Skip to main content
NCBI home page
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2025 Jan 21.
Published in final edited form as: Br J Dev Psychol. 2021 Aug 15;40(1):92–111. doi: 10.1111/bjdp.12393

Thinking about the Past, Present, and Future: Time Perspective and Self-Esteem in Adolescents, Young Adults, Middle-Aged Adults, and Older Adults

Zena R Mello 1,*, Sarah J Barber 1,2, Sara A Vasilenko 3, Julie Chandler 1, Ryan Howell 1
PMCID: PMC11748232  NIHMSID: NIHMS2040444  PMID: 34398498

Abstract

We examined time perspective and self-esteem in adolescents, young adults, middle-aged adults, and older adults. Time perspective was measured with scales that assess relative orientations and relationships among the past, present, and future. Age effects were examined with standard analytic strategies to determine categorical differences between age groups and with new statistical techniques designed to show continuous age patterns. Findings indicated that (a) thinking about the future was greatest for adolescents and young adults and lowest for middle-aged and older adults, and thinking about the present increased across ages; (b) fewer adolescents and middle-aged participants perceived that the time periods were interrelated compared to younger and older adults; and (c) across ages, a greater emphasis toward the past compared to other time periods was associated with lower self-esteem, whereas emphasizing the present and the future jointly was associated with higher self-esteem.

Keywords: Time perspective, time orientation, time relation, self-esteem, lifespan, adolescents, young adults, middle-aged adults, older adults

Thinking about the Past, Present, and Future: Time Perspective and Self-Esteem in Adolescents, Young Adults, Middle-Aged Adults, and Older Adults

How individuals are oriented toward the past, present, and future has long been thought to be associated with age (Frank, 1939; Lewin, 1939), and there is now a substantial body of research showing that there are age-related shifts in time perspective (Butler, 1963; Carstensen, 2006; Laureiro et al. 2017). However, as we describe below, time perspective is a multi-dimensional construct (Mello & Worrell, 2015; Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999), and the field would benefit from knowledge about how certain time perspective dimensions vary (or not) with age. Thus, the current study focused on how multiple dimensions of time perspective differ across adolescents, young adults, middle-aged adults, and older adults. In doing so, we also evaluate how dimensions of time perspective relate to self-esteem. Prior research has shown some associations between time perspective and self-esteem in adolescents (Mello et al., 2013), young adults (Chishima et al., 2017), and adults (Webster, 2011). However, different conceptualizations of time perspective have been used for different age groups, so we do not yet know how specific time perspective dimensions are associated with self-esteem, and whether or not this varies with age. Self-esteem has powerful implications for mental health across the lifespan (Mann et al., 2004), including risky behaviors in adolescents (Wheeler, 2010) and job satisfaction in adulthood (Pierce & Gardner, 2004). Thus, the current study aimed to contribute new knowledge about the associations among time perspective dimensions, self-esteem, and age, which is important for ultimately informing the development of intervention programs that use time perspective to foster psychological health.

Theories about Time Perspective

Time perspective has been conceptualized in a variety of ways (Carstensen, 2006; Cottle, 1967; Lewin, 1939; Mello & Worrell, 2015; Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999). Zimbardo and Boyd’s (1999) theory includes the past, present, and future and several dimensions, such as orientations, feelings, and behaviors. These dimensions are captured by The Zimbardo Perspective Time Inventory (ZTPI), an instrument that assesses past positive, past negative, hedonism (a focus on pleasure in the present), fatalism (events are predetermined), and future planning. Carstensen’s (2006) socioemotional selectivity theory focuses on whether people view their future as expansive or as “running out” and being limited. These theories have been influential in generating knowledge about time perspective.

However, in an effort to further clarify the unique contributions of particular time periods and dimensions, Mello and colleagues (2015, 2019) proposed a new conceptual model. This model includes three time periods (past, present, and future) and several dimensions, including time orientation, time relation, and time frequency. This conceptualization of time perspective enables researchers to parse the specific elements of the construct. Time orientation refers to the emphasis one has toward a particular time period or periods (Cottle, 1967; Mello et al., 2013). Individuals may be oriented solely toward the future, whereas others may have a “balanced” view that emphasizes the time periods equally (Cottle, 1967; Mello et al., 2013; Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999). Time relation refers to the perceived relationships among the time periods, where some individuals think that time periods are unrelated, and others perceive them to be completely interrelated. (Cottle, 1967; Mello et al., 2013). Time frequency is the degree that people think about each time period; for instance, some people think about the past most of the time and others think about the past very little (Konowalczyk et al., 2019; Mello et al., 2009).

Time Perspective and Age

Many developmental theories suggest that time perspective varies with age. For instance, Lewin (1939) posited that with increased life experience individuals would widen their orientation toward the future from days to months and years from childhood to adolescence. Mello (2019) described how improved cognitive abilities and the processes of identity formation in adolescence allow an increased ability to think about the relationships between the past, present, and future. Carstensen (2006) discussed how older adults would be more likely to see the future as limited than younger adults and this would result in an emphasis toward emotionally salient goals. Combined, time perspective theories have drawn from maturational, cognitive, emotional development to describe how time perspectives changes with age. However, each of these theories have focused on different dimensions of time.

Some research has also shown age differences in time perspective. For instance, in a cross-sectional study, Lang and Carstensen (2002) showed that older adults (aged 70–90) viewed their future as more limited than younger adults (aged 45–65). Relatedly, in another study, older participants (aged 60–81) thought less far into the future than younger participants (aged 20–37; Fingerman & Perlmutter, 1995). More recently, researchers examined individuals aged 13.5 to 75.5 and showed that negative attitudes toward the past were inversely associated with age (Laureiro et al. 2017).

