Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-b6zl4 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-11T23:21:31.426Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An Alternative Approach to Understanding Generational Differences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 October 2015

Yi Wang  and
Yisheng Peng
Yi Wang*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Bowling Green State University
Yisheng Peng
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Bowling Green State University
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Yi Wang, Psychology Building, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, OH 43403. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

According to Costanza and Finkelstein (2015), the definition and measurement of generational membership could be two major problems inherent in the literature on generational differences. So far, researchers have defined generation in terms of groups of people belonging to the same cohorts, age groups, and experience of certain common events (Joshi, Dencker, & Franz, 2011). In this vein, generational difference is operationalized mostly as a categorical variable, and most researchers assign participants into generational categories based on date of birth. For instance, people born in 1958–1959 and 1973–1974 are typically divided into Boomers and Gen X, respectively (Twenge, Campbell, Hoffman, & Lance, 2010).

Type
Commentaries
Information
Industrial and Organizational Psychology , Volume 8 , Issue 3 , September 2015 , pp. 390 - 395
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ashforth, B. E., & Mael, F. (1989). Social identity theory and the organization. Academy of Management Review, 14 (1), 20–39.Google Scholar
Constantinople, A. (1973). Masculinity–femininity: An exception to a famous dictum? Psychological Bulletin, 80 (5), 389–407.Google Scholar
Costanza, D. P., Badger, J. M., Fraser, R. L., Severt, J. B., & Gade, P. A. (2012). Generational differences in work-related attitudes: A meta-analysis. Journal of Business and Psychology, 27 (4), 375–394. doi:10.1007/s10869-012-9259-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costanza, D. P., & Finkelstein, L. M. (2015). Generationally based differences in the workplace: Is there a there there? Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 8 (4), 308–323.Google Scholar
Egan, S. K., & Perry, D. G. (2001). Gender identity: A multidimensional analysis with implications for psychosocial adjustment. Developmental Psychology, 37 (4), 451–463.Google Scholar
Gardiner, S., Grace, D., & King, C. (2013). Challenging the use of generational segmentation through understanding self-identity. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, 31 (6), 639–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
George, L. K., Mutran, E. J., & Pennybacker, M. R. (1980). The meaning and measurement of age identity. Experimental Aging Research, 6 (3), 283–298.Google Scholar
Johnson, E. J., Haubl, G., & Keinan, A. (2007). Aspects of endowment: A query theory of value construction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33 (3), 461–474.Google Scholar
Joshi, A., Dencker, J. C., & Franz, G. (2011). Generations in organizations. Research in Organizational Behavior, 31, 177–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joshi, A., Dencker, J. C., Franz, G., & Martocchio, J. J. (2010). Unpacking generational identities in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 35 (3), 392–414.Google Scholar
Kelley, H. H. (1973). The processes of causal attribution. American Psychologist, 28 (2), 107–127.Google Scholar
Lancaster, L., & Stillman, D. (2002). When generations collide: Traditionalists, baby boomers, generation Xers, millennials: Who they are, why they clash, how to solve the generational puzzle at work. New York, NY: HarperBusiness.Google Scholar
Phinney, J. S., & Ong, A. D. (2007). Conceptualization and measurement of ethnic identity: Current status and future directions. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54 (3), 271–281.Google Scholar
Ponterotto, J. G., & Park-Taylor, J. (2007). Racial and ethnic identity theory, measurement, and research in counseling psychology: Present status and future directions. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 54 (3), 282–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Santos, S. R., & Cox, K. (2000). Workplace adjustment and intergenerational differences between matures, boomers, and Xers. Nurse Economics, 18 (1), 7–13.Google Scholar
Strauss, W., & Howe, N. (1991). Generations: The history of America's future, 1584 to 2069. New York, NY: Morrow.Google Scholar
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1985). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In Worchel, S. & Austin, W. G. (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (2nd ed., pp. 7–24). Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.Google Scholar
Twenge, J. M., Campbell, S. M., Hoffman, B. J., & Lance, C. E. (2010). Generational differences in work values: Leisure and extrinsic values increasing, social and intrinsic values decreasing. Journal of Management, 36 (5), 1117–1142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westerhof, G. J., & Barrett, A. E. (2005). Age identity and subjective well-being: A comparison of the United States and Germany. Journal of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 60 (3), S129–S136.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed