Level and change in economic, social, and personal resources for people retiring from paid work and other labour market statuses

Abstract

Well-being in retirement is thought to depend on person’s level of resources and how his or her resources change during retirement. However, to date few studies have directly investigated resource trajectories during retirement. The current study therefore examines how economic, personal, and social-relational resources change during the retirement transition for people retiring from paid employment and for people retiring from other, non-working labour market statuses (e.g. disability pension, homemaker, unemployment). Based on four representative baseline samples of the German Ageing Survey (1996, 2002, 2008, and 2014) and their respective 6-year follow-up interviews, we identified N = 586 retirees. We then used dual change score models to separately estimate the level and change in income, health, activity, family and non-family network size, and social support for people retiring from paid work (n = 384) and people retiring from other statuses (n = 202) adjusted for age, gender, education, region, period, and time since retirement. Overall, we found that resources changed only modestly during the retirement transition. Resource changes did, however, differ by last labour market status and sociodemographic characteristics. Income and social support declined and family networks increased for both those retiring from paid work and those retiring from other statuses. Leisure activities increased only for those retiring from paid work. No changes in health or non-family networks were observed. People with many resources before retirement also had many resources after retirement. We conclude that retirement affects resources less than researchers often expect. Accordingly, differences based on labour market remain despite retirement.

Appendix

We followed the same procedure for each resource variable. We started with the most flexible model in which all parameters were estimated freely. We then tested whether setting the intercepts of both groups as equal (fix int) decreased model fit. Next, we examined whether fixing the slope terms or allowing different slope terms for the two groups resulted in better model fit (fix sl or free sl). If fixing the intercepts to be equal and the slopes to be unequal resulted in better model fit, we retested whether allowing the intercepts to differ with fixed slopes improved model fit. In the last step, we examined whether each of the maximum of four level and change parameters significantly differed from zero. Table 3 displays the results of the model tests. All models with significantly better fit over the preceding model are in bold. The final, most parsimonious model is in italics.

Table 3 Results of successive model testing

For available income, model fit decreased significantly when the intercepts (A2, A3) were set to be equal across groups regardless of whether the slopes were estimated freely or fixed. Model fit increased when the intercepts were estimated freely and the slopes were fixed (A4:A1; Δχ² = − 2.94; Δdf = 1; p ≥ 0.05). Model fit decreased when each parameter was set to zero (A5, A6, A7). Accordingly, the most parsimonious model was characterized by two different intercept terms and a common slope term which were all unequal to zero, indicating that the two groups of retirees had different income pre-retirements but experienced the same rate of change during retirement.

For physical health, both the intercepts (C2:C1; Δχ² = − 0.67; Δdf = 1; p ≥ 0.05) and the slopes (C3:C2; Δχ² = − 0.00; Δdf = 1; p ≥ 0.05) could be set to be equal across the two groups, and the intercept parameter and slope parameter could be set to be zero without reducing model fit (C5:C3; Δχ² = − 0.03; Δdf = 1; p ≥ 0.05; C6:C5; Δχ² = − 3.10; Δdf = 1; p ≥ 0.05). The final model was thus characterized by no differences in level and no change for either group, indicating that there were neither pre-retirement differences nor changes in physical health for either group.

For leisure activities, the intercepts for the two groups could be set as equal without decreasing model fit (B2:B1; Δχ² = − 3.15; Δdf = 1; p ≥ 0.05). Setting the slopes to be equal reduced model fit (B3). Setting the intercept parameter to zero did not decrease model fit (B5:B2; Δχ² = − 0.22; Δdf = 1; p ≥ 0.05). The slope for people retiring from paid work was not equal to zero (B6), whereas the slope for those retiring from other, non-working statuses could be set to zero without affecting model fit (B7:B5; Δχ² = − 0.19; Δdf = 1; p ≥ 0.05). The final model was thus characterized by an intercept of 0 for both groups, with an increase for people retiring from paid work and no change for people retiring from other, non-working statuses.

For family network size, setting the intercepts to be equal decreased model fit (D2). Setting the slopes to be equal also decreased model fit (D3). Setting the intercepts as unequal and the slopes as equal affected model (D4:D1; Δχ² = − 0.12; Δdf = 1; p ≥ 0.05). Successively setting each intercept to zero did not affect model fit for either model (D5:D1; Δχ² = − 2.80; Δdf = 1; p ≥ 0.05; D6:D1; Δχ² = − 1.73; Δdf = 1; p ≥ 0.05). The equal slope parameters could not, however, be set to zero (D6). The final model thus indicated that both groups of retirees began with the same family network size (0) and experienced the same slight increase in family network size during retirement.

For non-family network size, intercepts were unequal and the slopes were equal (E4:E1; Δχ² = 0.08; Δdf = 1; p ≥ 0.05). The intercept for those retiring from paid work could be set to zero (E5:E4; Δχ² = − 2.09; Δdf = 1; p ≥ 0.05), but not the intercept for people retiring from other non-working statuses. Setting the slope parameters to zero did not decrease model fit (E7:E5; Δχ² = − 2.30; Δdf = 1; p ≥ 0.05). The final model thus indicated different intercepts for the two groups (lower intercept for people retiring from non-work statuses) and no change for either group.

Finally, for social support, neither the intercepts (F2:F1; Δχ² = − 3.57; Δdf = 1; p ≥ 0.05) nor the slopes were statistically different (F3:F2; Δχ² = − 0.76; Δdf = 1; p ≥ 0.05) between the two groups. The intercept did not significantly differ from zero (F5:F3; Δχ² = − 0.01; Δdf = 1; p ≥ 0.05), but the slopes did. Thus, the final model suggests that the intercept of both groups was 0 (i.e. there were no pre-retirement differences in social support) and that social support decreased for both groups.