Abstract
Engaging in aging preparatory activities that is perceived to be utile for oneself (e.g., to retain autonomy and independence) and for others (e.g., to retain a harmonious relationship with important others) may have a functional effect on one’s aging process. We examined how perceived self- and other-related utilities of aging preparatory activities were associated with positive future thinking across adulthood, and whether these associations differed by culture. Building upon cross-sectional data from a web-based study conducted in Hong Kong (n = 283, Mage = 55.12, aged 18–85 years), the USA (n = 264, Mage = 51.06, aged 20–85 years) and Germany (n = 402, Mage = 51.65, aged 19–90 years), we observed different patterns of associations across these three cultures. Perceiving self-related utilities was linked to positive future thinking in the USA and Germany, but not in Hong Kong. In contrast, perceiving other-related utilities of aging preparatory activities was positively associated with future thinking in Hong Kong, but not in the USA or Germany. Perceived risks, on the other hand, showed a negative association with positive future thinking across all cultures. Findings suggest that there might be a culture-specific tendency for individuals to appraise their future, based on their perceived self- or other-related utilities of aging preparatory activities.
Keywords: Perceived utilities, Perceived risks, Aging preparatory activities, Positive future thinking, Cross-cultural study, Culture, Self-construal
Introduction
Aging brings about considerable challenges in diverse life domains. According to the life-span development perspective, individuals tend to co-shape their life as active agents to maximize positive developmental outcomes and minimize potential losses (Baltes and Baltes 1990; Baltes et al. 2006). In this vein, we posit aging preparation, that is, mobilizing current resources for a better adaptation in old age, as a type of coping against age-related losses (Aspinwall and Taylor 1997), whose foundations are laid already in younger ages (Kornadt et al. 2018a; Stawski et al. 2007). Based upon studies that extended the scope of aging preparation beyond financial provision (Kornadt et al. 2018a, b), we take multiple life domains into account in which age-related challenges are highly predictable, namely, preparation for financial provision, need for care, living arrangements, social connectedness, and dying and death.
Given that one’s subsequent thoughts and behavior could be motivated by the valence given in the specific activity through an appraisal for its utility (Atkinson 1957; Feather 1982), we postulate that those who share an action-related thought that engaging in aging preparatory activities is utile for oneself or for important others would be likely to perceive their future as positive. Moreover, one’s cultural background may be relevant in this association, considering that each culture socializes its members into giving different priorities to self- versus other-related utilities. An established way to differentiate the hypothesized role of culture is self-construal, i.e., whether an individual construes oneself as a unique individual, as in Western cultures, or as a part of a group, as it is salient in Eastern cultures (Markus and Kitayama 1991). According to this account, individuals from a relatively independent culture may pursue a goal to retain autonomy and independence to a greater extent, whereas individuals from a more interdependent background may find a goal to retain a harmonious relationship with others more worthwhile. We presume that this pursuit would affect how they perceive their future, depending on whether their engagement in an action brings about culturally desirable utilities. We expect that such a cross-cultural approach may be a first step to better understand the motivational process of aging preparatory activities.
The link between perceived utilities of aging preparatory activities and one’s positive future thinking
Positive future thinking is a more general and diffuse term referring to the belief that good things will occur in one’s future. It is an adaptive state that encourages one to actively seek out new opportunities, although some challenges are likely to come (Rasmussen and Berntsen 2013). Given the unique feature of aging preparation, that is, investing one’s current resources in hopes of positive but delayed rewards in the future (Kornadt et al. 2018a; Löckenhoff 2011), one’s future thinking would be influenced if one perceives that aging preparatory activities are utile in order to reach long- and short-range goals. In the present study, we attempt to conceptualize this perceived utility of aging preparation, a sort of action-related thoughts, and examine how this concept is related to one’s positive future thinking.
Perceived utility of aging preparation is the value that relevant activities acquire; broadly defined as the anticipated reward one receives from engaging in specific activities (i.e., task value; Atkinson 1957; Rotter 1982), and more specifically as the reasons for engaging in an activity, not for its own sake but to achieve a favorable end-state (i.e., utility value; Eccles and Wigfield 1995; Wigfield and Eccles 2000). Drawing on the notion of expectancy-value models of behavior (e.g., Atkinson 1957; Feather 1982), such values would affect the valence of aging preparatory activities, which will in turn motivate individuals to pursue selected goals and direct their behavior accordingly. Moreover, it would also affect one’s perception of future, given that the aim of engaging in such activities is to cope with future challenges. When individuals perceive that preparing for aging fits into their own desired self, they may have a more positive outlook on future by having less worry about the upcoming changes and facing it with confidence.
Previous studies have conceived aging preparation as a type of proactive coping (Aspinwall and Taylor 1997), and evinced its beneficial effects, namely, greater well-being and life satisfaction (e.g., Noone et al. 2009; Prenda and Lachman 2001) and lower levels of depression as well as anxiety (e.g., Sörensen et al. 2012). However, to the best of our knowledge, only few studies have investigated how individuals appraise the aging preparatory activities and its effects on one’s following action and thoughts (Pinquart and Sörensen 2002a; Rohr and Lang 2016). In a qualitative study by Pinquart and Sörensen (2002a), participants found it utile to engage themselves in preparatory activities for future care needs, because it rewards them with “gaining a feeling of security” and “avoiding being a burden,” whereas they identified “difficulty in foreseeing future care needs” and “lack of resources” as risks preventing the preparation. Likewise, Rohr and Lang (2016) observed that the willingness to provide care is associated with anticipated gains and losses of engaging in future caregiving work. Based on their studies, we assume that perceived utility may be associated not only with the activity itself, but also with subsequent changes in future relevant thinking. Although none of these studies uses the same terminology, they both agree that perceiving aging preparation as utile plays a motivational role.