There has also been some research examining how time orientation and time relation are related to age. Regarding time orientation (i.e., the emphasis one has toward a particular time period or periods), a cross-sectional study found that an orientation toward the future was greater among participants aged 10–16 than those aged 16 to 30 (Steinberg et al., 2009). Young participants (15–25) were more oriented toward the present, whereas older participants (aged 35–55) were more future oriented (Siu et al., 2014). In contrast, adolescents (aged 16–20) were most oriented towards the past, young adults to the future (aged 21–34), and middle-aged adults towards the present (aged 35–63; Ortuño et al., 2011). With regards to time relation and age, to our knowledge, there is only one study available. Cottle et al. (1968) examined the time relations of adolescents aged 12–18 and showed that older adolescents were more likely to report an interrelated view of the past, present, and future than younger adolescents.

In contrast, there has been greater attention paid to how age affects time frequency (i.e., the degree that people think about the past, present, and future). Butler’s (1963) landmark article argued that older adults were more likely to reminisce about the past than other age groups. The emphasis toward the past in old age is also inherent in Erikson’s (1959) notion of a life review that was thought to occur at the final stage of life. However, some research has failed to support the idea that older adults are more past focused (Hyland & Ackerman, 1988; Merriam & Cross, 1982; Parker, 1995; Webster, 1994). One study found that increasing age did not affect the frequency with which people thought about the past; however, compared to other age groups, older adults thought more about the present and less about the future (Cameron, 1972; Reichstadt et al., 2010).

Time Perspective, Age, and Self-Esteem

Research has also shown that for adolescents and younger adults, time orientation, time relation, and time frequency are each related to self-esteem. In a study with two independent samples of adolescents, relationships were demonstrated among time orientation, time relation, and self-esteem (Mello et al., 2013). For time orientation, the study found that emphasizing both the present and the future jointly and deemphasizing the past was associated with higher self-esteem. For time relation, the study found that perceiving time periods to be unrelated to one another was associated with the lowest self-esteem. Whereas, a study with adults showed that a time orientation indicated by “balanced” time perspective, one emphasizing the past, present, and future simultaneously, was positively associated with happiness, positive affect, vitality, as well as decreased negative affect (Zhang et al., 2013). Similarly, Webster (2011) showed that adults who emphasized both the present and the future had higher self-esteem than their counterparts. When considering the time frequency dimension of time perspective, research has indicated that focusing more on the future was associated with higher self-esteem in studies with college students (Lyu et al., 2019; Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999). Other research has indicated that focusing on the past was negatively related to self-esteem, whereas focusing on the present was positively associated, and that the degree of emphasis toward the future was unrelated to self-esteem (Chishima et al., 2017).

Although no research has yet examined how time orientation, time relation, and time frequency relate to self-esteem in older adults, other time constructs have been shown to affect emotional processing. Seeing the future as temporally constrained affects emotional and social processing (Barber et al., 2016; Fung et al., 1999). For example, a study with participated aged 17–87 indicated that perceiving the future as limited was negatively associated with psychological well-being (Grühn et al., 2015). Likewise, in another study with participants aged 18–93, perceiving the future as limited was associated with a preoccupation with negative events (Strough et al., 2016).

The Present Study

The first aim of this study was to contribute toward the existing literature (Carstensen, 2006; Laureiro et al. 2017) by examining differences in multiple time perspective dimensions across adolescents, young adults, middle-aged adults, and older adults. We examined age in two ways: between categorical age groups and across continuous age. Our measures of time perspective included multiple dimensions: time orientation (relative emphasis toward a time period), time relation (perceived relationship among time periods), and time frequency (frequency with which one thinks about the time periods). As the literature review showed, prior research has sometimes used different time perspective conceptualizations (Cottle et el., 2016; Siu et al., 2014), which has resulted in mixed findings. Thus, we base our hypotheses on the majority of the results reported. Regarding time orientation and time frequency, we hypothesized that (a) adolescents and young adults would be more oriented to the future and would think more often about the future than the past and the present and (b) older adults would be characterized by a focus on the present and the past, given prior studies (Cohen & Taylor, 1998; Steinberg et al., 2009). For time relation, we hypothesized that fewer adolescents and young adults would view the time periods as interrelated compared to middle-aged and older adults, given prior research (Cottle et al., 1968).

A second aim of this study was to generate new knowledge about the associations between time perspective and self-esteem across developmental periods. Based on prior studies (Chishima et al., 2017; Mello et al., 2013), we hypothesized that focusing on the (a) future would be positively associated with self-esteem and (b) past would be negatively associated with self-esteem. We further hypothesized that (c) emphasizing multiple time periods simultaneously would be associated with higher self-esteem, given extant research (Zhang et al., 2013; Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999).

Method

Participants

Table 1 shows the participant demographic characteristics. Four samples were included: adolescents (N = 760), young adults (N = 398), middle-aged adults (N = 312), and older adults (N = 189). Data were evaluated for missingness. Less than 10% (n = 129, 8%) of the participants across the samples were missing data on either one (n = 60, 4%) or more (n = 69, 4%) key study variables (i.e., time orientation, time relation, time frequency, and self-esteem). We used listwise deletion in multiple regression and ANOVA analyses. Participants with missing responses did not differ from the rest of the samples in self-esteem scores (p = .32).

Table 1.

Participant demographic characteristics.

Adolescents Young Adults Middle-Aged Adults Older Adults
N 760 398 312 189
Age
 Mean 15.81 20.52 36.27 69.99
 SD 1.22 1.82 7.1 6.08
 Range 12–18 18–24 25–51 60–85
Gender
 Female 413 (56%) 310 (78%) 174 (56%) 138 (73%)
 Male 311 (42%) 87 (22%) 133 (34%) 50 (26%)
 Transgender Female 2 (.27%) n/a n/a n/a
 Transgender Male 1 (.14%) n/a n/a n/a
 Gender Queer/Nonbinary n/a 1 (0.25%) 2 (0.5%) n/a
 Intersex n/a n/a n/a 1 (0.5%)
Racial/Ethnic Groups
 African American/Black 46 (6%) 20 (5%) 12 (4%) 11 (6%)
 American Indian/Alaskan Native 3 (.5%) 1 (.25%) 1 (.3%) 3 (2%)
 Asian American/Pacific Islander 136 (18%) 109 (27%) 16 (5%) 6 (3%)
 Hispanic/Latino(a) American 319 (43%) 120 (30%) 16 (5%) 1 (.5%)
 European American/White 114 (15%) 86 (17%) 234 (75%) 159 (84%)
 Other racial/ethnic group 18 (2%) 31 (8%) 12 (4%) 3 (2%)
 Mixed racial/ethnic groups 116 (15%) 52 (13%) 22 (7%) 6 (3%)
Open in a new tab

Note. n/a = not applicable.

