A Commitment to Family, Work, Society, and Future Generations Is Called:

J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2009 Jan; 64B(one): 45–54.

Generativity in After Life: Perceived Respect From Younger Generations as a Determinant of Goal Disengagement and Psychological Well-beingness

Received 2008 Mar ane; Accustomed 2008 Jul 27.

Abstract

It was hypothesized that actions to benefit the next generation would not pb to well-beingness unless they are perceived to be valued and respected and that the lack of perceived respect would further lead to disengagement from generative goals. Older persons responded to measures of generative concern, action, perceived respect, and psychological well-beingness at ii time points 12 months autonomously. Structural equation modeling showed that at both time points, the effect of action on well-being was completely mediated by perceived respect. Moreover, a lack of perceived respect at baseline predicted a decrease in generative concern 12 months later, suggesting that, in afterwards life, standing business organisation is partly dependent on the attitudes of younger generations. When their attitudes are unfavorable, a downward spiral in generativity development and well-beingness is possible.

Keywords: Elderly, Generativity, Goal detachment, Hong Kong Chinese, Psychological well-being, Respect

ACCORDING to E. H. Erikson (1950/1963), the human life wheel evolves through 8 sequential stages from infancy to late adulthood on the basis of biologically and culturally determined timing. In later adulthood, the major psychosocial crisis to be resolved is ego integrity versus despair. Ego integrity is accomplished past accepting how things have turned out, and by finding order and meanings, in life. It is besides the cumulative product of the previous vii stages considering the successful resolution of the earlier psychosocial crises, including generativity versus stagnation in midlife, forms the foundation for a sense of completeness and coherence in old age.

Even so, after having experienced old historic period himself, E. H. Erikson (1997) believed that generativity has a more than important function to play in later life than he initially idea. "Much of their [older people's] despair is, in fact, a continuing sense of stagnation" (p. 63). Indeed, research suggests that generativity may be the single most important factor in achieving ego integrity. In a recent study, a minor sample of 78 women aged seventy–91 years provided self-report measures of ego integrity and generativity (James & Zarrett, 2006). These measures were analyzed with the data on identity formation obtained through an unstructured interview 45 years before. Results showed that generativity was the simply variable predicting ego integrity, whereas identity, number of major or chronic illnesses, and sociodemographic variables had no independent effects. However, information on the other Eriksonian constructs was not bachelor, and the dissimilar data collection methods for the key variables made data estimation difficult.

To date, simply ane study is known to accept examined how ego integrity is predicted by the achievement of the other seven psychosocial tasks. Using the Inventory of Psychosocial Rest, Hannah, Domino, Figueredo, and Hendrickson (1996) studied the predictors of ego integrity in 520 men and women aged 55–84 years cross-sectionally. In a multivariate assay, ego integrity was predicted by five tasks, namely, generativity, intimacy, identity, autonomy, and trust, but generativity alone deemed for 78% of the variance in ego integrity.

Thus, despite the paucity of research, there are preliminary data suggesting the importance of having achieved generativity for late-life development. In this connectedness, information technology is of import to recognize that generativity evolution may continue into old age. Co-ordinate to E. H. Erikson (1997, p. 63), "[generativity in old age] should mean only a subsequently version of a previous item, non a loss of information technology . . . onetime people tin and demand to maintain a grand-generative part . . . that minimum of vital involvement that is necessary for staying actually live." Indeed, the commitment to nurture younger generations, as measured past daily strivings, shows an upwards age trend (McAdams, de St. Aubin, & Logan, 1993; Sheldon & Kasser, 2001).

Several observations advise that generativity may occupy a more fundamental spot in late-life evolution in contemporary lodge. First, the delay in marriage and childbearing historic period suggests that many adults do non stop their parental responsibleness until being young old. Second, with the increase in longevity and improvement in health care, older adults are spending more years with their grandchildren and bully-grandchildren. In a thought-provoking article, Bengtson (2001) argued that ties across more than than two generations were becoming more important than ties within nuclear families due to such sociodemographic changes. Thus, it is conceivable that older persons will be more and more than involved in child-rearing responsibilities as grandparents or great-grandparents. Finally, electric current rhetoric and professional wisdom promotes the image of active aging and encourages older people to participate socially, such as working as volunteers (Rowe & Kahn, 1997; United nations, 2002). Indeed, unlike midlife generativity that tends to exist dominated by the parenting office, generativity in later life is often extended beyond the family, in the grade of assistance to unrelated others and borough engagement (Keyes & Ryff, 1998; Rossi, 2001). All these trends suggest that generativity, a topic relatively missing in the gerontological literature, is an increasingly salient phenomenon in later on life, beyond the theoretical exclamation that humans are motivated to transcend the mortal cocky by leaving a legacy behind through constructing a better earth (Erikson, Erikson, & Kivnick, 1986; Kotre, 1984; McAdams, 1985).

Generativity and Psychological Well-being: The Function of Perceived Respect

Generativity has been studied from different perspectives (e.g., Bradley, 1997; Kotre, 1984; Peterson & Klohnen, 1995; Peterson & Stewart, 1993; Ryff & Heincke, 1983). A perspective that has generated much interest in contempo years is the seven-facet model by McAdams and de St. Aubin (1992). A central concept in this model is generative business (i.e., conscious business organization for the next generation), which is the result of motivational forces (cultural need and inner desires for symbolic immortality). Generative concern leads to concrete goals and deportment to benefit the side by side generation, as well equally narrative constructions of the generative cocky. Although studies are few, preliminary data based primarily on Western samples of younger and midlife adults show that generative business is moderately to strongly associated with psychological well-existence, only the concrete actions announced to be unrelated to well-beingness, despite its strong correlation with generative business organization (Grossbaum & Bates, 2002; McAdams et al., 1993). Given the importance of generativity for belatedly-life development, it is not surprising that generative concern is predictive of well-existence. Even so, the relationship betwixt generative acts and well-existence may be more circuitous.