However, whether perceived utility of aging preparation is related to positive outcomes throughout diverse life domains is still unclear. Providing that individuals, who perceive aging preparation as utile, would adjust the way they think about the topic and even implement relevant activities, it is conceivable that this tendency would be related to having confidence in the face of aging-related challenges. Note that we additionally include the role of perceived risks in our model to control for its influence on future thinking, considering that the aforementioned studies explored negative factors that demotivate one’s following actions or thoughts (Pinquart and Sörensen 2002a; Rohr and Lang 2016). Consequently, we hypothesize that individuals, who perceive the utilities of aging preparatory activities, would have a more positive outlook even after controlling for the impact of perceived risks of such activities.
Expected cultural differences
People from the same culture often share values, beliefs, norms, and self-construal that are relevant with regard to fundamental motivational processes (Markus and Kitayama 1991; Pecchioni et al. 2004). We submit that these culturally shared thoughts may also underlie aging preparatory activities across adulthood. For instance, the salience of self- and other-related utilities regarding aging preparation may depend on whether one construes oneself as a unique individual (i.e., independent self-construal) or oneself as part of an encompassing social relationship (i.e., interdependent self-construal). Markus and Kitayama (1991) conceptually differentiated these two construals of the self, depending on the extent to which the self is perceived to be separated from others. Although there is still a great diversity in how one defines the self even within the same culture, independent self-construal is known to be more prevalent among Western cultures in which people prioritize the individual over the group and strive for independence and autonomy, whereas interdependent self-construal may be better described as the characteristics of East Asian cultures, namely, seeking for group harmony and fit. Individuals in these cultures perceive the self as inseparable from the group. Therefore, it is expected that individuals from Western cultures are primarily motivated by individually rooted need or motive, such as self-related utilities of one’s activities. In contrast, when the cultural imperative is to seek interpersonal harmony, the motives focusing on others should be typically regarded as positive and desirable (Markus and Kitayama 1991). Such cross-cultural perspective on motivation was empirically tested in a study that examined how independent and interdependent goal pursuits resulted in divergent affective consequences in different cultures (Oishi and Diener 2001). In their study, pursuing goals for oneself only appeared to be functional for European Americans, leading to an increased level of well-being, while pursuing goals for important others was linked to positive outcomes only for Asian Americans. In this regard, we distinguish between one’s perception of self-related utilities from other-related utilities of aging preparation and aim to explore their different impacts on the self.
We hypothesize that pursuing the type of utilities that is emphasized more in each culture would be functional, and therefore lead one to think of their future positively. Although this distinction between self and others is not new in the cross-cultural literature (e.g., Morling and Lamoreaux 2008), there is no empirical study dealing with such cultural differences in terms of aging preparation. Given a set of cross-cultural findings that older adults’ definition of successful aging was contingent upon their cultural backgrounds (Keith et al. 1990; Paik and Choi 2007), it is plausible that individuals may have a better view of their future, if they expect constitutive conditions to be met in old age. Both studies by Keith et al. (1990) and Paik and Choi (2007) found that those from East Asian countries, like Hong Kong, viewed relatedness as an essential factor of successful aging, whereas Westerners mainly associated it with self-related issues. Accordingly, we assume that Westerners’ positive future thinking might be more associated with having an expectation of “better me” through aging preparatory activities, whereas Easterners would attribute it to an expectation of “better us.” We aim to examine these questions by analyzing the data of a study conducted simultaneously in three different cultures: Hong Kong, the USA, and Germany.
The current study
Taken together, we derived a set of hypotheses from the literature reviewed above as follows: (1) people from Germany and the USA may show more positive future thinking when they perceive a higher level of self-related utilities of aging preparatory activities, whereas (2) people from Hong Kong may show more positive future thinking when they perceive a higher level of other-related utilities of aging preparatory activities.
