Work Across the Lifespan

Work Across the Lifespan coalesces theoretical and empirical perspectives on aging and work. This volume examines a collection of human development theories that explain trajectories of change, including patterns of growth, maintenance, and decline across the adult lifespan. At its core, the lifespan perspective assumes a focus on aging as a continuous process of intraindividual change and goal-based self-regulation. In this text, the lifespan perspective serves as a lens for examining the complex relationship between aging and work. Integrating research from the fields of developmental psychology as well as industrial, work, and organizational psychology, this authoritative reference brings together the collective thinking of researchers who study work, careers, organizations, and aging.

• Summarizes key tenets of lifespan theories
• Applies lifespan theories to work, organizational life, and careers
• Examines age and work-related processes
• Provides an comprehensive lifespan perspective on work and aging
• Focuses on aging as a continuous intraindividual change process

• Language: English
• Publisher: Academic Press
• Release date: Jan 7, 2019
• ISBN: 9780128127575

Book preview

Canada

Preface

This book brings together the expertise and ideas of researchers using the lifespan developmental perspective and associated theories to study work, careers, and organizations. It also provides an integrative base for future research and practical applications in this area. The lifespan perspective refers to a collection of theories of human development that explain trajectories of change and stability across the course of people’s lives. This perspective is well suited to serve as an overarching theoretical framework to investigate and integrate topics linking age with work, careers, and organizations. However, until now, no single comprehensive source or handbook has been available that coalesces theories and empirical findings on age, work, careers, and organizations based on the lifespan developmental perspective. The book provides readers with knowledge on how workers may change across the lifespan and which individual and work-related factors influence their development. It is a valuable resource for students, researchers, and practitioners interested in work, careers, and organizations (including those working in the fields of industrial-organizational psychology, organizational behavior, management, human resources, and occupational health), as well as aging and lifespan development (including those working in the fields of developmental psychology, sociology, and gerontology).

Following an introduction to the lifespan developmental perspective by the editors, the book is organized into three main sections. The first section, Lifespan Perspectives, provides an overview of several contemporary theories based upon the lifespan developmental perspective, including theories of cognitive aging, personality development, as well as social, emotional, and motivational changes across the lifespan. These theories are used in subsequent chapters to understand better more specific topics related to work, careers, and organizations. The second section, Lifespan Perspectives on Working and Careers, bridges the first and the third main sections of the book. It focuses more specifically on lifespan developmental perspectives on working and careers, including cognitive-motivational models of workers’ development, action regulation across the lifespan, and successful aging at work and career management. The third section of the book, Applications of Lifespan Perspectives, comprises applications of the lifespan developmental perspective to more specific work psychology and organizational behavior topics, including job design, job performance, learning and training, and personnel selection and recruitment. Additionally, authors of chapters in this section adopt lifespan perspectives on occupational health, work and nonwork roles, stereotypes and discrimination, and teamwork. This final section further includes lifespan perspectives on psychological contracts, work motivation, work values and job attitudes, leadership, emotions and stress, organizational climate, and the work-to-retirement transition. The book concludes with an integrative summary and outlook for future research by the editors.

Chapter 1

An Invitation to Lifespan Thinking

Hannes Zacher¹, Cort W. Rudolph² and Boris B. Baltes³,    ¹Institute of Psychology, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany,    ²Department of Psychology, Saint Louis University, St. Louis, MO, United States,    ³Department of Psychology, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, United States

Abstract

This first chapter of the book, Work Across the Lifespan, introduces readers to the lifespan developmental perspective, which constitutes the guiding theoretical framework of subsequent chapters in the book. We first describe the background and overarching goals of this book. Second, we trace the history of the lifespan developmental perspective from its roots in the late 18th century over its formalization and broader reception in the second half of the 20th century to contemporary discourse. Third, we outline the core tenets of the lifespan developmental perspective. We conclude this introductory chapter by giving an overview of the three main sections (i.e., lifespan perspectives, lifespan perspectives on working and careers, and applications of lifespan perspectives) as well as the following chapters of the book.

Keywords

Aging; lifespan; older workers; psychology; work

Over the past two decades, scholars who investigate the role of chronological age for work, careers, and organizations have increasingly adopted a lifespan developmental perspective (Hertel & Zacher, 2018; Rudolph, 2016). One possible reason for this trend is the publication of two articles at the beginning of the 21st century that introduced the lifespan perspective to organizational researchers. In 2001, Baltes and Dickson (2001) discussed how lifespan thinking and models could be fruitfully applied to gain a better understanding of various phenomena in industrial, work, and organizational psychology, including work-family conflict, leadership, and organizational performance. A few years later, Kanfer and Ackerman (2004) outlined how lifespan thinking and research on age-related changes could be integrated with theorizing on associations among individual abilities, motivation, and performance.

The lifespan developmental perspective is not a monolithic theory, but a metatheory or broader way of thinking about human development (ontogenesis). It has influenced the development of several more specific or mid-range theories. As a metatheory, the lifespan developmental perspective provides a comprehensive framework and parameters for comparing and integrating not only these mid-range theories, but also associated constructs, research questions, and predictions (see Abrams & Hogg, 2004; Lewis & Grimes, 1999). It also offers guidance regarding potential future research directions and practical applications.

The overarching goals of this book are to take stock of the growing body of literature that uses the lifespan developmental perspective and associated theories to study work, careers, and organizations, and to provide an integrative base for future research and practice in this area. Until now, no single comprehensive source or handbook has been available that coalesces theories and empirical findings on age, work, careers, and organizations based on the lifespan developmental perspective. In this book, we bring together the collective knowledge and ideas of researchers specializing in this area. The book is written for students, researchers, and practitioners interested in work, careers, and organizations (including those working in the fields of industrial-organizational psychology, organizational behavior, management, human resources, and occupational health), as well as aging and lifespan development (including those working in the fields of developmental psychology, sociology, and gerontology).

In this first chapter, our primary aims are to introduce readers to the lifespan developmental perspective, which constitutes the guiding theoretical framework of subsequent chapters in this book, and to explain the structure and content of this book, more generally. To this end, we first trace the history of the lifespan developmental perspective from its roots in the late 18th century over its formalization and broader reception in the second half of the 20th century to contemporary discourse. Next, we outline the core tenets of the lifespan developmental perspective. We conclude this introductory chapter by giving an overview of the three main sections (lifespan perspectives, lifespan perspectives on working and careers, and applications of lifespan perspectives) and the following chapters of the book.