Scholars have noted that the resource differential betwixt one generation and the side by side declines, if non reverses, as 1 advances from heart to late adulthood (Morgan, Schuster, & Butler, 1991). Considering of this, generative capacity likewise decreases as ane ages (Stewart & Vandewater, 1998). Thus, when activity does not result in a positive impact, well-beingness may be diminished rather than enhanced. Because generativity is often manifested in a social context (e.g., assistance to others in need), the judgment of bear upon, therefore, largely depends on others' feedback. In this connection, it is important to consider the declining status of older persons in gimmicky societies and the normative feedback that they receive from younger generations.

In today'due south quickly changing world, older people may be seen as having little to offer to the problems and issues faced past younger people, and their role as keepers of traditional wisdom is profoundly diminished. One thousand. Erikson noted that "the pace of technological change and the growth of homo knowledge are now climbing and then abrupt an incline almost everywhere in the world that the skills and outlooks of the present generation may exist of express value for the worlds their children will presently occupy" (Erikson, 2004, p. 53). McAdams, Hart, and Maruna (1998) referred to this phenomenon as generativity mismatch. In many developing societies, the disparity in educational attainment between generations contributes further to a loss of status by older people.

To investigate how generativity is actualized in this context, Cheng, Chan, and Chan (2008) asked 71 older men and women of dissimilar socioeconomic levels in Hong Kong to participate in focus grouping meetings, in which they talked about their thoughts nigh younger generations and the society and what they wanted to practise for them. When doing then, many commented on the educational disparity betwixt younger people and themselves (approximately 40% of older people in Hong Kong are without formal education and another 40% attained some primary education; Census and Statistics Section, 2002). In reality, their attempts to help were often brushed aside or even criticized by their own offspring who were accepted to dissimilar lifestyles and ways of doing things. To avoid conflict and to preserve harmony, they withdrew to more passive and small-scale generative roles, such as waiting for invitation to offer assistance or confining themselves to routine household tasks (harmony was seen equally essential for maintaining the continuous support from children in instance their weather condition deteriorate). Importantly, although legacy tin can exist achieved by creating ideas and products (E. H. Erikson, 1950/1963), Hong Kong's older persons, cognizant of the gap between their expertise and social development, place primarily with the transmission of moral and behavioral codes, mostly by sharing stories of hardship in the old days and being a model of grapheme, every bit a fashion of creating a more lasting influence.

These findings illustrate the changing cultural norms and the larger social forces that transform modern societies, which widen the gap between older and younger generations in terms of knowledge, skills, values, lifestyles, and financial resources, and devalue older people's contributions to societies. At the same time, they reveal the mean solar day-to-day interactions between older people and their offspring and other community members, and the general lack of respect and appreciation for their work, within this larger social context. The major premise of this article is that the pursuit of generative goals and the feelings of well-being are both tied to the caste of respect older persons receive for their generative acts. This perspective is consequent with McAdams and de St. Aubin's (1992) view that generativity is situated in a "psychosocial space that subsumes person and environment" (p. 1004) and with E. H. Erikson's (1997) contention that "an private life cycle cannot exist fairly understood autonomously from the social context in which it comes to fruition" (p. 114).

Report Hypotheses

In this study, I advise, first, that generative acts per se would not predict well-existence because it is the expressed regard for these acts that truly matters. In other words, I postulate that whether actions result in well-being depends on the extent to which they are welcomed, appreciated, and valued by others, peculiarly the younger generations. For this reason, the feeling of respect should completely mediate the relationship between activeness and well-being (H₁). In this article, I focus on respect as perceived by older persons themselves because arguably, what matters for well-being is the subjective feelings that 1's status needs have been met (encounter Steverink & Lindenberg, 2006), not the actual levels of respect displayed past others.

2nd, I argue that, unlike during midlife parenting when one's sense of responsibility for the next generation remains strong regardless of reactions from children, generative responsibility in old age is low in cultural demand (McAdams & de St. Aubin, 1992) and hence much less emphasized in modernistic societies. Thus, older adults' motivation to sustain interest in the welfare of the next generation may depend on their perception that younger people want such business organisation from the older generation. A lack of positive regard from the younger generations suggests that 1'south generative goals are non going to be realized. Because successful aging depends on the disengagement from unattainable goals and the channeling of resource to attainable ones (Baltes & Baltes, 1990; Brandtstädter & Greve, 1994; Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995), information technology can be reasonably argued that feelings of disrespect would lead to subsequent disengagement from generative goals (H₂). In other words, although generativity is supposed to be intrinsically motivating, its pursuit in an unwelcoming environment will eventually wear out 1'south motivation and atomic number 82 to goal disengagement. In the present study, this is operationalized as the decrease in generative business organisation over time. Because generative business organisation has a large result on beliefs, this implies a downward spiral of generativity development over time due to negative reactions from others.

Notation that in the work of McAdams and colleagues (1993), generative goals were measured in terms of daily strivings (i.e., generative delivery). Still, although they proposed that commitment was a more proximal predictor of generative action, it had only a weak correlation with activity (r = .20) in a sample of young, midlife, and older adults. On the opposite, the relationship betwixt concern (an antecedent of commitment) and action was strong (r = .53 in the same sample; McAdams et al., 1993). For a written report aimed at investigating how goal disengagement influences subsequent beliefs, business may be a more appropriate measure of generative goals.