Method
Participants
The sample consisted of N = 949 participants from China (Hong Kong, n = 283), the USA (North Carolina, n = 264), and Germany (nationwide, n = 402), who completed a web-based questionnaire study in 2014. Participants were recruited by convenience sampling through contacting participants who took part in prior studies. Those who agreed to participate were sent a link for study access by email. The institutional review boards of the respective US and Hong Kong universities approved the study. The German sample received approval of compliance with ethical rules and data security law by a governmental authority of the State of Bavaria (Germany). Participants received a monetary compensation in the value of about 20 USD. Our sample was age heterogeneous, ranging from 18 to 90 years. The average age of the whole participants was 52.51 (SD = 18.48). As shown in Table 1, the average age of the Hong Kong sample was the oldest (M = 55.12, SD = 18.21, aged 18–85 years) followed by the German (M = 51.65, SD = 18.78, aged 19–90 years) and US samples (M = 51.06, SD = 18.07, aged 20–85 years), F(2, 946) = 4.48, p < .05. A total of 560 women (59.0%) participated in the study, and this female proportion was the largest in the German sample (67.1%), followed by the Hong Kong (54.1%) and US (51.9%) samples, x2(2) = 21.57, p < .001. Regarding the status of relationship, about 70% of the total sample reported that they were currently having a steady relationship, and the participants from Hong Kong (84.1%) were more likely to have a partner than those from the USA (72%) and Germany (59.2%), x2(2) = 49.74, p < .001. The average income level was around 2292.80 USD per month (SD = 1668.95), and the US sample (M = 3060.66, SD = 2164.28) reported the highest amount in comparison with the German (M = 2111.31, SD = 1077.50) and Hong Kong samples (M = 1825.86, SD = 1588.82), F(2, 946) = 45.08, p < .001. The average score of subjective health was 3.71 (SD = 0.96), indicating that our sample found their current health status quite good. The US sample reported the highest level of subjective health (M = 4.17, SD = 0.83), followed by the German (M = 3.67, SD = 0.99) and Hong Kong samples (M = 3.34, SD = 0.85), F(2, 946) = 59.10, p < .001. The average education level of the current sample was 2.87 (SD = 1.23), representing the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) levels 4 (post-secondary non-tertiary education) and 5B (short-cycle tertiary education). The US sample (M = 3.99, SD = 0.97) were more likely to have higher education level with the ISCED level 5A (Bachelor or equivalent) than the Hong Kong (M = 2.45, SD = 1.18) and German samples (M = 2.43, SD = 0.90), with both of them showing around the ISCED level 3 (upper secondary education), F(2, 946) = 224.41, p < .001.
Table 1.
Descriptive statistics of study participants by culture
| Total (N = 949) |
Hong Kong (n = 283) |
USA (n = 264) |
Germany (n = 402) |
Δ Subsamples | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive future thinking |
M (SD) |
3.58 (0.82) |
3.29 (0.71) |
3.76 (0.82) |
3.67 (0.84) |
F(2, 946) = 28.17*** |
| Perceived self-related utilities |
M (SD) |
5.24 (1.06) |
4.92 (0.96) |
5.28 (1.03) |
5.41 (1.11) |
F (2, 946) = 19.25*** |
| Perceived other-related utilities |
M (SD) |
4.69 (1.34) |
4.91 (0.99) |
4.87 (1.26) |
4.40 (1.54) |
F (2, 946) = 16.54*** |
| Perceived risks |
M (SD) |
4.09 (1.26) |
4.62 (1.00) |
4.32 (1.15) |
3.59 (1.29) |
F (2, 946) = 70.19*** |
| Age (years) |
M (SD) |
52.51 (18.48) |
55.12 (18.21) |
51.06 (18.07) |
51.65 (18.78) |
F (2, 946) = 4.48* |
| Female |
N (%) |
560 (59.0) |
153 (54.1) |
137 (51.9) |
270 (67.1) |
x2(2) = 21.57*** |
| Having a relationship |
N (%) |
666 (70.2) |
238 (84.1) |
190 (72.0) |
238 (59.2) |
x2(2) = 49.74*** |
| Monthly income (USD) |
M (SD) |
2292.80 (1668.95) |
1825.86 (1588.82) |
3060.66 (2164.28) |
2111.31 (1077.50) |
F (2, 946) = 45.08*** |
| Subjective health |
M (SD) |
3.71 (0.96) |
3.34 (0.85) |
4.17 (0.83) |
3.67 (0.99) |
F (2, 946) = 59.10*** |
| Education |
M (SD) |
2.87 (1.23) |
2.45 (1.18) |
3.99 (0.97) |
2.43 (0.90) |
F (2, 946) = 224.41*** |
Descriptive statistics are shown as means with standard deviation in parentheses, or the number together with % in parentheses
***p < .001; **p < .01; *p < .05
Measures
Perceived utilities
We took a domain specific approach and measured aging preparation in diverse life domains, including, financial provision (Hershey and Mowen 2000; Stawski et al. 2007), living arrangements (Beyer et al. 2017), need for care (Pinquart and Sörensen 2002a; Rohr and Lang 2016), social connectedness (Kornadt et al. 2018a), and dying and death (Pinquart and Sörensen 2002b). Participants rated on a 7-point Likert scale the extent they agree that aging preparation in the respective domains is utile. Two items assessed self-related utilities, namely, “By taking actions to provide for (each domain) in old age, I retain my autonomy and independence” and “…, I free myself from burden.” Two items assessed other-related utilities: “…, I avoid conflicts and confrontations with friends and family” and “…, I contribute to the solidarity between generations.” As a latent model should at least consist of three manifested indicators to achieve model identification (Kline 2015), we parceled those two items from each utility type in each domain by taking their average (Hall et al. 1999). The Cronbach’s alphas of self- and other-related utilities were .86 and .93, respectively.
Perceived risks
This construct consisted of average scores of two items from each five domains: “By taking actions to provide (each domain) in old age, I accept burdens today,” and “…, I restrict myself today in my everyday life.” The Cronbach alpha for this measure was .88.
