Perceived collective continuity: Seeing groups as entities that move through time. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 1118–1134.
36.
ShieldsC. B.KingD. A.WynneL. C. (1995). Interventions with later-life families. InMikesellD. D.LustermanD. D.McdanielS. H. (Ed.), Integrating family therapy: Handbook of family psychology and systems theory (pp. 141–158). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
37.
SpanierG. B. (1989). Bequeathing family continuity. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 51, 3–13.
38.
SussmanM. B. (1954). Family continuity: Selective factors which affect relationships between families at generational levels. Marriage and Family Living, 16, 112–120.
39.
TriandisH. C. (1989). The self and social-behaviour in differing cultural contexts. Psychological Review, 96, 506–520.
