Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-s22k5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-14T00:58:49.879Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Rethinking the measurement of time horizons in the context of socioemotional selectivity theory

Commentary on “Testing a model of biopsychosocial successful aging based on socioemotional selectivity theory in the second half of life” by Soylu et al.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 June 2023

Li Chu  and
Laura L. Carstensen
Li Chu
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
Laura L. Carstensen*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
*
Email: laura.carstensen@stanford.edu
Get access

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Commentary
Information
International Psychogeriatrics , Volume 35 , Special Issue 10: Issue Theme: Aging and Well-Being , October 2023 , pp. 533 - 536
Copyright
© International Psychogeriatric Association 2023

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Brothers, A., Gabrian, M., Wahl, H. W. and Diehl, M. (2016). Future time perspective and awareness of age-related change: examining their role in predicting psychological well-being. Psychology and Aging, 31, 605–617.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bryant, F. B. and Veroff, J. (2007). Savoring: A New Model of Positive Experience. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.Google Scholar
Carstensen, L. (2006). The influence of a sense of time on human development. Science, 312, 1913–1916. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1127488.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carstensen, L. L. (2021). Socioemotional selectivity theory: the role of perceived endings in human motivation. The Gerontologist, 61, 1188–1196. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnab116.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carstensen, L. L., Chu, L. and Matteson, T. (in preparation). Time savoring scale.Google Scholar
Carstensen, L. L. and Lang, F. R. (1996). Future orientation scale. Unpublished Manuscript.Google Scholar
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2014). Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 63(04), 83. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6304a7.htm Google Scholar
Fredrickson, B. L. and Carstensen, L. L. (1990). Choosing social partners: how old age and anticipated endings make people more selective. Psychology and Aging, 5, 335–347. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.5.3.335.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fung, H. H., Carstensen, L. L. and Lutz, A. M. (1999). Influence of time on social preferences: implications for life-span development. Psychology and Aging, 14, 595–604.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fung, H. H., Lai, P. and Ng, R. (2001). Age differences in social preferences among Taiwanese and mainland chinese: the role of perceived time. Psychology and Aging, 16, 351–356.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gallagher, M. W., Lopez, S. J. and Pressman, S. D. (2013). Optimism is universal: exploring the presence and benefits of optimism in a representative sample of the world. Journal of Personality, 81, 429–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grühn, D., Sharifian, N. and Chu, Q. (2016). The limits of a limited future time perspective in explaining age differences in emotional functioning. Psychology and Aging, 31, 583–593.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hoppmann, C. A., Infurna, F. J., Ram, N. and Gerstorf, D. (2017). Associations among individualsʼ perceptions of future time, individual resources, and subjective well-being in old age. The Journals of Gerontology. Series B, Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 72, 388–399. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbv063.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kooij, D. T. A. M., Kanfer, R., Betts, M. and Rudolph, C. W. (2018). Future time perspective: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology, 103, 867–893. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000306.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lang, F. R. (2000). Endings and continuity of social relationships: maximizing intrinsic benefits within personal networks when feeling near to death. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 17, 155–182. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407500172001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lang, F. R. and Carstensen, L. L. (1994). Close emotional relationships in late life: further support for proactive aging in the social domain. Psychology and Aging, 9, 315–324. https://doi.org/10.1037//0882-7974.9.2.315.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lang, F. R. and Carstensen, L. L. (2002). Time counts: future time perspective, goals, and social relationships. Psychology and Aging, 17, 125–139. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.17.1.125.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Soylu, C. and Ozekes, B. C. (2022). Testing a model of biopsychosocial successful aging based on socioemotional selectivity theory in the second half of life. International Psychogeriatrics, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1041610222001090.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkins, J. M. et al. (2022). Predictors of the importance of everyday preferences for older adults with cognitive impairment. International Psychogeriatrics, 34, 287–294. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1041610220003956.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Windsor, T. D., Fiori, K. L. and Crisp, D. A. (2012). Personal and neighborhood resources, future time perspective, and social relations in middle and older adulthood. The Journals of Gerontology. Series B, Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 67B, 423–431. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbr117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar