Article

How Do Older Adults Define Successful Aging? A Scoping Review

Barbra Teater 1 and Jill M. Chonody

2

Abstract

Successful aging is a prominent theory that describes the aging process and the

expected activities and behaviors older adults should engage in or exhibit to age

successfully. Although this theory is used to gauge the extent to which older adults

are aging successfully, older adults’ experiences and perspectives of what successful

aging means to them are missing from the theory. A five-step scoping review frame-

work was used to explore and synthesize the existing research that investigated

older adults’ perspectives on successful aging. Twelve main themes were found

and ranged from the importance of social relationships and interactions to having

a good death. Findings indicated older adults do not define successful aging as strictly

as is found in the literature. Old age and the aging process from the views of older

adults provide future directions for theory development and research.

Keywords

aging, successful aging, older adults, scoping review, aging theory

1 Department of Social Work, College of Staten Island, City University of New York, Staten Island,

NY, USA 2 Boise State University, Boise, ID, USA

Corresponding Author:

Barbra Teater, College of Staten Island, 2800 Victory Blvd. 2A, 201, Staten Island, NY 10314, USA.

Email: [email protected]

The International Journal of Aging

and Human Development

0(0) 1–27

! The Author(s) 2019 Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0091415019871207

journals.sagepub.com/home/ahd

Article

The International Journal of Aging and Human Development 2020, Vol. 91(4) 599–625

© The Author(s) 2019 Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0091415019871207

journals. sagepub. com/ home/ ahd

 

 

600 The International Journal of Aging and Human Development 91(4)

Aging is a socially constructed phenomenon and how it is perceived and expe- rienced is influenced by culture, societal expectations, and individuals’ lived experiences (Brooks, 2010; Chonody & Teater, 2018). Old age has historically

been defined through governmental policies by establishing a specific chrono- logical age to denote an “older person” and is used to determine eligibility for

particular services (e.g., age 67 to receive Social Security benefits in the United States if born after 1960). Likewise, expectations and explanations of behaviors of people who are classified as “older” adults have been presented through

sociological, psychological, and gerontological theories, including disengage- ment theory (Cumming & Henry, 1961), productive ageing (Bass, Caro, &

Chen, 1993), activity theory (Havighurst, 1961), healthy ageing (White House Conference on Ageing, 2015), successful ageing (Rowe & Kahn, 1997), and active aging (World Health Organization, 2002). However, over the past 15 to

20 years, successful aging has become a prominent aging paradigm in the sub- stantive literature, yet a close examination of successful aging reveals that the

voices of older adults are missing. This is a significant flaw in theory develop- ment in that older adults’ experiences and perspectives play an essential role in understanding and explaining aging. Therefore, this scoping review aims to

review the literature to explore and synthesize the existing research that inves- tigated older adults’ views and definitions of successful aging.

Literature Review

Theories and Frameworks of Aging

Historically, the coming of old age was seen as a time associated with disease and disability and as disengagement theory proposed, a period of withdrawal or

disengagement from social interactions and activities (Cumming & Henry, 1961). Relatedly, activity theory purports that old age is a time when older

adults adjust, redefine, and substitute their roles and activities in an attempt to maintain their sense of self (Havighurst, 1961). Over time, theorists began rejecting these premises, and positive theories of aging that focused on health

and activity were proposed. Productive aging is one such theory and argues that older adults needed to remain active and productive through engagement in

social activities and through the production of goods and services via paid and volunteer employment, thus reducing their reliance on social services (Bass et al., 1993). The more recent concept of healthy aging, which is defined

as “living a long productive, meaningful life and enjoying a high quality of life” (White House Conference on Ageing, 2015), also aims to maximize older adults’

physical, social, and mental well-being to promote independence and reduce burdens on others. Yet, both of these theories fail to consider social and

2 The International Journal of Aging and Human Development 0(0)

 

 

Teater and Chonody 601

environmental factors that contribute to the extent to which one can age “healthy” (Mendes, 2013).

More current aging theories, such as active aging and successful aging, were developed as a counter response to theories that focused on decline, loss, and disengagement. Active aging is a positive policy framework that focuses on the connection of health and activity through six determinants: health and social services; behavioral; personal; physical; social; and economic, with cross-cutting determinants of culture and gender. Active aging was developed by the World Health Organization (2002) as a policy framework to assist governments in promoting and supporting active aging, which they defined as:

[T]he process of optimizing opportunities for health, participation, and security in

order to enhance quality of life as people age [ . . . ] The word ‘active’ refers to

continuing participation in social, economic, cultural, spiritual, and civic affairs,

not just the ability to be physically active or to participate in the labor force. [. . .]

Active aging aims to extend healthy life expectancy and quality of life for all people

as they age, including those who are frail, disabled, and in need of care. (p. 12)

Finally, successful aging is achieved when individuals exhibit the following: (a) low probability of disease and disability, (b) high cognitive and physical func- tional capacity, and (c) high social activity and engagement in social relation- ships (Rowe & Kahn, 1997). Many argue that this theory pushed too far in the other direction whereby older adults are being held to unrealistic standards in order to be “successful” (Foster & Walker, 2015; Martinson & Berridge, 2015; Morell, 2003; Rubinstein & de Medeiros, 2015; Teater & Chonody, 2017; Walker, 2009). Furthermore, the focus on remaining free of disease and disabil- ity fails to acknowledge the natural changes that occur in an aging body (Teater & Chonody, 2017) and implies “hostility toward ageing bodies” (Morell, 2003, p. 69). In addition, successful aging assumes that “through individual choice and effort” one can age successfully and remain physically and socially active (Rowe & Kahn, 1997, p. 37). This individualist view supports reduction in governmen- tal policies that “provide social and other supports for [older adults] . . . and, notably, to address the social and structural inequalities that create illness and disability in the first place” (Martinson & Berridge, 2015, p. 63).

Although successful aging aims to take a more positive view of aging by focus- ing on health promotion, activity, and the positive features of aging, it was devel- oped without the input of older adults’ views and experiences or an evaluation of the extent to which the theory’s principles and premises adequately depict the lived experiences of older adults. Without exploring “how the social meanings ascribed to aging interact with individuals’ lived experiences of the aging process,” aging is being socially constructed and defined by culture instead (Brooks, 2010, p. 238).

Teater and Chonody 3

 

 

602 The International Journal of Aging and Human Development 91(4)

Measuring Successful Aging

Successful aging has been used to explain the aging process but has also been

used as the basis for determining the extent to which older adults are aging

successfully. For example, Kim (2008) developed a 31-item instrument to mea-

sure successful aging on a 5-point Likert-type scale (1 ¼ never; 5 ¼ always), which was comprised of items on autonomous life, self-realization, active par-

ticipation in life, satisfaction with children, self-acceptance, and acceptance of

others. Phelan, Anderson, LaCroix, and Larson (2004) developed the successful

aging questionnaire where 20 factors of successful aging, consisting of aspects of

psychological, social, physical, and functional health, were identified from the

existing literature where older adults rated on a 3-point Likert-type scale how

important they believed each attribute was to successful aging (1 ¼ not impor- tant, 2 ¼ neutral, and 3 ¼ important). The older adults in Phelan et al.’s study reported that health, freedom from disability, life satisfaction, close personal

relationships, staying active and involved, maintaining independence, meeting

needs, adapting to aging-related changes, self-acceptance, and mastery were

most important, which supported the successful aging theory. Both Kim and Phelan et al.’s studies assessed successful aging by predefining

the factors versus asking older adults to define successful aging themselves,

which may create an inaccurate picture of reality. Hilton, Gonzalez, Saleh,

Maitoza, and Anngela-Cole (2012) highlighted a weakness in Phelan et al.’s

study, which is the failure to include financial security and religiosity/spiritual-

ity; factors older adults often mention as important to their well-being. The

potential incongruence between predefining the factors of successful aging and

self-assessment by older adults was underscored in a mixed-methods study

where quantitative scores on physical, social, and psychocognitive functions

indicated lower levels of successful aging among a group of older adults who

qualitatively considered themselves to have aged successfully (von Faber et al.,

2001). In addition, Montross et al. (2006) found 92% of community-dwelling

older adults aged 60 years and older to perceive themselves as aging successfully

despite experiencing a disease or disability. Such studies point to the need for

more open-ended measures given that the current views on aging are not

informed by older adults’ perspectives but, rather, by what others—often

academic researchers—think older adults need (Clarke & Warren, 2007).