METHODS

Participants and Procedure

One hundred ninety persons older than 60 years were recruited on a convenience basis from social centers for older persons. Each was interviewed individually using the unfolding method (i.e., first indicating the direction of response before choosing the options on a frequency or Likert calibration) for approximately 30 min, after satisfactory operation on the Mini-Mental State Examination (i.eastward., score ≥20; Chiu, Lee, Chung, & Kwong, 1994; Folstein, Folstein, & McHugh, 1975). All except two were successfully interviewed 12 months later; these 188 individuals constituted the sample for this study. Missing data were few and did not differ by gender, educational level, and measurement occasion; they were replaced using the multiple imputation procedure in LISREL.

The sample had a mean historic period of 73.0 (SD = v.93; range = 60–89 years) and more women (67.6%) than men (32.4%). Most one-half (47.iii%) were married and some other 42.0% were widowed. One third (34.0%) were living alone. Consistent with the educational level of this age cohort, 38.3% had no formal teaching and another 46.3% had some principal educational activity. Because this sample was based in social centers having more than women, information technology was more female dominant than the full general population, and for this reason, had more people who were widowed rather than married.

Pilot Study: Development of Items

To develop measures of perceived respect and generative acts for the local population, I content-analyzed verbatim records of the focus group discussions reported in Cheng, Chan, and Chan (2008) and came upward with 36 items for perceived respect and 44 for generative acts (meet Measures for rating scales). For reasons already mentioned, the list of acts used for this enquiry did non include idea or product creation but included attempts to laissez passer on moral and behavioral codes that are traditionally valued. Through individual interviews, these items were administered to a separate sample of 126 older persons (32 men, 94 women; Thousand _age = 73.6, SD = 6.92, range = 60–89 years) along with the following measures: a back-translated Loyola Generativity Calibration (LGS, a measure of generative business organisation; McAdams & de St. Aubin, 1992), a cursory version of the Generative Behavior Checklist (GBC; McAdams & de St. Aubin, 1992), an 8-detail checklist of other activities unrelated to generativity (e.g., watching movies, inviting friends and relatives for a meal at home), and a 10-item version of the Marlowe–Crowne Social Desirability Calibration (Crowne & Marlowe, 1960; Strahan & Gerbasi, 1972). The brief GBC consisted of 11 items that were nearly strongly correlated with the LGS in an American sample (McAdams & de St. Aubin, 1992).

Respect and generative act items that had low particular-total correlations and those that were rarely endorsed (e.g., "Made a decision that had positive effects on many people") were removed, resulting in 15 items for perceived respect and 20 for generative acts. Both these measures were internally consistent and showed expected convergent and discriminant correlations (Table one). Importantly, the new measure of generative acts was highly correlated with GBC, although the two had only a moderate degree of overlap in content, and this correlation coefficient was significantly higher than the one with LGS (Fisher's Z transformation of rs = i.80, p < .05). This measure also correlated with LGS at almost the same magnitude as GBC. It was weakly correlated with other activities, suggesting that this measure of behavior frequency was not contaminated by general activity level. Moreover, perceived respect was only moderately correlated with LGS and generative acts, suggesting that it measures something unique in 1's generative experience. Finally, although generative acts and perceived respect were significantly correlated with the Marlowe–Crowne scale, such correlations were very small-scale indeed, suggesting that these measures (along with LGS) were generally free of social desirability bias. Items for generative acts and perceived respect, translated into English, are listed in the Appendix.

Table 1.

Product–Moment Correlations and Internal Consistencies, Pilot Study

		1	2	iii	4	5
1.	LGS	(.76)
2.	Generative acts	.59	(.87)
three.	Perceived respect	.43	.35	(.75)
4.	Social desirability	.x	.17	.17	(.70)
five.	GBC	.58	.72	.28	.07	(.68)
half-dozen.	Other activities	.thirteen	.18	−.01	.11	.26

Measures

Perceived respect.—

Iii (detail numbers ii, 8, and 12; run into Appendix) of the 15 items developed were specifically concerned with how i'southward borough acts, mostly voluntary activities, were evaluated by relevant individuals or organizations. Thirty-i individuals without volunteer experience could non answer these questions. The other 12 items were concerned with the reactions of one'southward offspring or the younger generations in general (without specifying whom). Statistical analyses were therefore performed on the two sets of items separately. For the sake of convenience, I will call the former perceived respect–borough and the latter perceived respect–nonspecific. Fourth dimension 1 (T1) and time 2 (T2) alpha coefficients were .63 and .65, respectively, for the civic measure, and .74 and .fourscore, respectively, for the nonspecific measure.

Generative acts.—

For like reasons, 4 (detail numbers 3, 4, 10, and nineteen; meet Appendix) of the xx items were grouped together to form a measure of generative human activity–civic (T1 α = .67, T2 α = .70) and the remaining xvi for measuring generative act–nonspecific (T1 α = .88, T2 α = .90).

Generative concern.—

The LGS contains 20 items (eastward.g., "I effort to laissez passer along the cognition I have gained through my experience," "I feel every bit though my contributions will exist after I die") rated on a 4-point scale from 0 never applies to me to 3 very ofttimes applies to me. Alpha coefficients equaled .84 at both times.

