Abstract
Intergenerational transmission of generativity is a process through which one generation passes elements of its generative potential, such as values and patterns of behavior, on to another. So far, most research on intergenerational transmission of generativity came from relatively stable societies, where the transmission process might be facilitated by the fact that adjacent generations face relatively similar socioeconomic challenges and can therefore make use of similar solutions. In contrast, our study focused on the relationships between parental and offspring characteristics in the context of a society that had undergone a major macro-social change in the past few decades, involving the downfall of the communist regime and subsequent transformation of major political, cultural, and social structures and norms. Apart from examining whether relationships between parental and offspring generative concern and action would show patterns similar to those observed in previous studies, we looked at intergenerational similarities in stagnation, which was recently redefined as a construct partly separable from generativity (Van Hiel et al. Journal of Personality, 74(2), 543–574, 2006). One hundred and twenty-three predominantly female university students and their parents completed measures of generative concern, generative action, stagnation, and Big Five personality traits. Multiple-group path analysis revealed that the structure of the relationships between generativity, stagnation and personality traits did not differ significantly between the groups of parents and offspring. Further analyses showed that parental generative concern was not related to offspring generative concern, but maternal generative action was significantly related to offspring generative action, and maternal stagnation was significantly related to offspring stagnation. The parental level of education was unrelated to offspring generativity or stagnation. These results indicate a certain degree of intergenerational continuity of generativity and stagnation, especially their behavioral components, even though the two generations in our study were raised in different socio-cultural contexts.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Data Availability
The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Code Availability
Not applicable.
Notes
The original scale had 32 items; however, the original authors recommend discarding 2 items since their inclusion did not improve the scale’s internal consistency.
The fit remained acceptable after agreeableness was completely removed from the model, thus reducing the number of model degrees of freedom (χ2(3) = 7.64, p = .05; RMSEA = .07 [.00, .13]; CFI = .98; TLI = .91), although the value of RMSEA was inflated by the small df and the value of TLI reduced due to the generally weak paths between variables. For the purpose of the subsequent multiple-group analysis the fixed path between agreeableness and generative concern and stagnation was retained in the model.
References
Baldwin, M., Molina, L. E., & Naemi, P. (2020). Family ties: Exploring the influence of family legacy on self and identity. Self and Identity, 19(1), 64–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2018.1526820.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundation of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice Hall, Inc.
Blatný, M., Millová, K., Jelínek, M., & Romaňáková, M. (2019). Personality predictors of midlife generativity: A longitudinal study. Journal of Adult Development, 26(3), 219–231. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10804-018-9323-z.
Bradley, C. L. (1997). Generativity–stagnation: Development of a status model. Developmental Review, 17(3), 262–290. https://doi.org/10.1006/drev.1997.0432.
Bradley, C. L., & Marcia, J. E. (1998). Generativity-stagnation: A five-category model. Journal of Personality, 66(1), 39–64. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.00002.
Chaloupková, J. (2006). Dohromady, nebo každý zvlášť? Hospodaření s příjmy manželských a nesezdaných párů. [Joint or separate? Income management among married and cohabitating couples]. Sociologický časopis / Czech Sociological Review, 42, 971–986.
Chan, C. G., & Elder Jr., G. H. (2001). Family influences on the social participation of youth: The effects of parental social involvement and farming. Rural Sociology, 66(1), 22–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1549-0831.2001.tb00053.x.
Cheng, S.-T. (2009). Generativity in later life: Perceived respect from younger generations as a determinant of goal disengagement and psychological well-being. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 64B(1), 45–54. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbn027.
Costa, P T., & McCrae, R. (1992). Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO five factor model (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Psychological Assessment Centre.
Cox, K. S., Wilt, J., Olson, B., & McAdams, D. P. (2010). Generativity, the big five, and psychosocial adaptation in midlife adults. Journal of Personality, 78(4), 1185–1208. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00647.x.
Czech Statistical Office (2014). Úroveň vzdělání obyvatelstva podle výsledků sčítání lidu – 2011. [Population education level according to results of the census – 2011]. Czech Statistical Office. https://www.czso.cz/documents/10180/25385875/19922387+240001313.pdf/e36dc52f-3b49-4801-9a31-bd5ab4f26de7?version=1.0.
Czech Statistical Office (2017). Total divorce rate, 1950–2016. Czech Statistical Office. https://www.czso.cz/csu/czso/total-divorce-rate-1950-2016.
de St. Aubin, E., & McAdams, D. P. (1995). The relations of generative concern and generative action to personality traits, satisfaction/happiness with life, and ego development. Journal of Adult Development, 2(2), 99–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02251258.
Einolf, C. J. (2014). Stability and change in generative concern: Evidence from a longitudinal survey. Journal of Research in Personality, 51, 54–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2014.04.003.
Elder Jr., G. H. (1998). The life course as developmental theory. Child Development, 69(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1998.tb06128.x.
Erikson, E. H. (1950/2002). Dětství a společnost [childhood and society]. Argo.