The Subjective Experience of Older Adults in Defining Successful Aging

The incongruence found between predefined measures of successful aging and

self-assessment may be related to variations among older adults given they are a

heterogeneous group. Therefore, theories of aging should incorporate differing

views of the aging experience based on gender, culture, health status, and

other identities as such dimensions could help or hinder the aging process

4 The International Journal of Aging and Human Development 0(0)

 

 

Teater and Chonody 603

(Martinson & Berridge, 2015). For example, older adults in non-Western soci- eties may not subscribe to the ideals of successful aging as they may value interdependence and family relations more than the promotion of autonomy, independence, and individual responsibility (Amin, 2017). Moreover, accessibil- ity to resources is not equitable, which can shape how people age. Narrative or life history research may be useful in further capturing how aging is understood among different groups of older adults, and “allow for the examination of how perceptions of aging may vary at different times and across the shifting contexts of people’s lives” (Dionigi, Horton, & Bellamy, 2011, p. 416). Such knowledge allows for a more accurate representation of experiences, referred to as bio- graphical aging, which enables older adults to adapt to or cope with life chal- lenges while also creating alternative meanings of the aging process based on experience and understanding of the self (Chapman, 2005; Dionigi et al., 2011). Acknowledging individual life stories allows for alternative explanations of aging and the aging process that can be valued and accepted among different groups of older adults, thus refuting the belief that all older adults should be held to one standard of “successful” aging.

This scoping review aims to begin this challenge by (a) identifying any exist- ing research that examined the perspectives of older adults on their views of successful aging, (b) summarizing the themes found in this research, (c) com- paring older adults’ views and definitions to successful aging, and (d) providing future directions for the conceptualization of old age and the aging process based on the views of older adults.

Methodology

A scoping review framework was used to explore existing research on older adults’ perspectives of successful aging. A scoping review is “a form of knowl- edge synthesis that addresses an exploratory research question aimed at map- ping key concepts, types of evidence, and gaps in research related to a defined area or field by systematically searching, selecting, and synthesizing existing knowledge” (Colquhoun et al., 2014, pp. 1292–1294). The aim of a scoping review is not to critique the methodology of the studies reviewed but rather to synthesize the evidence on a topic of interest (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005).

The five steps in conducting a scoping review were followed as described by Levac, Colquhoun, and O’Brien (2010). The first step is to identify the research question, which was as follows: How do older adults define successful aging?” Given our interest in how participant driven research yields a conceptualization of successful aging, we delimited our research question to exclude researcher- driven ideas of successful aging. The second step in this process was to identify relevant studies. For this review, academic databases (Academic Search Premier; Abstracts in Social Gerontology; Family & Society Studies Worldwide; PsycINFO; Social Work Abstracts) were searched using the following search

Teater and Chonody 5

 

 

604 The International Journal of Aging and Human Development 91(4)

terms: successful aging, active aging, productive aging, healthy aging, attitudes, older adults. The positive aging theories of active aging, productive aging, and healthy aging were included in the search to review whether the studies were exploring successful aging in addition to these other positive theories, for exam- ple, asking older adults to define or provide examples of successful aging (see Lewis, 2013). Articles were limited to those available in English and published from 2002 to 2017. The search of the literature yielded 366 articles.

The third step in a scoping review is to determine whether each of the studies met the inclusion criteria. In addition to the parameters set around publication years and availability in English, the inclusion criteria included research on successful aging from the perspective of older adults through open-ended ques- tions to determine older adults’ definitions, experiences, and perspectives of successful aging (e.g., “What does successful aging mean to you?”; “What is involved in the process of successful aging?”). Articles where the researchers predefined successful aging were excluded, for example, when researchers uti- lized preexisting measures of successful aging or predefined the possible key elements of successful aging. Both researchers independently reviewed all 366 abstracts identified in the search. Once this process was complete, 56 articles were identified for possible inclusion. The researchers discussed this list together and reviewed the abstracts again to resolve any uncertainties of whether to include or exclude the article. After this process, 42 articles remained, and the full articles were downloaded. Upon reviewing these articles, an additional 12 articles were excluded primarily because upon closer examination, it was found that the researcher versus participants were delineating the definition for successful aging.