Psychological well-being.—

The positive relations, purpose in life, personal growth, and self-acceptance subscales of a Chinese version of the Ryff Psychological Well-existence Scales (Cheng & Chan, 2005; Ryff, 1989) were used. This Chinese version has four items per subscale, with each item rated on a 5-point calibration of 1 strongly disagree to five strongly agree. Emerging information suggest that positive relations, purpose in life, and personal growth are of import correlates of biological markers of psychological health (Ryff et al., 2006). These iii attributes, together with self-acceptance, are consistently highly intercorrelated across studies using representative population samples (Keyes, Shmotkin, & Ryff, 2002; Springer & Hauser, 2006), suggesting that these qualities together tap a core dimension of psychological health. I therefore focus on measuring these four qualities rather than the unabridged spectrum of positive qualities in the Ryff model. In this study, the sixteen items were summed to form an overall measure of psychological well-existence, with T1 and T2 alphas equal to .78 and .81, respectively.

Other information obtained included age, gender, marital status, educational level, living status, and self-rated wellness rated on a v-point calibration of 1 poor to 5 first-class.

Data Analytic Strategy

The theoretical model (Model 1) was tested with structural equation modeling, separately for civic acts and nonspecific acts. All T2 latent factors were predicted past their counterparts in T1. At both time points, generative business organization, generative action, and perceived respect were treated every bit antecedent factors for psychological well-being. Concern was an antecedent for activity, which in turn was an ancestor for respect. If respect completely mediated the relationship between activity and well-being, then the direct path from activeness to well-being should be nonsignificant, whereas the path from action to respect and that from respect to well-being should exist pregnant (H₁). Additionally, the Sobel (1982) test was conducted to run across if these mediating pathways were pregnant. Finally, T2 concern was predicted by T1 respect to see if perceived respect led to subsequent disengagement from generative goals (H_ii).

To rule out the possibility that respect led to changes in activeness direct, without altering levels of concern, I tested an alternate Model 2, which was identical to Model one except that T2 action was predicted by T1 respect, with the path from T1 respect to T2 concern removed (hence same df). If Model ii did not fit the data also as Model ane, the statement that lack of respect leads to disengagement from generative goals would exist bolstered.

Indicators for the latent variables were formed by randomly splitting a scale into iii roughly equal parts (i.e., parcels), with each parcel equal to the average score of the chosen items. The exception was psychological well-being, for which the indicators were composite scores of the four subscales (positive relations, purpose in life, personal growth, and self-credence). Item parcels are more reliable than the individual items themselves, are less likely to suffer from distribution problems, and amend the ratio of sample size to indicators (Little, Cunningham, Shahar, & Widaman, 2002), thus improving the reliability of the factor scores existence estimated.

Initially, historic period, gender, marital status, education, living condition, and cocky-rated health were included as covariates. Because the findings were basically the same with and without these covariates, they were removed to simplify the model. Their removal, as well every bit the use of parcels, reduced essentially the number of parameters to be estimated for this relatively pocket-size sample.

The covariance matrix of the indicators was subject to maximum likelihood estimation using LISREL version viii.52. Post-obit more recent evaluations of goodness-of-fit indexes (Hu & Bentler, 1999; Marsh, Hau, & Grayson, 2005), I study the chi-foursquare statistic, comparative fit index (CFI), nonnormed fit index (NNFI), root mean foursquare mistake of approximation (RMSEA), and standardized root hateful square rest (SRMR). Additionally, the Akaike information criterion (AIC) is reported for model comparison (the chi-square divergence test could not exist used when two models have identical df). The AIC is a modification of the chi-square statistic with a punishment for model complexity; an AIC difference of ≥x is a strong indication that ane model is inferior to the other (Burnham & Anderson, 2002).

RESULTS

Preliminary Analyses

Three sets of preliminary analyses were conducted. Commencement, descriptive statistics are presented in Table 2. The level of generative concern reported by this sample appeared to be lower than that reported for an American older sample (McAdams et al., 1993), just it is hard to say whether such an ascertainment represented a genuine difference across societies, given the different sample characteristics (the American sample was younger and more educated) and the lack of show on construct equivalence beyond the two cultures. Nonetheless, the electric current data suggested a moderate level of concern and a relatively low level of behavioral attempt, regardless of domain, to nurture the younger generations. It was noteworthy that, based on the subsample of participants with borough involvement, the frequency of civic acts was even slightly higher than that for nonspecific acts; this deviation was not significant at T1, t(156) = 0.86, ns, but was significant at T2, t(156) = two.75, p < .01. Also, they perceived significantly more respect for their civic acts than for nonspecific acts (T1 t = vii.42, T2 t = 8.77, both dfdue south = 156, both psouth < .001). In add-on, no T2 variables were significantly different from their T1 counterparts.

Tabular array 2.

Descriptive Statistics and Production–Moment Correlations

		one	2	three	4	5	6	7	8	nine	ten	xi	12
Time ane
1.	Psychological well-beingness		.64	.38	.42	.39	.thirty	.62	.53	.xl	.46	.52	.40
2.	Generative business concern	.61		.55	.31	.36	.40	.45	.69	.58	.47	.42	.40
3.	Generative deed–nonspecific	.53	.62		.39	.36	.35	.38	.37	.67	.41	.32	.26
4.	Generative act–borough	.36	.46	.39		.10	.23	.28	.46	.22	.58	.20	.29
v.	Perceived respect–nonspecific	.46	.44	.twoscore	.28		.62	.35	.21	.48	.27	.58	.47
6.	Perceived respect–borough	.51	.44	.25	.27	.49		.42	.39	.36	.32	.62	.59
Time 2
seven.	Psychological well-being	.59	.48	.44	.28	.46	.41		.62	.48	.fifty	.58	.43
viii.	Generative business organisation	.53	.66	.52	.43	.31	.27	.64		.59	.70	.58	.53
9.	Generative human action–nonspecific	.46	.52	.68	.33	.38	.23	.47	.56		.52	.57	.37
10.	Generative human action–civic	.40	.46	.33	.67	.32	.34	.50	.56	.32		.47	.56
11.	Perceived respect–nonspecific	.44	.44	.44	.26	.63	.38	.59	.49	.52	.34		.60
12.	Perceived respect–civic	.38	.38	.24	.32	.28	.44	.57	.51	.22	.48	.39
	Yard	iii.41	one.36	0.96	1.06	2.44	2.73	3.37	1.32	0.xc	1.13	2.43	2.78
	SD	0.51	0.53	0.69	0.84	0.38	0.53	0.49	0.fifty	0.72	0.88	0.39	0.50

