This dyadic study examined how grandparents’ and grandchildren’s perceptions of receiving accommodation, overaccommodation, and underaccommodation were indirectly associated with grandchildren’s intentions to provide instrumental care and grandparents’ expectations that they would receive instrumental care, via both parties’ communication satisfaction. For grandchildren, a series of indirect associations emerged: Grandchildren’s perceptions of receiving accommodation positively predicted grandchildren’s communication satisfaction; grandchildren’s perceptions of receiving overaccommodation and underaccommodation negatively predicted grandchildren’s communication satisfaction. Grandchildren’s communication satisfaction then positively predicted grandchildren’s intentions to provide instrumental care. In contrast, no indirect associations emerged involving the grandparent versions of the variables. Rather, for grandparents, a direct association was observed: Grandparents’ perceptions of receiving accommodation directly and positively predicted grandparents’ expectations to receive instrumental care. This discrepancy in results (indirect associations for grandchildren, a direct association for grandparents) is discussed in terms of the mediating mechanism phase of communication accommodation theory scholarship.
BarkerV. (2007). Young adults’ reactions to grandparent painful self-disclosure: The influence of grandparent sex and overall motives for communicating. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 64, 195–215. https://doi.org/10.2190/ktnu-0373-20w7-4781
2.
BernholdQ. S.GilesH. (2018). Ethnic differences in grandparent-grandchild affectionate communication. Communication Reports, 31, 188–202. https://doi.org/10.1080/08934215.2018.1488984
3.
BlantonP. W. (2013). Family caregiving to frail elders: Experiences of young adult grandchildren as auxiliary caregivers. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 11, 18–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/15350770.2013.755076
4.
BrussoniM. J.BoonS. D. (1998). Grandparental impact in young adults’ relationships with their closest grandparents: The role of relationship strength and emotional closeness. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 46, 267–286. https://doi.org/10.2190/2B7B-E3LH-74JJ-UJRY
5.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2009, December11). QuickStats: Percentage of adults with activity limitations, by age group and type of limitation—National Health Interview Survey, United States, 2008. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5848a6.htm
6.
CongerR. D.CongerK. J.MartinM. J. (2010). Socioeconomic status, family processes, and individual development. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72, 685–704. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00725.x
7.
CouplandN.CouplandJ.GilesH.HenwoodK. (1988). Accommodating the elderly: Invoking and extending a theory. Language in Society, 17, 1–41. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0047404500012574
8.
DragojevicM.GasiorekJ.GilesH. (2016). Accommodative strategies as core of the theory. In GilesH. (Ed.), Communication accommodation theory: Negotiating personal and social identities across contexts (pp. 36–59). Cambridge University Press.
ForsytheK. E.LedbetterA. M. (2015). Relational uncertainty, self-other inclusion, and communication satisfaction as predictors of friendship relational maintenance, and how equity changes the story. Communication Studies, 66, 321–340. https://doi.org/10.1080/10510974.2015.1018444
11.
FowlerC. (2015). The role of shared family identity and future time perspective in shaping the outcomes of grandparents’ positive and negative social behaviors. Journal of Family Communication, 15, 20–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/15267431.2014.980822
12.
FowlerC.SolizJ. (2010). Responses of young adult grandchildren to grandparents’ painful self-disclosures. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 29, 75–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X09351680
13.
FruhaufC. A.JarrottS. E.AllenK. R. (2006). Grandchildren’s perceptions of caring for grandparents. Journal of Family Issues, 27, 887–911. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192513X05286019
14.
GasiorekJ. (2013). “I was impolite to her because that’s how she was to me”: Perceptions of motive and young adults’ communicative responses to underaccommodation. Western Journal of Communication, 77, 604–624. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570314.2013.778421
15.
GasiorekJ. (2015). Perspective-taking, inferred motive, and perceived accommodation in nonaccommodative conversations. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 34, 577–586. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X15584681
16.
GasiorekJ. (2016). The “dark side” of CAT: Nonaccommodation. In GilesH. (Ed.), Communication accommodation theory: Negotiating personal relationships and social identities across contexts (pp. 85–104). Cambridge University Press.
17.
GasiorekJ.GilesH. (2012). Effects of inferred motive on evaluations of nonaccommodative communication. Human Communication Research, 38, 309–331. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2958.2012.01426.x
18.
GasiorekJ.GilesH. (2015). The role of inferred motive in processing nonaccommodation: Evaluations of communication and speakers. Western Journal of Communication, 79, 456–471. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570314.2015.1066030
19.
