64
which enhance affinity and interdependencies between individuals. The
duration of the relationship reflects the history of shared experiences
through time, which contributes to the development of mutual identity,
feelings of trust, and sense of belonging (Mesch and Talmud 2006 ). Also,
sharing the same household, the co-experience of life transitions and
events (linked lives), as well as the exchange of emotional and instrumen-
tal resources potentiate the creation of proximity. Despite the care and
support between household members, issues of reciprocity and norma-
tive expectations can also trigger tension and ambivalence (Lüscher
2002 ). Furthermore, transformations in living arrangements, such as the
increase of single-person households or the decline of intergenerational
co- residency are likely to be associated with shifts in relational proximity
(Ruggles 2007 ). Therefore, co-residency is also an important indicator
that should be integrated in this study.
Likewise, gender has been used as a major coordinate in the study of
the composition of personal networks, although often revealing inconsis-
tent conclusions. Women are usually seen as kin-keepers, as they are more
actively engaged in activities and exchanges with more diversified kin;
while men often restrict their interactions to immediate kin and to
friends, and in the case of married men, the contact often operates
through the wives (Fisher and Oliker 1983 ). Moreover, patterns of sup-
port are heavily structured by gender as the volume, type, and intensity
of exchanges are unequally distributed between men and women (Wall
et al. 2001 ). In addition, networks tend to be regulated by homophily
criteria, meaning that individuals tend to have network members who
share the same sociodemographic characteristics (Mcpherson et al. 2001 ).
Therefore, it is important to understand whether gender homophily also
works as a mechanism of closeness. Some studies have proved that same-
sex dyads tend to be closer than cross-sex dyads (same-sex siblings,
mother-daughter bond, and same-sex friends) (Akiyama et al. 1996 ;
Cicirelli 1985 ; Hagestad 1984 ). Gender differences in personal networks
are also likely to be associated with the models of conjugal division of
paid work and strategies of family-work conciliation promoted by social
policies in the countries. If on the one hand, the participation in the
labour market offers new possibilities to build ties outside the family
realm, such as colleagues and friends, on the other hand, the care arrange-
R. Gouveia et al.