The Concept of Ambivalence in the Study of Family Relations

Publication type Article
Status Published
Occupation: Leading Researcher
Affiliation: Institute of Sociology FCTAS RAS
Address: Russian Federation, Moscow
Journal nameSotsiologicheskie issledovaniya
EditionIssue 2

The purpose of the article was to draw attention to the ambivalence concept, its use and measurement in Russian sociological research, including family. In the article particular emphasis is placed on the “structured ambivalence” core the source of which is a different distribution of privileges and resources in society among social groups based on class, age, gender, ethnicity/race, sexual orientation, place of birth, etc. Structural ambivalence affects the micro level of family interaction. It is important to study the social causes that provoke family ambivalence including social policy, mitigation of social inequalities and social stereotypes. Diversifications of family institute create new sources of family ambivalence such as role uncertainty, role conflict, ambiguity of family boundaries, non-normative family transitions, etc. The article substantiates the actuality of studies of relations between adult children and parents in connection with the increasing number of elderly people associated with an increase in life expectancy and low birth rate. In Russia, as in developed countries, there are problems of care for the elderly, providing them with physical, emotional and financial support, the development of care services. Russian sociology features few works analyzing relationship of genealogical generations – mainly from the perspective of solidarity/ conflict. Not studied remain social sources of intergenerational ambivalence that arise currently, in particular, due to different norms of generations in the marriage and family sphere.

Keywordsambivalence, theoretical approach, families, gender, parents, children
Publication date16.03.2020
Number of characters25424
100 rub.
When subscribing to an article or issue, the user can download PDF, evaluate the publication or contact the author. Need to register.

Number of purchasers: 2, views: 2434

Readers community rating: votes 0

1. Albert I., Abbey E., Valsiner J., eds. (2018) Trans-generational Family Relations: Investigating Ambivalences. Charlotte, NG: Information Age Publishing Inc.

2. Bengtson V.L., Giarrusso R., Mabry J.B., Silverstein M. (2002) Solidarity, conflict, and ambivalence: Complementary or competing perspectives on intergenerational relationships? Journal of Marriage and Family. Vol. 64. No. 3: 568–576.

3. Connidis I.A., McMullin J.A. (2002a) Sociological ambivalence and family ties: A critical perspective. Journal of Marriage and Family. Vol. 64. No. 3: 558–567.

4. Connidis I.A., McMullin J.A. (2002b). Ambivalence, family ties, and doing sociology. Journal of Marriage and Family. Vol. 64. No. 3: 594–601.

5. Connidis I.A. (2015) Exploring Ambivalence in Family Ties: Progress and Prospects. Journal of Marriage and the Family. Vol. 77. No.1: 77–95.

6. Coser R.L. (1966). Role distance, sociological ambivalence, and transitional status systems. American Journal of Sociology. Vol. 72. No. 2: 173–187.

7. Curran S.R. (2002) Agency, accountability, and embedded relations: “What's Love Got to Do With It?” Journal of Marriage and Family. Vol. 64. No.3: 577–584.

8. Freud Z. (1990) Three essays on the theory of sexuality. In: Psychology of the Unconscious. Moscow: Prosveshchenie. (In Russ.)

9. Gurko T.A. (2001) Feminist perspective in sociology Chapter V. In: Theory and methodology of gender studies. Ed. by O.A. Voronina. Moscow: MTSGI – MVSHSEHN – MFO: 311–348. (In Russ.)

10. Gurko T.A. (2008) Marriage and parenting in Russia. Moscow. IS RAN. (In Russ.)

11. Gurko T. A. (2016) Theoretical approaches to family studies. 2nd ed., rev. and added. Moscow: IS RAN. (In Russ.)

12. Hogerbrugge M.J.A., Komter A.E. (2012). Solidarity and ambivalence: Comparing two perspectives on intergenerational relations using longitudinal panel data. Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences. Vol. 67. No. 3: 372–383.

13. Knapp S.J., Wurm G. (2019) Theorizing family change: A review and reconceptualization. Journal of Family Theory and Review. Vol. 11. No. 2: 4–19.