Procedures

Adolescents were recruited from two public high schools in the United States. Data were collected with anonymous surveys. Parental consent and adolescent assent were obtained. Adolescents received $10 compensation (Institutional Review Board [IRB]# H15–33c). Young adults were recruited from psychology courses at a public four-year university in the United States. Participants completed an on-line and received course credit at the discretion of instructors (IRB# X15–08R1). Middle-aged adults self-selected via the website BeyondThePurchase.org. We included participants who completed all measures in the current study (IRB# X12–03). Older adults were recruited from databases from the western United States. Participants completed the study through an online system. Participants were offered a $10 gift card upon completion (IRB# X14–37).

Measures

Time Perspective

We used the Adolescent and Adult Time Inventory (AATI; Mello & Worrell, 2007) to measure time perspective. First, time orientation was measured with the Time Orientation Scale (TOS). The TOS is a single-item categorical variable that determines the emphasis one places on the past, present, and future. Participants were instructed to select a set of circles among seven options that reflected their time orientation (see Table 2). Circles differed in size, with larger circles representing more important time periods. The test-retest reliability of the TOS has been shown with young adults (Cramer’s V = .50; Moon, Lieber, R., & Bayazitli, I., Mello, Z. R., 2023). The validity of the TOS has been shown with studies demonstrating that individuals who are oriented towards all three time periods equally (“balanced,” option #7) or the present-future evenly (option #6) report higher self-esteem and lower risk-taking than their counterparts with other time orientations (Mello et al., 2013)

Table 2.

Time Orientation, Age Groups, and Self-Esteem.

Time Orientation Age Group a Self-Esteem and Age Groups
Response Option Adolescent Young Adult Middle Adult Older Adult Adolescentb Young Adulte Middle-age Adultg Older Adulti
M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD)
1 Past graphic file with name nihms-2040444-t0003.jpg 2% 1% 2% 2% 2.36 (0.61)c 3.40 (N/A) 2.82 (0.88) 2.53 (0.38)
2 Present graphic file with name nihms-2040444-t0004.jpg 7% 8% 17% 27% 2.81 (0.55) 2.83 (0.51)f 3.10 (0.81) 2.60 (0.22)
3 Future graphic file with name nihms-2040444-t0005.jpg 12% 7% 9% 4% 2.83 (0.52)c, d 2.95 (0.49) 3.01 (0.59) 2.57 (0.21)
4 Past-Future graphic file with name nihms-2040444-t0006.jpg 15% 13% 10% 2% 2.55 (0.57)c 2.79 (0.60)f 2.80 (0.80)h 2.43 (0.06)
5 Past-Present graphic file with name nihms-2040444-t0007.jpg 3% 3% 7% 5% 2.63 (0.40) 2.53 (0.51)f 2.74 (0.66)h 2.50 (0.20)
6 Present-Future graphic file with name nihms-2040444-t0008.jpg 44% 48% 46% 39% 2.95 (0.57)c 3.19 (0.50)f 3.33 (0.63)h 2.60 (0.19)
7 Balanced graphic file with name nihms-2040444-t0009.jpg 17% 21% 8% 22% 2.85 (0.48)c 3.02 (0.59) 2.97 (0.81) 2.57 (0.20)
Open in a new tab

Note. When administered, circles were labeled “past,” “present,” and “future.” Circle configuration names are shown for clarity and are not included on actual instrument. N/A denotes the abence of a standard deviation given that there was a single participant who selected the option. Bonferroni tests used for comparisons.

***

p < .001

**

p < .01

*

p < .05

a

X2 = 139.13, p < 0.001, ϕCramer = 0.17.

b

F(6, 674) = 8.76, p < .001, R2adj = .07, η2 = .08.

c

(3, 7 > 1, p < .05; 6 > 1, p < .01).

d

(3 > 4; p < .05).

e

F(6, 377) = 7.27, p < .001, R2adj = .09, η2 = .10.

f

(2 < 6, p < .05; 4 < 6, p < .001; 5 < 6, p < .01).

g

F(6, 297) = 5.09, p < .001, R2adj = .07, η2 = .09.

h

(4, 5 > 6, p < .01).

i

F (6, 180) = 0.74, p = .62, R 2adj = .01, η2 = .02.

Second, time relation was assessed with the Time Relation Scale (TRS). The TRS is a single-item categorical variable that determines the perceived relationships among the past, present, and future. Participants were asked to select one among four sets of circles with varying degrees of overlap that reflected their perceived relationship among the time periods (see Table 3). The test-retest reliability of the TRS has been shown with young adults (Cramer’s V = .33; Moon et al., 2023). The validity of the TRS has been shown with studies demonstrating that individuals who perceive time periods to be interrelated (option #4) report higher academic achievement and lower risk-taking than their counterparts who perceive time periods to be unrelated (option #1; Mello et al., 2013).

Table 3.

Time Relation, Age Groups, and Self-Esteem.

Time Relation Age Group a Self-Esteem and Age Groups
Response Option Adolescent Young Adult Middle Adult Older Adult Adolescentb Young Adultc Middle Adultd Older Adulte
M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD)
1 Unrelated graphic file with name nihms-2040444-t0010.jpg 10% 5% 10% 4% 2.72 (0.66) 2.78 (0.68) 3.15 (0.66) 2.58 (0.16)
2 Present-Future Related graphic file with name nihms-2040444-t0011.jpg 30% 21% 30% 26% 2.84 (0.57) 2.92 (0.55) 3.16 (0.74) 2.60 (0.19)
3 Linear Related graphic file with name nihms-2040444-t0012.jpg 27% 24% 29% 20% 2.89 (0.55) 3.09 (0.56) 3.03 (0.77) 2.55 (0.19)
4 Interrelated graphic file with name nihms-2040444-t0013.jpg 34% 50% 30% 49% 2.79 (0.60) 3.08 (0.54) 3.15 (0.69) 2.59 (0.21)
Open in a new tab

Note. When administered, circles were labeled “past,” “present,” and “future.” Circle configuration names are shown for clarity and are not included on actual instrument.

