PROSOCIAL BEHAVIOUR AND ADOLESCENT GENERATIVITY:
A QUESTION OF MORAL ORIENTATION AND PARENTAL EXAMPLE
A Thesis
Presented to
The Faculty of Graduate Studies
of
The University of Guelph
by
KAREN M. FRENSCH
In partial fulfilment of requirements
for the degree of
Masters of Science
October, 2000
Karen M. Frensch, 2000
1*1
ofcanada
National Library
Bibliothèque nationale
du Canada
Acquisitions and
Bibliographie Services
Acquisitions et
services bibliographiques
395 WeIlington Street
OttawaON K1AON4
Canada
395.nie Wellington
OttawaON K1AON4
Canada
Your tile Votre r e I è m œ
Ow fi& Narre réfdrenca
The author has granted a nonexclusive licence ailowing the
National Library of Canada to
reproduce, loan, distribute or sell
copies of this thesis in microfom,
paper or electronic formats.
L'auteur a accordé une licence non
exclusive permettant à la
Bibliothèque nationale du Canada de
reproduire, prêter, distribuer ou
vendre des copies de cette thèse sous
la fome de rnicrofiche/fïlm, de
reproduction sur papier ou sur format
électronique.
The author retains ownership of the
copyright in this thesis. Neither the
thesis nor substantial extracts fiom it
rnay be printed or otheMrise
reproduced without the author's
permissioc.
L'auteur conserve la propriété du
droit d'auteur qui protège cette thèse.
Ni la thèse ni des extraits substantiels
de celle-ci ne doivent être imprimés
ou autrement reproduits sans son
autorisation.
ABSTRACT
PROSOCIAL BEHAVIOUR AND ADOLESCENT GENERATIVITY: A
QUESTION OF MORAL ORIENTATION AND PARENTAL EXAMPLE
Karen M. Frensch
University of Guelph, 2000
Advisor:
Dr. Joan Norris
The process of becoming generative may not involve a life-stage specific
personality change, but the ability of an individual to respond to a social demand
for other-oriented, caring behaviours. Therefore, the goal of the current study
was to understand how generativity begins to manifest itself in a sample of
individuats in late adolescence. Adolescents' stories of events or
accomplishments that made them proud were explored for themes of
generativity. Eighteen out of thirty narratives were coded as containing themes
of generativity. In addition, a logistic regression was used to explore the effects
of moral orientation, prosocial behaviour, gender, and parental example of
generativity on predicting the presence of generative themes in adolescents'
narratives. The analysis revealed that these variables explain approximateiy
50.5% of the variance in predicting adolescents' generative themes. The findings
were interpreted within McAdams, Hart, and Maruna's (1998) conceptualization
of generativity as a multifaceted construct evident in many persons at many
different ages. Implications for the way in which individuals can be generative
and at what age were discussed.
Acknowledgements
Thank you to Joan Norris. my advisor, for giving me the freedom to
exp!ore without letting me wander too far off.
Thank yoii to Mike Pratt, Joan Norris, and Mary Louise Arnold for the
opportunity to contribute to their longitudinal study on farnily socialization and
morality.
Thank you to the families who participated in the study, and in particular,
thank you to the adolescents who offered their time and effort to be interviewed
by Cheryl Hicks and myself.
Thank you to rny parents Arthur and Sandra Frensch who instilled in me
the ambition to pursue my dreams and the dedication to cornplete my thesis to
the best of my ability.
Thank you to rny husband Jason Heldt for al1 his love, support. and
laughter.
Table of Contents
Abstract
Acknowledgernents
i
..
Il
Table of Contents
iii
List of Tables
v
List of Figures
vi
Introduction
1
Theoretical Framework
4
Moral Orientation and Adolescent Prosocial Behaviour
7
Family Valuing of Generativity
IO
Statement of Purpose
13
Research Questions and Hypotheses
15
Method
17
Participants
17
Tasks and Measures
17
Procedure
20
Results
21
Discussion
38
Conclusion
45
References
47
Appendix A: Real Life Moral Conflict Narrative Script
Appendix B: Loyola Generativity Scale
Appendix C: Generative Behaviour Checklist
Appendix D: Volunteering Measure
Appendix E: Something You Are Proud Of Narrative Script
Tables
TabIe 1:
Frequencies of Generative Theme Categories in
Adolescents' "Proud Of" Stories
Table 2:
Presence or absence of generative themes in
adolescents' "proud of' stories as categorized
by moral orientation
Table 3:
A comparison of adolescents' mean volunteering
scores based on the presence or absence of
generative themes in their "proud of' stories
32
Table 4:
Summary of logistic regression for Model 1
34
TabIe 5:
Summary of logistic regression for Model 2
36
Table €5:
Summary of logistic regression for Model 3
37
26
Figures
Fiqure 1:
Seven Features of Generativity
Introduction
There appears to be a general agreement among scholarç that
generativity is a manifestly adult issue in the lifecycle (Erikson, 1963; Kotre,
1984; McAdams & de St. Aubin, 1992; Peterson & Stewart, 1993). Generativity
refers to the psychosocial goal of providing for the well-being of the next
generation and involves a shift from a self-focus to an other-focus perspective.
At the core of the generative character is caring: '90 care to do something", "to
care for someone", or "to take care of' (MacDermid, Franz, & De Reus, 1998, p206). One rnay be generative in a wide variety of ways: work life, professional
activities, volunteer endeavours, participation in religious or political
organizations, neighbourhood and community activism, friendships, and even
leisure-time activities. Generative people are able to foster the development o f
others, as well as contribute to the culture to which they belong (Peterson &
Stewart, 1993). Although there is little research in the area of adolescent
generativity, it is said that children and adolescents may act in prosocial ways,
but most cannot be said to be "generative" (McAdams, de St. Aubin, & Logan,
1993).
According to Erikson (1963),psychosocial development progresses so
that a person's readiness to be driven toward, to be aware of, and to interact wSth
a widening social radius increases with age. Stewart and Vandewater (1998)
suggest that generativity involves three dimensions that peak at different times
over adulthood. The desire for generativity peaks in early adulthood. In middle
age, the felt capacity for generativity is most prominent and later adulthood
highlights generative accomplishrnents. During adolescence, issues of societal
concem are less salient than personal productivity and issues of identity and
intimacy (Erikson, 1963). McAdams et al. (1993) acknowledge that
preoccupation and concern with generativity can emerge quite early, but, daily
goals and projects exemplifying generativity peak in middle age and persist for a
long time. However, today it is not uncomrnon for younger individuals to be part
of, and contribute to, the ever-growing global comrnunity- With the advent of an
"information society" in the latter half of the twentieth century, recent advances in
media (remote satellite broadcasting, the world wide web) have aIlowed global
concerns (preservation of the environment, liberation of oppressed peoples, etc.)
to permeate the consciousness of today's youth (Steinfeld & Salvaggio, 1989).
Present social realities rnay be demanding generative behaviours such as
volunteer work, cornmunity activism, and global concern earlier from individuals.
The process of becoming generative may not involve a life-stage specific
personality change, but the ability of an individual to respond to a social demand
for other-oriented, world-sustaining, caring behaviours (MacDermid, Franz,
DeReus, 1998). Vandewater and McAdams (1989) suggest that generative
people develop an early fundamental belief in the future of humankind, which is
reflected in the view that society can be improved through political action.
Peterson and Klohnen (1995) found that their index of generative realization was
related to political activism. Similarly, in their longitudinal study of antecedents of
generativity in wornen, Peterson and Stewart (1996) reported that generativity
motivation in rnidlife (age 48) was significantly related to women's history of
political activity as weil as to their ratings of the importance of social movernents
during young adulthood (age 18). Moreover, Erikson (1963) has argued that in
order to be generative, one must have a fundamental "belief in the speciesn,or
the belief that human progress is obtainable and worth working toward.
More recent conceptualizations of generativity, such as McAdarns and de
St. Aubin (1992),suggest that generativity is a multifaceted psychosocial
construct that exists in rnany forms and, when present, evident in persons at
many different ages. In their examination of level of generative concern, using
the Loyola Generativity Scale (LGS), and generative behaviours stratified by age
and gender, McAdarns and de St. Aubin found no significant age effects (age
range 25-74).
However, when their coIlege and adult samples were combined,
there was a modest but significant relationship between LGS scores and age (r
=.17, p < -05).
Erikson's construction of generativity as a later adulthood issue in a agespecific process may have been a product of the social reality of his time, rather
than an articulation of a developmental transition that transcends social history
(Stewart & Vandewater, 1998). In retrospective questioning of middle age
wornen (age 40-55), Ryff and Migdal (1984) reported that middle age wornen
view generativity as being more important in their present Iives than when
looking back on young adulthood. However, in the same study, young women's
(age 18-30) concurrent ratings on generativity scales were higher than their
prospective ratings. These women saw generativity as being more important
during young adulthood than during middle age. Young wornen and middle-aged
women in the study rated themselves in the present at about the same Ievel of
generativity. Perhaps changes in wornen's roles and ûpportunities between
these two age cohorts of women result in a higher level of generativity measures
in contemporary young wornen.