2nd, because studies testify that women are generally more involved in generative acts, both inside and outside the habitation (e.k., Keyes & Ryff, 1998; McAdams & de St. Aubin, 1992), I commencement examined whether the relationships amongst the study variables were different betwixt men and women. Intercorrelations among the study variables are shown in Table 2, separately for men and women. Aside from the test–retest correlations and the concurrent correlations between well-being and concern, the correlational coefficients tended to be moderate. Dissimilar from Western findings (Grossbaum & Bates, 2002), generative human activity, whether civic or nonspecific, was moderately to strongly correlated with psychological well-being. Correlations respective to the structural paths specified in the structural equation models are boldfaced for piece of cake reference. None of these correlational coefficients differed between men and women, every bit revealed by Fisher's Z tests. On the whole, the findings suggested that it was appropriate to combine men and women in subsequent analyses.

Third, it was crucial to demonstrate that the same latent constructs were existence assessed over time before moving on to the structural analyses. This series of analyses was limited to the 157 individuals with full data on all measures. Action and respect in both civic and nonspecific domains were analyzed together in one confirmatory cistron assay. Results showed that the indicators related to the same factors across the two time points (i.e., cistron pattern invariance): χⁱⁱ(262, N = 157) = 410.96, p < .01; CFI = .98, NNFI = .97, SRMR = .05, and RMSEA = .06. Farther constraining the cistron loadings to be equal between the two time points resulted in a nonsignificant increase in χⁱⁱ = eleven.69 (Δdf = 19, p > .05), along with CFI = .98, NNFI = .97, SRMR = .06, and RMSEA = .05. Thus, factor loadings were also invariant, meaning that the aforementioned constructs were being measured by the items between the two time points, and borough and nonspecific acts were distinguishable from each other. Based on the common metric completely standardized solution, all parcels were highly loaded (≥.55) on their corresponding factors.

Evaluating the Structural Equation Models

Table 3 shows that Model 2 did not fit the information besides as Model 1; whether in the nonspecific or the civic domain, the AIC difference was well over ten. Hence, respect affected subsequent activity through modifying generative concern, not straight. The fit indexes suggested that Model 1 fit the data rather well (Browne & Cudeck, 1993; Hu & Bentler, 1999; Marsh et al., 2005).

Table 3.

Goodness of Fit of Structural Equation Models

	χii	df	CFI	NNFI	SRMR	RMSEA	AIC
Nonspecific domain
Model i	631.68	284	.96	.96	.08	.08	739.11
Model 2	686.46	284	.96	.95	.09	.08	785.95
Civic domain
Model one	517.01	284	.96	.95	.08	.07	627.42
Model two	571.97	284	.95	.94	.10	.08	682.77

As can be seen from Figures 1 and ​ 2, the results, regardless of whether civic or nonspecific acts or respect was analyzed, were very similar. One striking finding was the moderate temporal stability for psychological well-existence, which if compared with the correlation using raw score composites in Tabular array 2, was rather low. This suggested that a practiced proportion of the observed stability of psychological well-beingness was due to the simultaneous stabilities of generative concern, generative acts, and perceived respect and their combined furnishings on well-being. At T1, 55%–63% of the variance in psychological well-existence was explained past these three factors together. At T2, 70%–74% of the variance in well-being was explained by the model as a whole.

Structural relationships among the latent variables, focusing on nonspecific acts and associated respect. PWB = psychological well-being. Paths that were nonsignificant (p>.05) are indicated by dotted lines. *p < .05, **p < .01, and ***p < .001

Structural relationships among the latent variables, focusing on civic acts and associated respect. PWB = psychological well-being. Paths that were nonsignificant (p> .05) were indicated by dotted lines.*p < .05, **p < .01, and ***p < .001

At both time points, generative action had no effect on psychological well-being, whereas activeness was positively associated with perceived respect from others, which in turn was positively associated with well-being. Perhaps because the targets of civic acts (east.g., voluntary services) frequently inverse or because actual performance varied across tasks, there was less stability for respect in the borough domain, leaving more residual variance to be explained by action at T2. For the mediating pathways involving nonspecific acts and associated respect, the Sobel test produced critical ratios of 3.21 (p < .01) and 2.32 (p < .05) for T1 and T2, respectively. For the mediating pathways in the civic domain, the disquisitional ratios were ii.31 and 2.16, respectively, for T1 and T2 (both pdue south < .05). Thus, the hypothesis that perceived respect completely mediates the relationship between generative acts and psychological well-being was supported by data. The concurrent (T1) indirect result size that generative acts had on well-being was .22 for nonspecific acts and .16 for civic acts, whereas the indirect upshot sizes on changes in well-being (T2) were .x and .18, respectively.