***

p < .001

**

p < .01.

*

p < .05.

a

X2 = 52.630, p < 0.001, ϕCramer = 0.11.

b

p = 0.181.

c

F(3, 372) = 3.23, p < .05, R2adj = .003, η2 = .008, Bonferonni indicated no pairwise differences.

d

p = 0.60.

e

p = 0.72.

Third, time frequency was assessed with three items that asked participants how frequently they thought about the past, the present, or the future. Response options ranged from 1 (Almost Never) to 5 (Almost Always). These items have been used to measure time frequency in prior research (Konowalczyk et al., 2019).

Self-Esteem

The Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965) was used to assess self-esteem. This 10-item scale measures an individual’s global self-esteem. Response options ranged from 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 4 (Strongly Agree), with greater scores indicating higher self-esteem. Five of the 10 items were reverse-coded. Prior studies have demonstrated strong internal consistency estimates (α = .91; Sinclair et al., 2010). In the current study, internal consistency for self-esteem scores were acceptable across samples (adolescents: α = .85, young adults: α = .89, middle-aged adults: α = .94, and older adults: α = .87).

Results

Analytic Strategy

We employed standard and new statistical techniques to determine how time perspective was associated with age and how associations between time perspective and self-esteem were associated with age. First, we treated age categorically and used chi-square and ANOVAs to examine differences among the samples (adolescents, young adults, middle-aged adults, and older adults). We interpreted effect sizes based on Cohen’s guidelines (1992). Second, we treated age continuously and used time-varying effect models (TVEMs; Tan et al., 2012). Age was measured chronologically in years (12 to 85), in line with prior TVEM studies (e.g., Douglas & Umaña-Taylor, 2016; Thompson et al., 2015; Vasilenko & Lanza, 2014; Vasilenko, 2017).

TVEM is an analytic method that demonstrates how associations between variables change over the course of continuous time. This method has been applied to developmental constructs (Douglass & Umaña-Taylor, 2016; Vasilenko, et al., 2017). TVEM does not require associations to take on any particular parametric form, but flexibly estimates associations over time, allowing for identification of more precise periods where changes are occurring (Lanza et al., 2014; Vasilenko et al., 2017). Like many prior TVEM studies on age-related differences, this study uses cross-sectional data (Evans-Polce et al., 2020; Lee & Chopick, 2018; Rice et al., 2019; Thapa et al., 2017; Vasilenko et al., 2017). This is appropriate given that TVEM’s primary usage of looking at how within wave/time associations differ across various times or ages. However, like all cross-sectional studies of age-related differences, findings must be interpreted in light of limitations, such as the difficulty of disentangling age and cohort effects.

To examine the associations between each time perspective dimension and continuous age, we generated five intercept-only TVEM models (Figures 1a–e). The first two models included time orientation (Figure 1a) and time relation (Figure 1b). Given that these variables were assessed with single-items with multiple response options, the variables were recoded to binary to facilitate the interpretation of TVEM. For time orientation, we compared responses indicating an orientation toward all time periods simultaneously or the present and future to orientations toward fewer time periods. Specifically, we compared response options 7 and 6 to response options 1–5 (see Table 2). For time relation, we compared response options indicating time periods as related to those indicating no relationships. Specifically, we compared response options 4 and 3 to response options 1 and 2 (see Table 3). We organized time orientation and time relation response options into binary variables following past research that has indicated the particular response options associated with healthy outcomes (Mello et al., 2013).

Figure 1.

Figure 1.

Open in a new tab

Intercept-only TVEMs showing differences in time perspective dimensions across ages 12–85. Dashed lines indicate 95% confidence intervals.

TVEM models were generated for each time perspective dimension and indicated the prevalence of being oriented toward multiple time periods (Figure 1a) and perceiving that time periods were related (Figure 1b) across ages. Three models were generated to show how the frequency of thinking about the past, present, and future were each associated with age (Figures 1c–e). We examined age-varying associations between time perspective dimensions and self-esteem. These models estimated the strength of the associations between each time perspective dimension and self-esteem as a function of age (Figures 2a–e). Below, we present results using standard (categorical age) and TVEM (continuous age) statistical techniques for each time perspective dimension showing (a) how time perspective and age are associated and (b) how associations between time perspective and self-esteem differ across ages.

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

Open in a new tab

TVEMs showing associations between time perspective dimensions and self-esteem across ages 12–85. Dashed lines indicate 95% confidence intervals.

Time Perspective and Age

Time Orientation

The Chi-square statistic (Table 2, left portion) showed an association between time orientation and age. For “balanced orientation”, in which the past, present, and future are equally emphasized (option #7), more young and older adults selected this option compared to adolescents and middle-aged adults. The present-only orientation (option #2) was chosen more often by middle-aged and older adults than adolescents and young adults. TVEM (Figure 1a) indicated that about half of the participants reported an orientation toward all three time periods of the present and the future equally (option #6 or #7) at age 12. This percentage increased until about age 22, decreased until about age 45, and then increased again through age 85.

Time Relation

The chi-square statistic (Table 3, left portion) showed an association between time relation and age. Compared to younger and older adults, fewer adolescents and middle-aged adults reported interrelated time relations (option #4). TVEM (Figure 1b) showed that about half of the participants perceived that the time periods were either linearly related or interrelated (option #3 or #4) at age 12; this increased until about age 22, then decreased to until about age 41, increased again to age 69, and then decreased again through age 85.