History of the Lifespan Developmental Perspective

The roots of the lifespan developmental perspective can be traced back to the late 18th century in Germany (Baltes, Lindenberger, & Staudinger, 2006). At this time, the philosopher, mathematician, and physicist Johann Nicolaus Tetens (1777) published a two-volume book called Philosophische Versuche über die menschliche Natur und ihre Entwicklung (philosophical investigations on human nature and its development). Influenced by the Enlightenment movement and empiricism, Tetens’ work discussed individual development across the entire lifespan from birth to old age. Chapters in the book covered the development and optimization of human psyche and functioning, developmental gains and losses, interindividual differences in development, plasticity (modifiability) of development and its limits, influences of the sociocultural and historical context on individual development, and links between human evolution (phylogenesis) and individual development (ontogenesis). Therefore, Tetens is often considered to be not only the founder of developmental psychology, but also of the lifespan developmental perspective (Baltes et al., 2006). A few decades after Tetens published his book, the Belgian social statistician Adolphe Quetelet (1835) published a two-volume book entitled Sur l’homme et le développement de ses facultés, ou essai de physique sociale (a treatise on man and the development of his faculties). Quetelet also adopted a lifespan perspectives on the development of individual abilities and functioning, and his discussion about links between individual development and historical changes contributed to the advancement of methods used by later developmental and lifespan researchers (Baltes et al., 2006).

While lifespan thinking has a long tradition in Europe, it was adopted much later—beginning in the early 20th century—by developmental researchers in North America, whose focus until then was primarily on the development in (early) childhood (Baltes et al., 2006; Baltes, Reese, & Lipsitt, 1980). In the United States, the rise and broader reception of lifespan thinking in the second half of the 20th century was closely related to the establishment of the field of adult development and aging, or gerontology, which focuses primarily on people’s experiences and behavior in old age (see Birren, 1958; Havighurst & Albrecht, 1953). Furthermore, the aging of the population, methodological advancements, and the advent of life course sociology (Elder, 1975), which emphasizes the role of institutions and agency in shaping individual development, contributed to the development of the lifespan developmental perspective (Baltes, 1987; Baltes et al., 1980).

Several influential publications by Paul B. Baltes and colleagues advanced the formalization and led to a broader reception of the lifespan developmental perspective at the end of the 20th century. Moreover, these publications impacted the development of a number of more specific lifespan developmental theories that importantly shape modern discourse on human development both within and outside of the work context. First, in an article in Annual Review of Psychology, Baltes et al. (1980) laid out the conceptual orientation of lifespan developmental psychology (e.g., development as a lifelong process, pluralistic conceptions of development, normative and nonnormative influences on development), illustrated it with examples from specific areas of application (i.e., memory, intelligence), and described intersections with other fields (e.g., early childhood developmental psychology, gerontology, clinical and community psychology, personality psychology, occupational psychology, sociology, economics, biology). According to Baltes et al. (1980), Lifespan developmental psychology is concerned with the description, explanation, and modification (optimization) of developmental processes in the human life course from conception to death (p. 66).

A few years later, Baltes (1987) published a seminal article in Developmental Psychology in which he presented a set of theoretical propositions of lifespan developmental psychology that, together, form a metatheoretical perspectives on the nature of development. Moreover, he discussed several methodological and conceptual implications of this metatheoretical perspective. A decade later, in another Annual Review of Psychology article, Baltes, Staudinger, and Lindenberger (1999) reviewed and advanced theory on lifespan developmental psychology. Specifically, they developed several propositions on the age-related allocation of resources into different developmental functions (i.e., growth, maintenance, and regulation of loss; see also Ebner, Freund, & Baltes, 2006), as well as the interplay of three action regulation strategies (i.e., selection, optimization, and compensation; see also Baltes & Baltes, 1990). They also reviewed empirical evidence on the development of cognitive functioning across the lifespan. Finally, in a chapter in the Handbook of Child Development, Baltes et al. (2006) updated their theorizing on lifespan developmental psychology. In particular, they described five conceptual levels of analysis regarding lifespan development, which are explained in further detail in the following section.

Core Tenets of the Lifespan Developmental Perspective

The lifespan developmental perspectives adopts a lifelong view on individual development, ranging from conception until death (Baltes, 1987). This implies that ontogenesis does not stop at some point in child- or adulthood but continues across one’s life, including old age. The main goals of the lifespan developmental perspective are to describe the structure and sequence of individual development, to link earlier and later life events and processes, and to map individual (biological, psychological) and contextual (social, cultural, historical) influences on development (Baltes et al., 1999; Baltes et al., 2006). Lifespan researchers are interested in general (or normative) patterns of development (i.e., regularities observed for most if not all people), interindividual differences in development, as well as intraindividual plasticity and the range and boundaries of individuals’ possible development. Fig. 1.1 illustrates the three concepts of general developmental pattern across the lifespan, interindividual differences in development, and range of intraindividual plasticity. More practically speaking, lifespan researchers aim to enable people to age successfully with regard to the maximization of developmental gains, that is, favorable subjective evaluations (e.g., life satisfaction) and achievement of positive objective outcomes (e.g., effective functioning)—and with regard to minimizing developmental losses, or undesirable outcomes and ineffective functioning (Baltes & Baltes, 1990; Baltes & Carstensen, 1996).

Figure 1.1 Illustration of general developmental pattern, interindividual differences in development, and intraindividual plasticity. For reasons of simplicity, the figure shows linear trends in a psychological characteristic, but development can also entail nonlinear trends and developmental emergence of psychological characteristics.

Baltes et al. (2006) outlined five hierarchical levels of analysis to theorize on the lifespan developmental perspective (see Fig. 1.2). These levels range from more fundamental theoretical considerations (at the top of the pyramid in Fig. 1.2) to rather specific theories of lifespan development (at the bottom of the pyramid in Fig. 1.2).

Figure 1.2 Five levels of analysis of theorizing on the lifespan developmental perspective. Adapted from Baltes, P.B., Lindenberger, U., & Staudinger, U.M. (2006). Lifespan theory in developmental psychology. In W. Damon & R.M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 1. Theoretical models of human development (6th ed., pp. 569–664). New York: Wiley.

Level 1: Biological and Cultural Evolutionary Perspectives

The first level is the most general level and is informed by evolutionary, historical, biological, and cultural perspectives on the lifespan (Baltes et al., 2006). This level involves reciprocal influences between the continuously evolving interplay of human biology and culture across the lifespan and the incomplete architecture of human development (Fig. 1.2). In essence, incomplete architecture means that the structure and shape of individuals’ lifespan development is open and constrained at the same time (Baltes, 1997). While there is much plasticity, development is also restricted by the outcomes of evolution, genetics, and cultural factors, with some courses of development being more likely than others. Also inherent in this notion is the observation that the scaffolding of development is rather well established and culturally supported for early childhood through adolescence and early adult development, with decreasing structural support for continued successful development across the remainder of the lifespan.

Baltes (1997) outlined three trajectories of the interplay between biology and culture across the lifespan. First, biological effectiveness and evolutionary selection benefits decrease with age and, thus, the incompleteness of the dynamic architecture of the lifespan increases with age (Baltes et al., 2006). Second, at the same time, there is an age-related increase in people’s need for culture, that is, the use of various material, psychosocial, and knowledge-based resources for successful development (Baltes et al., 2006). In other words, cultural resources are required to compensate for age-related decreases in biology and plasticity to function effectively. Third, the lifespan perspective suggests that the efficiency of culture weakens as people get older. That is, as biological effectiveness is reduced and people’s need for culture increases, the relative effectiveness of cultural resources decreases (Baltes et al., 2006). Overall, these three trajectories form a general framework that illustrates how the openness of the human lifespan is constrained by biological and cultural factors.