Positive future thinking
We used the Affective Valence of Future Perspective scale, a subscale of the Experience of Time and Future scale (Brandtstädter and Wentura 1994) to measure future thinking. Participants rated the following three items on a 5-point Likert scale: “Looking at my own life fills me with worries (recoded),” “I look into the future with confidence,” and “The future will bring a lot of good things for me.” The Cronbach’s alpha for this measure was .75.
Covariates
Age (years), gender (male or female), relationship status (in a steady relationship or not), economic status (in USD, weighted monthly income depending on household size according to OECD), subjective health (5-point Likert scale from bad to very good), and education level (according to ISCED, 5-point Likert scale from lower secondary education to Masters and equivalent degrees or above). Among them, those that showed differences among the three cultures were included in the model as covariates.
Analytic procedures
We conducted descriptive data analyses and data screening through SPSS 25.0, and multigroup structural equation modeling (MGSEM) through AMOS 21.0 (Arbuckle 2012). MGSEM has several strengths to test our hypotheses, for example, instead of measured variables, mean differences are derived based on latent constructs corrected for error (Raykov et al. 1991). Moreover, this method can consider missing values by implementing full information maximum likelihood (FIML), and researchers can define parameters as invariant across the various groups to compare group differences (Kline 2015). We tested the differences between the three cultures by constraining the unstandardized factor loadings and examining whether this model showed a significant loss in model fit compared with the one unconstrained. In order to assess the goodness-of-fit of our model, we checked the x2 statistic, CFI, IFI and RMSEA. The cut-offs of each value indicating a good fit were, CFI and IFI ≥ .90 and RMSEA ≤ .80 (Marsh et al. 2004). The MGSEM model is presented in Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.
Multigroup Structural Equation Modeling. Each manifest variables composing the latent variables of the “self-related utilities,” “other-related utilities,” and “risks” indicates the five domains of aging preparation (i.e., D1: financial provision, D2: future care needs, D3: living arrangements, D4: social connectedness, D5: dying and death). The latent variable of positive future thinking consists of three manifest variables (i.e., V1: future with worries, V2: future with confidence, V3: Good things to come in future). A multigroup comparison was made among Germany, USA and Hong Kong. The covariates as well as error terms included in our model are not shown in this figure
Results
Table 1 shows the descriptive information of the included variables across the three cultures. The average score of positive future thinking of our total sample was 3.58 (SD = 0.82), indicating that participants tended to report a fairly positive future outlook. The US sample (M = 3.76, SD = 0.82) showed the highest level of positive future thinking, followed by the German (M = 3.67, SD = 0.84) and Hong Kong samples (M = 3.29, SD = 0.71), F(2, 946) = 28.17, p < .001. As to the level of perceived self-related utilities, the average of our total sample was 5.24 (SD = 1.06), indicating that participants overall agreed that aging preparation was utile for oneself. The German sample reported higher level of perceived self-related utilities (M = 5.41, SD = 1.11) than did the US (M = 5.28, SD = 1.03) and Hong Kong samples (M = 4.92, SD = 0.96), F(2, 946) = 19.25, p < .001. In addition, the average perceived other-related utilities were slightly lower than that of self-related utilities (M = 4.69, SD = 1.34) overall. The Hong Kong sample perceived more of such utilities (M = 4.91, SD =0 .99) than did the US (M = 4.87, SD = 1.26) and German samples (M = 4.40, SD = 1.54), F(2, 946) = 16.54, p < .001. Furthermore, our sample was quite neutral regarding the level of perceived risks relevant to aging preparatory activities (M = 4.09, SD = 1.26). The Hong Kong sample perceived more risks of aging preparatory activities (M = 4.62, SD = 1.00) than did the US (M = 4.32, SD = 1.15) and German samples (M = 3.59, SD = 1.29), F(2, 946) = 70.19, p < .001.
Table 2 displays Pearson’s correlations among the variables included in our model. Perceived self- and other-related utilities of aging preparatory activities was positively related to the level of positive future thinking, whereas perceived risks showed no significant correlation. Considering that the variance inflation factor (VIF) statistic was between 1.06 and 1.93, no multicollinearity problem was detected in our model.
Table 2.
Correlations of the variables
| Variable | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 Positive future thinking | – | |||||||
| 2 Perceived self-related utilities | +.32 | – | ||||||
| 3 Perceived other-related utilities | +.18 | .60 | – | |||||
| 4 Perceived risks | − .05 | .28 | .49 | – | ||||
| 5 Age (years) | − .07 | .19 | .24 | +.19 | – | |||
| 6 Monthly income (USD) | +.12 | .06 | .02 | +.00 | +.05 | – | ||
| 7 Subjective health | +.37 | .12 | .03 | − .05 | − .14 | .16 | – | |
| 8 Education | +.12 | .03 | .00 | +.04 | − .28 | .34 | .27 | – |
Coefficients printed in bold are significant (p < .05)
Before proceeding with the MGSEM, we first tested for measurement invariance to examine whether factor loadings, intercepts, and residual variances are equivalent across the three cultures (Van de Schoot et al. 2012). Modification indices suggested a correlation between the error terms from the two of perceived risks variables (i.e., preparation for social connectedness and dying and death). Compared with the configural model (CFI = .91, IFI = .91, RMSEA = .05), the overall model fit of the metric invariance model was significantly worse (p < .001), indicating that at least one factor loading was not equivalent across the three cultures. However, considering that full measurement invariance is often not supported (Putnick and Bornstein 2016), we further tested partial measurement invariance by releasing constraints that caused variance (Byrne et al. 1989).1 The partial measurement invariance model did not have a significant fit loss (CFI = .91, IFI = .91, RMSEA = .05, p = .113), supporting that our research model was partially comparable across different culture groups (Horn and McArdle 1992). A basic model with the standardized factor loadings of the four latent variables is presented in “Appendix, Table 4”.