Theoretical Framework
If generativity may be present at rnany different ages, can adolescents
exhibit generative behaviour? And if they can, what might be some of the ways
in which adolescents are generative? McAdams, Hart, and Maruna's (1998)
model of generativity adapted from McAdam and de St. Aubin (1992) was used
to frame the current investigation. Their conceptualization of generativity
consists of a constellation of inner desire, cultural demand, conscious
concern, belief, cornmitment, action, and narration revolving around and
ultimately justified in terms of the overall psychosocial goal of providing for
the survival, well-being, and development of human life in succeeding
generations. (McAdams, Hart, & Maruna, 1998, p.9)
Figure 1 shows how these seven features fit together to produce generative
action and the construction of the generative narrative to ultimately give meaning
to one's generative efforts.
Figure 1
Seven Features of Generativity
Belief in the
1
Tnner nesire
1
Central to understanding generativity within the current investigation is the
role of inner desire and the social and cultural environment (labelled culfural
demand within the model) in producing generative action. Earlier conceptions of
generativity, by suvh theorists as Erikson (1963) and Kotre (1984), also
underscore the importance of an individual's inner desire in understanding
generativity. The inner desire to be generative cornes in both agentic and
communal forms. Agency manifests itseIf as the creation of a product that will
outlive the self and can be given to or left behind for successive generations.
Communion appears as the desire to nurture others and encompasses a general
tendency to relate to others in a caring way (McAdams et al., 1998).
Equally salient to understanding generativity is the role that cultural
demand plays in determining an individual's generative actions. This demand is
said to be normative and age-graded. More specifically, society expects adults
to take responsibility for the well-being of the next generation as they take on
roles of parent, teacher, mentor, and leader. At the same tirne society also
presents economic and ideological (among others) factors that are unique to a
particular point in history to which individuals must respond. For example, as a
result cf increased occupational opportunities, women today have more ways in
which to be generative than their earlier counterparts, for whom generativity was
lirnited to child rearing and activities within the home.
For McAdams et al. (19981, generative action is not the end result to the
process of becoming generative. Generative actions are given meaning in
namafion, and this meaning serves to inforrn inner desire and cultural dernand,
as well as the other elernents in the rnodel. The way in which individuals narrate
generative action is influenced by the cultural stories that are generated and
valued by societies, institutions, and families (Bellah, Madsen, Sullivan, Swidler,
& Tipton, 1991). For exarnple, within the farnily, stories told to daughters more
often contain themes of "caring" than stories told to sons (Pratt, Arnold, &
Hilbers, 1998).
There are certain features of McAdam and colleagues' rnodel that hold
promise in understanding how generativity begins to manifest itself in late
adolescence. First, the relationship among the inner desires for agency,
communion and generative action is not unlike the interplay among moral
orientation and adolescent prosocial behaviour to be outlined below. Secondly,
the role of culture may exert unique dernands on the adolescents of today who
rnay be increasingly aware of the need for "communion" on a global scale. And
third, there may be a relationship between the stories generated and valued by
families and the generative narratives produced by adolescents. What follows is
a review of the Iiterature on adolescent prgsocial behaviour and its connections
to adolescent moral orientation and the family valuing of generative actions.
Moral Orientation and Adolescent Prosocial Behaviour
Since the publication of h a Different Voice (1982) by Carol Gilligan there
has been much debate around the assertion that women tend to resolve moral
dilemmas using a "care" approach whereas men tend to use a "justice"
approach. To reason with a justice perspective is to be concerned with issues of
inequality and oppression and to uphold a morality of reciprocity and equal
respect. Conversely, within a care orientation, the focus is upholding a morality
of attention to others and responsiveness to human need (Gilligan, 1982). It has
been argued that the two moral orientations of justice and care are not genderspecific, but gender-related and that both genders use both orientations to sorne
degree (Pratt et al., 1998).
What has received little attention in this debate thus far is the relationship
between these differing moral orientations and the prosocial behaviours that are
expected to follow from them. Much of the knowledge of prosocial behaviour is
limited to the study of children (Zeldin, Savin-Williams, & Small, 1984).
Relatively little is known about how these behaviours develop in adolescents and
young adults within the family context. This gap in the literature is noteworthy
given that patterns of prosocial behaviour in adolescence may help to explain the
developrnent of generativity in adulthood.
There are some indications that a "carenethic rnay be a more central
component of identity for women than for men in young adulthood. It has been
theorized that gender-specific socialization practices may lead to gender
differences in care-oriented modes of moral reasoning (Eisenberg, Fabes, 8
Shea, 1989). Gilligan (1982) suggests the presence of "voices" in people's moral
narratives and that these "voices" rnay be gendered. In their analysis of
narratives toid by parents to their children, Pratt et al. (1998) discovered that
fathers told stories with stronger achievement themes, whereas mothers told
stories with more affiliative thernes. Across both parents, stories told to
daughters also were significantly more likely to involve care considerations than
stories told to sons. Mother's care ernphasis in socialization was generally more
consistently correlated in a positive way with adolescents' own social and
cognitive development. This was not observed for fathers' use of care.
Within the context of the family, differentiai emphasis is placed on selfdefinition and relatedness for girls and boys. According to Chodorow (1W8),
boys have the early task of shifting their object of gender identification away from
the first object of attachment, the mother. Boys therefore possess a greater
concern for separation and individuality than girls, for whom this process is not
necessary. Women and men experience different paths of socialization, with
women's socialization being directed toward an ethic of caring rather than an
ethic of justice, with ethic of caring promoting the ernpathic concern over
another's plight (Gilligan & Wiggins, 1987). For wornen, the imperative to act
arises from the experience of "relationship" and the belief that to turn away from
another in need is wrong (Brown, 1994).
It would appear then that women might be more likely to engage in
prosocial behaviour than men as a result of their responsiveness to the needs of
others. Prosocial behaviour can be defined as an act benefiting another
individual or group (Zeldin, Savin-Williams, & Small, -1984) and, indeed, Ma
(1985) found that girls in both samples of English and Chinese children were
more likely to engage in prosocial behaviour than boys. However, in their metaanalytic review of gender differences in prcsocial behaviour, Eagly and Crowley
(1986) concluded that adolescent boys generally helped more than adolescent
girls did. In their observational study of prosocial activities by adolescent boys at
camp, Zeldin e t al (1984) noted t liat only 14% of prosocial acts by boys involved
sharing or supportive behaviour. The authors suggest that with increasing age,
men typically exhibit instrumental modes of prosocial behaviour rather than
ernotionally expressive or supportive forms.
Characteristics of both the individual and the social context contribute to
the expression of prosocial behaviour (Chou, 1998). Advancement in
perspective taking, empathic and sympathetic reasoning, and level of moral
reasoning have al1 been linked to the development of prosocial behaviour in
children and adults (Carlo, Koller, Eisenberg, Da Silva, & Frohlich, 1996; Miller,
Eisenberg, Fabes, & Shell, 1996). In their study of prosocial development in
adolescence, Eisenberg, Miller, Shell, McNalley and Shea (1991) reported that
several modes of higher level reasoning such as self-reflective and otheroriented perspective-taking emerged in late childhood and adolescence. In
addition adolescents' helping behaviour was positively related to high scores on
moral reasoning. Similarly Carlo et al. (1996) found that internalized or ernpathic
reasoning was positively related to prosocial behaviour. In particular, individuals
who preferred an other-oriented mode of moral reasoning were viewed by others
as generous and helpful. Needs-oriented reasoning was positively related to
prosocial behaviour for boys. Contrary to their hypothesis that prosocial
behaviour would be positively related to care-oriented moral reasoning, Sochting,
Skoe, and Marcia (1994) found no significant relationship between care-oriented
or other-oriented moral reasoning and their measure of prosocial behaviour.
However, they note that a large proportion of their sample (54%) was not willing
to engage in helping behaviours at al1 and this most likely contributed to their
non-significant results-
Familv Valuinq of Generativitv
There is a large body of literature that points to the influence of farnily
context. in particular the role of parents, on chi/drenJsprosocial behaviour
(Eisenberg, 1990). Children's prosocial behaviour has been linked to (1)
exposure to parental teachings about prosocial behaviour, (2) characteristics of
the parent-child relationship, in particular, "authoritative" parenting, and (3)
parents' modelling of prosocial behaviours (Eisenberg & Mussen, 1989).
(1) Childrenls consideration for others, as assessed by their classmates, has
been linked to parental valuing of prosocial behaviour. In particular, children of
mothers and fathers who ranked the values of "showing consideration of others'
feelings" and "going out of one's way to help other people" as very important
were ranked highly by their classmates as being considerate of others (Hoffrnan,
1975). In their investigation of adult investment in the telling of value
socialization narratives to the Young, Pratt, Norris, Arnold, and Filyer (1999)
found that generative concern (as measured by the LGS of McAdams) was
positively linked to the presence of generative themes in participants' narratives
and investment in value socialization. They also noted that women scored
higher than men in their use of generative themes in narratives and showed
greater investment in value socialization with the Young.
(2) The expression of generative concern has been somewhat more consistently
related to parenting for mothers than fer fathers (Pratt, Danso, Arnold, Norris, &
Filyer, in press). In their assessment of parental generative concern, using the
LGS, Pratt et al. found that mothers demonstrated a positive relationship
between the LGS and an authoritative style of parenting. Mothers' generative
concern was also associated with more positive optimistic views of adolescent
developrnent. In regards to the development of prosocial behaviour, children
reared by parents employing an authoritative style of parenting were found to be
more socially responsible, friendly and CO-operativethan children of other
parenting styles (Baumrind, 1971).
