88 EvrpENce-BRSt:Il TuEol
<strong>Personality</strong> Theories <strong>of</strong> Successful Aging 89 ensen/ 1996; P. B. Baltes, Labouvie-Vief, 1981). At repted set <strong>of</strong> criteria that laborated by Freund and lstions regard i ng cri teria <strong>aging</strong> in particular. P. B. :cessful <strong>aging</strong> longevity, :ial competence, procluc- Similarly, Lawton (1983) >jective satisfaction with tppiness or goal achievenotor behavior, and cogt as financial or living ortcomings <strong>of</strong> such lists, ld be combined, whether other, and whether the :ollection to which criteted. res to defining <strong>successful</strong> characteristics constitut- ; the guiding question <strong>of</strong> (2) process-oriented ap- :he question What are the r time? These approaches sly adapting to changing rments to fit their needs, Busch-Rossnagel, 1981). reeds and capabilities on :onstraints on the other Lracterization <strong>of</strong> successspecific, single criterion. :-criterion approach that re only criterion for suc- 'herefore, to understand in ernpirical studies it is there is no single def ining is seen as indicating d ages well (Neugarten, rishes between "broad" mber <strong>of</strong> defining facets. ng (e.9., Lawton, 7975). esses the importance <strong>of</strong> tl functioninS;. Her contce, environmental maspersonal growth, and nguish between two dirn (life satisfaction) and an emotional dimension (encompassing positive and negative affect; Bradburn, 1969; Campbell, Converse, & Rodgers, 1976; Diener, 1984; Veenhoven, 1991). These dimensions can be either used in a domain-general way or applied to specific life domains. One <strong>of</strong> the critiques <strong>of</strong> subjective well-being as the main or even sole criterion for <strong>successful</strong> development is that it does not explicitly take environmental conditions into consideration that support <strong>successful</strong> <strong>aging</strong> or the <strong>successful</strong> interaction between a person and his or her life context (Havighurst, 1963; Lawton, 1989). A multiple-criteria approach, in contrast, aims at an integration <strong>of</strong> subjective indicators (e.g., personal life satisfaction and happiness) and more objective indicators (e.g., everyday instrumental competence). These criteria can be either short term (e.g., last week's happiness) or long term (e.9., meaning and purpose in life), domain-specific (e.g., satisfaction with financial situation) or general (e.g., overall life satisfaction), as well as static and with a definite end point (e.g., life satisfaction at a given point in time) or dynamic (e.g., change in life satisfaction over time; Freund & Riediger, 2003). Taken together, we distinguish four main approaches to conceptualizing <strong>successful</strong> development and <strong>aging</strong>: criteria-oriented, process-oriented, single-criterion, and multi-criteria approaches. Table 4.1 summarizes these four outlined approaches. As we pointed out, there is currently no agreement as to which single criterion or combination <strong>of</strong> criteria best defines <strong>successful</strong> development. One <strong>of</strong> the reasons for this lack <strong>of</strong> consensus is that there is no generally agreed-upon model <strong>of</strong> <strong>successful</strong> development and <strong>aging</strong> that could serve as the basis for such a definition. Instead, there are numerous theoretical approaches to <strong>successful</strong> development and even more empirical findings pertaining to more or less specific factors contributing to adaptive development. Integration <strong>of</strong> these findings is difficult because studies use different indicators for <strong>successful</strong> <strong>aging</strong>. It is beyond the scope <strong>of</strong> this chapter to <strong>of</strong>fer a comprehensive, integrative model <strong>of</strong> <strong>successful</strong> development. Instead, we aim at approaching the topic <strong>of</strong> <strong>successful</strong> <strong>aging</strong> on different levels <strong>of</strong> personality, focusing on the level <strong>of</strong> personal goals and taking different criteria and dimensions into account. Approach Table 4.1 Approaches to Conceptualizing Successf ul Development and Aging Aim <strong>of</strong> Approach (Leading Question) Criteria-oriented Description <strong>of</strong> characteristics constituting success as an outcome <strong>of</strong> development ("What ls successf ul development?") Process-oriented Persoective on individuals as in continuous interaction with their environment ("What are the processes and conditions that foster developmental success over time?") Multiple criteria Single criterion Integration <strong>of</strong> subjective and objective indicators ("How can subjective and objective indicators be integrated into one index <strong>of</strong> successf u I development?") Assessment <strong>of</strong> a person's global or domain-specific subjective wellbeing ("How can subjective well-being as one indicator <strong>of</strong> <strong>successful</strong> development be assessed [general or domain-specif ic, once or repeated lyl?")