Level 2: Dynamics of Gains and Losses

The second level (see Fig. 1.2) moves closer to psychological theories of human development and discusses central concepts of lifespan developmental psychology (Baltes et al., 2006). On one hand, this level entails the assumptions that individuals experience both gains and losses in psychological characteristics and functioning across the lifespan, and that losses are unavoidable. On the other hand, it proposes that individuals allocate their resources to three distinct functions—growth, maintenance (including resilience and recovery), and regulation of loss—and that the relative allocation of resources to these functions changes with age (Ebner et al., 2006). Growth involves increases in functioning and adaptive capacity. Maintenance entails behaviors that help avoid losses when facing challenges/threats (resilience) or that help return to previous levels of functioning after a loss (recovery). Finally, regulation of loss refers to behaviors that ensure acceptable functioning when complete recovery is not possible anymore (Baltes et al., 2006). According to the lifespan developmental perspective, people have to invest more resources into the regulation of loss as compared to the other two functions as they get older. However, this does not imply that growth in certain areas of functioning is not possible at higher ages (e.g., emotion regulation); moreover, regulation of loss also involves the investment of personal resources and may, therefore, not always be possible after a loss.

Another tenet of this level is that developmental losses may, over time and under certain favorable circumstances, trigger growth processes (Baltes & Graf, 1996). For instance, this deficits-breed-growth hypothesis suggests that declines in physical functioning (e.g., due to back problems, a worker cannot lift heavy materials anymore) can lead to improvements in adaptive capacity, mastery, and innovation (e.g., the worker develops an innovative piece of equipment that can aide in lifting heavy materials). Thus, certain aspects of culture can be conceived as important ways to compensate for age-related biological deficits (Baltes et al., 2006).

Level 3: Family of Metatheoretical Propositions

At the next conceptual level (see Fig. 1.2), Baltes et al. (2006) outlined a set of fundamental assumptions of a psychological lifespan perspective (see also Baltes, 1987; Lerner & Busch-Rossnagel, 1981). These metatheoretical propositions are summarized in Table 1.1. The first three propositions summarize the tenets of the lifespan developmental perspective discussed so far as part of levels 1 and 2. Specifically, Proposition 1 suggests that human development is influenced by both biology and culture, and that development takes place across the entire lifespan, with no age period being more important for development than other age periods (Baltes, 1987). Proposition 2 is that the mismatch between biology and culture increases with age. That is, with increasing age, individuals are less likely to achieve individual and culture-based goals by relying on their biological resources (hence, the incomplete biological architecture of the lifespan; see Level 1, above). Proposition 3 suggests that individuals allocate their resources to three distinct developmental functions, growth, maintenance, and regulation of loss (see Level 2 above). The relative allocation of resources changes with age, with more and more resources allocated to maintenance and regulation of loss as people get older (Baltes et al., 2006).

Table 1.1

Adapted from Baltes, P.B., Reese, H.W., & Lipsitt, L.P. (1980). Lifespan developmental psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 31, 65–110. Baltes, P.B., Staudinger, U.M., & Lindenberger, U. (1999). Lifespan psychology: Theory and application to intellectual functioning. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 471–507. Baltes, P.B., Lindenberger, U., & Staudinger, U.M. (2006). Lifespan theory in developmental psychology. In W. Damon & R.M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 1. Theoretical models of human development (6th ed., pp. 569–664). New York: Wiley, Baltes, P.B. (1987). Theoretical propositions of lifespan developmental psychology: On the dynamics between growth and decline. Developmental Psychology, 23(5), 611–626.

According to Proposition 4, human development necessarily involves selection (e.g., focus on a small number of specific goals), selective optimization (e.g., advancement with regard to one’s goals), and compensation for losses in functioning (Baltes & Baltes, 1990; Baltes et al., 2006). With age and decreasing biological functioning, the importance of selective optimization in adaptive capacity and compensation becomes increasingly vital. Importantly, this proposition emphasizes the active role of individuals in influencing their environment and their own development (Brandtstädter, 1999; Kooij, 2015).

Proposition 5 emphasizes the dynamic of gains and losses across the lifespan and suggests that there is not gain without loss and vice versa (Baltes et al., 2006). The concepts of selection and selective optimization imply that there are not only improvements in people’s adaptive capacity, but also losses in adaptive capacity for those options not selected. Thus, this proposition also advances the idea of multidimensional and multidirectional changes in psychological characteristics and functioning across the lifespan (Baltes, 1987).

Proposition 6 focuses on intraindividual plasticity or within-person variability and modifiability over the course of lifespan development (see Fig. 1.1 for an illustration). According to Baltes et al. (2006), a key goal of lifespan research is to identify the range of intraindividual plasticity as well as interindividual differences, age-related changes, and constraints in plasticity. The notion of plasticity emphasizes that development is both open and constrained by biological and cultural conditions. Moreover, plasticity means that a certain developmental outcome is only one of several potential outcomes and developmental end states, except for death (Baltes, 1987). The concept is of fundamental importance to the lifespan developmental perspective because it highlights the idea of multidirectionality and the possibility to change and positively impact an individual’s course of development through interventions and agentic behavior (Baltes, Freund, & Li, 2005).

According to Proposition 7, people’s social, historical, and cultural context influences their development in line with the assumption that the biological and cultural architecture of development is incomplete (Baltes et al., 2006; Baltes, 1987). The paradigm of contextualism suggests that development is the result of interactions between three types of influences. Normative age-graded influences entail biological and environmental events and experiences that are strongly related to age. Examples are physical maturation and sequential developmental tasks (i.e., schooling, work, family, retirement). Thus, normative here means that these developments apply to most if not all people. Normative history-graded influences are biological and environmental events and experiences that lead to different developmental pathways across historical (birth) cohort and time periods. Examples are changes in educational and work systems, medical and technological developments, as well as revolutions and wars. Nonnormative or idiosyncratic influences include infrequent and unpredictable biological and environmental events and experiences that are unique to each individual, such as accidents or lottery wins. Importantly, there are individual differences with regard to each of these three influences on development that create individuals’ developmental context (Baltes, 1987).

Finally, Proposition 8 is intended to support the advancement of a general theory of successful development, with selection, optimization, and compensation as core building blocks (see also Level 4, below; Baltes & Baltes, 1990; Baltes & Carstensen, 1996). Based on the lifespan developmental perspective, successful development is defined as the subjective and objective maximization of gains and minimization of losses (Baltes et al., 2006). The interplay among selection, optimization, and compensation strategies is thought to facilitate successful aging and development, particularly at higher ages when the effectiveness of biological resources as well as the efficiency of cultural resources decreases.

