Generativity, the Big Five, and Psychosocial Adaptation in Midlife Adults

Cox, Keith S.; Wilt, Joshua; Olson, Bradley D.; McAdams, Dan P.

doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00647.x

Cited by 75 publications

(63 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous research has found that generative concern and action is associated with psychological well-being and with well-adjusted personality types (de St. Aubin & McAdams, 1995;Cox, Wilt, Olson, & McAdams, 2010). Consistent with this prior research and a positive interpretation of this function, we found that memories elicited to items from the Generative function were rated more emotionally positive (in Study 3).…”

Section: Generative Functionsupporting

confidence: 81%

The functions of autobiographical memory: An integrative approach

Harris

Rasmussen

Berntsen

2013

Memory

169

167

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent research in cognitive psychology has emphasized the uses, or functions, of autobiographical memory. Theoretical and empirical approaches have focused on a three-function model: autobiographical memory serves self, directive, and social functions. In the reminiscence literature, other taxonomies and additional functions have been postulated. We examined the relationships between functions proposed by these literatures, in order to broaden conceptualisations and make links between research traditions. In Study 1, we combined two measures of individual differences in the uses of autobiographical memory. Our results suggested four classes of memory functions, which we labelled Reflective, Generative, Ruminative, and Social. In Study 2, we tested relationships between our four functions and broader individual differences, and found conceptually consistent relationships. In Study 3, we found that memories cued by Generative and Social functions were more emotionally positive than were memories cued by Reflective and Ruminative functions. In Study 4, we found that reported use of Generative functions increased across the lifespan, while reported use of the other three functions decreased. Overall, our findings suggest a broader view of autobiographical memory functions that links them to ways in which people make meaning of their selves, their environment, and their social world more generally. Memory, 22, th June , available online at: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080June /09658211.2013. NOTICE: This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in 3 The Functions of Autobiographical Memory: An Integrative ApproachTheoretical perspectives across a range of traditions have suggested that we use our autobiographical memories to develop a coherent sense of our selves, our emotions, our future plans, and our relationships with other people (Bluck & Alea, 2008;Conway, 2005;Conway & Pleydell-Pearce, 2000;Habermas, 2007;Habermas & de Silveira, 2008;McLean & Pasupathi, 2006(?);Olivares, 2010;Pasupathi, 2006). Because of the rich role of autobiographical memory in daily life, the ways people use their memories is relevant across cognitive (e.g., Conway, 2005), clinical (e.g. Berntsen & Rubin, 2007), developmental (e.g. Kulkofsky, 2011), social (e.g. Beaman, Pushkar, Etezadi, Bye, & Conway, 2007Goddard, Dritschel, & Burton, 1997), and personality psychology (e.g. Habermas, 2007;McLean, 2005). Here, we define function as "reasons for remembering" or "uses of autobiographical memory" or "motivations for remembering", consistent with explicit definitions in the cognitive memory functions literature (e.g. Bluck & Alea, 2011;Bluck, Alea, Habermas, & Rubin, 2005). That is, we do not necessarily equate function with "adaptiveness", nor make strong claims about the adaptive vs. maladaptive nature of the reasons that people give for thinking about or talking about the past, (although we return to this point and issues with determining "adaptiveness" in the Discussion).The primary aim of the c...

show abstract

Section: Generative Functionsupporting

confidence: 81%

The functions of autobiographical memory: An integrative approach

Harris

Rasmussen

Berntsen

2013

Memory

169

167

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other research on the correlates of generativity has demonstrated links to well-being and life satisfaction (Ackerman et al 2000; An and Cooney 2006; Aubin and McAdams 1995; Cox et al 2010; Grossbaum and Bates 2002; Keyes and Ryff 1998; McAdams et al 1993). While more work is needed to demonstrate if high levels of generativity affect, for instance, innovations improving social, political, or commercial life, and choices made which improve outcomes for future generations, it is fair to say that the LGS appears to be a valid measure according to evidence from multiple realms: from family and relationships to work and society and encompasses new creations that help future generations as well as direct guidance of future generations (McAdams 2013).…”

Section: Beyond Family: the Effects Of Transmitted Cognitive Capitalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Physical and Cultural Inheritance Enhance Agency, but What are the Origins of this Concern to Establish a Legacy? A Nationally-Representative Twin Study of Erikson’s Concept of Generativity

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Generativity—showing concern to establish and guide future generations—has been argued to be a biological adaptation central to cumulative culture and survival, but also, in turn, to be a cultural adaptation dependent on norms. From the perspective of human agency, concern for the future has played a key role in raising agency for generations that follow by creating infrastructure and cultural inheritance. Here, in a population-representative sample of 756 twin-pairs, we present the first test of the genetic and environmental structure of generativity using the Loyola Generativity Scale (short). Genetic analysis of scale sum-scores revealed that shared environmental effects were comparable in magnitude or exceeded effects estimated for genetic differences (A = 0.30 CI95 [− 0.01, 0.61], C = 0.41 [0.25, 0.56], E = 0.86 [0.79, 0.93]). At the item level, a well-fitting genetically-informed model suggested 3 factors influencing generativity via a common-pathway structure. The first was tentatively characterized as reflecting a heritable general concern for the future. The second reflected being a valued source of advice and assistance. The third factor showed only unique environment effects and had as its strongest indicator having had a good influence on the lives of others. Replicability of this structure should be tested in the full version of the scale. Work is needed also to validate influences of generativity on vocations such as teaching and on philanthropic activity improving life for subsequent generations.

show abstract

“…PSA includes multiple dimensions such as social behavior, emotional regulation, and the development of social habits (Bishop et al, 2005; Cox et al, 2010). Psychosocial functioning represents an ecological approach to everyday adaptation as well as a theoretical approach which integrates cognition and emotion (Wilson, 2008).…”

Section: A Preliminary Model Of Fi Sc and Pca As Predictors Of Psamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…PSA, defined as the quality of social life and subjective well-being of an individual in context (Bishop et al, 2008; Cox et al, 2010), is relevant for proper development. Research suggests that the prefrontal cortex plays a major role in adaptation, given its involvement in behavioral flexibility, executive functions, FI, and SC (Van Horn et al, 2012; Waters-Wood et al, 2012).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%