14. Kuchinov A.M. (2011) Modern structure-agency theories and Russian sociology Humanities scientific researches. 2015. No. 4. URL: (accessed 20.02.19). (In Russ.)

15. Luescher K., Pillemer, K. (1998). Intergenerational ambivalence: A new approach to the study of parent–child relations in later life. Journal of Marriage and the Family. Vol. 60. (2), 413–425.

16. Lüsche, K. (2002) Intergenerational Ambivalence: Further Steps in Theory and Research. Journal of Marriage and Family, Vol. 64 (3): 585-593.

17. Lüscher К. (2011) Ambivalence: A “Sensitizing construct” for the study and practice of intergenerational relationships. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships. Vol. 9. No. 2: 191–206.

18. Magaraggia S. (2012) Tensions between fatherhood and the social construction of masculinity in Italy. Current Sociology. Vol. 61. No.1: 76–92.

19. Mason J., May V., Clarke L. (2007) Ambivalence and the paradoxes of grandparenting. The Sociological Review. Vol. 55. No. 4: 687–706.

20. Merton R.K., Barber E. (1963). Sociological ambivalence. In: E. Tiryakian (ed.) Sociological theory: Values and sociocultural change: essays in the honor of Pitirim A. Sorokin. New York: Free Press: 91–120.

21. Mironova A. (2012) Intra-family intergenerational transfers in Russia. Demoscope. No. 521–522. URL: (accessed 12.08.19). (In Russ.)

22. Mitina O.V., Pluzhnikov I.V. (2017a) An Buridan’s ass between a rock and a hard place: operationalization and measure of ambivalence in humanities. Psikhologicheskie Issledovaniya [Psychological Studies]. Vol.10. No. 51: 11. (In Russ.)

23. Mitina O.V., Pluzhnikov I.V. (2017b) An Buridan’s ass between a rock and a hard place: operationalization and measure of ambivalence in humanities. Psikhologicheskie Issledovaniya [Psychological Studies]. Vol. 10. No. 52: 12. (In Russ.)

24. Moskowitz A., Heim G. (2011) Eugen Bleuler’s Dementia Praecox or the Group of Schizophrenias (1911): A Centenary Appreciation and Reconsideration. Schizophrenia Bulletin. Vol. 37. No. 3: 471‑479.

25. Nelson M.K. (2006) Single mothers “do” family. Journal of Marriage and Family. Vol. 68. No. 4: 781–795.

26. Palmberger M. (2019) Relational ambivalence: Exploring the social and discursive dimensions of ambivalence. The case of Turkish aging labor migrants. International Journal of Comparative Sociology. Vol. 60. No. 1–2: 74–90.

27. Pillemer К., Suitor J.J. (2002) Explaining mothers' ambivalence toward their adult children. Journal of Marriage and Family. Vol. 64. No. 3: 602–613.

28. Pillemer К.C.L., Munsch C.L., Fuller-Rowell T., Suitor J.J. (2012) Ambivalence toward adult children: differences between mothers and fathers. Journal of Marriage and Family. No. 74 (5): 1101–1113.

29. Sarkisian N. (2006) “Doing family ambivalence”: Nuclear and extended families in single mothers lives. Journal of Marriage and Family. Vol. 68. No. 4: 804–811.

30. Shapiro V. D. (1980) Retired person. Moscow: Mysl. (In Russ.)

31. Smelser, N. J. (1998). The rational and the ambivalent in the social sciences. American Sociological Review. Vol. 63, No. 1: 1–16.

32. Vdovina M. V. (2005) Intergenerational conflicts in the modern Russian family. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological studies]. No. 1: 102–104. (In Russ.)

33. Vinogradsky V. G., Vinogradskya O. Ya., Nikoulin A. M., Fadeeva O. P. (2002) Liuba Kouranovskaya’s life circles. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological studies]. No. 11: 100–109. (In Russ.)

34. Willson A.E., Shuey K.M., Elder G.H., Jr. (2003). Ambivalence in the relationship of adult children to aging parents and in-laws. Journal of Marriage and Family. Vol. 65. No. 4. 1055–1072.

Система Orphus