Time Frequency

For the past, an ANOVA (Table 4, left portion) showed that adolescents and middle-aged adults thought about this time period less often than young adults and older adults. TVEM (Figure 1c) showed that thinking about the past was the least frequent at age 12, increased until about age 19, declined until about 35, after which it increased though age 85. For the present, an ANOVA (Table 4, left portion) showed that older adults reported thinking about this time period more frequently than any other age group. TVEM (Figure 1d) showed that the frequency of thinking about the present increased in a linear fashion from ages 12 to 85. For the future time period, an ANOVA (Table 4, left portion) showed that young adults thought most often about the future, followed by adolescents, older adults, and middle-aged adults. TVEM (Figure 1e) showed that the frequency of thinking about the future was lowest at age 12, increased until about age 19, declined until about 47, after which it increased again through 67.

Table 4.

Time Frequency, Age Group, and Self-Esteem

Age Group Self-Esteem and Age Groups
Time Frequency Adolescents Young Adults Middle Adults Older Adults Adolescentsk Young Adultsl Middle Adultsm Older Adultsn
M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) M (SD) Coeff. SE β Coeff. SE β Coeff. SE β Coeff. SE β
Pasta 3.47 (0.95) 3.61 (0.76)b 3.34 (0.73)b 3.60 (0.77)b −15 *** .02 −.24 −20 *** .04 −.24 − 38 *** .05 −.38 −.05 ** .02 −.21
Presentc 3.75 (1.00)d 3.92 (0.90)d, e 3.91 (0.74)e 4.34 (0.74)d,e, f 12 *** .02 .21 .08 ** .03 .14 .08 .05 .08 .02 .02 .08
Futureg 4.06 (0.97)h 4.27 (0.76)h, i 3.64 (0.70)h, i, j 3.99 (0.69)h, i .04 * .02 .08 14 *** .03 .20 .11 .05 .10 .06 ** .02 .22
Open in a new tab

Bonferroni tests used for comparisons.

***

p < .001

**

p < .01

*

p < .05

a

F(3, 1,633) = 6.70, p < .001, R2adj = .01, η2 = .01

b

(young adults > middle adults, p < .001; middle adults < older adults, p < .01).

c

F(3, 1635) = 21.85, p < .001, R2adj = .04, η2 = .04.

d

(adolescents < young adults, p < .05; adolescents < older adults, p < .001).

e

(young adults < older adults, p < .001).

f

(middle adults < older adults, p < .001).

g

F(3, 1,634) = 33.82, p < .0001, R2adj = .06, η2 = .06.

h

(adolescents < young adults, p < .001; adolescents > middle adults; p < .001).

i

(young adults > middle adults, p < .001; young adults > older adults, p < .01).

j

(middle adults < older adults, p < .001).

k

βintercept = 2.71, p < .001, R2adj 0.08

l

βintercept = 2.75, p < .001, R2adj 0.12

m

βintercept = 3.67, p < .001, R2adj 0.15

n

βintercept = 2.43, p < .001, R2adj 0.06

Time Perspective, Self-Esteem, and Age

Time Orientation

The relationship between time orientation and self-esteem varied with age. The Chi-square statistic (Table 2, right portion) showed that in the adolescents and middle-aged adults, participants with a present-future orientation (option #6) had the highest self-esteem. The lowest self-esteem was reported by adolescents with a past orientation (option #1), and by young adults and middle-aged adults with a past-present orientation (option #5). Note that for young adults, the highest self-esteem was reported by a single participant who had a past orientation (option #1). Time orientation was not related to self-esteem in older adults. TVEM (Figure 2a) showed that the association between time orientation and self-esteem was significant until age 53, with participants who were oriented toward all time periods or the present and the future equally (option #6 or #7) reported higher self-esteem. This orientation was associated with an increase of .22 points on the self-esteem scale at age 12; this increased to about .36 points at age 27, and declined through age 53.

Time Relation

Time relation was associated with self-esteem for younger adults. The Chi-square statistic (Table 3, right portion) showed that young adults who perceived the time periods as unrelated (option #1) also reported the lowest self-esteem than those who perceived time periods as interrelated (option #4). However, time relation was not associated with self-esteem for adolescents, middle-aged adults, or older adults. TVEM (Figure 2b) showed that the association between perceiving time periods to be interrelated (option #3 or #4) and having greater self-esteem was only significant between ages 17 and 23; where individuals who perceived time as interrelated had an increase of up to .10 point on the self-esteem scale.

Time Frequency

An ANOVA (Table 4, right portion) showed that for all age groups, thinking about the past was negatively associated with self-esteem. This effect was stronger for middle-aged and older adults than young adults and adolescents. Regarding the present, an ANOVA (Table 4, right portion) showed that thinking about this time period was positively associated with self-esteem for adolescents and young adults. Regarding the future, an ANOVA (Table 4, right portion) showed that thinking about this time period was positively associated with self-esteem for adolescents, young adults, and older adults. TVEM (Figure 2c) showed that thinking more often about the past was associated with lower self-esteem from ages 14 to 70. This association was the strongest at around age 40, when an increase of 1 point on the time-frequency-past scale was associated with a decrease in self-esteem of .35. Thinking more frequently about both the present (Figure 2d) and future (Figure 2e) was associated with higher self-esteem from ages 15 through the 40s, with the strongest associations at around age 30.

Discussion

Drawing from a multidimensional model of time perspective (Mello & Worrell, 2015), we added to the existing literature on time perspective differences across the lifespan (Carstensen, 2006; Laureiro et al. 2017) by showing how adolescents, young adults, middle-aged adults, and older adults differed across multiple time perspective dimensions. We used this information about developmental differences in time perspective to generate new knowledge about the associations between time perspective and self-esteem across the lifespan. This information is useful for informing programs that use time perspective to foster psychological health.

Time Perspective, Age, and Self-Esteem

Consistent with our predictions, time perspective was associated with self-esteem across age groups. Specific dimensions of time perspective had different relationships with self-esteem. In particular, adolescents, young adults, and middle-aged adults who emphasized the present and the future (i.e., time orientation) had higher self-esteem than their counterparts with other time orientations. These results are consistent with prior research that has included adolescents (Mello et al., 2013). This study demonstrated that individuals who emphasized the present and the future also reported higher self-esteem than their counterparts with other time orientations. Our finding compliments and extends existing research that has focused on the past and future (Webster, 2011) to show that thoughts about the present and the future time periods are associated with self-esteem.

A multi-temporal perspective was associated with higher self-esteem, consistent with theory that posits that focusing on more than one time period is useful (Mello, 2019; Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999). However, this finding deviates from research that has shown that focusing on all three time periods is the healthiest time perspective (Zhang et al., 2013; Zimbardo & Boyd, 1999). It may be that the time periods that one emphasizes are differentially associated with outcomes. Focusing on the present and future (and, thereby de-emphasizing the past) may be particularly useful for self-esteem. Whereas, focusing on all three time periods may be beneficial for other outcomes, as past research has shown this association with academic achievement (Mello et al., 2013) and subjective well-being (Zhang et al., 2013). Further, discrepancies in findings about self-esteem across studies may be due to differences among the time-related constructs and measures.

The current study showed that thinking more about the past was associated with lower self-esteem, and that this relationship was observed across all age groups. This result is similar to prior research with young adults (Chishima et al., 2017) and shows that the same pattern exists in other periods of the lifespan. Of particular note, this relationship holds in midlife and older adulthood, during which past reflection is thought to be particularly important, as noted by Lachman (2004, p. 310): “When in the middle, it is natural to look back to see what has come before.”

Time Perspective and Age

We also added to the literature on time perspective differences across the lifespan (Laureiro et al. 2017) by using a multidimensional model of time perspective (Mello & Worrell, 2015). Findings indicated that thinking about the future was greatest for adolescents and young adults and lowest for middle-aged and older adults. This pattern was accompanied by an increase in thinking about the present across age. This was observed both when asking participants about their relative emphasis toward the past, present, and future time periods (i.e., time orientation) and when asking about the degree to which they thought about each time period individually (i.e., time frequency). Our study highlights the value of examining multiple time periods and is consistent with work showing that older adults’ definitions of successful aging include “living one day at a time” and seeing the present as the only time period that truly matters (Reichstadt, et al., 2010).

Younger and older adults were more likely to perceive that the time periods were interrelated compared to adolescents and middle-aged adults. We had expected that with age more individuals would view time as interrelated given prior research (Cottle et al., 1968). One way to interpret these findings is that the temporal pattern reflects life-transitions. According to life-course theory (Elder, 2003), the lifespan may be organized into life-transitions, such as finishing college, starting a career, becoming a parent, marrying, retiring, and the death of a spouse, with many of these transitions occurring in younger and older adulthood. In this way, the time perspectives of younger and older adults, in which they see the time periods as more interrelated, may be indicative of the changes in careers, family, and health that are associated with these periods of the lifespan (Erikson, 1968; Lachman et al., 2014). Future research should examine the associations between life-transitions and time perspectives explicitly.

Implications

Results of this study have implications for researchers who aim to develop interventions based on time perspective. Existing research has indicated that some dimensions of time perspective are modifiable. Marko and Savickas (1998) used time perspective theory in an intervention program about career development with adolescents and young adults. Findings indicated that time perspectives, defined as orientation and relation, changed in the experimental group and were associated with an increase in career development compared to a control group. The findings from this study indicate that time perspective may be a useful mechanism in changing self-esteem. Our findings support efforts by Boniwell et al. (2014) who have created a coaching technique that uses time perspective to diagnose, treat, and promote psychological well-being. More recent evidence indicates that time perspective may be a valuable intervention target with findings from a study showing that time perspective mediated the associations between family functioning and couple satisfaction (Gugliandolo et al., 2021).

Our results also have implications for reminiscence therapy (Westerhof et al., 2010). Based upon Butler’s (1963) theory, this therapeutic technique used with older adults and involves the recollection of past memories, often in group settings, and aided by external prompts (such as photographs). Although research has found that reminiscence therapy improves psychological outcomes for older adults (Cotelli et al., 2012), one study has indicated that reminiscence that originated from guilt over past failings is associated with poorer outcomes (Wong & Watt, 1991). Combined with our results, a past focus that is not guided by specific therapeutic goals may be detrimental.

Limitations and Future Directions

The current study makes several contributions, but has limitations. First, a cross-sectional research design was used, which is unable to separate cohort from age effects. Longitudinal data would be preferred, although it would take 70 years to be achieved. Cross-sectional data prevents our understanding of the directionality of associations between time perspective and self-esteem. It is possible that these associations are mutually influencing or that self-esteem underlies time perspective. Second, the methods were confounded with the samples. The adolescent data were paper-and-pencil surveys and the other data were collected online. The middle-aged adult sample was obtained through an academic website and studies have shown these participants to have similar characteristics to those with other recruitment methods (Zhang et al., 2014). Findings may be attributed to method rather than age. Future research should use similar data collection methods. Third, we were unable to consider alternate explanations for the associations between time perspective and self-esteem. It is possible that life-events could contribute toward either self-esteem and time perspective. Lastly, an important direction of future research would be to examine the interrelated nature of the time perspective dimensions. Despite these limitations, the current study offers the field knowledge about the associations between time perspective dimensions and self-esteem among individuals that span adolescence to adulthood.

Acknowledgements:

This project was partially supported by funds provided by The Regents of the University of California, Tobacco-Related Diseases Research Program, Grant Number No. T31IP1855. The opinions, findings, and conclusions herein are those of the author and not necessarily represent those The Regents of the University of California, or any of its programs.

The project described was supported in part by Award Number P50 DA039838 from the National Institute on Drug Abuse. The content is solely the responsibility of the author and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institute on Drug Abuse or the National Institutes of Health.

Data Availability Statement:

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. The data available includes data for the middle-aged and older adult samples.

