1 / 31

Environmental Gerontology and the Psychology of Aging

Environmental Gerontology and the Psychology of Aging. Hans-Werner Wahl Institute of Psychology, Department of Psychology Aging Research, University of Heidelberg Presentation on Workshop at CASE in Lund April 10-11, 2008. Pre-Warning.

abril
Download Presentation

Environmental Gerontology and the Psychology of Aging

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Environmental Gerontology and the Psychology of Aging Hans-Werner Wahl Institute of Psychology, Department of Psychology Aging Research, University of Heidelberg Presentation on Workshop at CASE in Lund April 10-11, 2008

  2. Pre-Warning I have purposefully planned this lecture as a workshop contribution That is: • I am going a bit global here and there • I am raising issues without the aspiration to provide final conceptual or empirical answers • I am taking the freedom to provide my view and this is hopefully seen as a stimulation and not as an unbalanced and egotistic perspective

  3. Outline Why a consideration of environmental gerontology and the psychology of aging? Ambition, goals and plan of attack of presentation Perspective I: Making better use of psychology of aging principles in environmental gerontology Perspective II: Making better use of environmental gerontology principles in the psychology of aging Attempt towards conceptual integration Suggestions for future research Possible practical implications

  4. Why a Consideration of Environmental Gerontology and the Psychology of Aging? Environmental Gerontology: “The overarching aim of environmental gerontology is to describe, explain, and modify / optimize the relationship between the aging person and his/her socio-physical environment, a task accomplished within an interdisciplinary framework.” (Wahl & Gitlin, 2007, p. 494)  P X E • Behavior, Cognition and Emotion Psychology of Aging: “Behavioral processes of aging”; “…how behavior is organized and how it changes over the course of life.” (Birren & Schaie, 2006, p. XVII); “…ecological view of aging, in which aging is seen as a result of diverse forces interacting.” (Birren, 2006, p. XV-XVI)

  5. Why a Consideration of Environmental Gerontology and the Psychology of Aging? • Society: Living the “new long live” as a major challenge for both environmental gerontology and psychology • Academia: Psychology had (has?) a major input on the emergence and unfolding of environmental gerontology • However: Environmental gerontology is still not well recognized by the psychology of aging, though “contextual issues” are en vogue in many spheres of the current psychology of aging • Examples: Cognitive aging; self-regulation and goal adjustment; selective optimization with compensation

  6. Environmental Gerontology (Focus on P X E) Psychology of Aging (Focus on Behavior, Cognition, Emotion, and Development) ! Ambitions, Goals and Plan of Attack of Presentation • To unfold predominantly a conceptual argument that the current environmental gerontology should take more profit from the psychology and aging – and vice versa • To consider the dynamics of aging both as a process of person-environment interrelations (see again: “ecological view of aging”; Birren, 2006, p. XV) as well as a developmental phenomenon deserving a life-span view

  7. Ambitions, Goals and Plan of Attack of Presentation • To underline that psychology brings in a life-span development view, able to link person-environmental interrelations with aging as a highly individualized process • To underline that what environmental gerontology offers to the understanding of person-environmental interrelations is able to enrich life-span developmental concepts

  8. Plan of Attack of Presentation • Begin with a selection of fundamental principles and concepts of the psychology of aging and developmental science and apply these to person-environment relations • Identify in exemplary manner concepts of environmental gerontology with the potential to infuse the psychology of aging and developmental science at large • Come up with a conceptual integration in order to delineate some of the synergies between both perspectives • Spell out some research and practice suggestions • Much is drawn from my collaboration with Frank Oswald!

  9. Perspective I: Making Better Use of Psychology of Aging Principles • Concept of human development – development as loss and gain  implications for the consideration of person-environment interrelations as people age [Baltes, 1987; Baltes, Lindenberger & Staudinger, 1998; Greve & Staudinger, 2006; Wahl et al., 2008] • Plasticity, reserve capacity, compensation and optimization  Think plasticity and related concepts of human development in person-environment terms • Great between-person differences as a result of life-long antecedents  Think heterogeneity of aging in person-environment terms; again: aging as a highly individualized process

  10. Perspective I: Making Better Use of Psychology of Aging Principles • Psychological resilience as among the major resources of development under constraints (such as advanced old age)  Role of person-environment interrelations • Multidimensionality and multidirectionality of aging  Should include some of the complexity of person-environment relations inherent in human aging  Antecedences, processes, and outcomes of aging  Empirical illustration with data from ENABLE-AGE Study

  11. A Closer Look at Multidirectionality in Very Old Age • Data from the ENABLE-AGE Survey Study [Iwarsson, Wahl, Nygren, Oswald et al al., 2007] • Aggregation of Swedish and German Data • Cross-sectional (across age-groups 80-81 years; 82-83 years; 84-85 years; 86-87 years; 88-89 years) AND • Longitudinal (across the available one-year observation period from data collection 1 / 2002-2003) • N’s per age group between 94 and 163 • Well-being related measures • Health and function related measures • Person-environment related measures

  12. Health and Function Related Measures Across Age Groups and Time Functional Limitations (Housing Enabler) ADL (ADL-Staircase) IADL (ADL-Staircase) Subjective Health (1-Item Rat. 1-5)

  13. Well-being Related Measures Across Age Groups and Time Positive Affect (PANAS) Negative Affect (PANAS) General Life Satisfaction (1 Item Rat. 0-10) Depression (GDS)

  14. Person-environment Related Measures Across Age Groups and Time Accessibility (Housing Enabler) Usability In My Home (Phys. Env. Aspects) Usability In My Home (Activity Aspects)