The influence of child-rearing practices and parental modelling on an
individual's prosocial behaviour was documented by Oliner and Oliner (1988) in
their study of the life histories of individuals who rescued Jews from the Nazis
during World War II. According to Oliner and Oliner, the origin of prosocial
behaviour could be traced back to family relationships
in which parents mode1 caring behaviour and communicate caring values.
They implicitly or explicitly communicate the obligation to help others in a
spirit of generosity, without concern fcr external rewards or reciprocity.
Parents themselves mode1 such behaviours, not only in relation ta their
children but also toward other family members and neighbours (Oliner &
Oliner, 1988, p.249)-
(3) Much of the research on family socialization and prosocial behaviour
discusses causal relationships in childhood. There has been less discussion,
however, about the relationship between adolescent prosocial behaviour and
family influence. Dollahite, Slife, and Hawkins' (1998) theory of family
generativity may be helpful in understanding prosocial behaviour in adolescents
as well as the potential for adolescent generative behaviours.
Family generativity resides in relationships between generations, rather
than being seen only as a developmental transition that takes place within an
individual. It is defined as the "moral responsibility to connect with and care for
the next generation that resides in the family and extended family systems and in
adult family members" (Dollahite et al., 1998, p.452). Family generativity
involves "sustaining generative connections", which are relationships that
families have with people and communities that contribute to the care of the next
generation. Farnily generativity also involves a moral component in the form of
"keeping generative cornmitrnentsn. According to Dollahite et al., older
generations have an ethical and moral obligation to the younger generation.
Farnily generativity implies one ought to care for the next generation through
example. education, or mentoring. It also implies one ought to care, not for
benefiting oneself, but because one simply should do so even if it involves selfsacrifice.
Statement of Purpose
Thus far, it appears that the potential for understanding how generativity
begins to manifest itself in a young adult population has remained largely
unexplored. An analysis of the literature on moral orientation, adolescent prosocial behaviour, and parental generativity, suggests that these developmental
concepts share some intriguing connections that warrant further investigation.
For exarnpIe, do level of prosocial behaviour, choice of moral orientation and
parental example of generativity predict presence of generative themes in
adolescents' narratives? Do adolescents with a "care" moral orientation engage
in prosocial behaviours more frequently than adolescents who do not reason
from a care orientation? Does adolescents' frequency of prosocial behaviour
Vary as a function of parents' level of generativity? What is the relationship
between adolescent prosocial behaviour and future generativity?
The goal of the current study was to understand how generativity begins
to rnanifest itself in a sample of individuals in late adolescence and early
adulthood by exploring narratives of events and accomplishments that made
13
adolescents proud of thernselveç for themes of generativity. In addition, the
relationship among adolescent prosocial behaviour, adolescents' orientation
toward moral reasoning, gender, and parents1generativity was explored in an
effort to uncover possible links to adolescent generativity. Data from 31
adolescents and their families were used to explore these questions.
Research Questions and Hypotheses
1. Do adolescents exhibitgenerative behaviours?
To determine whether or not adolescents could manifest generative
strivings or behaviours, their narratives of events or accornplishments that made
them proud were explored for themes of generativity. It was hypothesized,
based on a review of the literature, that generative themes would be seen in a
sample of narratives frorn adolescents. No predictions, however, were made
regarding the nature and frequency of these themes.
2. What is the relationship behveen moral orientation and prosocial behaviour in
adolescents?
A one-way ANOVA was used to test the prediction that edolescents who
used a "care" or "other oriented" approach to moral reasoning would score higher
on the volunteerism measure than adolescents identified as employing a "justice"
or "mixed" approach. as other-oriented concerns are consonant with helpfulness
and generosity toward others.
3. What is the relationship behveen moral orientation and adolescent
generativity ?
As generativity encompasses a desire to care for others, in particular the
next generation, it was hypothesized that adolescents who employed a care
moral orientation would be more likely to tell stories of events or
accornplishments that contained generative themes than adolescents using
either a justice or mixed moral orientation.
4. What is the relationship befween parental example of generativity and
adolescents' prosocial beha viour?
It was hypothesized that adolescents' prosocial behaviour, as measured
by a volunteering scale, would be positively correlated with parental indices of
generativity, in particular scores on the Loyola Generativity Scale and the
Generative Behaviour Checklist, as adolescent prosocial behaviour is enhanced
by a positive family environment which implicitly provides positive modefling
(Eisenberg et al., i989).
5. What is the relationship between adolescent prosocial behaviour and
adolescent generativify ?
It was hypothesized that adolescents who scored high on the volunteerism
measure would also be more likely to tell stories with generative themes than
would adolescents scoring lower on the volunteer rneasure.
6. What is the relative explanatory power of moral orientation, gender, prosocial
behaviour, and parental generativity as predictors of the presence of
generative themes in adolescenb' narratives of accomplishments?
Building on the aforementioned hypotheses, the relative explanatory
power of moral orientation, gender, prosocial behaviour, and parental LGS
scores as predictors of the presence of generative themes in adolescent's
narratives of accornplishments was tested using logistic regression. It was
predicted that generative themes would most likely be present in the narratives
of female adolescents who employed a "care" orientation, showed higher levels
of prosocial behaviour, and had parents with higher levels of generative concern
as measured by the LGS.
Method
Participants
Participants consisted of 31 adolescents (15 females, 16 males) ranging
in age from approximately 17 to 21 and their parents. The families Iive in
Southwestern Ontario and are part of an ongoing longitudinal study on moral
development (see Pratt et al., 1998, for more description). Families were mainly
Caucasian, working to middle class, and recruited through a newspaper
advertisement in a mid-sized city in Ontario.
Tasks and Measures
Moral Orientation. To assess an individual's preference for a "justice" or "care"
orientation in addressing moral difemmas, participants were asked to recount a
real-life moral conffict (Skoe & Marcia, 1991). Stories were prompted by the
folIowing: "l'd like you to think about a situation or event where you personally
experienced a moral conflict of some kind. Have you ever been in a situation
where you weren't sure what was the right thing to do?" (See appendix A for
complete script). Narratives were then coded by two independent raters to
determine a participant's preferred moral orientation, either "care", "justice", or
"mixed", using Lyons (1983) coding scheme. Lyons describes two perspectives
on self and their relationship to moral orientation. A "separate or objective" self
experiences relationships in terms of reciprocity, mediated through rules, and is
grounded in roles which come from duties of obligation and commitment.
Conversely, a "connected" self experiences relationships as a response to
others, mediated through the activity of care, and is grounded in
interdependence. Individuals defined as having a separate self tend to employ a
morality of "justice". Those defined as having a connected self operate using a
morality of response and "care". As an orientation, "care" expresses an empathic
sense of connectedness to others. The Cohen's kappa coefficient for inter-rater
agreement between coders for the sample of 29 transcripts was acceptable at
-775.
Parental Generativity. The Loyola Generativity Scale (McAdams & de St. Aubin,
1992) was used to measure parents' generative concerns. Parents' responses to
the 20 statements could range from -4 to +4 where a "-4" indicated very strong
disagreement, a "0"for neutral, and a "+4"indicated very strong agreement.
Sorne items were reverse-scored and total LGS scores could range from -80 (no
generative concern) to +80 (high generative concern). An example of a
statement is "1 feel as though my contributions will exist after I die" (See appendix
B for complete measure). In this sample, Cronbach's alphas for both mothers'
and fathers' LGS scores were high, at .97 and -96, respectively.
In addition, McAdams et al. (1993) Generative Behaviour Checklist was
completed by parents. The checklist consists of 50 items, to which respondents
were asked to indicate how rnay times a particular behaviour had been
performed during the past two months. A "0" for not at all, "1" for performing the
behaviour once, and "2" for pberforming the behaviour more than once during the
last two months. Behaviours described include those characterized as
generative, such as "served a s a role model for a young person", interspersed
with neutral behaviours such as "aie dinner at a restaurant" (See appendix C for
cornplete measure).
Adolescents' Prosocial Behaviour. To assess adolescents' prosocial behaviour,
participants completed a volu nteering measure (Pancer, Pratt, & Hunsberger,
1998) which consisted of 30 i;tems describing school, community, and political
activities that individuals could partake in (See appendix D for complete
measure). In response to each item, for example, "visited or helped out people
who were sick and " ran for a position in student government", adolescents
could score from O to 4 where a "O" indicated that this parlicular activity had
never been done in the last year and a "4"indicated this activity was engaged in
frequently within the last year- Cronbach's alpha for the volunteer rneasure was
acceptable, at .82 for this sarnple of adolescents.
Adolescent Generativity. Participants were asked to respond to the question
"Can you tell me about a situation or time when you felt really good about
yourself or proud of yourself?" (See appendix E for complete script). Narratives
were audio-taped, transcribed, and then coded by two independent raters for
generative thernes of caring, productivity, and general generativity using
Peterson and Stewart's (1993) generative coding scheme. The inter-rater
reliability indicated by Cohen's kappa coefficient was -897.
In the Peterson and Stewart system, an expression of concern for caring
for others, or "to care to do sornething". is captured by the "caring" theme of
generativity. "Productivityl' themes involved developing through the generation of
tangible products or ideas. "General generativity" thernes encompassed more
broad expressions of generativity such as making a lasting contribution to future
generations. For the logistic regression, narratives were coded as either
generative (if any one of the three themes appeared) or non-generative (none of
the thernes appeared) to produce a dichotomous dependent variable.
