| Literature DB >> 35331057 |
Orlaith Tunney1,2, Kène Henkens1,2,3, Hanna van Solinge1,2.
Abstract
There is widespread speculation that baby boomers will make significant changes to the retirement landscape. Some attribute these changes, at least in part, to countercultural movements this generation pioneered during the sixties and seventies. However, empirical investigation into the long-term impact of countercultural identification in youth is scarce. To address this, our study examines associations between baby boomers' retirement views and identification with counterculture. Using data from 6024 pre-retired Dutch older workers, we investigate whether greater identification with counterculture is associated with more active retirement views. Our results show that greater identification with counterculture is associated with more active retirement views, even when controlling for potential confounders. Beyond highlighting the diversity of the baby boom generation, these findings support the idea that (counter)cultural identity in youth has an impact across the life course and may therefore have implications for other key questions of life's third age beyond retirement.Entities:
Keywords: ageing; identity; older worker; retirement; retirement patterns
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35331057 PMCID: PMC9403380 DOI: 10.1177/01640275211068456
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Res Aging ISSN: 0164-0275
Correlation Matrix of all Independent and Control Variables Included in the Analysis.
| Variable | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Counterculture | — | |||||||||
| 2. Sex (male = 1) | .04** | — | ||||||||
| 3. Education level | .29*** | .11*** | — | |||||||
| 4. Partner status (partner = 1) | .07*** | .25*** | .02 | — | ||||||
| 5. Health | -.00 | .02 | .09*** | −.05*** | — | |||||
| 6. Wealth | -.00 | −.09*** | .20*** | −.23*** | .15*** | — | ||||
| 7. Job stress | .08*** | .01 | .14*** | −.02 | −.13*** | −.01 | — | |||
| 8. Job physicality | −.12*** | .03 | −.40*** | .01 | −.17*** | −.13*** | .18*** | — | ||
| 9. Self-Efficacy | .05*** | .00 | .01 | −.01 | .18*** | .06*** | −.01 | .01 | — | |
| 10. Future time perspective | .03* | −.03* | .11*** | −.12*** | .10*** | .13*** | .11*** | −.04** | .36*** | — |
| Mean | 1.52 | .45 | 4.61 | 1.21 | 3.20 | 1.89 | 2.67 | 1.96 | 3.92 | 3.63 |
| SD | .53 | .50 | 1.80 | .40 | .87 | .74 | .88 | 1.03 | .62 | .68 |
| No. of obs | 5602 | 6024 | 5978 | 5946 | 5952 | 5543 | 5863 | 5745 | 5912 | 5885 |
*p ≤ .05; ** p ≤ .01; *** p ≤ .001.
Note. Table is based on original, non-imputed data. Due to missing data cases per variable may differ.
Breakdown of Identification with Retirement Views amongst the Sample Population.
|
| % | |
|---|---|---|
| Freedom From Work | 3162 | 52.49 |
| Retreater | 217 | 3.60 |
| New beginning | 1294 | 21.48 |
| Continuer | 774 | 12.85 |
| Searcher | 577 | 9.58 |
Figure 1.Identification with countercultural identities. Note. Figure is based on original, non-imputed data. Due to missing data cases per variable may differ.
Multinomial Logistic Regression Analyses Predicting Retirement Views from Identification with Counterculture Without (Model 1) and with (Model 2) the Inclusion of Control Variables.
| Variable | Outcome: Retreater | Outcome: New Beginning | Outcome: Continuer | Outcome: Searcher |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1: Model with key predictor variable | ||||
| Counterculture | −0.06 (.17) | 0.60 (.06)*** | 0.40 (.08)*** | 0.23 (.09)** |
| Model 2: Model with controls | ||||
| | ||||
| Counterculture | −0.11 (.18) | 0.41 (.07)*** | 0.29 (.08)*** | 0.23 (.09)* |
|
| ||||
| Sex (ref. male) | ||||
| Female | 0.67 (.15)*** | 0.23 (.07)*** | 0.04 (.09) | 0.24 (.10)* |
| Education level | 0.04 (.05) | 0.19 (.02)*** | 0.15 (.03)*** | 0.05 (.03) |
| Partner status (ref. living with partner) | ||||
| Living alone | 0.27 (.18) | 0.32 (.09)*** | 0.22 (.11) | 0.34 (.12)** |
| Health | 0.14 (.09) | 0.07 (.04) | 0.29 (.05)*** | 0.19 (.06)*** |
| Wealth (ref. low) | ||||
| Moderate | −0.54 (.19)** | −0.04 (.08) | 0.01 (.10) | 0.03 (.11) |
| High | 0.30 (.20) | 0.12 (.11) | 0.29 (.12)* | 0.21 (.15) |
| Job stress | −0.14 (.08) | 0.02 (.04) | −0.20 (.05)*** | −0.16 (.06)** |
| Job physicality | −0.29 (.09)*** | −0.06 (.04) | −0.04 (.05) | −0.08 (.05) |
| Retirement self-efficacy | −0.67 (.13)*** | −0.09 (.06) | −0.32 (.07)*** | −0.65 (.08)*** |
| Future time perspective | −0.29 (.11)** | 0.24 (.06)*** | −0.12 (.06)* | −0.46 (.08)*** |
*p ≤ .05; ** p ≤ .01; *** p ≤ .001.
Note. Base outcome = Freedom From Work. No. of observations for each analysis is 6023 when controlling for clusters within the data.
Description of Retirement Views: Freedom From Work = Retirement as a time to enjoy that you are no longer working; Retreater = Retirement as something you would rather not think about; New Beginning = Retirement as a time to develop yourself and learn new things; Continuer = Retirement as a continuation of work activities but at a slower pace; Searcher = Retirement is still unknown ground for me.
Figure 2.(a) Predictive margins for identification with retirement view based on counterculture, without the inclusion of control variables. (b) Predictive margins for identification with retirement view based on counterculture, with the inclusion of control variables.
Results of Separate Logistic Regression Analyses Investigating Association Between Countercultural Identification and Retirement Views.
| Variable | Freedom From Work Coef. | Retreater | New Beginning | Continuer | Searcher |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||||
| Counterculture | −0.12 (.05)* | −0.18 (.11) | 0.37 (.05)*** | 0.16 (.06)* | −0.12 (.08) |
|
| |||||
| Counterculture | −0.09 (.06) | −0.08 (.11) | 0.34 (.06)*** | 0.18 (.07)** | 0.02 (.08) |
| | 5942 | 5825 | 5876 | 5844 | 5832 |
| Identification with retirement view | 55.97% | 7.74% | 38.51% | 19.13% | 15.48% |
Note. Model 2 includes control variables used in the primary analysis, but their coefficients are omitted here for the sake of brevity.