Moreover, T1 respect had a small effect size (<.20) on T2 generative business organization, regardless of activity domain, supporting the hypothesis that a lack of felt respect for one'south generative acts would lead to disengagement from generative goals. Hence, perceived respect at T1 predicted positive changes in well-being subsequently 12 months. On the contrary, a lack of perceived respect resulted in a slight reduction in well-existence beyond this interval, leading farther, via the T2 business organisation → acts → respect → well-existence pathway, to reductions in generative acts, respect, and well-being. Thus, an up or downwardly spiral in generativity development and well-being depends partly on the felt respect for i'south generative acts.

DISCUSSION

To my knowledge, this is the get-go study investigating the prospective relationship between generativity and well-being and the disengagement from generative goals in subsequently life. In the study, I postulate that the relationship between generative activeness and well-existence is mediated by the degree to which i's deportment are valued and respected by others. I also propose that the perception of respect for i's actions has the outcome of promoting further generativity development, whereas a perceived lack of respect would lead to disengagement from generative goals.

Replicating the Western literature (Grossbaum & Bates, 2002; McAdams et al., 1993), the factor most predictive of psychological well-being was generative business organization. Different from the Western literature, I found that generative behavior was moderately to strongly correlated with well-being at the bivariate level. Subsequently controlling for business concern and respect, however, behavior no longer accounted for well-being. Its indirect furnishings by way of perceived respect, however, were significant and were of small to moderate magnitudes. It was noteworthy that action was positively related to perceived respect, which in turn was positively related to well-beingness. The ability to engage in more than generative acts echoed what Stewart and Vandewater (1998) called the chapters to be generative, which explained why these individuals were more than respected by those around them. These patterns existed at both T1 (concurrent) and T2 (changes over 12 months). Thus, perceived respect completely mediated the concurrent relationship between beliefs and well-being, and change in respect also completely mediated the relationship between behavioral change and well-beingness change over time. Later on all, why should one endeavor to guide younger people when 1 feels that they do not want to listen? This line of research thus adds an interesting dimension to extant theories of generativity.

Not only did perceived respect mediate the human relationship betwixt action and well-being but it also predicted generative business concern over fourth dimension. The nature of this effect, albeit a small-scale one, was that if one felt respected by younger people, one's concern for them would increase over time. On the reverse, a lack of respect would atomic number 82 to subsequent disengagement from generative goals, as indicated by a decrease in generative concern, and a downward spiral of generativity development and well-being over fourth dimension. Unlike midlife generativity for which there is strong cultural demand, which may override, at least partially, the effect of reactions from children, late-life generativity may be deeply embedded in the twenty-four hour period-to-twenty-four hours interactions with younger people whose gestures convey to older people whether their generative actions are all the same desired. When younger people are perceived to be receptive and show respect, the preservation of generative cocky into one-time age will be more than likely. One time again, this result reinforces the importance of the social context in the realization of generativity in later life. Considering social and cultural environments provide relevant normative expectations every bit well equally opportunities for guiding younger generations (McAdams & de St. Aubin, 1992), future research on generativity should be grounded in the social and cultural text in which the written report takes place.

It was interesting that those who had civic participation reported more perceived respect for their civic than nonspecific acts at both time points and a higher frequency of civic than nonspecific acts at T2 also. Although the targets of nonspecific acts were not specified, the fact that such actions were rated so differently from civic acts suggested that participants were primarily referring to the noncivic, or family unit, domain when rating these behaviors. If this were true, and so despite the traditional condition accorded to older people in Chinese families (Cheng & Chan, 2006), most of the participants appeared to see more than opportunities for generative involvement outside the family than inside, and felt more respect from professionals, neighbors, and the people they served than from children and grandchildren. Information technology is reasonable to assume that borough involvement, such equally volunteer piece of work, is more self-selected, so that older people are more likely to stay abroad from tasks that are unrewarding. All the same, our participants also saw a relatively weak connection between the respect and the frequency of generative acts in the nonspecific domain (Figure ane), suggesting farther that respect was not perceived to exist forthcoming in this domain. Every bit Cheng, Chan, and Chan (2008) have shown, older persons are often criticized for their generative acts inside the family and, because of this, are deprived of the respect so crucial for a sense of filial piety from children (Cheng & Chan, 2006). There is much to say almost revitalizing our traditional respect for older persons in the family.

The foregoing give-and-take leads to an interesting question nigh the cantankerous-cultural generalizability of the present findings. Cultures differ in terms of the norms of respect for elders. Although respect for elders is a value endorsed in well-nigh, if not all, societies, its salience in terms of regulating social behaviors may vary. Compared with Asian cultures, which have been heavily influenced by Confucianism (Cheng & Chan, 2006), Western societies tend non to value what Streib (1987) called "automated respect" for older persons. Would the same effects due to perceived respect exist observed in Western samples? Information technology will be important to place this line of inquiry in a cross-cultural context to see if the findings hold beyond cultures.

Although opening a new line of inquiry, this research suffers from several potential limitations. First, to provide a more complete picture of the goal detachment process, hereafter research should too measure out generative goals at the behavioral level, that is, daily strivings (McAdams et al., 1993). 2d, show for disengagement from generative goals came from a longitudinal information set that had only two waves spanning 12 months. A longer interval with more data waves volition provide more definite conclusions virtually the long-term changes in generativity due to perceived respect. Third, because the future cohorts of older people volition be more educated (Cheng, Chan, & Phillips, 2008), information technology is not certain whether they will exist more than able than the present cohort to command respect from the younger generations. Fourth, it is conceivable that respect from unlike sources (children, professionals, community members, etc.) might carry different impacts and deserves to be studied separately. 5th, this was a relatively minor convenience sample. Future enquiry should apply a larger, more representative sample.

