Mismatch Between Older Persons' Generative Concern and Internalized Generative Capacities: Leveraging on Generative Ambivalence to Enhance Intergenerational Cohesion

Studies have shown how generativity, the concern for establishing and guiding the next generation and safeguarding its wellbeing, functions as an intergenerational conduit, bridging the developmental stages of older individuals with those younger. Yet, applications of generativity, as a means to bridge generational gaps within rapid social change, remain underexplored in the intergenerational field. Using Singapore as a case study, and through focus group discussions with 103 older persons, this paper examines how older Singaporeans express their generative concern and internalize their generative capacities across different social settings and rapid socioeconomic transformation. Mismatch between older Singaporeans' generative concern and capacity contributes to ambivalence - mixed feelings about guiding younger generations - which emerges out of older Singaporeans' struggles with cultural change prompted by economic progress, as well as concerns about their place and value in a technologically advanced global city-state. The concept of generative ambivalence can add value to policy perspectives on intergenerational cohesion, as it considers people's attempts to forge commonalities and mutual reciprocity despite differences (e.g. gender, age, race, skills), as well as highlights intergenerational complexities beyond superficial binaries. Policies aimed at bringing generations together must be intentional in creating opportunity structures that go beyond categorical differences, where multiple generations can thrive interdependently.

Preferred Feedback Styles Among Different Groups in an Academic Medical Center

INTRODUCTION

Feedback is an essential component in complex work environments. Different generations have been shown to have different sets of values, derived from societal and cultural changes. We hypothesize that generational differences may be associated with preferred feedback patterns among medical trainees and faculty in a large academic institution.

METHODS

A survey was distributed to all students, residents/fellows, and faculty at a large academic medical institution from April 2020 through June 2020. Survey questions evaluated feedback methods for six domains: preparedness, performance, attitude, technical procedures, inpatient, and outpatient care. Participants selected a preferred feedback method for each category. Patient demographics and survey responses were described using frequency statistics. We compared differences in feedback preferences based on generation and field of practice.

RESULTS

A total of 871 participants completed the survey. Preferred feedback patterns in the medical field do not seem to align with sociologic theories of generational gaps. Most participants preferred to receive direct feedback after an activity away from their team, irrespective of their age or medical specialty. Individuals preferred direct feedback during an activity in front of their team only for technical procedures. Compared to nonsurgeons, surgeons were more likely to prefer direct feedback in front of team members for preparedness, performance, and attitude.

CONCLUSIONS

Generational membership is not significantly associated with preferred feedback patterns in this complex medical academic environment. Variations in feedback preferences are associated with field of practice that may be due to specialty-specific differences in culture and personality traits present within certain medical specialties, particularly surgery.