The fourth step involved charting the data or findings of the review. For this review, a data extraction form was created to chart the data, which included demographics of the sample, research design, instruments used, questions asked, sampling method, data analysis, and findings. The researchers worked together to develop this form, and then each researcher independently extracted data from the first two articles in the final list. This process helped to determine whether extraction was aligned with the research question (Levac et al., 2010). These extractions were discussed, and then the researchers divided the remaining articles for independent extraction. Once this process was complete, researchers discussed their extractions and once again explored how each article aligned with the purpose of the review. An additional eight articles were found to be slightly off topic; that is, the findings were focused on an element of aging, such as the meaning of death, but participants were not asked to provide their per- spective on successful aging. Thus, the final sample of articles used in this review was 22. Table 1 provides a summary of these studies.

The final fifth step involved collecting, summarizing, and reporting the results. To summarize and synthesize the findings, the researchers each indepen- dently reviewed all the data extraction forms and created a list of themes found

6 The International Journal of Aging and Human Development 0(0)

 

 

605

T a b le

1 . A

S u m m a ry

o f th e S tu d ie s In c lu d e d in

th e R e v ie w .

A u th o r( s)

D e m o g ra p h ic s

D e si g n /A n a ly se s

Q u e st io n s

M a jo r T h e m e s (s u b th e m e s)

A m in

(2 0 1 7 )

7 M a le s; 5 fe m a le s

M e an

a g e ¼ 7 1 .5

ye a rs ;

ra n g e : 6 0 – 9 0

B a n g la d e sh i

C o m m u n it y d w e ll in g

S e m i- st ru c tu re d in te r-

v ie w s (f a c e -t o -f ac e o r

o ve r th e p h o n e )

G ro u n d e d th e o ry ; th e –

m at ic c o d in g st ra te g y

1 . W

h e n yo u th in k a b o u t yo u r li fe ,

w h at

th in g s d o yo u li k e le a st a b o u t

b e in g th e a g e yo u a re ?

2 . W

h a t w o u ld

m ak e yo u sa ti sf ie d in

o ld

a g e ?

3 . W

h a t d o yo u th in k it m e a n s to

a g e

w e ll ?

4 . W

h a t d o yo u th in k o n e n e e d s to

fe e l c o n te n t in

o ld

a g e ?

A d a p ta ti o n to

th e a g in g b o d y ; fi n a n c ia l

se c u ri ty ; fa m il y a n d in te rg e n e ra ti o n a l

c ar e ; so c ia l p a rt ic ip at io n

C h e n (2 0 1 5 )

1 4 F e m a le s

M e an

a g e ¼ 7 3 .2 8 y e a rs ;

ra n g e : 6 0 – 9 0

T a iw a n

C o m m u n it y d w e ll in g

O p e n -e n d e d , in -d e p th

se m i- st ru c tu re d in te r-

v ie w s

In d u c ti v e a n a ly si s w it h

c o n st a n t c o m p a ra –

ti v e m e th o d

N o t p ro v id e d

B e in g h e a lt h y ; n o fi n a n c ia l w o rr ie s;

m ai n ta in in g c o n n e c ti o n s w it h fa m il y

a n d fr ie n d s; a g o o d d e a th

C h o n g, N g ,

W o o , a n d

K w a n (2 0 0 6 )

4 0 F e m a le s; 1 8 m al e s (6 0 þ)

2 0 fe m a le s; 1 7 m a le s

(m id d le

a g e d ;

ra n g e : 4 0 – 5 9 )

H o n g K o n g

M ix tu re

o f c o m m u n it y

d w e ll in g a n d re si d e n –

ti a l c a re

F o c u s g ro u p s w it h 5 – 8

p a rt ic ip a n ts

e a c h

“ In d iv id u a l u n it s o f m e a n –

in g ” w e re

re c o rd e d b y

tw o m e m b e rs

o f

re se a rc h te a m

a n d

th e n c o m p a re d

“ A t e a c h fo c u s g ro u p , th e p a rt ic i-

p a n ts

w e re

in v it e d to

a rt ic u la te

th e ir n o ti o n s o f p o si ti ve

a g e in g , to

g iv e p e rs o n a l e x a m p le s, a n d to

id e n ti fy

th e fa c to rs

th a t w o u ld

a ff e c t h o w

th e y a g e d w e ll o r p o s-

it iv e ly ” (p . 2 4 8 )