Level 4: Systemic and Overall Theories of Successful Lifespan Development

At this level (see Fig. 1.2), more general psychological theories of lifespan development are discussed that can be applied to different, more specific content areas (Baltes et al., 2006). The most prominent example of such theories is the model of selection, optimization, and compensation, a metatheory on proactive and adaptive development (Baltes & Baltes, 1990). This model has been applied to the content areas of motivation and action regulation (Freund & Baltes, 2002; Wiese, Freund, & Baltes, 2000), cognitive and physiological functioning (Li, Lindenberger, Freund, & Baltes, 2001), as well as emotional regulation (Opitz, Gross, & Urry, 2012). It has also been applied to investigate various topics related to work, careers, and organizations, such as performance, job attitudes, and the work-family interface (Moghimi, Zacher, Scheibe, & Von Yperen, 2017). The model of selection, optimization, and compensation is described in further detail in Chapter 4, The Model of Selection, Optimization, Compensation, and most subsequent chapters on more specific lifespan topics refer to this model. Another systemic theory of lifespan development is Heckhausen and Schulz’ motivational theory of lifespan development (Heckhausen, Wrosch, & Schulz, 2010), which developed from their earlier lifespan theories of control and successful aging (Heckhausen & Schulz, 1995; Schulz & Heckhausen, 1996). This theory is described in Chapter 5, Motivational Theory of Lifespan Development.

Level 5: Lifespan Theories in Specific Functions and Domains

At this lowest level in the pyramid (see Fig. 1.2), more specific, mid-range theories of lifespan development are discussed. These theories are based on the tenets and propositions outlined at higher levels, but they focus on more concrete phenomena, such as cognition (e.g., dual component theory of intelligence; see Chapter 2: Theories of Cognitive Aging and Work), personality (e.g., neo-socioanalytic model of personality development; see Chapter 3: A Neo-Socioanalytic Model of Personality Development), and emotions (e.g., socioemotional selectivity theory and the strength and vulnerability integration model; see Chapter 6: Social and Emotional Theories of Aging).

Structure and Content of this Book

We believe—and much conceptual and empirical research conducted over the past two decades supports our view—that the lifespan developmental perspective is well-suited to serve as an overarching theoretical framework to investigate and integrate topics linking age with work, careers, and organizations (Baltes & Dickson, 2001; Baltes, Rudolph, & Bal, 2012; Rudolph, 2016; Zacher, 2015; Zacher & Rudolph, 2017). For instance, both the lifespan developmental perspective and research on work, careers, and organizations emphasize goal-based, agentic self-regulation processes. Moreover, both approaches highlight the important role of context on the development, functioning, and well-being of individuals.

This book is organized into three main sections. The first section, Lifespan Perspectives, provides an overview of several contemporary mid-range theories based upon the lifespan developmental perspective. These theories will be used in subsequent chapters to understand better work and careers, as well as more specific topics in the work and organizational context. Specifically, Chapters 2–6 present theories of cognitive aging and work (Fisher, Chacon, & Chaffee), the neo-socioanalytic model of personality development (Nye & Roberts), the model of selection, optimization, and compensation (Moghimi, Scheibe, & Freund), the motivational theory of lifespan development (Shane & Heckhausen), and social and emotional theories of aging (Jiang & Fung).

The second section, Lifespan Perspectives on Working and Careers, bridges the first and the third main sections of the book. It focuses more specifically on lifespan developmental perspectives on working and careers, but does not address specific applications. Chapters 7–10 address cognitive-motivational models of lifespan development (Beier, Bradford, Torres, Shaw, & Kim), action regulation across the lifespan (Hacker, Sachse, & Seubert), lifespan perspectives on successful aging at work (Olson & Shultz), and lifespan perspectives on careers and career management (Nagy, Froidevaux, & Hirschi).

Finally, the third and largest section of the book, Applications of Lifespan Perspectives, comprises applications of the lifespan developmental perspective to more specific work and organizational topics. In particular, Chapters 11–14 discuss lifespan perspectives on job design (Cadiz, Rineer, & Truxillo), job performance (Cleveland, Hübner, Andersen, & Agbeke), learning and training (Sterns & Harrington), and personnel selection and recruitment (Doverspike, Flores, & VanderLeest). Chapters 15–18 present lifespan perspectives on occupational health (Schmitt & Unger), work and nonwork roles (Clark, Sanders, Haynes, & Vande Griek), stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination (McCarthy, Heraty, & Bamberg), and individual effort in teams (Gärtner, Nohe, & Hertel). Further, Chapters 19–23 discuss lifespan perspectives on psychological contracts (Bal & Vantilborgh), work motivation (Kooij & Kanfer), work values and job attitudes (Thrasher & Bramble), leadership (Rosing & Jungmann), and emotions, stress, and conflict management (Zapf, Johnson, & Beitler). The final two chapters present lifespan perspectives on organizational climate (Kunze & Toader), as well as the work-to-retirement transition (Zhan, Wang, & Daniel). We conclude the book with an integrative summary and outlook (Chapter 26, Looking Forward: A New Agenda for Studying Work Across the Lifespan).

We thank all of the authors for contributing to this book, and we hope you enjoy reading it!

References

1. Abrams D, Hogg MA. Metatheory: Lessons from social identity research. Personality and Social Psychology Review. 2004;8(2):98–106.

2. Baltes BB, Dickson MW. Using life-span models in industrial-organizational psychology: The theory of selective optimization with compensation. Applied Developmental Science. 2001;5:51–62.

3. Baltes BB, Rudolph CW, Bal AC. A review of aging theories and modern work perspectives. In: Hedge JW, Borman WC, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Work and Aging. New York: Oxford University Press; 2012;117–136.

4. Baltes MM, Carstensen LL. The process of successful ageing. Ageing and Society. 1996;16:397–422.

5. Baltes PB. Theoretical propositions of life-span developmental psychology: On the dynamics between growth and decline. Developmental Psychology. 1987;23(5):611–626.

6. Baltes PB. On the incomplete architecture of human ontogeny: Selection, optimization, and compensation as foundation of developmental theory. American Psychologist. 1997;52(4):366–380.

7. Baltes PB, Baltes MM. Psychological perspectives on successful aging: The model of selective optimization with compensation. In: Baltes PB, Baltes MM, eds. Successful aging: Perspectives from the behavioral sciences. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1990;1–34.

8. Baltes PB, Freund AM, Li S-C. The psychological science of human ageing. In: Johnson ML, ed. The Cambridge handbook of age and ageing. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2005;47–71.

9. Baltes PB, Graf P. Psychological aspects of aging: Facts and frontiers. In: Magnusson D, ed. The lifespan development of individuals: Behavioral, neurobiological, and psychosocial perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1996;427–459.

10. Baltes PB, Lindenberger U, Staudinger UM. Lifespan theory in developmental psychology. In: Damon W, Lerner RM, eds. Handbook of child psychology: Vol 1 Theoretical models of human development. 6th ed. New York: Wiley; 2006;569–664.

11. Baltes PB, Reese HW, Lipsitt LP. Life-span developmental psychology. Annual Review of Psychology. 1980;31:65–110.

12. Baltes PB, Staudinger UM, Lindenberger U. Lifespan psychology: Theory and application to intellectual functioning. Annual Review of Psychology. 1999;50:471–507.

13. Birren JE. Chapter X: Aging and psychological adjustment. Review of Educational Research. 1958;28(5):475–490.

14. Brandtstädter J. The self in action and development: Cultural, biosocial, and ontogenetic bases of intentional self-development. In: Brandtstädter J, Lerner RM, eds. Action and self development: Theory and research through the life span. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1999;37–65.

