Age Versus Social Responsibility
Posted By Rob Millard - 0 Comments -
It is often said that social responsibility is primarily a trait of the younger Generation Xs and Generation Ys, certainly not those Baby Boomers over the age of 60. They're the ones that polluted the environment and caused all those wars, remember? Here's a data set, though, that seems to fly in the face of that assumption.
I came across the Seattle Longitudinal Study ("SLS") through my interest in inter-generational differences in professional firms and also issues surrounding ageing in the profession, within the context of the shortage of talent and hence a need to allow experienced professionals to continue practicing for longer if they are willing and able. It has made a useful addition to my doctoral research into strategy in law firms.
The SLS has tracked a group of people (18,000 in the original sample) in Seattle, USA every seven years for over 45 years now. The original intent of the study was organized around five questions:
1. Does intelligence change uniformly throughout adulthood or are there different life-course-ability patterns?
2. At what age and at what magnitude can decrement in ability be reliably detected?
3. What are the patterns and magnitude of generational differences?
4. What accounts for individual differences in age-related change in adulthood?
5. Can the intellectual decline that increases with age be reversed by educational intervention?
The graphic above comes from pages 287 - 289 of the latest report on the study (Schaie, 2005.) It shows a fascinating trend in the directly observed trait of social responsibility. I have isolated the trend lines from the 1963 and 1970 studies (the purple and the red line respectively) and the most recently published data, from 1991 and 1998 (the green and dark blue lines.) The lines indicate the level of social responsibility across the various age cohorts in each of the four studies.
In this study, Social Responsibility is derived from the Social Responsibility Scale in the California Psychological Inventory, which is a commonly used measure of a traditional view of what it means to be a socially responsible person. Social responsibility in this context may be defined as an ethical or ideological view that one (as an individual or as a member of a group) holds that one has a responsibility to society.
During the 1960s and probably early 1970s, it seems there was indeed a trend where social responsibility decreased steadily from age 50 - 60 onwards. For today's adult population, however, a very different picture exists. The data indicates that the level of social responsibility INCREASES STEADILY WITH AGE, with those in their 20s being the lowest and those over 65 highest. The difference between the two early trend lines and the two most recent trend lines is at its most pronounced after age 60.
What does this mean? I genuinely don't know for sure, but its worth finding out. I'd be fascinated to hear insights from readers of this blog. Why are those over 65 so much more socially responsbile than their predecessors were 30 - 40 years ago? Are today's 'baby boomers' really more socially responsible than the Gen Y's? If this is true, then perhaps other assumptions about generational differences also need to be challenged, too.
Reference: Schaie, K.W. (2005). Developmental influences on adult intelligence - The Seattle longitudinal study. New York: Oxford University Press. pp 287-9. Link to the book at Amazon.
http://www.robmillard.com/admin/trackback/47438