U n d e rs ta n d in g o f p o si ti ve

a ge in g: g o o d

h e a lt h ; h av in g a p o si ti ve

a tt it u d e ;

a c ti v e p a rt ic ip a ti o n ; h av in g g o o d so c ia l

a n d fa m il y su p p o rt ; fi n a n c ia l se c u ri ty

Fa ct o rs

a ff e ct in g p o si ti ve

a ge in g: g e tt in g a n

e a rl y st a rt ; a d o p ti n g a h e a lt h y li fe st y le ;

th in k in g p o si ti ve ly ; p ro m o ti n g fa m il y

a n d in te rp e rs o n a l re la ti o n sh ip s; b u il d –

in g u p fi n a n c ia l re so u rc e s; p re fe rr e d

li v in g a rr an g e m e n ts

C o ll is a n d

W a te rf ie ld

(2 0 1 4 )

3 F e m a le s; 3 m al e s

M e an

a g e ¼ 7 9 ye a rs ;

ra n g e : 7 5 – 9 0

E n g la n d

C o m m u n it y d w e ll in g

In te rv ie w s

G ro u n d e d th e o ry -o p e n

c o d in g ; a x ia l

c o d in g in te rv ie w s;

E x p lo re d :

1 . W

h a t ‘s u c c e ss fu l a g in g ’ m e a n t to

th e p a rt ic ip a n ts

2 . W

h y th e y fe lt th e y h a d a g e d

su c c e ss fu ll y

U n d e rs ta n d in g p a in ; p e rc e p ti o n s o f a g in g

(p e rc e p ti o n s o f o th e rs ; a tt it u d e s o f

h e a lt h c a re

p ro fe ss io n a ls ; d is a b il it y ;

a d a p ta ti o n )

(c o n ti n u e d )

7

 

 

606

T a b le

1 . C o n ti n u e d .

A u th o r( s)

D e m o g ra p h ic s

D e si g n /A n a ly se s

Q u e st io n s

M a jo r T h e m e s (s u b th e m e s)

3 . R e c o ll e c ti o n o f p a in fu l e p is o d e s

4 . M e th o d s o f c o p in g w it h p a in

5 . If a n d h o w

p a in

re so lv e d

6 . H o w

th e y th o u g h t th a t p a in d if fe rs

w h e n yo u n g e r ve rs u s th a n o ld e r

7 . C u rr e n t e x p e ri e n c e s w it h o f p a in ,

if a n y

8 . H o w

th e ir e x p e ri e n c e o f p a in

c o m p a re d w it h th a t o f o th e r o ld e r

p e o p le

9 . In

th e li g h t o f th e ir u n d e rs ta n d in g

o f su c c e ss fu l a g in g , h o w

th is m ig h t

b e in h ib it e d b y p a in

D io n ig i e t a l.

(2 0 1 1 )

2 1 F e m a le s

M e an

a g e ¼ 8 3 .3

ye a rs ;

ra n g e : 7 5 – 9 2

M id d le

c la ss

C a u c a si a n s

C o m m u n it y d w e ll in g

In -d e p th

in te rv ie w s

In d u c ti ve

a n al y si s

a p p ro a c h ; n a rr a ti ve

c o n te n t a n al y si s

In c lu d e d :

1 . D o yo u h av e a n y h o b b ie s o r re g –

u la r a c ti v it ie s th a t y o u e n jo y ?

P le a se

d e sc ri b e .

2 . W

h a t d o e s su c c e ss fu l a g in g m e a n

to yo u ?

3 . W

h a t d o e s th e te rm

o ld

m e a n to

yo u ?

4 . P le a se

d e sc ri b e yo u r c u rr e n t

h e a lt h st a tu s”

(4 0 6 ).