15. Ebner NC, Freund AM, Baltes PB. Developmental changes in personal goal orientation from young to late adulthood: From striving for gains to maintenance and prevention of losses. Psychology and Aging. 2006;21(4):664–678.

16. Elder GH. Age differentiation and the life course. Annual Review of Sociology. 1975;1(1):165–190.

17. Freund AM, Baltes PB. Life-management strategies of selection, optimization, and compensation: Measurement by self-report and construct validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2002;82(4):642–662.

18. Havighurst RJ, Albrecht R. Older people Oxford, England: Longmans; 1953.

19. Heckhausen J, Schulz R. A life-span theory of control. Psychological Review. 1995;102:284–304.

20. Heckhausen J, Wrosch C, Schulz R. A motivational theory of life-span development. Psychological Review. 2010;117(1):32–60.

21. Hertel G, Zacher H. Managing the aging workforce. In: 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2018;396–428. Ones DS, Anderson N, Viswesvaran C, Sinangil HK, eds. The Sage handbook of industrial, work and organizational psychology. Vol. 3.

22. Kanfer R, Ackerman PL. Aging, adult development, and work motivation. Academy of Management Review. 2004;29(3):440–458.

23. Kooij DTAM. Successful aging at work: The active role of employees. Work, Aging and Retirement. 2015;1(3):309–319.

24. Lerner RM, Busch-Rossnagel NA. Individuals as producers of their development: A life-span perspective New York: Academic Press; 1981.

25. Lewis MW, Grimes AJ. Metatriangulation: Building theory from multiple paradigms. Academy of Management Review. 1999;24(4):672–690.

26. Li KZH, Lindenberger U, Freund AM, Baltes PB. Walking while memorizing: Age-related differences in compensatory behavior. Psychological Science. 2001;12:230–237.

27. Moghimi D, Zacher H, Scheibe S, Von Yperen NW. The selection, optimization, and compensation model in the work context: A systematic review and meta-analysis of two decades of research. Journal of Organizational Behavior. 2017;38(2):247–275.

28. Opitz P, Gross JJ, Urry HL. Selection, optimization, and compensation in the domain of emotion regulation: Applications to adolescence, older age, and major depressive disorder. Social and Personality Psychology Compass. 2012;6(2):142–155.

29. Quetelet A. Sur l’homme et le développement de ses facultés, ou essai de physique sociale [A treatise on man and the development of his faculties] Paris, France: Bachelier; 1835.

30. Rudolph CW. Lifespan developmental perspectives on working: A literature review of motivational theories. Work, Aging and Retirement. 2016;2:130–158.

31. Schulz R, Heckhausen J. A life span model of successful aging. American Psychologist. 1996;51(7):702–714.

32. Tetens JN. Philosophische Versuche über die menschliche Natur und ihre Entwicklung [Philosophical investigations on human nature and its development] Leipzig, Germany: Weidmanns Erben und Reich; 1777.

33. Wiese BS, Freund AM, Baltes PB. Selection, optimization, and compensation: An action-related approach to work and partnership. Journal of Vocational Behavior. 2000;57:273–300.

34. Zacher H. Successful aging at work. Work, Aging and Retirement. 2015;1(1):4–25.

35. Zacher H, Rudolph CW. Successful aging at work and beyond: A review and critical perspective. In: Profili S, Sammarra A, Innocenti L, eds. Age diversity in the workplace: An organizational perspective. Bingley, UK: Emerald; 2017;35–64.

Part I

Lifespan Perspectives

Outline

Chapter 2 Theories of Cognitive Aging and Work

Chapter 3 A Neo-Socioanalytic Model of Personality Development

Chapter 4 The Model of Selection, Optimization, Compensation

Chapter 5 Motivational Theory of Lifespan Development

Chapter 6 Social and Emotional Theories of Aging

Chapter 2

Theories of Cognitive Aging and Work

Gwenith G. Fisher, Marisol Chacon and Dorey S. Chaffee,    Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, United States

Abstract

The link between cognitive aging and work is more important than ever, given the increased proportion of older workers in the labor force and the notion that cognitive functioning is essential for performing work and achieving successful aging at work. The purpose of this chapter is to discuss cognitive functioning and work from a lifespan perspective. First, we define cognitive functioning. Second, we summarize multiple theories of cognitive functioning and describe how cognitive abilities change over the lifespan. Third, we integrate and relate theories of cognitive aging to work. Next, we summarize empirical research results from recent studies of cognitive aging and work in two ways: how work impacts cognitive functioning, and how cognitive functioning impacts work. Finally, we suggest practical implications and offer some recommendations to guide future research.

Keywords

Cognitive functioning; cognitive aging; cognition; abilities; fluid intelligence; crystallized intelligence

The link between cognitive aging and work is more important than ever before for many reasons. First, the proportion of older workers in the labor force continues to grow in many countries as recent trends point to an increase in retirement age and individuals remaining the in the workforce until later ages (Fisher, Chaffee, & Sonnega, 2016). Second, cognitive functioning is essential for performing work and successful aging at work (Kooij, 2015; Zacher, 2015). Cognitive ability is related to job performance in part because of its influence on workers’ capacity to learn the knowledge and skills necessary to carry out work-related functions (Salthouse, 2012). Cognitive functioning also has clear implications for work motivation and other individual and organizational outcomes (Kanfer & Ackerman, 2004). Maintaining high levels of cognitive functioning is essential for preserving work ability, which refers to workers’ job-related functional capacity, or a worker’s ability to continue working in his or her current job, given the challenges or demands of the job and his or her resources (Ilmarinen, Gould, Järvikoski, & Järvisalo, 2008). Cognitive functioning is also important for continuing to work longer, such that individuals can continue working as long as they are able and desire to do so (McGonagle, Fisher, Barnes-Farrell, & Grosch, 2015).

A growing body of research highlights the need to understand cognitive functioning across the lifespan, how it impacts work, and how it is impacted by work. For example, prior research has highlighted important intersections between cognitive abilities and work on many topics. Such issues include personnel selection and human resource management (Hough, Oswald, & Ployhart, 2001), age discrimination (Klein, Dilchert, Ones, & Dages, 2015; Fisher, Truxillo, Finkelstein, & Wallace, 2017), occupational health and well-being (Fisher et al., 2014; Fisher, Chaffee, Tetrick, Davalos, & Potter, 2017), and work ability and retirement (Fisher et al., 2016; Rohwedder & Willis, 2010). Additionally, there is strong empirical evidence to indicate that there are important age-related changes in cognitive functioning over the lifespan (Salthouse, 2012). Therefore, it is important to understand how cognitive functioning changes over age and what implications that has for work and workers.

The purpose of this chapter is to discuss cognitive functioning and work from a lifespan perspective. First, we define cognitive functioning. Second, we summarize multiple theories of cognitive functioning and describe how cognitive abilities change over the lifespan. Third, we relate and integrate theories of cognitive aging to work. Next, we summarize empirical research from recent studies of cognitive aging and work in two ways: how work impacts cognitive functioning, and how cognitive functioning impacts work. Finally, we suggest practical implications and offer some recommendations to guide future research.