Finally, respect was measured from the point of view of older persons only, which might be biased. Although the simultaneous perspectives of other people (due east.g., those of children) are informative, information technology may exist the respect that is subjectively felt past the older person that truly matters. Future research might reveal how felt respect is related to avowed respect past children and others. On the whole, the present findings advise that at that place is a social dimension to generativity and that the degree to which one's generative behaviors are valued by others determines to some extent the continuous engagement with generative goals and the experience of psychological well-being in after life.

FUNDING

The training of the manuscript was supported in part by Urban center University strategic grant no. 7001652.

Acknowledgments

I am grateful to Alfred Chan for his valuable assistance in information collection, and to Coty Lee and three anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments on an earlier version of the manuscript.

Appendix Items

Generative acts

1. I take care of children and grandchildren when they are sick.

2. Taking care of my offspring's daily life, including preparing meals.

3. Participate in volunteer work and continue to serve the customs.

4. Visit other people in need, similar patients.

5. Be a role model to the next generation.

6. Learn new things then as to make myself useful to the younger generations.

7. Take intendance of the grandchildren when their parents are not available.

8. Practise housework for my children.

9. Teach the younger generations how to get forth with others and handle various matters.

10. Participate in customs educational activities.

11. Have initiative to comfort immature people in distress.

12. Share my past experience, whether bitter or sweet, with the next generation.

13. Teach the next generation not to spend money on unnecessary items.

14. Teach the next generation to know right from wrong, and to observe rules and regulations.

15. Pass on my skills and talents to the next generation.

16. Counsel younger people who are emotionally disturbed.

17. Encourage the younger generations to learn new things and develop multiple interests.

18. Teach younger generations to do voluntary work and to serve others.

19. Requite a hand to needy people in the community.

20. Do something that benefits others.

Perceived Respect

1. Others don't want my help because they think I am too erstwhile (−).

2. Sometimes, I think that the organizations in which I do service do non value my volunteer work (−).

3. I have no style of getting younger generations to accept my guidance (−).

4. The younger generations practice not need my assistance (−).

5. I am unable to teach the younger generations to observe rules (−).

6. I am helpful in the eyes of my neighbors.

7. I want to help the next generation, but I don't have the ability to do so (−).

8. Sometimes, I felt that those who received my services did not capeesh my work for them (−).

9. The younger generations don't like "former people's ways" of seeing and doing things (−).

10. The younger generations defer to experts more than they would to older people (−).

11. My children and children-in-law endorse my way of taking care of the grandchildren.

12. Professionals by and large think that senior volunteers are non helpful (−).

13. The younger generations do non appreciate my thoughts and concern for them (−).

14. Older people have no status at home (−).

15. I wish to help the adjacent generation but they don't appreciate information technology (−).

(−) = scored in the contrary.

