Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-lcgwf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-13T15:57:27.581Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Who would ask whom for health advice? The structural anatomy of health advice networks among middle-aged and older adults

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2025

Amelie Reiner*
Affiliation:
Department of Sociology and Social Psychology, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
Mark Wittek
Affiliation:
Department of Network and Data Science, Central European University (CEU), Vienna, Austria
Lea Ellwardt
Affiliation:
Department of Sociology and Social Psychology, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
*
Corresponding author: Amelie Reiner; Email: areiner@wiso.uni-koeln.de
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Social relationships provide opportunities to exchange and obtain health advice. Not only close confidants may be perceived as sources of health advice, but also acquaintances met in places outside a closed circle of family and friends, e.g., in voluntary organizations. This study is the first to analyze the structure of complete health advice networks in three voluntary organizations and compare them with more commonly studied close relationships. To this end, we collected data on multiple networks and health outcomes among 143 middle-aged and older adults (mean age = 53.9 years) in three carnival clubs in Germany. Our analyses demonstrate that perceived health advice and close relationships overlap only by 34%. Moreover, recent advances in exponential random graph models (ERGMs) allow us to illustrate that the network structure of perceived health advice differs starkly from that of close relationships. For instance, we found that advice networks exhibited lower transitivity and greater segregation by gender and age in comparison to networks of close relationships. We also found that actors with poor physical health perceive less individuals as health advisors than those with good physical health. Our findings suggest that community settings, such as voluntary associations, provide a unique platform for exchanging health advice and information among both close and distant network members.

Information

Type
Research Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NCCreative Common License - SA
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the same Creative Commons licence is used to distribute the re-used or adapted article and the original article is properly cited. The written permission of Cambridge University Press must be obtained prior to any commercial use.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2025. Published by Cambridge University Press
Figure 0

Table 1. Overview of hypotheses

Figure 1

Table 2. Summary of exponential random graph model specifications

Figure 2

Table 3. Summary statistics for analysis sample

Figure 3

Table 4. Network descriptives: health advice networks and close relationship networks

Figure 4

Figure 1. Visual comparison network of close relationships and health advice.

Figure 5

Table 5. Average marginal effects (AME) of exponential random graph models (ERGMs) for HAN and network of close ties

Figure 6

Figure 2. Scaled AME of the health advice network and network of close ties; Note: Only theoretically relevant coefficients of M1 are displayed here; confidence intervals refer to testing the predictions to be equal to 0 and do not refer to the significance.

Figure 7

Figure A1. Goodness of fit: Health advice network.

Figure 8

Figure A2. Goodness of fit: Network of close relationships.

Figure 9

Table A1. Sensitivity analysis: Operationalization of physical health as self-rated health

Figure 10

Table A2. Sensitivity analysis: Operationalization of mental health as loneliness

Figure 11

Table A3. Sensitivity analysis: Operationalization of close-tie network as being in contact at least once a month and respondents indicated the other person to give them great joy or great happiness

Figure 12

Table A4. Health advice network: AME estimation results of other model specifications

Figure 13

Table A5. Close-tie network: AME estimation results of other model specifications

Figure 14

Table A6. Mixed-gender voluntary association: AME estimation results