Table 4.
A basic model with standardized factor loadings of the latent variables
| Culture | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Hong Kong | USA | Germany | |
| Positive future thinking | |||
| Having confidence | .89 | .90 | .89 |
| Good things | .80 | .85 | .80 |
| Worries (recoded) | .20 | .48 | .61 |
| Perceived self-related utilities of preparing for… | |||
| Financial provision | .82 | .60 | .64 |
| Care needs | .88 | .83 | .80 |
| Living arrangement | .81 | .75 | .73 |
| Social connectedness | .85 | .80 | .73 |
| Death and dying | .81 | .76 | .68 |
| Perceived other-related utilities of preparing for… | |||
| Financial provision | .79 | .82 | .85 |
| Care needs | .84 | .89 | .91 |
| Living arrangement | .86 | .86 | .92 |
| Social connectedness | .87 | .89 | .78 |
| Death and dying | .83 | .83 | .74 |
| Perceived risks of preparing for… | |||
| Financial provision | .80 | .62 | .72 |
| Care needs | .91 | .91 | .85 |
| Living arrangement | .85 | .85 | .80 |
| Social connectedness | .89 | .78 | .59 |
| Death and dying | .80 | .73 | .67 |
Coefficients are all statistically significant (p < .001), except the question about future worries from the latent variable “positive future thinking” in Hong Kong group (p < .01)
Results for the MGSEM models are shown in Table 3. According to the chi-square difference test, the unconstrained model had a significantly better fit compared to the constrained model (p < .01), indicating that the effects of the factors varied by culture. We observed cultural differences in the path from both types of perceived utilities to positive future thinking. For the relations between perceived self-related utilities and positive future thinking, though the coefficients were all positive across the three groups, the relations in the US (B = .43, S.E. = .06, p < .001) and German samples (B = .18, S.E. = .06, p < .01) were statistically significant, but not in the Hong Kong sample (B = .09, S.E. = .08, ns). However, according to the results of pairwise parameter comparisons, the difference of coefficients between the Hong Kong and German samples was not statistically different (Z = 0.87, ns), while the coefficient in the US sample was significantly higher than both the Hong Kong (Z = 3.20, p < .01) and German samples (Z = − 2.85, p < .01). The relations between other-related utilities and positive future thinking showed an opposite pattern of the aforementioned results. The positive association between perceived other-related utilities and positive future thinking was only significant in the Hong Kong (B = .29, S.E. = .10, p < .01), but not in the US (B = .04, S.E. = .05, ns) or German samples (B = .03, S.E. = .03, ns). The group comparison results supported that these discrepancies between cultures were indeed significant (USA; Z = − 2.21, p < .05 and Germany; Z = − 2.41, p < .05). As to the relations between perceived risks and positive future thinking, the coefficients were significant in the US (B = − .13, S.E. = .05, p < .01) and moderately significant in the German sample (B = − .07, S.E. = .03, p < .01), but not in the Hong Kong sample (B = − .11, S.E. = .07, ns). However, pairwise comparisons revealed no significant cultural difference in this relation.
Table 3.
Unstandardized and standardized coefficients of structural equation models according to culture group
| Positive future thinking | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hong Kong | USA | Germany | |||||||
| B | β | S.E. | B | β | S.E. | B | β | S.E. | |
| Perceived self-related utilities | .09 | .12 | .08 | .43 | .55 | .06 | .18 | .27 | .06 |
| Perceived other-related utilities | .29 | .35 | .10 | .04 | .06 | .06 | .03 | .06 | .05 |
| Perceived risks | − .11 | − .14 | .07 | − .13 | − .19 | .05 | − .07 | − .11 | .03 |
| Age | − .01 | − .19 | .00 | − .01 | − .24 | .00 | − .01 | − .15 | .00 |
| Female | .10 | .06 | .10 | .10 | .06 | .10 | .09 | .05 | .09 |
| Having a relationship | .28 | .13 | .13 | .07 | .04 | .11 | .04 | .02 | .09 |
| Income | .00 | − .04 | .00 | .00 | .15 | .00 | .00 | .04 | .00 |
| Subjective health | .14 | .15 | .06 | .27 | .25 | .06 | .28 | .33 | .04 |
| Education | .04 | .06 | .05 | − .08 | − .08 | .05 | − .01 | − .01 | .05 |
Coefficients printed in bold are significant (p < .05). In German group, the estimated coefficient of perceived risks were moderately significant (p < .10). The association between perceived self- and other-related utilities with positive future thinking differs among the culture groups according to the significance test comparing unconstrained and constrained models (p < .001). Missing values were handled by implementing full information maximum likelihood
Discussion
By distinguishing between perceptions of self- from other-related utilities of aging preparatory activities, we examined whether each type of utilities were differently associated with positive future thinking depending on one’s cultural background. Results revealed that individuals from each culture were differently affected by self- versus other-related perceived utilities that reinforced them to engage in aging preparatory activities. These results remained robust even after holding the impacts of covariates statistically constant. Perceiving self-related utilities of aging preparatory activities was associated with one’s positive future thinking in the Western contexts (i.e., the USA and Germany), whereas perceiving other-related utilities exerted an influence on positive future thinking only in an Eastern culture (i.e., Hong Kong). We first discuss the findings with regard to the general effects of perceived utilities and risks on positive future thinking and then the cultural differences by focusing on the different types of perceived utilities.
