Main Article Content
Intergenerational practice (IP) is an approach within community health promotion which aims to bring older and younger community members together in collaborative activity. Little research has critically examined the assumptions and values within IP and their implications for these communities. A sample of 15 IP planning documents were analysed using a social constructionist thematic analysis (Braun & Clarke2006) guided by Prior’s (2008) concept of documents as active agents. Three tensions were identified: a community-led model versus a contact model; old and young as targets versus older people as targets; and process-focused versus outcome-focused evaluation. IP has relied on contact theory as a mechanism of change, which has rooted IP to an overly individualistic practice targeted at older people (rather than all ages). In contrast, the community-led ethos of IP was also evident alongside values of mutual benefit for old and young, and a desire for more process-focused evaluation.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Since 2020 the International Journal of Ageing and Later Life uses a Creative Commons: Attribution license, which allows users to distribute the work and to reform or build upon it without the author's permission. Full reference to the author must be given.
Alcock, C. L., Camic, P. M., Barker, C., Haridi, C. & Raven, R. (2011). Intergenerational practice in the community: A focused ethnographic evaluation. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology 21(5): 419–432. doi: 10.1002/casp.1084
Allport, G. W. (1954). The Nature of Prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Bernard, M. & Ellis, S. W. (2004). ‘How Do You Know that Intergenerational Practice Works?’: A Guide to Getting Started on Evaluating Intergenera- tional Practice. Stoke-on-Trent: Beth Johnson Foundation.
Beth Johnson Foundation. (2011). A guide to Intergenerational Practice. Stoke-on-Trent: Beth Johnson Foundation.
Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualita- tive Research in Psychology 3(2): 77–101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Brisbois, B. & Plamondon, K. (2018). The possible worlds of global health research: An ethics-focused discourse analysis. Social Science & Medicine 196(1): 142–149. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.11.034
Buffel, T., McGarry, P., Phillipson, C., De Donder, L., Dury, S., De Witte, N. & Verté, D. (2014). Developing age-friendly cities: Case studies from Brus- sels and Manchester and implications for policy and practice. Journal of Aging & Social Policy 26(1–2): 52–72. doi: 10.1080/08959420.2014.855043
Campbell, C. & Cornish, F. (2010). Towards a ‘fourth generation’ of approaches to HIV/AIDS management: Creating contexts for ef- fective community mobilisation. AIDS Care 22(2): 1569–1579. doi: 10.1080/09540121.2010.525812
Campbell, C. & Cornish, F. (2014). Reimagining community health psy- chology: Maps, journeys and new terrains. Journal of Health Psychology 19(1): 3–15. doi: 10.1177/1359105313500263
Drury, L., Abrams, D. & Swift, H. J. (2017). Making Intergenerational Connec- tions – An Evidence Review. London: Age-UK.
Fishbein, M. & Ajzen, I. (1974). Attitudes towards objects as predictors of single and multiple behavioral criteria. Psychological Review 81(1): 59–74. doi: 10.1037/h0020074
Gaggioli, A., Morganti, L., Bonfiglio, S., Scaratti, C., Cipresso, P., Serino, S. & Riva, G. (2014). Intergenerational group reminiscence: A poten- tially effective intervention to enhance elderly psychosocial wellbeing and to improve children’s perception of aging. Educational Gerontology 40(7): 486–498. doi: 10.1080/03601277.2013.844042
Granville, G. (2002). A Review of Intergenerational Practice in the UK. Stoke-on-Trent: Beth Johnson Foundation.
Grefe, D. (2011). Combating ageism with narrative and intergroup contact: Possibilities of intergenerational connections. Pastoral Psychology 60(1): 99–105. doi: 10.1007/s11089-010-0280-0
Hagestad, G. O. & Uhlenberg, P. (2006). Should we be concerned about age segregation? Some theoretical and empirical explorations. Research on Aging 28(6): 638–653. doi: 10.1177/0164027506291872
Haste, H. (2004). Constructing the citizen. Political Psychology 25(3): 413–439. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00378.x
Henkin, N. & Butts, D. (2002). Advancing an intergenerational agenda in the United States. In M. Kaplan, N. Henkin & A. Kusano (eds.), Linking Lifetimes: A Global View of Intergenerational Exchange (pp. 65–82). Lan- ham, MD: University Press of America.