P e rc e p ti o n s o f b e in g o ld ; d e fi n it io n s o f

su c c e ss fu l a g in g

G u e ll , S h e fe r,

G ri ff in , a n d

O g il v ie

(2 0 1 6 )

1 2 F e m a le s; 1 5 m a le s

1 0 w e re

6 5 – 6 9 ye a rs

o ld ;

7 w e re

7 0 – 7 4 ; 1 0

w e re

7 5 – 8 0

N o rf o lk , E n g la n d

C o m m u n it y d w e ll in g

S e m i- st ru c tu re d in te r-

v ie w ; th e m a ti c d a ta

a n al y si s

O p e n c o d in g sy n th e si ze d

in to

c a te g o ri e s

E x p lo re d : e ve ry d ay

a c ti v it ie s a n d

m o ti v a ti o n s; li fe st y le

o p p o rt u n i-

ti e s; c h o ic e a n d m o ti v a ti o n s

a c ro ss

th e se a so n s a n d th e ir li fe

c o u rs e ; a sp ir at io n s in to

o ld e r a g e

A sp ir a ti o n s o f a c ti v e li v in g (p o si ti ve

a tt i-

tu d e , k e e p in g b o d y a n d m in d a c ti v e ,

te n si o n b e tw

e e n st ay in g b u sy

a n d

st ay in g a c ti ve ); p ra c ti c e s o f a c ti v e

li v in g (b e in g o u t a n d a b o u t, p u rp o se fu l

a c ti v it ie s, a d a p ti v e a c ti v e n e ss ); so c ia l

c o n te x t o f a c ti v e li v in g (s o c ia l m o ti –

v at o rs

a s fa c il it a to rs , so c ia l li m it a ti o n s

a s b a rr ie rs )

(c o n ti n u e d )

8

 

 

607

T a b le

1 . C o n ti n u e d .

A u th o r( s)

D e m o g ra p h ic s

D e si g n /A n a ly se s

Q u e st io n s

M a jo r T h e m e s (s u b th e m e s)

H il to n e t a l.

(2 0 1 2 )

3 8 F e m a le s; 2 2 m a le s

M e an

a g e ¼ 6 1 ;

ra n g e : 5 0 – 8 4

L a ti n o (a )

W e st e rn

st a te s in

th e

U n it e d S ta te s

F a c e -t o -f ac e in te rv ie w s to

fi ll o u t q u e st io n n ai re

(m a in ly c lo se

e n d e d

q u e st io n s)

G ro u n d e d

th e o ry ; d e sc ri p –

ti v e st a ti st ic s

D e m o g ra p h ic s a n d h e a lt h st a tu s;

P h e la n ’s sc a le

o f su c c e ss fu l a g in g ;

a n d “ W

h e n yo u th in k a b o u t a g in g

w e ll , w h at

c o m e s to

m in d ? P le a se

te ll u s w h a t su c c e ss fu l a g in g m e a n s

to yo u .”

G o o d h e a lt h ; in d e p e n d e n c e ; st ay in g

a c ti v e a n d in vo lv e d ; fa m il y a n d so c ia l

re la ti o n sh ip s; se lf -c a re ; a c c e p ti n g th e

a g in g p ro c e ss ; p o si ti ve

a tt it u d e s; c o g –

n it iv e fu n c ti o n in g; fi n a n c ia l w e ll -b e in g ;

sp ir it u a li ty

a n d tr an sc e n d e n c e

H o rd e r, F ra n d in ,

a n d L a rs so n

(2 0 1 3 )

9 F e m a le s; 1 5 m a le s

M e an

a g e ¼ 8 1 ;

ra n g e : 7 7 – 9 0

W e st e rn

S w e d e n

C o m m u n it y d w e ll in g

In d iv id u a l in te rv ie w s

C o n te n t a n al y si s

E x p lo re d th o u g h ts

a n d fe e li n g s re la t-

e d to

su c c e ss fu l a g in g; o p e n in g

q u e st io n : “ P le as e te ll m e w h a t

su c c e ss fu l a g in g m e a n s to

yo u .” (3 )