References

  1. Barber SJ, Opitz PC, Martins B, Sakaki M, & Mather M (2016). Thinking about a limited future enhances the positivity of younger and older adults’ recall: Support for socioemotional selectivity theory. Memory & Cognition, 44(6), 869–882. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Boniwell I, Osin E, and Sircova A (2014). Introducing time perspective coaching: A new approach to improve time management and enhance well-being. International Journal of Evidence Based Coaching and Mentoring, 12(2), 24–40. [Google Scholar]
  3. Butler RN (1963). The life review: An interpretation of reminiscence in the aged. Psychiatry, 26, 65–76. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Cameron P (1972). The Generation Gap: Time Orientation. The Gerontologist, 12 (2, Part 1), 117–119. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Carstensen LL (2006). The Influence of a Sense of Time on Human Development. Science, 312, 1913–1915. doi: 10.1126/science.1127488 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Cate RA, & John OP (2007). Testing models of the structure and development of future time perspective: Maintaining a focus on opportunities in middle age. Psychology and Aging, 22, 186–201. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.22.1.186 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Chishima Y, McKay MT, & Murakami T (2017). The reliability and validity of the Temporal Focus Scale in young Japanese adults. Personality and Individual Differences, 119, 230–235. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2017.07.031 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  8. Cohen J (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Cohen G, & Taylor S (1998). Reminiscence and ageing. Ageing & Society, 18(5), 601–610. [Google Scholar]
  10. Cotelli M, Manenti R, & Zanetti O (2012). Reminiscence therapy in dementia: A review. Maturitas, 72, 203–205. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Cottle TJ, Howard P, & Pleck J (1968). Adolescent perceptions of time: The effect of age, sex, and social class. Journal of Personality, 636–50. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Cottle TJ (1967). The Circles Test: an investigation of perceptions of temporal relatedness and dominance. Journal of Projective Techniques & Personality Assessment, 31, 58–71. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.108010091651X.1967.10120417. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Douglass S, & Umaña-Taylor AJ (2016). Time-Varying Effects of Family Ethnic Socialization on Ethnic-Racial Identity Development Among Latino Adolescents. Developmental Psychology, 52, 1904–1912. doi: 10.1037/dev0000141 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Elder GH, Johnson MK, Crosnoe R (2003). The emergence and development of life course theory. In Handbook of the Life Course, Eds (Mortimor J & Shanahan MJ). Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. [Google Scholar]
  15. Erikson EH (1959). Identity and the life cycle. New York: International Universities Press. [Google Scholar]
  16. Erikson E (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis (First ed.). New York: Norton. [Google Scholar]
  17. Gugliandolo MC, Costa S, Cricchio L, & Liga F (2021). Exploring the Role of Time Perspective in Emerging Adult Couples: A Mediation Model. Journal of Happiness Studies. doi: https://doi-org.jpllnet.sfsu.edu/10.1007/s10902-021-00368-3 [Google Scholar]
  18. Evans-Polce RJ, Veliz PT, Boyd CJ, Hughes TL, & McCabe SE (2020). Associations between sexual orientation discrimination and substance use disorders: differences by age in US adults. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 55(1), 101–110. 10.1007/s00127-019-01694-x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Fingerman KL, & Perlmutter M (1995). Future time perspective and life events across adulthood. Journal of General Psychology, 122(1), 95–111. doi: 10.1080/00221309.1995.9921225 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Frank LK (1939). Time perspectives. Journal of Social Philosophy, 4, 293–312. [Google Scholar]
  21. Fung HH, Carstensen LL, & Lutz AM (1999). Influence of time on social preferences: Implications for life-span development. Psychology and Aging, 14(4), 595–604. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.14.4.595 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Grühn D, Sharifian N, & Chu Q (2015). The limits of a future time perspective in explaining age differences in emotional functioning. Psychology and Aging, 31(6), 583–593. doi 10.1037/pag0000060 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Hyland DT, & Ackerman AM (1988). Reminiscence and autobiographical memory in the study of the personal past. Journal of Gerontology, 43, 35–39. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Konowalczyk S, Moon J, Buhl M, & Mello ZR (2019). The past, present, and future all matter: How time perspective is associated with optimism and sensation seeking among young adults. Research in Human Development, 16, 119–134. 10.1080/15427609.2019.1662709 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  25. Lachman ME (2004). Development in midlife. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 305–331. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Lachman ME, Teshale S, & Agrigoroaei S (2014). Midlife as a pivotal period in the life course: Balancing growth and decline at the crossroads of youth and old age. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 39, 20–31. doi: 10.1177/0165025414533223 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Lang FR, & Carstensen LL (2002). Time counts: Future time perspective, goals, and social relationships. Psychology and Aging, 17(1), 125–139. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.17.1.125 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Lanza ST, Vasilenko SA, Liu X, Li R, & Piper ME (2014). Advancing understanding of the dynamics of smoking cessation using the time-varying effect model. Nicotine and Tobacco Research, 16, S127–S134. doi: 10.1093/ntr/ntt128 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Laureiro-Martinez D, Trujillo CA, & Unda J (2017). Time Perspective and Age: A Review of Age Associated Differences. Front Psychol, 8, 101–101. 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00101 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Lee J, & Chopik W (2018). Age-varying associations between perceived control, health, and cognition, and in older adulthood. Innovation in Aging, 2(Suppl 1), 903. [Google Scholar]
  31. Lewin K (1939). Field theory and experiment in social psychology: Concepts and methods. The American Journal of Sociology, 44, 868–897. [Google Scholar]
