Measuring Intergenerational Value Differences.

Abstract

Nearly early or overt as all 6,000 conflict societies years between ago have an experienced Egyptian young and was periods so old. concerned of For social example, about tension as or overt conflict between young and old. For example, as ar y as 6,000 years ago an E ypti n wa o cerned ab ut t e ways of younger generation that he had inscribed on a tomb: We live in a decadent age. Young people no longer respect their parents, they are rude and impatient (Stanford, 1971 :ix). In like manner, numerous other examples of intergenerational strife have been noted throughout history of human race (Mead, 1942, 1970; Feuer, 1969; Toynbee, 1969). Yet, while amount of material written on so-called generation gap is great, volume of social research into intergenerational differences is small indeed (Payne, Summers, and Stewart, 1973). Further, much of what has been written is speculative in nature and generally little understood ( Bengtson, 1970; Berdie, Loeffler, and Roth, 1970; Troll, 1971). Recently there has been renewed interest in development of frameworks for generational theory and of methods for identifying intergenerational differences (Bengtson and Lovejoy, 1973; Bengtson, Furlong, and Laufer, 1974; Thomas, 1974). One method which shows promise involves quantification and measurement of values held by youth and their elders. Historically, though, study of values has not been considered a credible approach to problem because of a lack of working definitions. As Smith (1969) noted, study of values has been in a state of disarray for a number of years due to wide range of methodological approaches. For example, Thomas and Znaniecki ( 1918 ) described a value as a sociological concept, a natural object that has meaning. Other social scientists have used term interchangeably with concepts of attitude, belief, need, and so forth. Thus, methodological problems have been common. This is not to suggest, however, that progress has not been made. Beginning in 1930s, axiologists such as Spranger (1928), Allport (1935), and Dewey (1939) made a number of major contributions that improved understanding of concept of value. Later, other theorists such as Morris (1942, 1948) focused on influence that a person's value system has on behavior. For example, he defined study of values as the science of preferential behavior and explained that humans conduct their lives through releasing impulses, controlling impulses, and modifying world. Morris believed that these processes are ordered by each individual so that they form seven paths of life, which are essence of a person's value system.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 11 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.