144
We performed a series of bivariate analyses to investigate the distribu-
tion of the personal configurations across countries. A series of χ^2 -tests
are then computed to see whether the distribution is statistically different
across countries (in bold in Table 5.2 when significant). Residuals indi-
cated whether a category is under- or over-represented, statistically esti-
mating the difference between the empirical value and an estimated value.
Residuals lower than −2 indicate under-representation, while residuals
higher than 2 indicate over-representation
Further analyses reveal that Parent and Sibling-oriented configurations
are evenly distributed across the three national contexts. This shows that
the family of origin is still an important point of reference in the construc-
tion of close relationships in the three countries. Similarly, Standard-
nuclear configurations are not country-specific, showing how the model
of family centred on the partner and several children is widespread. In
contrast, Narrow-nuclear and Beanpole configurations are found more in
Lithuania and less in Switzerland. Beanpole configurations accounted for
around one-tenth in Lithuania and slightly less in Portugal, showing that
intergenerational relationships are perceived as important in these two
countries with a strong familialist past and fairly high proportions of com-
plex family households (even if intergenerational co-residence represents
a transitory housing strategy). On the other hand, the timing of the tran-
sition to parenthood in Portugal and Lithuania increases the number of
Table 5.2 Relative frequencies of personal configurations, by country (N = 2774)
Portugal
(n = 1044)Switzerland
(n = 755)Lithuania
(n = 975)Total
(n = 2774)
Standard-nuclear (n = 306) 11.6 8.7 11.6 10.8
Narrow-nuclear (n = 574) 17.7 13.6 28.1 20.2
Parents (n = 405) 14.8 12.8 14.9 14.3
Beanpole (n = 197) 8.3 2.2 9.3 6.9
Extended conjugal (n = 313) 14.7 8.3 9.4 11.0
Sibling-oriented (n = 265) 8.3 10.9 9.2 9.3
Mixed (n = 147) 5.9 6.2 3.6 5.2
Friendship (n = 315) 11.8 21.6 2.1 11.1
Work-oriented (n = 252) 6.4 11.7 8.9 9.3
Alone 0.5 3.9 2.5 2.2
Total (n = 2774) 100 100 100 100
χ^2 293.4942***, p < 0.001
Note: Results in bold when significant
G. Aeby et al.