The effects of perceived utilities on positive future thinking
As hypothesized, both types of perceived utilities of aging preparatory activities had a positive impact on positive future thinking, whereas perceived risks appeared to have a negative impact on the same outcome. These findings are in line with previous findings by Pinquart and Sörensen (2002a) and Rohr and Lang (2016). Providing that individuals tend to actively plan, organize, and shape their life even when encountering aging-related life challenges (Baltes and Baltes 1990; Baltes et al. 2006), this finding suggests that people may have a positive appraisal regarding their future if they perceive that engaging in preparatory activities is utile to better cope with aging.
In order to understand the role of perceived utility in aging preparation context, we employ the perspective of expectancy-value models arguing that such value, derived by assessing its utility, will in turn motivate one’s relevant thoughts and behaviors (Atkinson 1957; Feather 1982). Because it is plausible that an actual implementation of aging preparation or a willingness to engage in such activities may play a role in these associations (Pinquart and Sörensen 2002a; Rohr and Lang 2016), we suggest further studies including the role of preparatory activities. Furthermore, based on the model of selective optimization with compensation (Baltes and Baltes 1990), studies considering perceived utilities and risks, resources and adjustment in behavior and thoughts may give us a better idea on the strategies underlying aging preparatory activities.
Given that the foundation of aging preparation has already been laid in younger age (Kornadt et al. 2018a; Stawski et al. 2007), our study dealt with an age-heterogeneous adult sample of participants aged 18–90 years. Earlier works have revealed that older adults, compared to their younger counterparts, may experience less negative emotion when losses are anticipated (Nielsen et al. 2008; Samanez-Larkin et al. 2007). We thus additionally tested age differences in the association between perceiving utilities and risks of aging preparation and positive future thinking, but the multigroup model did not show any significant group differences,2 indicating that perceiving utilities of aging preparation is similarly related to one’s affection across the three age groups. However, we still assume that the effect of perceived utilities on a de facto implementation of aging preparation might vary by age, concerning the urgency to cope with aging-related life challenges that is likely to happen in the distant future for younger adults or in the proximate future for older adults. We therefore call for future studies to examine the age differences in this regard.
An appraisal of “better me” in Western and “better us” in Eastern cultures
Our major concern is whether there exist cultural differences in the association between perceived utilities, categorized into self- and other-related aspects, and positive future thinking. The findings partially support our hypothesis of expected differences between Western and Eastern cultures. The extent to which one’s positive future thinking is related to perceiving self-related utilities of aging preparation was significantly higher in the USA than Hong Kong, where the association was not statistically significant. In contrast, how positive the Hong Kong sample perceived their future depended upon to what extent they perceived other-related utilities of aging preparatory activities, that is, achieving group harmony and solidarity. This relation was not significant in the German and US (Western) samples.
This finding is in accordance with the argument from Markus and Kitayama (1991), who addresses a culture-specific tendency that a dominant type of self-construal in certain cultural contexts would influence one’s belief. Oishi and Diener (2001) empirically showed how independent and interdependent goal pursuits motivated divergent affective outcomes between European and Asian Americans. Our finding further shows that the condition arousing one’s positive future thinking is contingent upon one’s cultural background in which a certain type of self-construal may be particularly salient, like Germans and Americans with independent- and Hong Kong Chinese with interdependent self-construal. Although our samples may not be representative of the each culture, the point we are making about aging preparation being contingent on self- versus other-related utilities is also consistent with the larger literature (Morling and Lamoreaux 2008). Based on meta-analysis of 51 studies, their study supported the roles of cultural products in reinforcing or priming particular ways of thinking, valuing, or feeling. In practical terms, this result addresses a culture-specific approach when promoting one’s awareness toward the need to engage in aging preparatory activities. While emphasizing self-related utilities seems more beneficial in the USA and Germany, Hong Kong Chinese may be more affected by other-related aspects. Providing that aging preparatory activities are a type of proactive coping, such an approach would elicit a functional state across diverse cultures.
We observe that, unlike our assumption, those from Germany showed somewhat different patterns in comparison with those from the USA. Regarding the association between perceived self-related utilities and positive future thinking, we found no significant group difference between Germans and Hong Kong Chinese. On the contrary, although perceived self-related utilities was significantly associated with positive future thinking in both the German and US samples, the strength of the association was significantly stronger in the USA than in Germany. Such a finding is consistent with a previous study showing that Germans and British, namely Western Europeans, were substantially more interdependent or less independent than Americans (Kitayama et al. 2009). Therefore, in order to capture such diverse tendencies, a broader range of cultures, not just the East–West comparison, should be examined in future studies.
Limitations
There are a few caveats that should be considered when interpreting our findings. First, because all the findings were based on cross-sectional data, the matter of causality was not fully considered. In order to figure out the sequential relationship of the variables, further studies based on longitudinal data would be necessary. Moreover, future studies based on longitudinal data would allow researchers to draw conclusions related to the motivational role of perceived utility and risk in the context of aging preparation. For example, longitudinal data would allow us to distinguish whether different types of perceived utility and risk indeed motivate or demotivate the actual activities, respectively, or whether the implementation of activities moderates or mediates the association between perceived utility and risk with positive future thinking. Second, although the present study is based on a large and age-heterogeneous sample from the USA, Germany, and Hong Kong, our sample was not designed to be representative of each culture’s population. We attempted to optimize the sample representativeness by recruiting participants through survey companies and local district offices before sending out the link to the questionnaire by email, but a web-based survey could still cause some selection biases regarding the Internet access. Therefore, the current findings should be interpreted with caution, and further studies with representative samples from diverse backgrounds are needed to test the generalizability of our findings.
Conclusion
Our study suggests that there is likely a culture-specific tendency for individuals to appraise their future, based on the perceived self- or other-related utility of aging preparatory activities. Individuals in the US culture, and to a lesser extent, the German culture, seem to have a positive perception of their future when they perceive self-related utilities of such activities, which may be influenced by their independent cultural imperative. On the contrary, the view of Hong Kong Chinese on future may be affected by perceiving more other-related utilities, as hoping for relatedness is known to be more salient in Eastern cultures. Although our study mainly focuses on how such perceptions are differently associated with positive future thinking based on the cross-sectional data, the present study with a culture-specific focus may contribute to better understanding on how and for what purpose people are motivated to prepare for their old age.
Acknowledgements
The research in this manuscript was supported by a research grant from the Volkswagen Foundation to Frieder R. Lang (Az 86 759, Az 93 273).
Appendix
See Table 4.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Footnotes
To test the partial measurement invariance, the constraints of the following seven items were released: One item “looking at my own life fills me with worries (recoded)” from positive future thinking, “financial provision” and “living arrangements” domains from perceived self-related utilities, “social connectedness” and “dying and death” domains from perceived other-related utilities, and lastly, “financial provision” and “social connectedness” domains from perceived risks of aging preparatory activities.
Three age groups were included for this additional analysis. The first group included those aged up to 39 years (n = 282), the second group included those aged 40–59 years (n = 281), and the last group consisted of those aged 60 and above (n = 401). The model fit after constraining the factor loadings was not significantly different from that of the unconstrained model suggesting that this research model was comparable across different age groups.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
References
- Arbuckle JL. IBM SPSS Amos 21 user’s guide. Crawfordville: Amos Development Corporation; 2012. [Google Scholar]
- Aspinwall LG, Taylor SE. A stitch in time: self-regulation and proactive coping. Psychol Bull. 1997;121:417–436. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.121.3.417. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Atkinson JW. Motivational determinants of risk taking behavior. Psychol Rev. 1957;64:359–372. doi: 10.1037/h0043445. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Baltes PB, Baltes MM. Psychological perspectives on successful aging: the model of selective optimization with compensation. In: Baltes PB, Baltes MM, editors. Successful aging: perspectives from the behavioral sciences (European network on longitudinal studies on individual development) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1990. pp. 1–34. [Google Scholar]
- Baltes PB, Lindenberger U, Staudinger UM. Life span theory in developmental psychology. In: Lerner RM, editor. Handbook of child psychology: vol. 1. Theoretical models of human development. 5. New York: Wiley; 2006. pp. 1029–1143. [Google Scholar]
- Beyer A, Rupprecht R, Lang FR. Subjektive Restlebenszeit und vorsorgende Umzugsplanung in der zweiten Lebenshälfte [Subjective time left in life and precautionary relocation planning in the last half of life] Z Gerontol Geriatr. 2017;50:194–199. doi: 10.1007/s00391-016-1025-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Brandtstädter J, Wentura D. Veränderungen der Zeit-und Zukunftsperspektive im Übergang zum höheren Erwachsenenalter: entwicklungspsychologische und differentielle Aspekte [Changes in time perspectives and attitudes toward the future during the transition to later adulthood: developmental psychology and differential aspects] Z Entwicklungspsychol Padagog Psychol. 1994;26:2–21. [Google Scholar]
- Byrne BM, Shavelson RJ, Muthén B. Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: the issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychol Bull. 1989;105:456–466. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.105.3.456. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Eccles JS, Wigfield A. In the mind of the actor: the structure of adolescents’ achievement task values and expectancy-related beliefs. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 1995;21:215–225. doi: 10.1177/0146167295213003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Feather NT. Human values and the prediction of action: An expectancy-value analysis. In: Feather NT, editor. Expectations and actions: expectancy-value models in Psychology. Newark: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1982. pp. 263–289. [Google Scholar]
- Hall RJ, Snell AF, Foust MS. Item parceling strategies in SEM: investigating the subtle effects of unmodeled secondary constructs. Organ Res Methods. 1999;2:233–256. doi: 10.1177/109442819923002. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Hershey DA, Mowen JC. Psychological determinants of financial preparedness for retirement. Gerontologist. 2000;40:687–697. doi: 10.1093/geront/40.6.687. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Horn JL, McArdle JJ. A practical and theoretical guide to measurement invariance in aging research. Exp Aging Res. 1992;18:117–144. doi: 10.1080/03610739208253916. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Keith J, Fry CL, Ikels C. Community as context for successful aging. In: Sokolovsky J, editor. The cultural context of aging: worldwide perspectives. London: Bergin and Garvey; 1990. pp. 245–261. [Google Scholar]
- Kitayama S, Park H, Sevincer AT, Karasawa M, Uskul AK. A cultural task analysis of implicit independence: comparing North America, Western Europe, and East Asia. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2009;97:236–255. doi: 10.1037/a0015999. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Publications; 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Kornadt AE, Voss P, Fung HH, Hess TM, Rothermund K. Preparation for old age-the role of cultural context and future perceptions. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2018 doi: 10.1093/geronb/gby075. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Kornadt AE, Voss P, Rothermund K. Subjective remaining lifetime and concreteness of the future as differential predictors of preparation for age-related changes. Eur J Ageing. 2018;15:67–76. doi: 10.1007/s10433-017-0426-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Löckenhoff CE. Age, time, and decision making: from processing speed to global time horizons. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2011;1235:44–56. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.06209.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Markus HR, Kitayama S. Culture and the selcf: implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychol Rev. 1991;98:224–253. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Marsh HW, Hau KT, Wen Z. In search of golden rules: comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler’s (1999) findings. Struct Equ Model. 2004;11:320–341. doi: 10.1207/s15328007sem1103_2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Morling B, Lamoreaux M. Measuring culture outside the head: a meta-analysis of individualism—collectivism in cultural products. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2008;12:199–221. doi: 10.1177/1088868308318260. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Nielsen L, Knutson B, Carstensen LL. Affect dynamics, affective forecasting, and aging. Emotion. 2008;8:318–330. doi: 10.1037/1528-3542.8.3.318. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Noone JH, Stephens C, Alpass FM. Preretirement planning and well-being in later life: a prospective study. Res Aging. 2009;31:295–317. doi: 10.1177/0164027508330718. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Oishi S, Diener E. Goals, culture, and subjective well-being. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2001;27:1674–1682. doi: 10.1007/978-90-481-2352-0_5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Paik JE, Choi HK. Cross-cultural study of successful aging in Korean and Western society. J Koean Home Manag Assoc. 2007;25:137–153. [Google Scholar]
- Pecchioni LL, Ota H, Sparks L. Cultural issues in communication and aging. In: Nussbaum JF, Coupland J, editors. Handbook of communication and aging research. Newark: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2004. pp. 167–207. [Google Scholar]
- Pinquart M, Sörensen S. Factors that promote and prevent preparation for future care needs: perceptions of older Canadian, German, and US women. Health Care Women Int. 2002;23:729–741. doi: 10.1080/07399330290107467. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Pinquart M, Sörensen S. Preparation for death and preparation for care in older community-dwelling adults. OMEGA (Westport) 2002;45:69–88. doi: 10.2190/5K9J-C320-22LQ-KPH6. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Prenda KM, Lachman ME. Planning for the future: a life management strategy for increasing control and life satisfaction in adulthood. Psychol Aging. 2001;16:206–216. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.16.2.206. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Putnick DL, Bornstein MH. Measurement invariance conventions and reporting: the state of the art and future directions for psychological research. Dev Rev. 2016;41:71–90. doi: 10.1016/j.dr.2016.06.004. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rasmussen AS, Berntsen D. The reality of the past versus the ideality of the future: emotional valence and functional differences between past and future mental time travel. Mem Cognit. 2013;41:187–200. doi: 10.3758/s13421-012-0260-y. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Raykov T, Tomer A, Nesselroade JR. Reporting structural equation modeling results in psychology and aging: some proposed guidelines. Psychol Aging. 1991;6:499–503. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.6.4.499. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rohr MK, Lang FR. The role of anticipated gains and losses on preferences about future caregiving. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2016;71:405–414. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbu145. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Rotter JB. Social learning theory. In: Feather NT, editor. Expectations and actions: expectancy-value models in Psychology. Newark: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1982. pp. 241–260. [Google Scholar]
- Samanez-Larkin GR, Gibbs SE, Khanna K, Nielsen L, Carstensen LL, Knutson B. Anticipation of monetary gain but not loss in healthy older adults. Nat Neurosci. 2007;10:787–791. doi: 10.1038/nn1894. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Sörensen S, Mak W, Chapman B, Duberstein PR, Lyness JM. The relationship of preparation for future care to depression and anxiety in older primary care patients at 2-year follow-up. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2012;20:887–894. doi: 10.1097/JGP.0b013e31822ccd8c. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Stawski RS, Hershey DA, Jacobs-Lawson JM. Goal clarity and financial planning activities as determinants of retirement savings contributions. Int J Aging Hum Dev. 2007;64:13–32. doi: 10.2190/13GK-5H72-H324-16P2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Van de Schoot R, Lugtig P, Hox J. A checklist for testing measurement invariance. Eur J Dev Psychol. 2012;9:486–492. doi: 10.1080/17405629.2012.686740. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
- Wigfield A, Eccles JS. Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemp Educ Psychol. 2000;25:68–81. doi: 10.1006/ceps.1999.1015. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]