Defining Cognitive Functioning

Psychometric Approach

Cognitive functioning refers to multiple mental abilities, including learning, thinking, reasoning, remembering, problem solving, decision making, and attention. The dominant approach to the measurement and conceptualization of cognitive functioning in lifespan developmental psychology is the psychometric approach, which arose from efforts to define, measure, and quantify cognitive abilities using the most basic underlying constructs of abilities such as general intelligence (g), fluid intelligence (Gf), and crystallized intelligence (Gc; Carroll, 1993; Cattell, 1963, 1987; Horn & Cattell, 1967). General intelligence (g) derived from a single common factor underlying all cognitive abilities. Fluid cognitive abilities (Gf) refers to reasoning or thinking, processing speeds, and one’s ability to solve problems in novel situations, independent of acquired knowledge. Crystallized cognitive abilities (Gc) refer to acquired knowledge, which includes the accumulation of lifetime intellectual knowledge and achievements. Gc is often measured by abilities like knowledge and vocabulary. Lifespan psychologists (e.g., Baltes, Staudinger, & Lindenberger, 1999) have referred to these dimensions as cognitive mechanics and pragmatics (p. 486). The psychometric method relies upon the administration and scoring of multiple cognitive performance tests. This approach has had a strong influence on applied psychological research (e.g., Ackerman & Beier, 2012; Fisher et al., 2014; Klein et al., 2015; Salthouse, 2012).

Prior research has identified distinct intra-individual trajectories over the lifespan for different cognitive abilities, including important differences across one’s working life (Klein et al., 2015; McArdle, Hamagami, Meredith, & Bradway, 2000; Schaie, 1994). In particular, Gf peaks in early adulthood (around age 20) and then declines throughout the remainder of the lifespan (which includes the time during which people work; Salthouse, 2012). Alternatively, Gc typically increases over the lifespan due to the acquisition of new knowledge and experience. Gc is less likely to decline until much later ages and typically after people retire. Increases over age in Gc are believed to compensate for the losses in Gf and may account for the general stability (or even slight increase) in work performance as people age (Ng & Feldman, 2008). Fig. 2.1 illustrates distinct trajectories of Gf and Gc within individuals over time, with advancing age, and how the trajectory of g alone occludes the distinct patterns of more specific ability measures. When investigating cognitive abilities, it is important to be specific about which cognitive abilities are being investigated, given that there is not one single pattern of intellectual functioning over age across all abilities (Schaie, 1994). Furthermore, the patterns depicted in Fig. 2.1 show that age-related changes in cognitive functioning are more likely to be masked when using more general measures (such as g) compared to the use of more specific abilities.

Figure 2.1 Trajectories of cognitive abilities within individuals across time with advancing age.

It is important to consider age differences in cognitive abilities when investigating cognitive functioning and work-related issues. For example, Ackerman and Beier (2012) indicated that over a 20 or 30+ year span of one’s lifetime of work, both rank order and raw scores [of cognitive abilities] change in marked ways (p. 151). Klein et al. (2015) investigated cognitive predictors (e.g., general and specific mental abilities) related to age among business executives. Their results indicated that the largest mean differences in cognitive ability scores were among individuals age 65 or older, suggesting evidence of cognitive decline among older adults even in the working population. However, it is very important to note that there are vast individual differences in the aging process such that the extent and rate at which people decline can vary considerably (Salthouse, 2012).

Cohort differences

Previous research has identified important patterns in cognitive performance across birth cohorts (Baltes, 1968; Gerstorf, Ram, Hoppmann, Willis, & Schaie, 2011; Salthouse, 2013). A birth cohort refers to individuals born during the same year (Glenn, 2005). It is important to distinguish birth cohorts from other ways that cohorts have been defined (Rudolph & Zacher, 2016), such as age (i.e., one’s biological age in years) and period (i.e., refers to the same point in calendar time, such as an event that affects all age groups on one date/point in time). The distinction between birth cohort, age, and period is important for clarifying distinctions in time-varying phenomena. Specifically, prior research has found large birth cohort differences in inter-personal levels of cognitive abilities such that more recent birth cohorts perform better on tests of general intelligence and fluid cognitive abilities than previous birth cohorts, which is referred to as the Flynn effect (Flynn, 1984). Similarly, Gerstorf et al. (2011) obtained results consistent with Flynn’s, such that more recent cohorts have higher levels of cognitive functioning. Gerstorf et al. (2011) also found a slower rate of decline among more recent cohorts, with the only exception being steeper cognitive decline as individuals approached mortality. Dodge, Zhu, Lee, Chang, and Ganguli (2014) examined differences in executive function, psychomotor speed, and language across four sequential cohorts born between 1902 and 1943. Dodge et al. (2014) identified cohort differences on all three cognitive measures (even after adjusting for educational attainment), with more recent cohorts experiencing less cognitive decline. Measures of executive functioning resulted in the largest differences between cohorts. Skirbekk, Stonawski, Bonsang, and Staudinger (2013) examined immediate recall, delayed recall, and verbal fluency in a nationally representative sample of older adults in the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA) and found further evidence to support the Flynn effect. Furthermore, their results suggested that if cognitive functioning continues to improve with succeeding birth cohorts, improvements in cognitive functioning will offset population-level cognitive decline associated with population aging (Skirbekk et al., 2013).

Neurocognitive Method

The second approach for conceptualizing and measuring cognitive functioning is the neurocognitive method, which is grounded in clinical neuropsychology, cognitive psychology, and neuroscience. Although the neurocognitive approach has a psychometric basis as well, it focuses more on cognition as a function through brain-behavioral relationships (Lezak, Howieson, Bigler, & Tranel, 2012). The primary dimensions of interest in neurocognitive measurement (along with corresponding brain regions) include: (1) attention, executive functions, and higher order problem-solving (prefrontal cortex and frontostriatal networks); (2) memory functions (hippocampus and fronto-temporal systems); (3) language (temporal and prefrontal); (4) visual perception and processing (parietal, occipital), and (5) social and emotional processing (limbic and inferior prefrontal). Executive functions are a broad construct that include such functions as updating (of working memory), task switching, inhibitory control of attention, and response inhibition (Diamond, 2013; Stuss & Knight, 2013). Researchers have also argued that information processing speed underlies age-related changes in many neurocognitive abilities, including executive functions (Diamond, 2013; Rozas, Juncos-Rabadán, & González, 2008).

Because Gf includes short-term memory, processing speed, and quantitative, verbal, inductive, and deductive reasoning, it is similar to the neurocognitive conceptualization of executive functions. This is one area where the psychometric approach may inform the neurocognitive approach. Neuroscience research has shown that age differences in processing speed are influenced by underlying age-related differences in the integrity of white-matter pathways that facilitate communication among discrete brain regions (Kerchner et al., 2012).