  32. Lyu H, Du G, & Rios K (2019). The Relationship Between Future Time Perspective and Self-Esteem: A Cross-Cultural Study of Chinese and American College Students. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1–7. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01518 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Mann M, Hosman CMH, Schaalma HP, & de Vries NK (2004). Self-esteem in a broad-spectrum approach for mental health promotion. Health Education Research: Theory and Practice, 19, 357–372. doi: 10.1093/her/cyg041 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Marko KW, & Savickas ML (1998). Effectiveness of a career time perspective intervention. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 52, 106–119. doi: 10.1006/jvbe.1996.1566 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  35. Mello ZR (2019). A Construct Matures: Time Perspective’s Multidimensional, Developmental, and Modifiable Qualities. Research in Human Development, 16, 93–102. doi: 10.1080/15427609.2019.1651156 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Mello ZR, Finan LJ, & Worrell FC (2013). Introducing an instrument to assess time orientation and time relation in adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 36, 551–563. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2013.03.005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Mello ZR, & Worrell FC (2007). The Adolescent Time Inventory-English. University of California, Berkeley. [Google Scholar]
  38. Mello ZR, & Worrell FC (2015). The past, the present, and the future: A conceptual model of time perspective in adolescence. In Stolarski M, Fieulaine N, van Beek W, Stolarski M, Fieulaine N, & van Beek W (Eds.), Time perspective theory; Review, research and application: Essays in honor of Philip G. Zimbardo. (pp. 115–129). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing. [Google Scholar]
  39. Mello ZR, Worrell FC, & Andretta JR (2009). Variation in how frequently adolescents think about the past, the present, and the future in relation to academic achievement. Research on Child and Adolescent Development. [Diskurs Kindheits- und Jugendforschun [Google Scholar]
  40. Merriam SB, & Cross LH (1982). Adulthood and reminiscence: A descriptive study. Educational Gerontology: An International Quarterly, 8, 275–290. [Google Scholar]
  41. Moon J, Lieber R, & Bayazitli I, Mello ZR (2023). An examination of multidimensional time perspective and mental health outcomes. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(6), 1–14. 10.3390/ijerph20064688 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Ortuño VEC, Janeiro I, & Paixão MP (2011). Time across time: Study of Time Perspective differences across several age groups. Paper presented at the 1st International Conference of Time Perspective, Coimbra, Portugal. [Google Scholar]
  43. Parker RG (1995). Reminiscence: A continuity theory framework. The Gerontologist, 35, 515–525. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Pierce JL, & Gardner DG (2004). Self-Esteem Within the Work and Organizational Context: A Review of the Organization-Based Self-Esteem Literature. Journal of Management, 30, 591–622. [Google Scholar]
  45. Piaget J (1975). The intellectual development of the adolescent. In Caplan G & Lebovici S (Eds.), The Psychology of Adolescence: Essential Readings. New York: International Universities Press, Inc. [Google Scholar]
  46. Rice CE, Vasilenko SA, Fish JN, & Lanza ST (2019). Sexual minority health disparities: an examination of age-related trends across adulthood in a national cross-sectional sample. Annals of Epidemiology, 31, 20–25. 10.1016/j.annepidem.2019.01.001 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Reichstadt J, Sengupta G, Depp CA, Palinkas LA, & Jeste DV (2010). Older adults’ perspectives on successful aging: Qualitative interviews. The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 18(7), 567–575. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Rosenberg M (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. [Google Scholar]
  49. Sinclair SJ, Blais MA, Gansler DA, Sandberg E, Bistis K, & LoCicero A (2010). Psychometric properties of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale: overall and across demographic groups living within the United States. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 33, 56–80. 10.1177/0163278709356187. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Siu NYF, Lam HHY, Le JJY, & Przepiorka AM (2014). Time perception and time perspective differences between adolescents and adults. Acta Psychologica, 151, 222–229. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2014.06.013 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Tan X, Shiyko MP, Li R, Li Y, & Dierker L (2012). A time-varying effect model for intensive longitudinal data. Psychological Methods, 17, 61–77. doi: 10.1037/a0025814. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Thapa S, Selya AS, & Jonk Y (2017). Time-Varying Effects of Parental Alcoholism on Depression. Preventing Chronic Disease, 14. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Thompson K, Roemer A, & Leadbeater B (2015). Impulsive Personality, Parental Monitoring, and Alcohol Outcomes from Adolescence Through Young Adulthood. Journal of Adolescent Health, 57(3), 320–326. 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2015.05.005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  54. Vasilenko SA & Lanza ST (2014). Predictors of multiple sexual partners from adolescence through young adulthood. Journal of Adolescent Health, 56, 491–497. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2013.12.025 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  55. Vasilenko S (2017). Age-varying associations between nonmarital sexual behavior and depressive symptoms across adolescence and young adulthood. Developmental Psychology, 53(2), 366–378. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Vasilenko SA, Evans-Polce RJ, & Lanza ST (2017). Age trends in rates of substance use disorders across ages 18–90: Differences by gender and race/ethnicity. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 180, 260–264. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Watt LM, & Wong PT (1991). A taxonomy of reminiscence and therapeutic implications. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 16(1–2), 37–57. [Google Scholar]
  58. Webster JD (1994). Predictors of reminiscence: A lifespan perspective. Canadian Journal on Aging/La Revue canadienne du vieillissement, 13, 66–78. [Google Scholar]
  59. Webster JD (2011). A new measure of time perspective: Initial psychometric findings for the Balanced Time Perspective Scale (BTPS). Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement, 43(2), 111–118. doi: 10.1037/a0022801 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  60. Westerhof GJ, Bohlmeijer E, & Webster JD (2010). Reminiscence and mental health: A review of recent progress in theory, research and interventions. Ageing & Society, 30(4), 697–721. [Google Scholar]
  61. Wheeler SB (2010). Effects of Self-Esteem and Academic Performance on Adolescent Decision-Making: An Examination of Early Sexual Intercourse and Illegal Substance Use. Journal of Adolescent Health, 47, 582–590. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  62. Wong PT, & Watt LM (1991). What types of reminiscence are associated with successful aging? Psychology and Aging, 6, 272–279 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  63. Zhang JW, Howell R, & Stolarski M (2013). Comparing Three Methods to Measure a Balanced Time Perspective: The Relationship Between a Balanced Time Perspective and Subjective Well-Being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 169–184. doi: 10.1007/s10902-012-9322-x [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  64. Zimbardo PG, & Boyd JN (1999). Putting time in perspective: A valid, reliable individual-differences metric. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77(6), 1271–1288. [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. The data available includes data for the middle-aged and older adult samples.

RESOURCES