Höijer, B. (2011). Social representations theory. A new theory for media research. Nordicom Review 32(2): 3–16. doi: 10.1515/nor-2017-0109
Hewstone, M. & Swart, H. (2011). Fifty-odd years of inter-group contact: From hypothesis to integrated theory. British Journal of Social Psychology 50(3): 374–386. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8309.2011.02047.x
Jarrott, S. E. (2011). Where have we been and where are we going? Content analysis of evaluation research of intergenerational pro- grams. Journal of Intergenerational Relationships 9(1): 37–52. doi: 10.1080/15350770.2011.544594
Kalampalikis, N., Bauer, M.W. & Apostolidis (2013). Science, technology and society: The social representations approach. Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale 3(26): 1–232.
Knight, A. (2012). Funding intergenerational initiatives to strengthen local communities. Quality in Ageing and Older Adults 13(4): 307–316. doi: 10.1108/14717791211287011
Kok, G., Schaalma, H., Ruiter, R. A., Van Empelen, P. & Brug, J. (2004). Intervention mapping: Protocol for applying health psychology theory to prevention programmes. Journal of Health Psychology 9(1): 85–98. doi: 10.1177/1359105304038379
Larkin, E. & Rosebrook, V. (2002). Standards for intergenerational practice: A proposal. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education 23(2): 137–142. doi: 10.1080/1090102020230205
MacCallum, J., Palmer, D., Wright, P. R., Cumming-Potvin, W., Northcote, J. K., Brooker, M. A. & Tero, C. (2006). Community Building through Intergenerational Exchange Programs: Report to the National Youth Affairs Research Scheme (NYARS). Canberra: Australian Government Department of Families, Community Services & Indigenous Affairs.
Maoz, I. (2012). Contact and social change in an ongoing asymmetrical conflict: Four social-psychological models of reconciliation-aimed planned encounters between Israeli Jews and Palestinians. In J. Dixon &
M. Levine (eds.), Beyond Prejudice (pp. 269–85). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Markova, I. (2007). Social identities and social representations: How are they related? In G. Moloney & I. Walker (eds.), Social Representations and Identity: Content, Process, and power (pp. 215–37). New York: Springer.
Moreno, X., Sánchez, H., Huerta, M., Albala, C. & Márquez, C. (2016). Social representations of older adults among Chilean elders of three cities with different historical and socio-demographic background. Journal of Cross-Cultural Gerontology 31(2):115–128. doi: 10.1007/s10823-016-9288-y
Murray, M. (2014). Social history of health psychology: Context and textbooks. Health Psychology Review 8(2): 215–237. doi: 10.1080/17437199.2012.701058
Murray, M., Pullman, D. & Rodgers, T. H. (2003). Social representations of health and illness among ‘baby-boomers’ in eastern Canada. Journal of Health Psychology 8(5): 485–499. doi: 10.1177/13591053030085002
Petersen, A. & Lupton, D. (1996). The New Public Health: Health and Self in the Age of Risk. London: Sage.
Prior, L. (2003). Using Documents in Social Research. London: Sage.
Prior, L. (2008). Repositioning documents in social research. Sociology
42(5): 821–836. doi: 10.1177/0038038508094564
Sampson, E. L., Bulpitt, C. J. & Fletcher, A. E. (2009). Survival of commu- nity-dwelling older people: The effect of cognitive impairment and so- cial engagement. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society 57(6): 985–991. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2009.02265.x
Springate, I., Atkinson, M. & Martin, K. (2008). Intergenerational Practice: A Review of the Literature. LGA Research Report F/SR262. Berkshire: National Foundation for Educational Research.
Statham, E. (2009). Promoting intergenerational programmes: Where is the evidence to inform policy and practice? Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Re- search, Debate and Practice 5(4): 471–488. doi: 10.1332/174426409X478798
Sykes, C. M., Willig, C. & Marks, D. F. (2004). Discourses in the European Commission’s 1996–2000 health promotion programme. Journal of Health Psychology 9(1): 131–141. doi: 10.1177/1359105304036108