GilesH. (Ed.). (2016a). Communication accommodation theory: Negotiating personal relationships and social identities across contexts. Cambridge University Press.
20.
GilesH. (2016b). The social origins of CAT. In GilesH. (Ed.), Communication accommodation theory: Negotiating personal relationships and social identities across contexts (pp. 1–12). Cambridge University Press.
21.
GilesH.SolizJ. (2015). Communication accommodation theory: A situated framework for relational, family, and intergroup dynamics. In BraithwaiteD. O.SchrodtP. (Eds.), Engaging theories in interpersonal communication: Multiple perspectives (2nd ed., pp. 161–174). SAGE.
22.
GoldD. A. (2012). An examination of instrumental activities of daily living assessment in older adults and mild cognitive impairment. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 34, 11–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2011.614598
23.
HarwoodJ. (2000). Communicative predictors of solidarity in the grandparent-grandchild relationship. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 17, 743–766. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407500176003
HechtM. L. (1993). A research odyssey: Toward the development of a communication theory of identity. Communication Monographs, 60, 76–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637759309376297
26.
IharaE. S.HorioB. M.TompkinsC. J. (2012). Grandchildren caring for grandparents: Modeling the complexity of family caregiving. Journal of Social Service Research, 38, 619–636. https://doi.org/10.1080/01488376.2012.711684
27.
KarneyB. R.BradburyT. N. (2005). Contextual influences on marriage: Implications for policy and intervention. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 171–174. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00358.x
28.
KennyD. A.KashyD. A.CookW. L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. Guilford.
29.
Kincade NorburnJ. E.BernardS. L.KonradT. R.WoomertA.DeFrieseG. H.KalsbeekW. D.KochG. G.OryM. G. (1995). Self-care and assistance from others in coping with functional status limitations among a national sample of older adults. Journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 50B, S101–S109. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/50b.2.s101
30.
LaiD. W. L. (2012). Effect of financial costs on caregiving burden of family caregivers of older adults. SAGE Open, 2, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244012470467
31.
LinM. C.HarwoodJ. (2003). Accommodation predictors of grandparent-grandchild relational solidarity in Taiwan. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 20, 537–563. https://doi.org/10.1177/02654075030204006
PusateriK. B.RoachéD. J.KamJ. A. (2016). Grandparents’ and young adult grandchildren’s identity gaps and perceived caregiving intentions: An actor-partner interdependence model. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 33, 191–216. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407514568750
37.
RittenourC.SolizJ. (2009). Communicative and relational dimensions of shared family identity and relational intentions in mother-in-law/daughter-in-law relationships: Developing a conceptual model for mother-in-law/daughter-in-law research. Western Journal of Communication, 73, 67–90. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570310802636334
38.
RyanE. B.GilesH.BartolucciG.HenwoodK. (1986). Psycholinguistic and social psychological components of communication by and with the elderly. Language and Communication, 6, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/0271-5309(86)90002-9
39.
SassJ. S. (2000). Emotional labor as cultural performance: The communication of caregiving in a nonprofit nursing home. Western Journal of Communication, 64, 330–358. https://doi.org/10.1080/10570310009374679
40.
SolizJ.ColanerC. (2018). Communication accommodation theory and communication theory of identity: Theories of communication and identity. In BraithwaiteD. O.SuterE. A.FloydK. (Eds.), Engaging theories in family communication: Multiple perspectives (2nd ed., pp. 75–86). Routledge.
41.
SolizJ.GilesH. (2014). Relational and identity processes in communication: A contextual and meta-analytical review of communication accommodation theory. In CohenE. (Ed.), Communication yearbook (Vol. 38, pp. 108–143). SAGE.
42.
SpeerR. B.GilesH.DenesA. (2013). Investigating stepparent-stepchild interactions: The role of communication accommodation. Journal of Family Communication, 13, 218–241. https://doi.org/10.1080/15267431.2013.768248
43.
WatsonB. M.GalloisC. (1999). Communication accommodation between patients and health professionals: Themes and strategies in satisfying and unsatisfying encounters. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 9, 167–180. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.1999.tb00170.x
44.
YzerM. (2013). Reasoned action theory: Persuasion as belief-based behavior change. In DillardJ. P.ShenL. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of persuasion: Developments in theory and practice (2nd ed., pp. 120–136). SAGE.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