S e lf -r e sp e c t th ro u g h a b il it y to

k e e p fe ar

o f fr a il ty

a t a d is ta n c e (h av in g su ff ic ie n t

b o d il y re so u rc e s fo r se c u ri ty

a n d

o p p o rt u n it y ); st ru c tu re s th a t p ro m o te

se c u ri ty

a n d o p p o rt u n it ie s (s a ti sf a c –

ti o n w it h o n e ’s fi n a n c ia l si tu at io n ;

se c u ri ty

a n d o p p o rt u n it ie s in

th e

c lo se st

c o n te x t) ; fe e li n g v a lu a b le

in

re la ti o n to

th e o u ts id e w o rl d (f e e li n g

n o ti c e d a n d a p p re c ia te d in

so c ia l

re la ti o n s; e n g a g e m e n t in a c ti v it ie s th a t

p ro v id e p le a su re

o r b e n e fi t) ; c h o o si n g

g ra ti tu d e in st e a d o f w o rr ie s (c h o se

g ra ti tu d e fo r n o t b e in g a s b a d a s

o th e rs ; d e n y in g d if fi c u lt ie s; a c c e p ti n g

th in g s yo u c a n n o t c h a n g e )

H su

(2 0 0 7 )

4 8 .1 %

fe m a le ; 5 1 .9 %

m al e

(N ¼ 5 9 4 )

3 0 .3 %

w e re

6 5 – 6 9 ye a rs ;

2 4 .7 %

w e re

7 0 – 7 4 ;

2 4 .8 %

w e re

7 5 – 7 9 ;

2 0 .2 %

w e re

8 0 þ

T a iw a n

C o m m u n it y d w e ll in g

S u rv e y s c o n d u c te d v ia

fa c e -t o -f ac e in te rv ie w s

C o n te n t a n al y si s;

fa c to r a n al y si s

2 3 p re d e te rm

in e d it e m s a b o u t su c –

c e ss fu l a g in g a n d “ W

h a t d o yo u

th in k a re

th e e ss e n ti a l c o m p o –

n e n ts

o f a n id e a l a n d sa ti sf a c to ry

o ld -a g e li fe ?”

P h y si c a l h e a lt h (4 7 .4 % ); fa m il y a n d so c ia l

su p p o rt

(2 8 .7 % ); e c o n o m ic se c u ri ty

(1 7 .8 % ); sp ir it u a l w e ll -b e in g (1 6 .9 % );

e n v ir o n m e n t a n d so c ia l p o li c y (1 1 .7 % );

e n g a g e m e n t w it h li fe

(7 .5 % )

(c o n ti n u e d )

9

 

 

608

T a b le

1 . C o n ti n u e d .

A u th o r( s)

D e m o g ra p h ic s

D e si g n /A n a ly se s

Q u e st io n s

M a jo r T h e m e s (s u b th e m e s)

Jo p p e t a l.

(2 0 1 5 )

N ¼ 2 9 1 (1 5 1 A m e ri c a n s;

1 5 5 G e rm

a n s) ; g e n d e r

w a s n o t sp e c if ie d

U .S . sa m p le ¼ 2 1 %

A fr ic a n

A m e ri c a n ; 7 %

A si a n

A m e ri c a n ; 6 6 %

W h it e

G e rm

a n sa m p le ¼ 1 0 0 %

W h it e

A g e ra n g e : 1 5 – 9 6 (1 0 3

“ y o u n g p e o p le ” ; 9 2

“ m id d le -a g e d ”; a n d

9 6 “ o ld e r a d u lt s” )

M ix tu re

o f c o m m u n it y

d w e ll in g a n d re si d e n –

ti a l c a re

In d iv id u a l in te rv ie w s;

g ro u n d e d th e o ry

O p e n

c o d in g , c lu st e ri n g , a n d

th e m e id e n ti fi c a ti o n

1 . W

h a t is su c c e ss fu l a g in g in

yo u r

v ie w ?

2 . W

h a t is in vo lv e d in

th e p ro c e ss

o f

su c c e ss fu l a g in g ?