Although the rate of cognitive decline for each individual is influenced by a variety of factors, many researchers have observed patterns of pre-frontal cortex white matter degradation among older adults associated with decline in Gf tasks as compared to Gc tasks (Bugg, Zook, DeLosh, Davalos, & Davis, 2006; Horn & Cattell, 1967). White matter pathways affect communication and processing of information throughout the brain (Fisher et al., 2017). Older adults are thought to be more susceptible to Gf deficits due to associated white matter abnormalities in their prefrontal cortices as they age. Skills associated with Gc, however, have been proposed to be fairly stable, with select measures (such as knowledge and vocabulary) even improving with age and life experience. The link between aging and decline on Gf measures has led researchers to question whether older adults appear to get a greater benefit in Gf from work-related activities that may not be addressed adequately in retirement (Fisher et al., 2014; Peterson, Kramer, & Colcombe, 2002).

Changes in Cognitive Abilities over the Lifespan

Lifespan researchers have long been interested in cognitive functioning and within-person cognitive changes across the lifespan. For example, Baltes, Mayer, and colleagues conducted the Berlin Aging Study to examine cognitive, physical, and psychological health, and social and economic status among a group of 516 individuals between the ages of 70–100 who live(d) in former West Berlin (Baltes & Mayer, 2001). In the United States, Schaie began the Seattle Longitudinal Study in 1956, which studied a sample of individuals from the Seattle, Washington, area who ranged in age from their early 20 s to late 60 s in 1956 and from age 22 through 101 in later waves. Data on a wide variety of cognitive functioning tests were collected in seven-year intervals from 1956 to 2005 (Schaie, 1994, 2005). Taken together, these studies have played a prominent role in contributing to our knowledge about cognitive functioning and perspectives about cognitive mechanisms and changes across the lifespan.

Park (2000) described four mechanisms that explain intra-individual differences in cognitive functioning over the lifespan. These mechanisms include (1) the rate of perceptual speed, which affects the speed of cognitive processing; (2) working memory functions; (3) inhibitory function; and (4) sensory function. Perceptual speed rate is essential for all cognitive tasks (not just speeded tasks) because perception affects how we acquire and process information. Salthouse (1996) developed a processing speed theory to explain age differences in cognitive abilities among adults. According to Salthouse’s processing speed theory, how long it takes a person to perform complex cognitive operations is limited by how long it takes to process the each individual cognitive function (e.g., visual working memory, attention, etc.) of the cognitive operations. Slower processing at lower-level stages may lead to lost information when needed at higher-level stages (Salthouse, 1996). Cognitive processing speed is more important for cognitively difficult or complex tasks because it allows us to filter important and relevant information from what is less important (Park, 2000; Salthouse & Madden, 2015; Salthouse, 2012). Previous empirical research found that there are age-related differences on multiple measures of processing speed, and age differences in cognition are typically attenuated after controlling for processing speed (Salthouse & Madden, 2015). According to Park (2000), working memory is defined as the amount of online cognitive resources available at any given moment to process information (p. 10). Craik and Byrd (1982) suggested that one way to assist older adults is by providing environmental supports to decrease processing requirements. For example, presenting information visually, (e.g., in written form) and not just verbally (e.g., spoken instructions) may be helpful and more effective for older employees, as a mixed communication method would allow for retaining the most amount of details.

The cognitive aging mechanism called inhibition refers to age-related differences in how well individuals filter out (i.e., inhibit) irrelevant information that can distract from focused attention to relevant information. One explanation regarding why older adults may be more apt to be distracted when faced with multiple competing sources of information is due to inhibition. Although inhibition is not as well understood as working memory and processing speed functions, it is relevant to work because inhibition relates to one’s ability to focus on a task and avoid or manage distractions at work. Prior research by von Hippel and Dunlop (2005) found empirical evidence to suggest that older adults experience declines in inhibitory ability. The last of these four mechanisms is sensory function, which includes visual and auditory acuity. According to Lindenberger and Baltes (1994), sensory function is a basic measure of brain integrity and may serve to affect cognitive performance.

Mechanisms of Cognitive Aging

The two methods to the assessment of cognitive functioning we have reviewed (i.e., psychometric and neurocognitive approaches) overlap with the four mechanisms of cognitive aging that Park (2000) described (i.e., processing speed, working memory, inhibitory function, and sensory function). The neurocognitive method includes these four mechanisms, but also extends Park’s framework by adding executive functions, attention, language, and social and emotional processing. The neurocognitive method to conceptualizing cognitive functioning also complements the psychometric approach. For example, lower levels of Gf performance among healthy older adults have been associated with smaller prefrontal and orbitofrontal white matter (Raz et al., 2008). In addition, functional neuroimaging studies have suggested that older adults who perform better on executive or Gf-type tasks appear to compensate for age-related changes in brain structure and connectivity via increased engagement of the prefrontal cortex (Hakun, Zhu, Brown, Johnson, & Gold, 2015; Reuter-Lorenz & Cappell, 2008).

Although a thorough explanation of neuroanatomy and brain functions is well-beyond the scope of this chapter, we describe the neurocognitive method for three reasons. First, neuroscience and clinical neuropsychology are important and relevant to enhance our understanding of cognitive functioning and work in a multidisciplinary way. Second, the neurocognitive approach expands the conceptualization of cognitive mechanisms or functions beyond the four described by Park (2000). Third, there is an opportunity to integrate findings from neuropsychology and cognitive neuroscience as applied to work settings. Cognitive dysfunction is important for understanding the aging workforce because older workers are at higher risk for age-related cognitive decline, dementia, and difficulties with cognitive functioning that have implications for successful aging at work (i.e., maintenance of health, motivation, and work ability), as well as work disability, which refers to having health-related limitations that result in unemployment or result in decreased work productivity (Pransky, Loisel, & Anema, 2011).

Cognitive Functioning and Successful Aging

Society and organizations have a need to support active and successful aging among older adults at work, and during and after retirement as well (Kooij, 2015; Zacher, 2015). The aging and work literature describes two recent frameworks for understanding successful aging at work. First, Kooij (2015) defined successful aging as the maintenance of workers’ health, motivation, and working capacity or work ability now and in the future (p. 309). Second, Zacher (2015) offered a theoretical framework of successful aging that describes a process that includes intra-individual change over time, person and contextual mediators and moderators, and a variety of work outcomes (e.g., work motivation, job performance, turnover, and occupational health and well-being). The maintenance of cognitive functioning among older adults fits in Zacher’s model of successful aging as a person-level mediator between chronological age and work outcomes, and functions as a personal resource for successful aging. We conceptualize cognitive functioning as a mediator between intra-individual temporal changes and personal and contextual factors (which are also mediators and moderators). Recently some of our team’s research has identified cognitive functioning as an important antecedent of work ability (Fisher, McGonagle, Chaffee, & McCall, 2016). It is necessary to understand the intersection of aging, cognitive functioning, and work in order to advance our understanding of, and mechanisms to achieve, successful aging at work.

The Effects of Work on Cognitive Functioning

Next we conceptualize and summarize previous research in two ways: first we focus on ways in which work affects individuals’ cognitive functioning. Second, we discuss how cognitive functioning affects work.

