PofoliaShared via Pofolia

The Gerontologist· 2014Q1· Review

Critical Perspectives on Successful Aging: Does It “Appeal More Than It Illuminates”?

Stephen Katz, Toni Calasanti

Short summary

The widely adopted "successful aging" paradigm, while optimistic, is criticized for empirical and methodological limitations, overemphasis on individual choice, and neglect of social inequalities.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Key points

  • Critiques "successful aging" for empirical and methodological limitations.
  • Questions the paradigm's focus on individual choice and lifestyle.
  • Highlights the concept's inattention to social inequalities (income, gender, race, ethnicity).
  • Examines US-based differences in income, gender, racial, ethnic, and age.

AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.

Abstract

"Successful aging" is one of gerontology's most successful ideas. Applied as a model, a concept, an approach, an experience, and an outcome, it has inspired researchers to create affiliated terms such as "healthy," "positive," "active," "productive," and "effective" aging. Although embraced as an optimistic approach to measuring life satisfaction and as a challenge to ageist traditions based on decline, successful aging as defined by John Rowe and Robert Kahn has also invited considerable critical responses. This article takes a critical gerontological perspective to explore such responses to the Rowe-Kahn successful aging paradigm by summarizing its empirical and methodological limitations, theoretical assumptions around ideas of individual choice and lifestyle, and inattention to intersecting issues of social inequality, health disparities, and age relations. The latter point is elaborated with an examination of income, gender, racial, ethnic, and age differences in the United States. Conclusions raise questions of social exclusion and the future of successful aging research.

The authors' abstract, as published at the source. The Gerontologist, 2014 · DOI ↗

TakeawaysPremium
Ask the paperFree account

Continue with a free account

Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.

Continue free on the web

Sign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.

On your phone:

Field: Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology

Neuropsychology and Physiological PsychologyPsychology