In this chapter, we discuss diversity from a realist and a constructivist perspective. In the former case, three positions about ageing and human development are illustrated: an increased heterogeneity; a decreased heterogeneity; and a maintained heterogeneity. Smith and Gerstorf (Chapter Two of this volume) express this trichotomy in the following terms: (a) “the combined effects of individuals’ unique experiences over more years should produce increasing differences between them”; (b) “the reduction in birth cohort size among the oldest old as a function of selective mortality is thought to contribute to a corresponding reduction in observed inter-individual heterogeneity”; and (c) “humans are very susceptible to influence in their early years, but are thought to become increasingly stable in important respects with age”. In addition to the realist perspective, we also discuss the construction of diversity depending on research perspective. According to Burgess and Bengtson (2001), the purpose of future theory building in social gerontology is to focus on theories of the middle range and to challenge linear models of age and ageing. The positions above suggesting increasing heterogeneity, decreasing heterogeneity or stability are, at least partly, based on assumptions of linearity. Furthermore, it is reasonable to assume that new understandings and explanations of ageing of the middle range – attempting to interpret and explain elements of the ageing process – will probably verify all three positions outlined earlier, depending on the context, the object of study and the research perspective. Burgess and Bengtson (2001, p 1017) list several questions that theories in social gerontology need to address. One of them concerns “what social factors account for the considerable variability between individuals and groups in later-life trajectories and experiences”.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 8 citations exist upstream.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.