  15. Interpretation and Conclusion • There is pronounced loss in objective functional resources as well as in the objective behavioral person-environment fit (accessibility) even in a rather short advanced aging window both cross-sectionally and longitudinally • Subjective evaluations in terms of perceived health, well-being and the perceived usability of one’s environment seem to reflect such loss only marginally • Challenges:  Theoretically: The classic paradox of a pronounced discrepancy between objective and perceived age-related change should include the p-e sphere  Practically: P-e related intervention has to cover both dimensions; challenge to avoid early / late intervention

  16. Perspective I: Making Better Use of Psychology of Aging Principles Better understanding how well aging people are able to (reactively and proactively) regulate the aging self in context: • Goals and preferences in person-environment terms over the life course [Brandtstädter, 2006] • The complexities of a psychologicalcontrol as people age in a life-span view (reactivity, proactivity) [Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995; Lawton, 1989] • Improvement / optimization of person-environment fit as a multi-level phenomenon (social, physical, cultural /// objective and perceived) [Wahl & Lang, 2006] • Dealing with lack of person-environment fit as a natural and unavoidable occurrence of human aging [Baltes, 2006]

  17. Perspective II: Making Better Use of Environmental Gerontology Principles To start with a classic: The Competence-Press Model (CPM) as originally suggested by Lawton and Nahemow (1973) (reproduced after Lawton, 2000, p. 191)

  18. A Partial Operationalization of the CPM • Data from the ENABLE-AGE Survey Study [Iwarsson, Wahl, Nygren, Oswald et al al., 2007] • Data from Germany, Sweden and Latvia • Only cross-sectional data (T1) • Competence operationalized as number of functional limitations ( Housing Enabler) • Environmental press operationalized as number of environmental barriers in the home ( Housing Enabler) • Median split in both measures • Positive affect ( PANAS) • Negative affect ( PANAS)

  19. Competence, Environmental Press and Positive Affect Germany Sweden Latvia  Tendency that low competent elders show more loss in positive affect under high environmental press; high competent elders feel better under high environmental press?

  20. Competence, Environmental Press and Negative Affect Germany Sweden Latvia  Tendency that less competent elders do not necessarily feel worse under high environmental press

  21. Interpretation and Conclusion • There is some support that environmental press, competence and positive affect are indeed related • Data are so far inconsistent regarding negative affect • Challenges:  Theoretically: Environment reveals more impact on positive affect as people age?  Practically: Home as a significant condition for the experience of positive affect, not so much as a trigger of negative affect?

  22. Perspective II: Making Better Use of Environmental Gerontology Principles Better understanding how well aging people are able to regulate their environment in order to support the self: • Regulating environmental control and agency in person-environment terms over the life course [Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995; Wahl & Lang, 2006] • Environment as a major resource of aging well based on life-long internalization and familiarization [Rowles, 1983; Wahl & Oswald, in press] • Environment as a stimulating context for aging well [Wacker & Wahl, 2007] • Environment as a context for staying productive and exerting generativity [Staudinger, 2002]

  23. Attempts Toward Conceptual Integration • Attempt 1 toward better understanding and concept integration of person-environment interrelations (with a strong life span developmental focus)  Model of Wahl & Oswald (most recently spelled out in Dannefer/Phillipson, Eds., in press, International Handbook of the Social Gerontology) • Attempt 2 toward better understanding of fundamental human motivations across the adult lifespan (with a strong person-environment focus)  Model of Wahl & Lang (most recently spelled out in Conn, Ed., 2006, Handbook of Models of Human Aging)

  24. Attempts Toward Conceptual Integration • Attempt 3 toward better integration of environmental gerontology (through the lens of occupational therapy) and the psychology of aging  Work of Wahl & Iwarsson (in Fernandez-Ballesteros, Ed., 2007, Geropsychology. European perspectives for an ageing world)

  25. Wahl & Oswald (in press)

  26. Wahl & Lang (2006)

  27. Wahl & Iwarsson (2007) Why is collaboration between gero-psychology (GP) and occupational therapy (OT) a promising though still underused pathway for the treatment of p-e relations? • Emphasis is put on the physical environment as a still much neglected sphere in human aging research • ...but key concepts somewhat differ (e.g., OT: functional limitations, accessibility, activity; GP: psychological adaptation – goals, preferences, cognitions, emotions) • Need for a complementary understanding of person-environment transactions • Both GP and OT have added much to recent European contributions to environmental gerontology [Scheidt & Windley, 2006]

  28. Some Research Suggestions • Go for the long-term perspective, i.e., take a life-span view as strongly as possible, when it comes to the understanding of person-environmental interrelations  clearly see the limitations of a cross-sectional and static view approach regarding the p-e system • Always consider the multi-level character of the omnibus constructs of person and environment and person-environment interrelations Don’t interpret too much into a circumscribed and partial view on the p-e-system

  29. Some Research Suggestions • Acknowledge the paradox of aging as loss and gain also to be seen in the p-e system • Strive to understand how aging people are using the p-e- system in a variety of ways in order to stabilize their self • Don’t try to separate the objective from the perceived in understanding the p-e system

  30. Possible Practical Implications • Never do a p-e intervention without knowledge on life-span developmental issues related to the target person • Never do a p-e intervention without the consideration of multi-level impact in the short and longer run • Always keep in mind that aging persons are dealing in a variety of ways with their environments • Always keep in mind that environments have multiple meanings for aging persons • Never exaggerate the significance of the p-e system, but also never ignore the possibly fundamental role of the p-e system for human development, particularly in very old age

  31. Thank you very much for your attention!

More Related