Theoretical Framework

The use-it-or-lose-it hypothesis is the primary theory that has guided the investigation of the effects of work on cognition (Hultsch, Hertzog, Small, & Dixon, 1999; Salthouse, 1991, 2006). According to the use-it or-lose-it hypothesis, an individual’s level of cognitive functioning is determined by two mechanisms: differential preservation and preserved differentiation. Differential preservation indicates that a person’s level of cognitive functioning depends on his or her current mental activity. In other words, individuals who are consistently mentally active are preserving their function more than those who are not consistently mentally active. On the other hand, preserved differentiation suggests that individuals with higher levels of cognitive functioning in earlier life are the ones who are more apt to maintain higher levels of mental activity as they age. Many empirical studies (e.g., (Bielak, Anstey, Christensen, & Windsor, 2012; Potter, Helms, & Plassman, 2008; Schooler, 2007) have found evidence to support differential preservation even though Salthouse’s more recent research (e.g., Salthouse, 2006; Salthouse, Berish, & Miles, 2002) has cast doubt on differential preservation. Many studies also support the concept of preserved differentiation (e.g., Bielak, Cherbuin, Bunce, & Anstey, 2014; Finkel, Reynolds, McArdle, & Pedersen, 2007).

Two other theories relevant for understanding the impact of work on cognitive functioning include the brain or cognitive reserve hypothesis (Fratiglioni & Wang, 2007), and Schooler’s (1984, 1990) theory of environmental influences on cognitive functioning. According to the cognitive reserve hypothesis, engagement in mentally stimulating activities and environments is linked to increased neuronal development, which leads to the development of a cognitive reserve. Mental stimulation helps build additional cognitive strategies or neuronal resources, which, in turn, may increase an individual’s resilience to neuronal insults. These resources may serve to buffer against measurable cognitive decline. Schooler’s theory posits environmental influences on intellectual functioning, in which a person’s environment includes both stimulus and demand characteristics that contribute to the cognitive complexity of the environment (Schooler, Mulatu, & Oates, 1999). The presence of greater and varied environmental stimuli requires individuals to make more decisions, which, in turn, creates a more complex cognitive environment. In complex environments that reward cognitive effort, people should be motivated not only to develop their intellect, but to apply cognitive processes across different situations, thereby improving intellectual functioning. However, according to Schooler and colleagues, if high levels of cognitive functioning are unnecessary, intellectual abilities will not be maintained and consequently lead to decreases in cognitive functioning.

In the previous section, we described mechanisms by which work may influence cognitive functioning. Zacher’s (2015) theory of successful aging at work suggests such that work experiences provide a context by which cognitive functioning develops over time for each individual. Altogether, there are multiple theories suggesting that work provides a context that may influence cognitive functioning.

Job Characteristics and Work

One mechanism that explains how work may influence cognitive functioning is exposure to specific job characteristics. The job demands-resources (JD-R) model is a very useful framework for conceptualizing job characteristics and how they relate to worker health and well-being (Bakker & Demerouti, 2017; Demerouti, Bakker, Nachreiner, & Schaufeli, 2001). According to the JD-R model, jobs characteristics are comprised of demands and resources. Job demands refer to physical, social, or organizational aspects of a job that require sustained physical or mental effort and are therefore associated with certain physiological or psychological costs (Demerouti et al., 2001, p. 501). Thus far, we have discussed cognitive and physical job demands, as well as mental and social demands. In the context of the JD-R model, resources facilitate the completion of work goals, or may serve to buffer the relation between job demands and other worker or organizational outcomes. Next, we summarize prior research to describe what we know about the relation between each of these job characteristics and workers’ levels of cognitive functioning.

Cognitive Job Complexity and Cognition

Many studies during the last decade have examined the link between cognitive complexity of work (i.e., mental job demands) and workers’ level of cognitive functioning. These studies have relied upon the aforementioned theories (i.e., the use-it-or-lose-it hypothesis, cognitive reserve hypothesis, and environmental influences on intellectual functioning) and have provided empirical support for the notion that more cognitively complex work is related to better cognitive functioning in later life (Andel, Finkel, & Pedersen, 2015; Bosma, van Boxtel, Ponds, Houx, & Jolles, 2003; Finkel, Andel, Gatz, & Pedersen, 2009; Fisher et al., 2014; Potter et al., 2008; Schooler et al., 1999). A subset of these studies identified cognitively complex work as being associated with a lower prevalence of cognitive impairment and dementia (Andel et al., 2015; Potter et al., 2008). Andel et al. (2015) examined leisure pursuits and found that engagement in cognitively stimulating leisure activities was associated with higher levels of cognitive functioning; moreover, participation in such non-work activities appeared to be particularly helpful for individuals who do not work in cognitively complex jobs. This result is important, especially in light of prior research by Potter et al. (2008), who found an interaction between earlier life cognitive ability, cognitive job complexity, and cognitive functioning such that workers with lower levels of cognitive abilities in earlier life seemed to benefit more from cognitively complex work. Grzywacz, Segel-Karpas, and Lachman (2016) examined cross-sectional data from the National Survey of Midlife Development in the United States (MIDUS) and found that job complexity positively related to cognitive functioning assessed by episodic memory, executive functioning, and self-rated memory. Additionally, Grzywacz and colleagues reported that greater exposure to physical workplace hazards was associated with lower cognitive functioning.

Staudinger, Finkelstein, Calvo, and Sivaramakrishnan (2016) suggested three different dimensions of work that may impact cognitive functioning among older adults: the degree of routinization, level of difficulty, and novelty of exposure. Recently, Oltmanns et al. (2017) reported results of a workplace intervention that introduced work task changes (i.e., novelty) among automotive manufacturing workers in Germany. Oltmanns et al. (2017) found that workers who experienced more work task changes over a seventeen-year period demonstrated better cognitive processing speed, working memory, and more gray matter volume in brain regions associated with learning and age-related cognitive decline.

To summarize, working in more cognitively complex jobs is associated with better cognitive outcomes primarily for individuals in their 60 and 70 s, including g, assorted Gf measures such as memory and processing speed, as well as research diagnoses pertaining to dementia. Altogether, research results to date support the phenomenon of differential preservation (Salthouse, 2006).

Physical Job Demands and Cognition

In addition to mental job demands (i.e., cognitive job complexity), physical job demands may affect cognitive functioning. There is a large literature suggesting that greater physical activity and cardiovascular fitness in aging is associated with decreased risk of cognitive impairment (Schlosser Covell et al., 2015). In addition, robust physical functioning can protect against both physical and cognitive disability (Avila-Funes et al., 2009).

Despite positive physical and cognitive benefits associated with physical activity during leisure time, there is an ostensibly paradoxical relationship between cognitive performance and physical activity during work. Several studies have found that jobs characterized by higher physical activity demands are associated with greater cognitive decline and higher risk of dementia (Marengoni, Fratiglioni, Bandinelli, & Ferrucci, 2011; Potter, Plassman, Helms, Foster, & Edwards, 2006; Smyth et al., 2004). One interpretation for this pattern is that physically demanding activities, often characterized as manual labor or blue-collar work, are proxies for the cognitive correlates of lower socioeconomic status, educational attainment, and income that are associated with many of these occupations (Russo et al., 2006; Walker-Bone et al., 2016). A second interpretation is that many physically demanding jobs in occupations like construction, agricultural processing, and manufacturing, are cognitively overlearned or repetitive in nature, and