A presentation by Adam T. Perzynski, PhD and Eleanor P.Stoller, PhD Symposium paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Gerontological Society of America. Boston, MA.

1. Department of Sociology
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL
NETWORKS OF MALE AND FEMALE
RETIRED SUNBELT MIGRANTS
Adam T. Perzynski and Eleanor Palo Stoller
Department of Sociology
Case Western Reserve University Cleveland,
OH 44106

2. Abstract
This paper examines the (re)constructed networks of
retired men and women who made amenity moves to an
East Coast Florida community. Data were gathered
through in-person interviews with a probability sample of
593 retired Sunbelt migrants. We describe some of the
intricacies of how men’s networks are distinct from
women’s. Network measures were constructed from
network rosters, in which elderly respondents identified and
described people with whom they socialized and with
whom they exchanged emotional and instrumental support.
Controlling for marital status, there was no significant
difference in total size of networks, although men have
significantly more men in their networks and women have
significantly more women. Women have more network
members from their pre-retirement location, while men
have more recent acquaintances in their network. These
results reflect both the dominance of women within informal
networks and the preference of men and women to
(re)construct same sex networks.

3. Purpose
• Examine the social networks in a sample
of European American East Coast Florida
Migrants
• Describe statistically the ways in which the
men’s and women’s networks are distinct
and the ways in which they are similar.

4. Data
• Sample size = 593 selected through telephone
screenings.
• In-person interviews
• Sunbelt Migrants aged 52 to 102 (Mean = 78)
• European American respondents
• 248 Men (41.8%) and 345 Women (58.2%)
• 72.2% of Men were still married while 56.0% of
Women were already widows.
• 23.8% of Men and 63.2% of Women lived alone

5. Measures
• Self-reported gender and marital status
• Network Rosters
– Interviewer read a series of situations and
tasks with which respondents might have
interacted with those in their support network.
– Respondents gave the name and relationship
of those in the network and answered further
questions about each network member.

8. Key Network Variables
• Total number of network members
• Number of Men in the network
• Number of Women in the network
• Ratio of Men to Women in the network
• Number of network members known for
<10 years, 10-24 years, and >25 years
• Number of network members from “back
home” location

9. Table 1: Descriptives for Key Network Variables
Range Mean Std. Deviation
Total number of people in the network? 0 – 36 8.54 5.08
Ratio of men to women in the network 0–8 0.81 0.82
Number of women in the network 0 – 19 5.16 3.03
Number of men in the network 0 – 19 3.47 2.76
Number known <10 years 0 – 14 1.69 2.10
Number with same “back home” location 0 – 26 1.35 2.13

10. Analysis Plan
• OLS Regression
– Independent Variables
• Sex coded 0 = male, 1 = female
• Marital Status, 3 category, two dummy variables
– Widowed
– Single
– Dependent Variables
• Key Network Variables

11. Table 2: OLS Regression Results,
Standardized Coefficients
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6
Total # in # of Ratio of Men # Known < # from Back
Network # of Men Women to Women 10 years Home
Female -0.03 -0.23 0.14 -0.30 -0.13 0.11
Single -0.22 -0.21 -0.19 -0.06 -0.04 -0.16
Widowed -0.30 -0.31 -0.22 -0.10 -0.04 -0.22
R-
squared 0.11 0.21 0.06 0.13 0.02 0.05
Underlined Coefficients are significant at p < .01

12. Table 3: OLS Regression Results, Unstandardized
Coefficients
Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5 Model 6
Total # in # of Ratio of Men # Known < # from Back
Network # of Men Women to Women 10 years Home
Female -.34 -1.29 0.88 -.50 -.54 0.49
Single -3.73 -1.89 -1.89 -.14 -.16 -1.10
Widowed -3.14 -1.74 -1.36 -.16 -.26 -0.93
R-squared 0.11 0.21 0.06 0.13 0.02 0.05
Underlined Coefficients are significant at p < .01

13. Discussion of Findings
• Controlling for marital status there was no
significant difference in the total size of men’s
and women’s networks
• Men have significantly more men in their
networks
• Women have significantly more women in their
networks
• Women have more network members from back
home
• Men have more network members known less
than 10 years

14. Conclusions
• Older men and women are likely to
construct and maintain same sex
networks.
• Nevertheless men are more likely than
women to include members of the
opposite sex in their networks.
• Age and social networks
• Advantages and disadvantages of a
migrant sample