References

• Baltes Atomic number 82, Baltes MM. Psychological perspectives on successful aging: The model of selective optimization with compensation. In: Baltes Lead, Baltes MM, editors. Successful crumbling: Perspectives from the behavioral sciences. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press; 1990. pp. 1–34. [Google Scholar]
• Bengtson VL. Beyond the nuclear family: The increasing importance of multigenerational bonds. Journal of Marriage and Family. 2001;63:1–sixteen. [Google Scholar]
• Bradley CL. Generativity-stagnation: Development of a status model. Developmental Review. 1997;17:262–290. [Google Scholar]
• Brandtstädter J, Greve W. The aging self: Stabilizing and protective processes. Developmental Review. 1994;14:52–80. [Google Scholar]
• Browne MW, Cudeck R. Alternative means of assessing model fit. In: Bollen KA, Long JS, editors. Testing structural equation models. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1993. pp. 445–455. [Google Scholar]
• Burnham KP, Anderson DR. Model option and multimodel inference: A practical information theoretic arroyo. second ed. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2002. [Google Scholar]
• Census and Statistics Department. Hong Kong 2001 population demography primary report, Vols. I & Two. Hong Kong, Communist china: Writer; 2002. [Google Scholar]
• Cheng S-T, Chan ACM. Measuring psychological well-beingness in the Chinese. Personality and Individual Differences. 2005;38:1307–1316. [Google Scholar]
• Cheng S-T, Chan ACM. Filial piety and psychological well-beingness in well older Chinese. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences. 2006;61B:P262–P269. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Cheng Southward-T, Chan ACM, Phillips DR. The ageing state of affairs in Asia and the Pacific: Trends and priorities. In: Un Section of Economical and Social Diplomacy, editor. Regional dimensions of the ageing situation. New York: Un; 2008. pp. 35–69. [Google Scholar]
• Cheng S-T, Chan W, Chan ACM. Older people's realisation of generativity in a changing club: The example of Hong Kong. Ageing & Society. 2008;28:609–627. [Google Scholar]
• Chiu HFK, Lee HB, Chung WS, Kwong PK. Reliability and validity of the Cantonese version of Mini-Mental Country Examination: A preliminary report. Journal of the Hong Kong College of Psychiatrists. 1994;4(Suppl. 2):25–28. [Google Scholar]
• Crowne DP, Marlowe D. A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology. 1960;24:349–354. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Erikson EH. The life cycle completed: Extended version with new chapters on the ninth stage of development past Joan Chiliad. Erikson. New York: Norton; 1997. [Google Scholar]
• Erikson EH. Childhood and society. 2nd ed. New York: Norton; 1963. [Google Scholar]
• Erikson EH, Erikson JM, Kivnick HQ. Vital involvement in old age. New York: Norton; 1986. [Google Scholar]
• Erikson M. Reflections on generativity and society: A sociologist'southward perspective. In: de St. Aubin Eastward, McAdams DP, Kim T-C, editors. The generative guild: Caring for futurity generations. Washington, DC: American Psychological Clan; 2004. pp. 51–61. [Google Scholar]
• Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR. "Mini-mental state": A applied method for grading the cognitive country of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research. 1975;12:189–198. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Grossbaum MF, Bates GW. Correlates of psychological well-being at midlife: The role of generativity, agency and communion, and narrative themes. International Periodical of Behavioral Development. 2002;26:120–127. [Google Scholar]
• Hannah MT, Domino G, Figueredo AJ, Hendrickson R. The prediction of ego integrity in older persons. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 1996;56:930–950. [Google Scholar]
• Heckhausen J, Schulz R. A life-bridge theory of control. Psychological Review. 1995;102:284–304. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Hu L, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling. 1999;6:1–55. [Google Scholar]
• James JB, Zarrett N. Ego integrity in the lives of older women. Journal of Adult Development. 2006;13:61–75. [Google Scholar]
• Keyes CLM, Ryff CD. Generativity in developed lives: Social structural contours and quality of life consequences. In: McAdams DP, de St Aubin Due east, editors. Generativity and adult evolution. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 1998. [Google Scholar]
• Keyes CLM, Shmotkin D, Ryff CD. Optimizing well-being: The empirical encounter of ii traditions. Periodical of Personality and Social Psychology. 2002;82:1007–1022. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Kotre J. Outliving the self: How we live on in future generations. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Academy Press; 1984. [Google Scholar]
• Little TD, Cunningham WA, Shahar G, Widaman KF. To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighting the merits. Structural Equation Modeling. 2002;9:151–173. [Google Scholar]
• Marsh HW, Hau KT, Grayson D. Goodness of fit in structural equation models. In: Maydeu-Olivares A, McArdle JJ, editors. Gimmicky psychometrics: A festschrift for Roderick P. McDonald. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 2005. pp. 225–340. [Google Scholar]
• McAdams DP. Power, intimacy, and the life story: Personological inquiries into identity. New York: Guilford; 1985. [Google Scholar]
• McAdams DP, de St Aubin E. A theory of generativity and its assessment through cocky-report, behavioral acts, and narrative themes in autobiography. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1992;62:1003–1015. [Google Scholar]
• McAdams DP, de St Aubin Due east. Logan RL. Generativity among immature, midlife, and older adults. Psychology and Aging. 1993;8:221–230. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• McAdams DP, Hart HM, Maruna Southward. The anatomy of generativity. In: McAdams DP, de St Aubin E, editors. Generativity and adult development: How and why we intendance for the next generation. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 1998. pp. seven–43. [Google Scholar]
• Morgan DL, Schuster TL, Butler EW. Role reversals in the substitution of social support. Periodical of Gerontology. 1991;46:S278–S287. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Peterson BE, Klohnen EC. Realization of generativity in two samples of women at midlife. Psychology and Aging. 1995;10:xx–29. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Peterson Exist, Stewart AJ. Generativity and social motives in immature adults. Periodical of Personality and Social Psychology. 1993;65:186–198. [Google Scholar]
• Rossi AS. Domains and dimensions of social responsibleness: A sociodemographic contour. In: Rossi As, editor. Caring and doing for others: Social responsibility in the domains of family unit, work, and community. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2001. pp. 97–134. [Google Scholar]
• Rowe JW, Kahn RL. Successful aging. Gerontologist. 1997;37:433–440. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Ryff CD. Happiness is everything, or is information technology? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-existence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1989;57:1069–1081. [Google Scholar]
• Ryff CD, Heincke SG. Subjective organization of personality in adulthood and aging. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1983;44:807–816. [Google Scholar]
• Ryff CD, Love GD, Urry HL, Muller D, Rosenkranz MA, Friedman EM, Davidson RJ, Singer B. Psychological well-beingness and ill-being: Do they take distinct or mirrored biological correlates? Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics. 2006;75:85–95. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Sheldon KM, Kasser T. Getting older, getting better? Personal strivings and psychological maturity across the life span. Developmental Psychology. 2001;37:491–501. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Sobel ME. Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in structural equation modeling. In: Leinhardt S, editor. Sociological methodology. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 1982. pp. 290–312. [Google Scholar]
• Springer KW, Hauser RM. An assessment of the construct validity of Ryff'south Scales of Psychological Well-Being: Method, mode and measurement effects. Social Science Research. 2006;35:1080–1102. [Google Scholar]
• Steverink Due north, Lindenberg S. Which social needs are important for subjective well-being? What happens to them with aging? Psychology and Aging. 2006;21:281–290. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• Stewart AJ, Vandewater EA. The course of generativity. In: McAdams DP, de St Aubin E, editors. Generativity and adult development: How and why nosotros intendance for the next generation. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association; 1998. pp. 75–100. [Google Scholar]
• Strahan R, Gerbasi KC. Curt, homogeneous versions of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology. 1972;28:191–193. [Google Scholar]
• Streib GF. Old age in sociocultural context: Prc and the Us. Journal of Aging Studies. 1987;1:95–112. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
• United nations. Written report of the Second World Associates on Ageing. New York: Author; 2002. [Google Scholar]

holifieldyoustwou1977.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2654990/

Share this post