H e a lt h (8 1 7 % ); so c ia l re so u rc e s (6 5 .7 % );

a c ti v it ie s/ in te re st s (5 5 .9 % ); v ir tu e s/

a tt it u d e s/ b e li e fs (5 1 .0 % ); w e ll -b e in g

(4 9 .3 % ); li fe

m a n a ge m e n t/ c o p in g

(3 5 .9 % ); fi n a n c ia l re so u rc e s (3 1 .4 % );

a g in g /a g e a s a to p ic (2 5 .5 % ); in d e p e n –

d e n c e (1 7 .6 % ); m e a n in g in li fe (1 4 .7 % );

g ro w th /m

a tu ra ti o n (1 4 .4 % ); re sp e c t/

st a tu s (1 3 .7 % ); e d u c a ti o n /k n o w le d g e

(1 2 .1 % ); m ic ro e n v ir o n m e n t (9 .5 % );

so c ie ty /m

ic ro e n v ir o n m e n t (8 .2 % );

o th e r (2 .3 % )

L a d it k a e t a l.

(2 0 0 9 )

N ¼ 3 9 6

7 4 .9 %

fe m a le s

D iv e rs e p a rt ic ip a n ts ,

in c lu d in g A fr ic an

A m e ri c a n s, A m e ri c a n

In d ia n s, C h in e se ,

H is p a n ic , V ie tn a m e se ;

W h it e

M e an

a g e ¼ 7 1 .0

U n it e d S ta te s—

9 st a te s

C o m m u n it y d w e ll in g

4 2 fo c u s g ro u p s C o n st an t

c o m p a ri so n m e th o d s

A sk e d to

p ro v id e a d e sc ri p ti o n o f

“ so m e o n e w h o yo u th in k is

a g in g w e ll ”

L iv in g to

a d v a n c e d a g e ; h av in g g o o d

p h y si c a l h e a lt h ; h av in g a p o si ti ve

m e n ta l o u tl o o k ; b e in g c o g n it iv e ly

a le rt ; h av in g a g o o d m e m o ry ; a n d

b e in g so c ia ll y in vo lv e d

L e w is (2 0 1 1 )

1 6 F e m a le s; 1 0 m a le s

1 0 0 % A la sk a n N a ti ve s (A N )

A g e ra n g e : 6 1 – 9 3

6 B ri st o l B ay

C o m m u n it ie s

In te rv ie w s th a t u ti li ze d

th e “ e x p la n a to ry

m o d e l in te rv ie w

p ro –

to c o l”

1 5 q u e st io n s c o ve re d th e se

to p ic s:

“ h o w

A N

E ld e rs

d e fi n e su c c e ss fu l

a g in g ; h o w

th e ir a g in g p ro c e ss

a ff e c ts

th e ir e m o ti o n a l, sp ir it u a l,

F o u r e le m e n ts

w e re

im p o rt a n t to

e ld e r-

sh ip

(r e : su c c e ss fu l a g e in g ): e m o ti o n a l

w e ll -b e in g ; c o m m u n it y e n g a g e m e n t;

sp ir it u a li ty ; p h y si c a l h e a lt h (c o n ti n u e d )

10

 

 

609

T a b le

1 . C o n ti n u e d .

A u th o r( s)

D e m o g ra p h ic s

D e si g n /A n a ly se s

Q u e st io n s

M a jo r T h e m e s (s u b th e m e s)

(S W

A la sk a )

C o m m u n it y d w e ll in g

G ro u n d e d th e o ry , in d u c –

ti v e a p p ro a c h ; in te r-

ra te r re li a b il it y

c h e c k e d w it h K a p p a

st a ti st ic (M

¼ .8 7 )

a n d c o g n it iv e w e ll -b e in g ; a n d if

th e ir c o m m u n it y is su p p o rt iv e o f

th e m

a g in g su c c e ss fu ll y ”

L e w is (2 0 1 3 )

1 6 F e m a le s; 1 0 m a le s

1 0 0 %

A la sk a n N a ti ve s

A g e ra n g e : 6 1 – 9 3

6 B ri st o l B ay

C o m m u n it ie s

(S W

A la sk a )

C o m m u n it y d w e ll in g

In te rv ie w s th a t u ti li ze d

th e “ e x p la n a to ry

m o d e l in te rv ie w

p ro –

to c o l”

G ro u n d e d th e o ry , in d u c –

ti v e a p p ro a c h ; in te r-

ra te r re li a b il it y

c h e c k e d w it h K a p p a

st a ti st ic (M

¼ .8 7 )

1 5 q u e st io n s c o ve re d th e se