Frank J Infurna1, Denis Gerstorf, Nilam Ram2, Jürgen Schupp3, Mirjam A G Sprangers4, Gert G Wagner5. 1. German Socio-Economic Panel Study, German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin), Germany. Institute of Psychology, Humboldt University Berlin, Germany. frank.j.infurna@hu-berlin.de. 2. German Socio-Economic Panel Study, German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin), Germany. Department of Human Development and Family Studies, Pennsylvania State University, University Park. Center for Lifespan Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany. 3. German Socio-Economic Panel Study, German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin), Germany. Institute for Sociology, Free University of Berlin, Germany. 4. Department of Medical Psychology, University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands. 5. German Socio-Economic Panel Study, German Institute for Economic Research (DIW Berlin), Germany. Center for Lifespan Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Human Development, Berlin, Germany. Department of Economics, Berlin University of Technology, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We examined the extent to which retrospective proxy reports of well-being mirror participant self-reports at 12-24 months before death and how proxy reports of well-being change over the last year of life. We also explored the role of sociodemographic, cognitive, and health factors of both participants and proxies in moderating such associations. METHOD: We used retrospective proxy ratings obtained in the German Socio-Economic Panel Study (N = 164; age at death = 19-99 years). RESULTS: Results revealed moderate agreement between self- and proxy reports (r = .42), but proxies, on average, overestimated participants' life satisfaction by two thirds of a scale point on a 0-10 scale (or 0.4 SD). Discrepancies were particularly pronounced when proxies themselves reported low life satisfaction. Over the last year of life, participants were viewed to have experienced declines in life satisfaction (-0.54 SD). Declines were stronger for ill participants and proxies who reported low life satisfaction. DISCUSSION: Results qualify theoretical expectations and empirical results based on self-report data that are typically available 1 or 2 years before death. We discuss that retrospective proxy reports in panel surveys can be used as a hypothesis-generating tool to gather insights into late life.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: We examined the extent to which retrospective proxy reports of well-being mirror participant self-reports at 12-24 months before death and how proxy reports of well-being change over the last year of life. We also explored the role of sociodemographic, cognitive, and health factors of both participants and proxies in moderating such associations. METHOD: We used retrospective proxy ratings obtained in the German Socio-Economic Panel Study (N = 164; age at death = 19-99 years). RESULTS: Results revealed moderate agreement between self- and proxy reports (r = .42), but proxies, on average, overestimated participants' life satisfaction by two thirds of a scale point on a 0-10 scale (or 0.4 SD). Discrepancies were particularly pronounced when proxies themselves reported low life satisfaction. Over the last year of life, participants were viewed to have experienced declines in life satisfaction (-0.54 SD). Declines were stronger for ill participants and proxies who reported low life satisfaction. DISCUSSION: Results qualify theoretical expectations and empirical results based on self-report data that are typically available 1 or 2 years before death. We discuss that retrospective proxy reports in panel surveys can be used as a hypothesis-generating tool to gather insights into late life.
Authors: Kathleen W Piercy; Elizabeth B Fauth; Maria C Norton; Roxane Pfister; Chris D Corcoran; Peter V Rabins; Constantine Lyketsos; JoAnn T Tschanz Journal: J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci Date: 2012-12-14 Impact factor: 4.077
Authors: Nobufumi Yasuda; Sheryl Zimmerman; William G Hawkes; Ann L Gruber-Baldini; J Richard Hebel; Jay Magaziner Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Susan T Charles; Jennifer R Piazza; Jacqueline A Mogle; Emily J Urban; Martin J Sliwinski; David M Almeida Journal: J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci Date: 2015-03-08 Impact factor: 4.077
Authors: Denis Gerstorf; Christiane A Hoppmann; Corinna E Löckenhoff; Frank J Infurna; Jürgen Schupp; Gert G Wagner; Nilam Ram Journal: Psychol Aging Date: 2016-03