Procedure
Adolescents were visited in their homes by one of two graduate students
for an interview of approximately one and one-half hours. AI1 interviews were
audio-taped. To ensure confidentiality, al1 tapes and transcripts of interviews
were kept in a locked cabinet. Participants signed a consent form and were
assured that their participation was completely voluntary. During the interview,
participants were asked to recount a real-life moral conflict, as well as a tirne
when they felt proud.
lnterviews were transcribed by the two graduate students. Transcripts for
each of the narratives (real-life moral conflict and "proud of' story) were coded by
h o independent raters. Cohen's kappa coefficients were calculated to
determine inter-rater reliabilities. Differences between the two raters were then
discussed until a consensus was reached.
Adolescents and both of their parents were each given a questionnaire
booklet to cornplete containing the volunteer rneasure (adolescents only) and the
LGS and Generative Behaviour Checkiist (parents only), among several other
rneasures. Completed questionnaires were returned by mail to the university.
Upon receipt of the completed questionnaires, adolescents were sent a $50
honorarium.
Results
Overall, an examination of adolescents' narratives appears to indicate that
thernes of generativity were found in this sample of adolescents and that the
presence of generative themes in adolescents' narratives was linked to çeveral
of the predictor variables, most notably, moral orientation, in the Iogistic
regression analysis. The reporting of results begins with excerpts from
adolescents' "proud of' narratives, which are organized around Peterson and
Stewart's (1993) generative themes of caring, productivity, and general
generativity. Following that, several "real life moral conflict" narratives are
included to illustrate care, justice and mixed moral orientations. ln addition, the
results of several analyses of variance that explored the relationships among
moral orientation. prosocial behaviour, and adolescent generativity are
presented. Correlations among parental indicators of generativity and
adolescent prosocial behaviour are also reported. Finally, the results of the
logistic regression analyses are summarized and interpreted. In this section,
each research question and its corresponding hypothesis and results are
addressed in turn.
Do adolescents exhibit generafive behaviours?
There is evidence to suggest that generative strivings are present in this
sample of adolescents. Eighteen out of thirty "proud of" stories (as one
adolescent did not have a "proud of" narrative) were categorized as having sorne
form of generativity, involving either care. productivity, or general generativity
(Peterson & Stewart, 1993). The following quote is an example of generativity
with a caring theme, as the adolescent is concerned about caring for the welfare
of other people. She says,
I worked with special needs kids for six or seven years now, but different
kids. For the last two years I have been working for the same one. He's a
seven-year-old boy and his problems have to do with motor movements
and speech. I think just working with him I feel good. 1 feell am doing
something good for society, and for hirn, and for me.
Similariy another adolescent talked about her desire to help others after returning
from Central America where she met people who had been subject to rnilitary
repression and malnutrition,
I was involved in this fairly large non-violent protest, and I felt good being
there and risking arrest because I knew I was fighting a fight that my
friends in Central America couldn't fight. So I felt positive about myself
and that I was continuing on to struggle with them and trying to create
change where it had to happen. It was important for me to, for me that
was being in solidarity with them. It wasn't about building them any
schools, or whatever, it was about trying to change things here in order to
better their Iives there.
This adolescent described the event as important to her personal development
as it gave her some sense that she "could get out there and stand up and really
participate actively in society".
Generativity with a productivity theme is best described as persona1
developing or growing through the generation of tangible products. In the
following narrative an adolescent reflects on his graduation from university,
It's not just the actual moment of graduation, but just saying 1 have done
this for four years, and now I have something tangible, or at least on a
piece of paper. ...Just a few days ago, I ran into sorneone who I was on
the Roor with first year and he's a social worker now, and he's like 'yeah,
you're a teacher and you are starting your masters. It's really odd how
we've grown up.' And everyone I've talked to is, always seems to entice
some sort of looking back. And everyone does seem to be happy
because I know, because they know that if they've been here this long
that their t h e will corne.. .Just Iike I was, I've been proud of them.
Sirnilarly another adolescent describes his experience of receiving cornmunity
recognition through an award for writing a book of stories and poems,
I get a cal1 and they tell me I've been nominated for this award and you
know 'there's four finalists in that category. So corne in and we'll tell you
whether you win or not at this big ceremony.' And so I won. And I was
just like 'holy crap', you know, I am way too young to win this award
'cause one of them was in his thirties, and the other ones were at least in
their fifties and one of them was seventy-eight or eighty. And al1 these
people who 1 had respected growing up -like different writers from the
area and stuff like that -they were looking for me.
...I wrote a book...
it
was just a book of poems and stories. I published it and sold it at shows.
Interestingly, this adolescent also articulates the sense that writing a book and
receiving recognition for doing so is somehow non-normative to his age, as he
remarks he is "way too young" in comparison to the other finalists and their
accomplishments.
The following quote is taken from an adolescent's narrative that was found
to contain both caring and productivity themes of generativity. This adolescent
discussed her desire to write letters to some of her high school teachers who had
had an influence on her academic career. ln doing so, she discovered that one
teacher, in particular, was dying of cancer and described how writing a letter to
this teacher contributed to her own personal growth,
When I had graduated from high school, 1 had thought that it would be
really cool for me to write a letter to a few of rny teachers who had been,
who I had really enjoyed and who had helped me a lot and helped me to
enjoy school. ...When I heard about her [the teacher] dying, I decided to
write a letter to her and thank her for everything. ...I was going to send it
off, but the day after I'd written the letter, rny Mom called to tell me that
she had died.
...Then I thought maybe it's a good idea for me to send it
anyway so that her husband could read it.
The adolescent did send the letter, and then described how this experience
34
helped her to cornfort a friend at school in a similar fashion who had had two
relatives die in a short time period,
I've been able to take from that experience and realize the importance of
doing that sort of thing, and giving them [letters] to her [a friend], even
though 1 see her every day and I pass her in the hallway, but to have
something wniten down that she can look back at is helpful.
Themes of general generativity are characterized as expressions of
concem about rnaking a lasting contribution, especially to future generations.
The following was taken frorn a narrative, in which the adolescent talked of her
contribution through her involvement with her church,
So my cell group which I just explained as a small group of people that I
am responsible for, for just, you know, rnentokg, I guess you could Say
and encouraging them in things. Specifically 1 am proud every single tirne
one of thern does a good job but not only of them but of myself. Because
I know that I had some aspect of influence in their life.
Similarly another adolescent talked about her accornplishment of teaching others
through her study of women's issues,
1 think sometimes when you see how you influence the people you're
close to.. . Like you're playing a role in their life and you're teaching them
stuff and you see that. ...A lot of rny woman studies issues I'm very vocal
about.. .so 1 think that's when people Say 'yeah, I never thought about that'
or 'that's really a good point' and you know that they are actually thinking
differently and stuff like that. For me that's really positive...
Table 1 below surnmarizes the number of narratives that were coded in
each of Peterson and Stewart's (1993) generative theme categories. NIarratives
could contain more than one generative theme. There was onIy one narrative
that was coded as having al1 three themes present.
Table 1
Frequencies of Generative Theme Categones in Adolescents' "Proud Of' Stones
1
Productivity
Caring
General
Geneirativity
9
O
6)
1
5
Productivity
Caring
2
General
Generativity
AI1 Three Themes Present
None of the Three Themes Present
I
12
Moral Orientation, Prosocial Behaviour, and Adolescent Generativity
Two of the real-life conflict narratives were deterrnined to be non-codable
by the independent raters, as the narratives were perceived not to contain moral
conflicts. As a result, 29 real-life conflict narratives were analyzed. Ten
narratives were categorized as having a "justice' orientation. Nine narratives had
a "care" orientation. The remaining ten narratives contained both justice and care
thernes and were coded as having a "rnixed" orientation. The following quotes
were taken from adolescents' real-life conflict narratives to illustrate the moral
orientations of care, justice, and rnixed, respectively.
Care
An adolescent coded as having a care orientation talked about the
conflicts for hirn in deciding to break up with his girlfriend at the time,
l'II get out of this relationship and then it crossed my mind, uh-oh, this is
going to really hurt her because I know she wants to stay together. And
so, then I didn't know what to do. How, how fo nof be with someone
wifhouf huding them, how to make that removal without hurting thern, and
that's not a good option, and staying with them certainly isn't a good
option because then we'd both be unhappy in the end.
Another adolescent coded as having a care orientation recalled a dilemma in
which she
struggled with the decision to confront a friend about her compulsive lying,
She was a true compulsive liar. And 1 still haven't said anything to her
because it bothers me. It makes me not want to talk to her. Like I
hesitate talking to her on the phone because I know she is going to lie to
me. But I don't want to Say 'stop lying' because 1 don'f want to hurf her
feelings or make her feel rejected at all. So I don't know what to do.
Obviously she's doing it because she feels bad about herself which
makes me feel upset.
Justice
The following is an exarnple of a justice orientation in which the theme of
"teaching a lesson" can be heard. The adolescent discussed her reasons for
choosing to not have contact with her grandmother who had, in her opinion, hurt
the family,
1 guess because 1 feel Iike if 1 can forgive her, and the rest of the farnily
forgives her and everything, then she
won? really learn anything from it
because she's kind of been doing things Iike this all [her] life. So it's kind
of just one of the major things that just cut it al1 off completely...she would
just keep hurting us and, over and over again, so to kind of stop that.
Another illustration of a justice moral orientation is captured by an adolescent
who discussed his decision to break up with a girlfriend that his parents felt was
"not right for him",
My parents Say 1 should not be with her and I don? agree with thern. The
moral issue is, do 1 do what 1 think is right or do 1 obey my parents?
...They said, 'as long as you are in this house we want you to obey what
we say'. It has now corne to the point where my parents and I have, I
have decided to respect what my parents Say. 1 think it is well within their
righfs to Say that, whether they are right or wrong.
Mixed
Narratives in which both themes of care and justice can be heard were
coded as having a mixed orientation. In the following narrative, an adolescent
recalled the diffîculty she encountered when a close friend at work was stealing,
I can only think of this situation at work where a CO-workerwho was really
close to me was stealing. And 1 knew, you know, when I first started
working there you had to do al1 these tests and stuff, and they asked you
questions like 'what would you do if a CO-workerwas stealing?' And of
course 1 said if 1 knew a CO-wokerwas stealing, 1 would report i t But 1
think because 1 was close to this person, it was really different, like 1 had a
really hard time deciding what to do.
Another adolescent's dilemma of whether or not to have premarital sex was
coded as containing both justice and care concerns,
I'd been brought up with a whole, well, there was the religion side of it that
sex before marnage is totally wrong, and then there was just my Mom,
that's just so, if she ever found out at that age 1 was doing that with this
girl, she would have just been totally destroyed.
It was hypothesized that adolescents employing a care moral orientation
would score higher on the volunteering measure than adolescents identified as
using a justice or mixed moral orientation (hypothesis 2). Volunteering measure
scores for 26 adolescents (as 2 adolescents had not returned their volunteering
rneasure at the tirne of the analysis and 2 had non-codable persona1 conflict
narratives) were categorized by moral orientation and compared using a one-way
ANOVA. Adolescents using a "justice" orientation had volunteering scores that
ranged from 10 to 76 (M = 35.00, SD = 22.82). Adolescents using a "care"
orientation h3.i scores ranging from 24 to 57 (M = 35.67, SD = 10.67). Scores
for adolescents categorized as having a "mixedn orientation ranged from 16 to 57
(M = 34.00, SD = 12.75). Although mean differences were in the predicted
direction, the hypothesis that adolescents employing a "caren orientation would
score higher on the volunteer measure than adolescents using a "justice" or
"mixed" approach was not supported by the results of a one-way ANOVA, i32,
23) = -025,N.S.
It was also hypothesized that adolescents employing a "care" approach to
moral reasoning would tell stories containing generative themes more frequently
than adolescents using a "justicenor "rnixed" moral orientation (hypothesis3).
Table 2 summarizes the number of adolescents' "proud of' stories coded as
generative or non-generative based on adolescents' moral orientation. Results
of a Pearson Chi-square test using 28 adolescent narratives (as the moral
orientation of 2 adolescents could not be determined) indicated that the
frequency of generative themes in adolescents' "proud of" stories is not
independent of adolescents' moral orientation, X2 = 6.525, df = 2, p. = -038.
From TabIe 2, it can be seen that 32.1% of al1 adolescents employed a rnixed
moral orientation and had generative themes present in their narratives of
accomplishments as well.
Table 2
Presence or Absence of Generative Themes in Adolescents' "Proud Of' Stories
as Categonzed by Moral Orientation
/
justice
care
non-generative
6(21.4%)
4(14.3%)
generative
3(10.7%)
5(17.9%)
mixed
I
1(3.6%)
9(32.1%)
Parental Generativity and Adolescent Prosocial Beha viour
It was hypothesized that adolescents' scores on the volunteer measure
would be correlated in a positive direction with parental scores on the LGS
(hypothesis 4). Adolescents scores on the volunteering measure were
significantly positively related to father's scores on the LGS. 1 = -35,e < -05, onetailed. However, this was not observed for mothers, _r = . I l , Q > .05,one-tailed.
Positive significant relationships were also found between fathers' and
g c .05, one-tailed, and fathers' and rnothers'
mothers' LGS scores, _r = -38,
generative behaviour checklist scores, 1 = -31, e < -05, one-tailed. In addition
there was also a significant positive relationship between fathers' scores on the
LGS and the generative behaviour checklist, 1 = -41,Q < -05, one-tailed.
Prosocial Behaviour and Adolescent Generativity
Based on the presence or absence of generative themes in adolescents'
"proud of' stories. a cornparison of 28 adolescents' volunteering scores (as 2 did
not have volunteering scores) was carried out using a one-way ANOVA. It was
hypothesized that adolescents describing generative themes would have higher
volunteering rneasure scores than adolescents with no generative themes in
their narratives (hypothesis 5). The analysis revealed that the rnean score for
adolescents with generative themes in their narratives was significantly different
from the rnean volunteering measure score for adolescents coded as having no
generative themes present in their narratives,
(1, 26) = 4.470, p < .05. See
Table 3.
Table 3
A Comparison of Adolescents' Mean Volunteering Scores Based on the
Presence or Absence of Generative Themes in "Proud Of' Stones
Mean Volunteering
Score
Presence of
38.41
(sd=lI .59)
generative thernes
26.64
Absence of
(sd=15.90)
generative themes
F(1,26) = 4.470, p <.O5
Predictors of Adolescents' Generativity
As adolescent generativity was a dichotomous variable, that is, generative
themes were coded as present or absent from adolescents' "proud of' stories, a
Iogistic regression analysis was necessary to test the predictive power of
adolescent moral orientation, adoiescents' prosocial behaviour as measured by
the volunteering measure, gender, and parental generativity as rneasured by the
LGS. It was hypothesized that adolescents who employed a "care" orientation
with frequent prosocial behaviour and with parents who scored higher on the
LGS would be more likely to exhibit generative themes in their narratives than
adolescents using either a "justice" or lcmixed"moral orientation with lower scores
on the volunteering rneasure and on the LGS by their parents (hypothesis 6).
32
There were two categorical predictor variables that required re-coding:
gender and moral orientation. As it was predicted that females would be more
likely to have narratives containing generative themes than males, males were
used as a reference category for the variable gender. Thus the odds ratio or Exp
(B) for the female group is interpreted in comparison to the male reference
category. Similarly the "justice" orientation was chosen as the reference
category for moral orientation. It was hypothesized that adolescents with a
justice moral orientation would be the least likely to have narratives containing
generative themes. As a result, when interpreting the odds ratios for a "rnixed"
and "care" orientation, the interpretation is made in comparison to the "justice"
reference category.
Parental LGS scores were also re-coded prior to the logistic regression
analyses. As the possible range of scores on the LGS was -80 to +80,there
was some concern regarding how the negative scoring would affect the odds
ratio. To remedy this, 5 points were added to al1 the LGS scores bringing the
only negative observed score to O from -5.
The first model tested (Model A ) , as summarized in Table 4, included al1
initial predictor variables (moral orientation, volunteering behaviour, gender, and
parental generativity) and was successful at correctly classifying 73.1 % of the
however,
observed cases. The Cox and Snell R-Square for Model 1 was -372;
the Cox and Snell R-Square is problematic in that it cannot achieve a maximum
of 1 (Norusis, 1993). Therefore, the Nagelkereke R-Square (a modification of
the Cox and Snell) was used to quantify the variation in this model, as well as in
the two succeeding models. The Nagelkerke R-Square for Model 1 was -505,
thus explaining 50.5% of the variation in adolescent generativity.
Table 4
Summaty of Logisfic Regression for Model 1
1
Variable
Beta
Gender
(femaie)
Adolescent
Volunteer
Behaviour
Moral
Orientation
(justice)
Moral
Orientation
(mixed)
Moral
Orientation
(care)
Mothers'
Generativify
Fafhers'
Generativity
-539
Degrees of
Freedom
1
.O98
1
1
1
I
1
I
Wald Value
1
EXP(B)
-233
1-715
3.551
1.103
I
2
4.260
3.178
1
3.979""
23.995
-907
1
-450
2.478
.O20
1
-387
1.O20
-.O39
1
.827
.962
The Chi-square difference test (also referred to as the Likelihood ratio
test) was used to measure how well the estimated mode1 fit the data. The Chisquare difference test assesses the difference between the nul1 model
(containing only the constant) and the alternative model (containing the predictor
variables). The initial -2LL (-2 Log Likelihood) for the nuil model was 34.646 and
the -2LL for the predictor model was 22.551. The difference between these
values (which measures the fit of the model to the data) was 12.096 and was
non-significant at the -05level. However, within this model, possessing a
"mixed" moral orientation was the only variable that was significant in predicting
the likelihood of the presence of generative themes in adolescents' narratives of
accomplishments (p = .046).
From Model 1, there were several predictor variables that did not
significantly contribute to predicting the likelihood of generative themes. These
were gender. fathers' LGS scores, and rnothers' LGS scores. As a result, two
additional models were tested. Even though gender appeared not to contribute
to predicting the likelihood of adolescent generativity, it was left in the models to
address the debate in the literature around gender differences. A comment on
its implications is included later in the discussion. Models 2 and 3 excluded
mothers' LGS scores and fathers' LGS scores respectively as there was some
concern of multi-colinearity between these two predictor variables. Further
analysis revealed thal this was not the case, however.
Model 2 (which excluded mothers' LGS scores), as summarized in Table
5, correctly classified 73.1 % of the observed cases and accounted for 49.2% of
the variance in adolescent generative themes (Nagelkerke R square=.492).
