Do you believe that people who are stinkers at age 30 will still be stinkers at age 80? I, for one, don’t want to but the best scientific evidence suggests that we should.
This evidence comes from the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Human Aging. This fall, at a week-long seminar for journalists working the age beat, I visited Baltimore and learned more about this celebrated study.
Begun in 1958 (three years before the California Angels were born), this study calls itself “America’s longest-running scientific study of human aging.” The study is based on 1,200 men and women volunteers who range from their 20s to their 90s. A program of the National Institute on Aging, the BLSA is funded by our tax dollars and would appears to be a sound investment.
What “longitudinal” means is that the same people take part over the period of the study, although individuals are free to drop out at any time. This contrasts with research focusing on a series of different people and is considered more productive and reliable by the social science community.
During the first 40 years, researchers reached significant findings about a range of physical and psychological issues. Of these, I will consider only three.
As indicated above, the first asserts the stability of people’s personalities in adulthood and later years. “Analyses of long-term data show that adults as a whole change little after age 30,” the researchers state. They makes this concrete by adding: “People who are cheerful and assertive at age 30 are likely to be cheerful and assertive at age 80.”
My reason for feeling reluctant to accept this finding is that it smacks of predestination. What about free will so prized by human beings? Why must we continue be nasty toward other people just because we started out that way? Cannot Scrooge be converted and become a nice guy in time for later-life Christmases?
The scientists take some of the curse off their finding by strategic use of the phrase “as a whole.” Thus they do not assert the finding applies to absolutely everybody. They seem willing to admit exceptions.
The example they give, of course, would incline many to favor the thesis. Who, starting out as cheerful and assertive, would not wish to continue so in late life? Even there, however, I would incline toward the side of freedom: should not old people retain the freedom to become more misanthropic if they wish? After all, misanthropy is frequently recognized as a factor in helping some of us survive to longevity – the tough, grumpy old man or woman phenomenon.
The second finding of the BLSA researchers goes like this: “Older people cope more effectively with stress than young adults.”
This one fits in with my experience. The older people I run into tend to be remarkably resilient in coping with the insults, small and large, that so often come with age. The traditional view held elders to be rigid and lacking in coping abilities, but the Baltimore scientists suggest this generalization may not hold water.
My only problem with this finding is possible stereotyping of young people. Everyone knows young adults who cope courageously with illness and other threatening issues. The BLSA, in fact, recognizes how, health aside, older people “experience less stress than younger adults (who must juggle work, marriage, and children.)”
The third general proposition from BLSA asserts “Happiness is more predictable from a person’s disposition than from the special events he or she encounters.”
People often assume happiness to come from events such as getting a raise, staying healthy, or taking a dream vacation – – three cited by the study. But the researchers have found psychological well-being to come from character rather than circumstances.
“People quickly adapt to both good and bad circumstances,” they assert, “so the impact of special events can be fleeting; but people who are sociable, generous, goal-oriented, and emotionally stable consistently report higher levels of happiness and lower levels of depression than others.”
Yes, but I wonder how many of the 1,200 men and women studied in BLSA live in desperately poor circumstances, without adequate financial resources for a decent life. It would be a mistake to think happiness out of reach for such people, but its availability cannot be easy or assumed, however stable their character may be.
And, again, this finding sounds a bit deterministic as if a person’s character is not subject to change. Is it not possible for people as they grow older to modify their outlook on the world and let their new experiences work a transformation in some of their basic attitudes?
I do much welcome emphasis on the importance of character in the life of older people. As the Jungian analyst James Hillman says: “Without the idea of character, the old are merely lessened and worsened people and their longevity is society’s burden.”
But despite quibbles like mine, the three findings discussed here point toward the dignity of later life and the value of core personality.
Richard Griffin