Eurostat (2015). Mean age of women at birth of first child, 1995, 2000, 2005 and 2012. Eurostat. http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=File:Mean_age_of_women_at_birth_of_first_child,_1995,_2000,_2005_and_2012_(years)_BYIE15.png&oldid=228653
Eurostat (2018). Population by educational attainment level, sex and age. Eurostat. http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/submitViewTableAction.do
Faßbender, K., Wiebe, A., & Bates, T. C. (2019). 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. Behavior Genetics, 49(2), 244–257. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10519-018-9943-x.
Guastello, D. D., Guastello, S. J., & Briggs, J. M. (2014). Parenting style and generativity measured in college students and their parents. Sage Open, January–March, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244013518053.
Hart, H. M., McAdams, D. P., Hirsch, B. J., & Bauer, J. (2001). Generativity and social involvements among African-American and among euro-American adults. Journal of Research in Personality, 35(2), 208–230. https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.2001.2318.
Hřebíčková, M., & Kouřilová, S. (2012). Jak se vidíme, jak nás vidí a jací jsme: Porovnání národního auto- a heterostereotypu s posuzováním reálných lidí v kontextu pětifaktorového modelu osobnosti. [How do we see ourselves, how are we seen and how we are: Comparison of Czech national auto- and heterostereotypes with ratings of real Czechs in context of five-factor model of personality]. Československá psychologie, 56(1), 1–17.
Hřebíčková, M., & Urbánek, T. (2001). NEO pětifaktorový osobnostní inventář (podle NEO Five-Factor Inventory P.T. Costy a R.R. McCraee). [NEO five factor personality inventory (according to NEO five-factor inventory by P.T. Costa and R.R. McCrae]. Testcentrum.
Karacan, E. (2007). Effect of parenting on adult development and generativity. Dissertation thesis: The Graduate School of Social Sciences of Middle East Technical University.
Keyes, C. L. M., & Ryff, C. D. (1998). Generativity in adult lives: Social structural contours and quality of life consequences. In D. P. McAdams & E. de St. Aubin (Eds.), Generativity and adult development: How and why we care for the next generation (pp. 227–263). American Psychological Association.
Klicperová, M., Feierabend, I. K., & Hofstetter, C. R. (1997). In the search for a post-communist syndrome. A theoretical framework and empirical assessment. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 7(1), 39–52.
Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and practice of structural equation modelling (4th ed.). The Guilford Press.
Kruse, A., & Schmitt, E. (2012). Generativity as a route to active ageing. Current Gerontology and Geriatric Research, 2012(2), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/647650.
Lawford, H., Pratt, M. W., Hunsberger, B., & Pancer, S. M. (2005). Adolescent generativity: A longitudinal study of two possible contexts for learning concern for future generations. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 15(3), 261–273. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7795.2005.00096.x.
Leikas, S., Ilmarinen, V.-J., Verkasalo, M., Vartiainen, H.-L., & Lönquist, J.-E. (2018). Relationship satisfaction and similarity of personality traits, personal values, and attitudes. Personality and Individual Differences, 123, 191–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.11.024.
Loehlin, J. C. (2005). Resemblance in personality and attitudes between parents and their children: Genetic and environmental contributions. In S. Bowles, H. Gintis, & M. Osborne Groves (Eds.), Unequal chances: Family background and economic success (pp. 192–207). Princeton University Press.
Mahatmya, D., & Lohman, B. J. (2012). Predictors and pathways to civic involvement in emerging adulthood: Neighborhood, family, and school influences. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 41(9), 1168–1183. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-012-9777-4.
Malone, J. C., Liu, S. R., Vaillant, G. E., Rentz, D. M., & Waldinger, R. J. (2016). Midlife eriksonian psychosocial development: Setting the stage for late-life cognitive and emotional health. Developmental Psychology, 52(3), 496–508. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039875.
Marsiglio, W. (1991). Paternal engagement activities with minor children. Journal of Marriage and Family, 53(4), 973–986. https://doi.org/10.2307/353001.
McAdams, D. P., & de St. Aubin, E. (1992). A theory of generativity and its assessment through self-report, behavioral acts, and narrative themes in autobiography. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62(6), 1003–1015. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.62.6.1003.
McAdams, D. P., de St. Aubin, E., & Logan, R. L. (1993). Generativity among young, midlife, and older adults. Psychology and Aging, 8(2), 221–230. https://doi.org/10.1037//0882-7974.8.2.221.
McAdams, D. P., Hart, H. M., & Maruna, S. (1998). The anatomy of generativity. In D. P. McAdams & E. de St. Aubin (Eds.), Generativity and adult development: How and why we care for the next generation (pp. 7–43). American Psychological Association.
McBride, A. M., Sherraden, M. S., & Pritzker, S. (2006). Civic engagement among low-income and low-wealth families: In their words. Family Relations, 55(2), 152–162. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2006.00366.x.
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T., Jr. (2003). Personality in adulthood: A five-factor theory perspective (2nd. ed.). Guilford Press.
McCrae, R. R., Martin, T. A., Hřebíčková, M., Urbánek, T., Boomsma, B. I., Willemsen, G., & Costa Jr., P. T. (2008). Personality trait similarity between spouses in four cultures. Journal of Personality, 76, 1137–1164. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2008.00517.x.
McDonald, R. P. (1999). Test theory: A unified treatment. Erlbaum.
McNeish, D. (2018). Thanks coefficient alpha, we’ll take it from here. Psychological Methods, 23(3), 412–433. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000144.
Millová, K., Blatný, M., Poláčková, I., & Jelínek, M. (2018). Psychometrické charakteristiky českých verzí vybraných dotazníků generativity: vnitřní konzistence a faktorová struktura. [Psychometric characteristics of Czech versions of selected generativity measures: Internal consistency and factor structure]. Československá psychologie, 62(2), 119–142.
Newton, N. J., Chauhan, P. K., & Pates, J. L. (2020). Facing the future: Generativity, stagnation, intended legacies, and well-being in later life. Journal of Adult Development, 27(1), 70–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10804-019-09330-3.
Newton, N. J., & Jones, B. K. (2016). Passing on: Personal attributes associated with midlife expressions of intended legacies. Developmental Psychology, 52(2), 341–353. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039905.
OECD (2017). How’s life in Czech Republic? OECD. https://www.oecd.org/statistics/Better-Life-Initiative-country-note-Czech-Republic.pdf.
OECD. (2018). Family Database: SF3.1 Marriage and divorce rate. OECD, http://www.oecd.org/social/family/database.htm.
Peterson, B. E. (2006). Generativity and successful parenting: An analysis of young adult outcomes. Journal of Personality, 74(3), 847–870. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00394.x.
Peterson, B. E., Smirles, K. A., & Wenthworth, P. A. (1997). Generativity and authoritarianism: Implications for personality, political involvement, and parenting. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(5), 1202–1216. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.5.1202.
Pratt, M. W., Norris, J. E., Alisat, S., & Bisson, E. (2013). Earth mothers (and fathers): Examining generativity and environmental concerns in adolescents and their parents. Journal of Moral Education, 42(1), 12–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057240.2012.714751.
Revelle, W. (2017). Psych (version 1.7.5) [computer software and manual]. The Comprehensive R Archive Network. http://cran.r-project.org.
Richardson, H. A., Simmering, M. J., & Sturman, M. C. (2009). A tale of three perspectives: Examining post hoc statistical techniques for detection and correction of common method variance. Organizational Research Methods, 12(4), 762–800. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428109332834.
Rosseel, Y. (2012). Lavaan: An R package for structural equation modelling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48, 1–36. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v048.i02.
Satorra, A., & Bentler, P. M. (1994). Corrections to test statistics and standard errors in covariance structure analysis. In A. von Eye & C. C. Clogg (Eds.), Latent variables analysis: Applications for developmental research (pp. 399–419). Sage Publications, Inc.
Silbereisen, R. K., & Chen, X. (Eds.). (2010). Social change and human development: Concepts and results. Sage.
Son, J., & Wilson, J. (2011). Generativity and volunteering. Sociological Forum, 26(3), 644–667. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1573-7861.2011.01266.x.
Stewart, A. J., & Vandewater, E. A. (1998). The course of generativity. In D. P. McAdams & E. de St. Aubin (Eds.), Generativity and adult development (pp. 75–100). American Psychological Association Press.
Van Hiel, A., Mervielde, I., & De Fruyt, F. (2006). Stagnation and generativity: Structure, validity, and differential relationships with adaptive and maladaptive personality. Journal of Personality, 74(2), 543–574. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00384.x.
Verma, M., Seth, S., & Chadha, N. K. (2017). Intergenerational familial relationships from the lens of generativity. Indian Journal of Positive Psychology, 8(4), 554–557.
Villar, F., & Serrat, R. (2014). A field in search of concepts: The relevance of generativity to understanding intergenerational relationships. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships, 12(4), 381–397. https://doi.org/10.1080/15350770.2014.960352.
Wallace, C., Pichler, F., & Haerpfer, V. (2012). Changing patterns in civil society in Europe and America 1995-2005: Is Eastern Europe different? East European Politics and Societies, 26(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888325411401380.
Funding
The study was supported by the Czech Republic’s support for long-term strategic development for research organizations (RVO: 68081740).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Katarína Millová, Tatiana Malatincová and Marek Blatný. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Katarína Millová and Tatiana Malatincová and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethics Approval
This study was approved by the Ethical Committee of the Institute of Psychology, Czech Academy of Sciences. The study was performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments.
Consent to Participate
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Conflict of Interests
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
ESM 1
(PDF 327 kb)
Rights and permissions
About this article
_BYIE15.png&oldid=228653){kind=link}
Cite this article
Millová, K., Malatincová, T. & Blatný, M. Intergenerational transmission of generativity and stagnation within families in a society after a macrosocial change: A two-generation study. Curr Psychol 42, 3061–3075 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01688-6
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01688-6
Keywords
- Generativity
- Stagnation
- Families
- Macrosocial change
- Education
- Personality traits