Again the initial -2LL was 34.646 and the -2LL for Model 2 was 22.943 for a
difference of 11.704 which was significant at the -05level. Similar to Model 1,
possessing a "mixed" moral orientation significantly predicted the likelihood of
the presence of generative themes in adolescents' narratives. The variable
"adolescents' volunteering behaviour" approached significance (p =.055).
Table 5
Summary of Logistic Regression for Model 2
Variable
Beta
Gender
(female)
Adolescent
Voiunteer
Behaviour
Moral
Orientation
(justice)
Moral
Orientation
(mixed)
Moral
-657
(care)
Fathers'
1
.O99
1
3.126
I
Degrees of
Freedorn
1
1
Wald Value
-357
1
3.677
2
4.359
1
I
3.967**
.678
1
.281
-.O25
1
-474
Model 3 (which excluded fathers' LGS scores), as summarized in Table 6,
accounted for 47.7% (R square value -477) of the variation in adolescent
generative themes and was successful at correctly classiQing 76.9% of the
observed cases. The Chi-square difference test (Likelihood ratio test) was
significant at the .O5 level, thus indicating a good fit of the mode1 to the data.
The "mixed" moral orientation was the only significant individual variable.
Table 6
Summary of Logistic Regression for Mode1 3
-
Beta
Variable
Gender
(fernale)
Adolescent
Volunteer
Behaviour
Moral
Orientation
(justice)
Moral
Orientation
rnixed
Moral
Orientation
(care)
Mothers'
Generativity
1
.O05
Degrees of
Freedom
Discussion
Ir; an effort to understand how generativity begins to rnanifest itsef in an
adolescent sample, an exploration of relationships among adolescents' moral
orientation, gender, prosocial behaviour, and parental example of generativity
was undertaken. The picture of adolescent generativity that emerges from the
present study is striking given the traditional emphasis on generativity as mainly
an adult issue. Themes of generativity can clearly be heard in the narratives of
adolescents in this study. Adolescents who reasoned from a mixed moral
orientation perspective produced narratives of events which were considerably
more likely to be generative than those who had a justice or care orientation.
Moreover, the logistic regression revealed that a mode1 containing adolescent
moral orientation and volunteer behaviour, and to a lesser extent, gender,
explained a significant proportion of the variation in adolescent generativity.
There was evidence of a generative family environment contributing to
adolescents' prosocial behaviour. Parental generativity (particulariy fathers'
generativity) appeared to share a positive relationship with adolescents' prosocial
behaviour as revealed through their volunteerism scores (r = -35).However, the
relationship between parental generativity and adolescent generativity was less
clear, as neither fathers1 LGS scores nor mothers' LGS scores significantly
contributed to the prediction of generative themes in adolescents' narratives as
revealed in the logistic regression.
ln the current study, gender shared no significant relationships with moral
orientation, volunteering behaviour, and generativity. Furthermore, gender had
little involvernent in predicting the likelihood of generative themes in adolescents'
narratives. Females and males were almost equally as Iikely to have stories
containing generative themes, and as well, had mean volunteer behaviour
scores that did not significantly differ from one another. These findings suggest
that a distinction between males and females in the literature on moral
orientation and volunteering behaviour is still not clear, and may not be
warranted.
The following discussion is an interpretation of the findings, albeit a
cautious interpretation given that the sample size was srnall. By revisiting each
hypothesis and interpreting the results within the context of the existing Iiterature,
it is hoped that an understanding of how generativity begins to manifest itself in
late adolescence takes form.
Do adolescents exhibit generative behaviours?
Sixty percent of adolescents in this sample showed generative thernes in
their narratives, which wouId suggest that acting in generative ways might not be
exclusively an adult phenornenon. However, the ways in which adolescents can
be generative may differ frorn the ways in which adults can be generative.
Psychosocial development progresses so that interacting within a wider social
radius increases with age (Erikson, 1963). As a result, adolescents typically
have a smaller social radius in which to act than adults. This most likely affects
the ways in which adolescents can be generative. An obvious difference is
adults' opportunity to be generative through parenting. However, today's youth
may have a larger social arena in which to act than their earlier counterparts.
The role of media in artificially widening the social radius has most likely not
been seen to the same extent in the past as it is today. The stoi-y of the
adolescent who engaged in a non-violent protest in support of humanitarianism
in Central America is an ideal illustration of how societal concern may be
widening for today's youth. The adolescents' behaviour can also be understood
within the theoretical framework of McAdams et al. (1998) which encompasses
the element of 'cultural demand' in generativity. Similarly, for MacDermid et al.
(1998), the process of becoming generative rnay not involve a Iife-stage specific
change, but the individual ability to respond to a social demand for caring
behaviours.
Much of the groundwork on generativity was undertaken in the rnidtwentieth century prior to the explosion of what Bates (1989) calls the
"information society". Traditionally, generativity has been thought of as a
developmental issue relevant to mid-to late adulthood. This notion that
generativity is age-specific appears to have made its way into the general
culture. Even generative adolescents, like the adolescent quoted earlier, who
believed he was "way too young" to be recognized for his generative behaviour
(writing a book), have difficulty seeing themselves as generative. Only recently
have theorists explored generativity as a psychosocial construct that exists in
many forms and is evident in persons at many different ages (McAdams & de St.
Aubin, 1992). The fact that generative thernes were found in a sample of
narratives by adolescents suggests a need to further expand Our thinking about
who can be generative, at what age, and what constitutes generative behaviours
at any given stage in the lifespan.
What is the relationship between moral orientation and prosocial behaviour in
adolescents?
Contrary to the hypothesis that adolescents using a care orientation would
have higher scores on the volunteering measure, there was no significant
difference in scores on the volunteer rneasure among adolescents using a care,
justice, or rnixed moral orientation. Similarly Sochting et al. (1994) reported no
significant relationship between a care moral reasoning orientation and prosocial
behaviour. However, within the context of the reviewed literature, this finding
was unexpected given that Car10 et al., (1996) reported that other-oriented (care
oriented) concerns are consonant with helpfulness and generosity toward othersTo address the lack of support far the hypothesis in question, there are a
plethora of undetermined mediating variables between the way sorneone thinks
about moral dilemmas and the subsequent behaviour that is expected to follow.
For exarnple, in adolescence in particular, there may be a stronger case for the
effect of social variables such as peer group i n f uence on prosocial behaviour. In
a study of characteristics of adolescents' social networks and adolescents'
behaviour problems, Buysse (1997) found that belonging to a highly supportive
delinquent peer group was associated with antisocial behaviour among
adolescents.
The current sample was small and largely homogeneous in nature and
this rnay have accounted for the non-significance of the findings. It should also
41
be noted that there were large standard deviations observed within groups. In
particular, the standard deviation for those employing a justice orientation was
two times the standard deviation of both the mixed and care orientations
indicating a greater variability of scores in the justice group.
What is the relatimship befween moral orientation and adolescent generativity?
The data revealed that moral orientation and presence of generative
themes in adotescents' narratives are related in some fashion. Although
individual ceIl sizes within the contingency table were too small to conduct a
post-hoc analysis, an inspection of the frequencies would seem to indicate that
the effect occurs within the mixed moral orientation category. This conclusion is
speculative but appears to be supported by the strength of the effect of a mixed
orientation in other results contained in the study (specifically the logistic
regression models). The possible effect of a mixed moral orientation was
contrary to the prediction that adolescents with a care orientation would have
narratives containing generative themes more frequently than adolescents using
a mixed or justice orientation. Although this finding was surprising, given the
expected effect of a care moral orientation, when put into the context of the
current understanding of generativity as containing both agentic and communal
forms of inner desire (McAdams et al., 1998), a mixed moral orientation which
encompasses both justice and care issues appears to map ont0 agency and
communion remarkably well. This paralle1 between agency and justice and
communion and care is elaborated further below to address the significant effect
of a mixed moral orientation in increasing the likelihood of generative themes in
adolescents' narratives.
What is the relationship between parental example of generativity and prosocial
behaviour in adolescents?
There is evidence to suggest that generativity is present in this sample of
adolescents and is Iinked to the family environment. The relationship between
mothers' and fathers' scores on both the LGS and Generative Behaviour
Checklist was positive and significant, suggesting that both parents contribute to
the family environment of generativity. However, looking within the family unit. it
is specifically fathers' generativity as measured by the Loyola Generativity Scale
that is most strongly associated with adolescents' prosocial behaviour observed
using scores on the volunteering measure.
Why do fathers' generative strivings appear to share a stronger
relationship with adolescents' prosocial behaviour than mothers'? It is suspected
that this finding can be addressed by gender-specific role socialization
(Chodorow, 1978). Mothers are expected by society to "care for the next
generation" within the family. Generative tendencies when exhibited by fathers
are more likely to occur outside of the home and thus carry more weight in
influencing their children's prosocial behaviour. However, mothers' and fathers'
generative strivings could be acting in concert, and due to the small sample size
it was only fathers' generativity that shared a significant relationship with
adolescent prosocial behaviour. Would fathers' generativity still have as great of
an influence without the stability of mothers' generativity?
43
According to Bronfenbrenner (1961),"fathers show greater individual
differences in parental behaviour than do mothers a n d thus account for more of
the variations in the behaviour of their childrenn (p. 268). However, in this case it
was fathers' LGS scores (a measure of generative strivings) and not fathers'
generative behaviours, as observed by the behaviou checklist, that were related
to adolescents' volunteer behaviours. Exploring fathers' teaching narratives for
generative themes and general concern for others miight contribute to a better
understanding of the relationship between fathers' generativity and adolescents'
prosocial behaviour. For exarnple, mothers and fathers who ranked the values
of showing consideration of others' feelings and goin!g out of one's way to help
other people as very important were ranked highly by their classrnates as being
considerate of others (Hoffman, 1975).
Whaf is the relative explanatory power of moral oriemtation, gendec prosocial
behaviour, and parental generativiiy as predictors of adolescent generativity?
Model 2, which included adolescent prosocial behaviour, moral
orientation, gender, and fathers' generativity, accounted for 49.2% of the
variation in adolescent generativity and was significamt at the -05 level. Within al1
modets presented, what rernained constant was the strong presence of a mixed
moral orientation and its relationship to increasing the Iikelihood of seeing
generative themes in adolescents' narratives. More specifically, the mixed moral
orientation increased the Iikelihood of generative thernes in adoIescentsY
narratives by approximately 23 times in comparison t a a justice moral orientation;
whereas, a care orientation alone only doubled the likelihood of generative
44
themes. Again, although the strong presence of a mixed moral orientation was
not expected, in retrospect, a mixed moral orientation which possesses both
justice and care elernents appears to parallel the presence of both agentic and
communal desires in generativity. According to Gilligan (1982), a care
orientation encompasses a responsiveness to human need which maps nicely
on to the concept of communion, which appears as the desire to nurture others
(Erikson, 1963; Kotre, 1984; McAdams et al., 1998). The parallels between
agency and justice are less clear than those between care and communion;
however, both justice and agency appear to involve similar elements of
independence and action. The association between a mixed moral orientation
and generative themes in adolescent narratives offers further support for the
understanding of generative desire as containing both agentic and communal
forms, and suggests that reasoning from a mixed moral orientation is perhaps
more sophisticated than reasoning from either a care or justice orientation alone.
Conclusion
Several conclusions can be drawn within the framework of the current
study. Generative themes were found in 18 out of 30 adolescent narratives.
Results support McAdams et a h (1993) concept of generativity as more of an
individual personality trait rather than a life stage-specific concern. A further
contribution of the present study is the discovery of a link between family climate
and adolescent generativity. This relationship fits well with Dollahite et al.'s
(1998) theory of family generativity. This theory, which suggests that family
generativity resides in relationships between generations rather than only as an
individual developmental transition, is useful to provide a context in which to
understand the current findings. And finally, the effect of a mixed moral
orientation on adolescent generative themes was unmistakable. Adolescents
who reasoned from a mixed moral orientation were 23 times more likely to
produce narratives containing generative themes than adolescents reasoning
from a justice orientation.
This study was unique in its narrative approach to exploring adolescent
generativity. The use of narratives as a method brought voice to adolescent
generative strivings, which may not have otherwise been heard by employing
more traditional means. In previous research (e-g., Pratt et al., 1999) narrative
methods have been used successfully to explore value socialization and
generative processes in adults. The notion that generativity can be
conceptualized as an individual concern regardless of age, as seen here,
warrants further study. Future research could expand the scope of this study by
including other variables such as cultural differences, the effects of peer group
influence, or even teenage parenting. Given the success of the current study in
tapping into adolescent generativity, continuing in the same fashion by using a
narrative approach and re-framing generativity as a lifespan developmental issue
appears to have the most potential for further exploration.
References
Bates, B. (1989). Evolving to an information society: Issues and
problems. In B. J. Bates (Ed.), The information society (pp. 15-28). Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
Baumrind, D. (1971). Current patterns of parental authority.
Develo~rnentalPsychologv Monoctraphs, 4,l-103Bellah, R. N., Madsen, R., Sullivan, W. M., Swidler, A., & Tipton, S. M.
(1991). The qood societv. New York, NY: Knopf.
Bronfenbrenner, W. (1961). Some familial antecedents of responsibility
and leadership in adolescents. In B. Bass & L. Tetrullo (Eds.), Leadership and
interpersonal behaviour (pp. 239-271). New York: Holt, Rinehart, 8 Winston.
Brown, L. M. (1994). When is a moral problem not a moral problem?
Morality, identity, and female adolescence. In B. Puka (Ed). Caring voices and
women's moral frames: Gilligan's view. (pp. 138-159). New York, NY: Garland
Publishing, Inc.
Buysse, W. H. (1997). Behaviour problems and relationships with family
and peers during adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 20,645-659.
Carlo, G., Koller, S.H., Eisenberg, N., Da Silva, M.S., & Frohlich, C.B.
(1996). A cross-national study on the relations among prosocial moral
reasoning, gender role orientations, and prosocial behaviours. Developmental
PSVC~OIO
32,231-240.
~V,
Chodorow, N. (1978). The reproduction of motherina. Berkley, CA:
University of California Press.
Chou, K. L. (1998). Effects of age, gender, and participation in volunteer
activities on the altruistic behaviour of Chinese adolescents. The Journal of
Genetic Psycholoqv, 159,195-201.
Dotlahite,
D. C., Slife, B. D., & Hawkins, A. J. (1998). Family generativity
and generative counseling: Helping families keep faith with the next generation.
In D. P. McAdams and E. de St. Aubin (Eds). Generativiw and adult
development: How and why we care for the next qeneration. (pp. 449481).
Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
Eagly, A.H. & Crowley, M. (1986). Gender and helping behaviour: A metaanalytic review of the social psychological literature. P s ~ c h o l o ~ i cBulletin.
al
100,
283-308.
Eisenberg, N. (1990). Prosocial developrnent in early and midadolescence. In R. Montemayor, G. R. Adams, & T. P. Gullotta (Eds-1, From
childhood to adolescence: A transitional period? (pp. 240-268). Newbury Park,
CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R., & Shea, C. (1989). Gender differences in
empathy and prosocial moral reasoning: Empirical investigations. In M. M.
Brabeck (Ed.) Who cares? Theory, research. and educational implicatioins o f the
ethic of care, (pp. 127-143). New York: Praeger.
Eisenberg, N., Miller, P.A., Shetl, R., McNalley, S., & Shea, C. (1991).
Prosocial development in adolescence: A longitudinal study. Developmental
Psvchologv, 27, 849-857.
Eisenberg, N. & Mussen, P. H. (1989). The roots of prosocial behaviour
in children. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Erikson, E. H. (1963). Childhood and Societv. New York, NY: Norton.
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: psvcholonical theow and women'ç
development- Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Gilligan, C.,& Wiggins, G.(1987). The origins of morality in early
childhood relationships. In J. Kagan and S. Lamb (Eds.), The emergence of
moralitv in Young children. (pp. 277-305). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago
Press.
Hoffman, M. L. (1975). Altruistic behaviour and the parent-child
relationship. Journal of Personality and Social Psycholo_sy,31.937-943.
Kotre, J. (1984). Outliving the self: Generativitv and the interpretation of
lives. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Lyons, N. P. (1983). Two perspectives: On self, relationships, and
morality. Harvard Educational Review, 53, 125-145.
Ma, H. K. (1985). A cross-cultural study of sex differences in human
relationships. Psycholo-iicai Reports, 56,799-802.
MacDermid, S., Franz, C.E., & DeReus, L. (1998). Adult character:
Agency, communion, insight, and the expression of generativity in mid-life adults.
In A. Colby & J. B. James (Eds.), Competence and character throuqh life. (pp.
205-229). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
McAdams, D. P. & de St. Aubin, E. (1992). A theory of generativity and its
assessrnent through self-report, behavioural acts, and narrative thernes in
autobiography. Journal of Personalitv and Social Psvcholociv. 62,1003-1 015.
McAdams, D. P., de St. Aubin, E., & Logan, R. L. (1993). Generativity
among young, rnid-life, and older adults. Psvcholo~yand Aaina. 8,221-230.
McAdams, D. P., Hart, H. M., & Maruna, S. (1998). The anatomy of
generativity. In D. P. McAdams and E. de St. Aubin (Eds). Generativitv and adult
development: How and whv we care for the next qeneration. (pp. 7-43).
Washington, D.C.: Arnerican Psychological Association.
Miller, P.A., Eisenberg, N., Fabes, R. A., & Shell, R. (1996). Relations of
moral reasoning and vicarious ernotion to young children's prosocial behaviour
toward peers and adults. Developmental Psvchology. 32, 210-219.
Ncrusis, M. J. (1993). SPSS for windows advanced statistics: Release
6.0. Chicago, Il: SPSS Inc.
Oliner, S. P. & Oliner, P. M. (1988). The altruistic personalitv: Rescuers of
Jews in Nazi Europe. New York, NY: Free Press.
Pancer, S. M., Pratt, M. W., Hunsberger, B. (1998). Comrnunitv and
political involvement: What distinguishes the activist frorn the uninvolved?
Poster presented at the Biennial Meetings of the Society for Research on
Adolescence, San Diego, CA.
Peterson, B. E. & Klohnen, E. C. (1995) Realization of generativity in two
sarnples of women at rnidlife. Psvcholoqv and Aqing. 10,20-29.
Peterson, B. E. & Stewart, A. J. (1993). Generativity and social motives in
young adults. Journal of Personalitv and Social Psvcholo~v.65. 186-198.
Peterson, B. E. & Stewart, A. J. (1996). Antecedents and contexts of
generativity motivation at midlife. Psvcholoav and Aqino. 11, 21-33.
Pratt, M. W., Arnold, M. L., & Hilbers, S. M. (1998). A narrative approach
to the study of moral orientation in the family: Tales of kindness and care. In E.
E. Skoe & A. L. vonder Lippe (Eds.), Personalitv development in adolescence: A
cross-national and life span perspective. (pp. 61-78). London: Routledge.
Pratt, M.W., Danso, H., Arnold, M. L.. Norris, J. E., & Filyer, R. (in press).
Adult generativity and the socialization of adolescents: Relations to mothers' and
fathers' parenting beliefs, styles, and practices. Journal of Personalitv.
Pratt, M.W., Norris, J.E., Arnold, M.L., & Filyer, R. (1999). Generativity
and moral development as predictors of value-socialization narratives for young
perçons across the adult life span: From lessons learned to stories shared.
Psycholoc~vand Acrincr, 14, 414-426.
Ryff, C. D. & Midgal, S. (1984). lntimacy and generativity: Self-perceived
transitions. Sicins. 9,470-481.
Skoe, E. E., & Marcia, J. (1991). A measure of care-based morality and
its relation to ego identity. Merill-Palmer Quarterly, 40,289-304.
Sochting, 1.. Skoe, E. E., & Marcia, J. (1994). Gare oriented moral
reasoning and prosocial behaviour: A question of gender or sex role orientation.
Sex Rotes, 31,131-147.
Steinfeld, C. & Salvaggio, J. L. (1989). Toward a definition of the
information society. In J. L. Salvaggio (Ed.), The information societv:
economical. social and structural issues. (pp. 1-14). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates Pubtishers.
Stewart, A. J. & Vandewater, E. A. (1998). The course of generativity. In
D. P. McAdarns and E. de St. Aubin (Eds). Generativitv and adult developrnent:
How and whv we care for the next creneration. (pp. 75-100).Washington, D.C.:
American PsychoIogical Association.
Vandewater, E. A. & McAdarns, D. P. (1989). Generativity and Erikson's
"belief in the species". Journal of Research in Personalitv. 23,435-449.
Zeldin, R. S-, Savin-Williams, R. C., & Small, S. A. (1984). Dimensions of
prosocial behaviour in adolescent males. Journal of Social Psvchologv, 123,
159-168.
Appendix A
Ethic of Care Interview (Skoe & Marcia, 1991)Real Life Moral Confiict:
I'd like you to think about a situation or an event where you personally
experienced a moral confiict of some kind.
To first elicit the difemma, the following probes can be asked:
1.
2.
3.
Have you ever been in a situation where you weren't sure what was the
right thing to do?
Have you ever had a moral conflict?
Could you describe a moral conflict?
Once the teen has thought of a personal moral conflict, the following set of
questions can be asked:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
CouId you describe the situation?
What were the confiicts for you in this situation?
What did you do?
Do you think it was the right thing to do? Why or why not?
How did you know it was the right thing to do?
Appendix B
Lovola Generativiiy Scale (McAdam & de S t Aubin, 19921.
Use the foliowing scale to indicate your agreement or disagreement with the
following statements:
-4 = very strongly disagree
-3 = strongly disagree
-2 = rnoderately disagree
-7 = slightly disagree
+4 = very strongly agree
+3 = strongly agree
+2 = moderately agree
+ l = slightly agree
If you feel precisely neutral about an item. write "O" in the space provided.
1. I try to pass along the knowledge I have gained through my
experiences.
2. 1 do not feel that other people need me.
3. 1 think I would Iike the work of a teacher.
4.1 feel as though I have made a difference to many people.
5. 1 do not volunteer to work for a charity
6. 1 have made and created things that have had an impact on other
people.
7. i try to be creative in most things that I do.
8. 1 think that I will be remembered for a long tirne after I die.
9. 1 believe that society cannot be responsible for providing food and
shelter for al1 homeless people.
10. Others would Say that I have made unique contributions to society.
1A . If I were unable to have children of my own, I would like to adopt
children.
12. 1 have important skills that I try to teach others.
13. 1 feel that I have done nothing that will survive after I die.
14. In general. rny actions do not have a positive effect on others.
15. 1 feel as though I have done nothing of worth to contribute to others.
16. 1 have made many cornrnitments to may different kinds of people,
groups, and activities in my life.
17. Other people Say that I am a very productive person.
18. 1 have a responsibility to improve the neighbourhood in which I live.
19. People come to me for advice.
20. 1 feel as though my contributions will exist after I die.
Appendix C
Generative Behaviour Checklist (McAdams & de St- Aubin, 1992).
Below is a Iist of specific behaviours or acts. Over the past two months, it is
likely that you may have performed some of these behaviours. It is also likely
that you have not perforrned many of thern as well during this tirne.
Please consider each behaviour to deterrnine whether or not you have
perforrned the behaviour during the past two months. If you have performed the
behaviour, please indicate how many times you have performed it during the
past two months by providing one of the following ratings:
"O"
"1"
"2"
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
1o.
II.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
-if you have not performed the behaviour during the past two
months.
-if you have performed the behaviour one tirne during the past two
months.
-if you have performed the behaviour more than once during the
past two months.
Taught somebody a skill.
Served as a roIe mode1 for a young person.
Won an award or contest.
Went to see a movie or play.
Gave money to a charity.
Did volunteer work for a charity.
Listened to a person tell me his/her personal problems.
Purchased a new car or major appliance (dishwasher, television
set).
Taught Sunday school or provided similar religious instruction.
Taught somebody about right and wrong, good and bad.
Told somebody about rny own childhood.
Read a story to a child.
Baby-sat for somebody else's children.
Participated in an athletic sport.
Gave clothing or persona1 belongings to a non-profit organization.
Was eiected o r promoted to a leadership position.
Made a decision that influenced many people.
Ate dinner at a restaurant.
Produced a piece of art or other craft (e.g.. pottery, quilt, painting)
Produced a plan for an organization or group outside my own
fam ily.
55
Visited a non-relative in a hospital or nursing home.
Read a novel.
Made sornething for sornebody and gave it to them.
Drew upon my past experiences to help a person adjust to a
situation.
Picked up garbage or trash off the street or sorne other area that is
not my property.
Gave a stranger directions on how to get somewhere.
Attended a community or neighbourhood meeting.
Wrote a poem or story.
Took in a pet.
Did sornething that other people considered to be unique and
important.
Attended a meeting or activity at a church (not including
conventional worship servce such as Mass, Sunday morning
service, etc.)
Offered physical help to a friend or acquaintance (helped move, fix
a car).
Had an argument with a friend or family member.
Contributed time or rnoney to a political or social cause.
Planted or tended a garden, tree, flower, or other plant.
Wrote a letter to a newspaper, magazine, politician, etc. about a
social issue.
Cooked a meal for friends (non-family rnembers).
Donated blood.
Took prescription medicine.
Sewed or rnended a garrnent or other object.
Restored or rehabbed a house, part of a house, a piece of
furniture, etc.
Assembled or repaired a child's toy.
Voted for a political candidate or sorne other elected position.
lnvented sornething.
Provided first aid or other rnedical attention.
Attended a party.
Took an afternoon nap.
Participated in or attended a benefit or fund-raiser.
56
49.
50.
Learned a new skill (computer language, musical instrument, etc.)
Became a parent (had a child, adopted a child, became a foster
parent).
Appendix D
Volunteerina Measure (Pancer, Pratt, & Hunsberger, 1998)
The following is a list of school, community and political activities that people can
get involved in. For each of these activities, please use the following scale to
indicate whether in the last year you:
O -never did this
1 -did this once or twice
12.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
2 -did this a few times
3 -did this a fair bit
4 -did this a lot
visited or helped out people who were sick
took care of other families' children (on an unpaid basis)
participated in a church-connected group
participated in or helped a charity organization
participated in an ethnic club or organization
participated in a political party, club or organization
participated in a social or cultural group or organization
participated in a school academic club or team
participated in a sports team or club
ledorhelpedoutwithachildren'sgrouporclub
helped with a fund-raising project
helped organized neighbourhood or community events (carnival, pot luck)
helped prepare and make verbal and written presentations to
organizations, agencies, conferences, or politicians
did things to help improve your neighbourhood (helped clean
neighbourhood)
gave help (money, food, clothing, rides) to friends or classrnates who
needed it
served as a member of an organizing committee or board for a school
club or organization
wrote a letter to a school or community newspaper or publication
signed a petition
attended a demonstration
collected signatures for a petition drive
contacted a public official by phone or mail to tell himlher how you felt
about a particular issue
joined in a protest march, meeting or demonstration
got information about community activities from a local comrnunity
information centre
volunteered at a school event or function
helped people who were new to your country
gave money to a cause
worked on a political campaign
ran for a position in student government
participated in a discussion about a social or political issue
volunteered with a community service organization
Appendix E
Somethinq You Are Proud Of
I'd like you to think about a situation or tirne when you felt really good about
yourself or proud of yourself.
I'd Iike you to describe this situation in as much detail as possible.
?. What causes or circumstances led up to this?
2. What emotions did you feel at the time?
3. Looking back on this now, how has this experience had an impact on the kind
of person you are? Was it important in your personal development? Why or
why not?
4. How would (did) your parents have felt (feel) about the situation?
5. How do you think your friends would (did) think about the situation?