Life Course Perspective Essay
The life course perspective is a theoretical framework which was formed in order to capture certain historical and life characteristics about the human development from childhood into old age in a particular society. The life course signifies the potential consequences of trajectories, individual transitions, and how turning points in the trajectory can alter an individual’s life course (Alwin et. al 2005). As a result, many social scientists have employed the life course perspective into research on human development and aging. This theoretical framework emphasizes social experiences in historical time and the differential roles of cohorts on human development and aging (Elder et. al 2003) (Alwin et. al 2005). A crucial fact of the life course
…show more content…
perspective is that it is embedded in social structures and institutions in the form of social positions. This theoretical framework is driven by the role of social interactions, social organizations, and is hidden in the subsets of a society (Diewald 2009).
The life course perspective establishes three concepts of transitions, trajectories, and turning points that introduce changes in age structure and the social contexts in which people progress in a society. Transitions are changes in identities, roles, or contexts that occur on personal and social levels that bring opportunities for alternation of an individual’s behavior (Elder 1993). Transitions are established in trajectories which give them meaning and in the trajectories, have lifelong implications in shaping later events and experiences (Elder et. al 2003). Between transitions, there are durations defined as the distance between changes in the acquired role, thus long durations of time show stability in behavior and represent successive growth of the person in the transition. (Elder et. al 2003) (George 1993). Researchers focus on the mechanisms that historical and social events construct in life transitions (George 1993).
Trajectories are the sequencing of life experiences through the correlation between social and historical contexts (Elder et. al 2003) (George 2009). Trajectories identify between-individual experiences that predict within-individual trends of change and illustrate an individual’s stability (George 2009). The life course perspective reveals internal dynamics of the life course in which there is a dependence of forthcoming events on the life history in experiences, availability of resources, and turning points (Alwin et. al 2005). Turning points which are primarily referred to as “defining moments” from specific outcomes, alter the direction of the trajectory. For instance, becoming incarcerated, drafted into the military, or returning to school at an older age (Elder et. al 2003). In the words of Alwin and Wray (2005), “the life course is defined by events and transitions experienced by individuals and the sequences of roles followed by individuals over particular phases in their lives” (Alwin et. al 2005).
The social meanings of age impact the life course perspective through aging normative expectations and age markers like childhood or adolescence aging norms (Elder et. al 2003). Theorists such as Matilda Riley created a theory of age stratification which studies age cohort effects on social structures over the life span. In order to analyze historical effects on a cohort, the theory determines normative age-related patterns displayed in culture and social institutions that are responsive to social change (Elder 1994). Therefore, age represents a historical marker, including an understanding about the nature of life (Ryder 1965). The acknowledgement of age being attached to social and personal meanings brought greater attention to transitional timing and the life stage duration in the life course (Elder et. al 2003).
Trajectories depicts the timing and ordering of life events: graduation from school, employment, marriage, childbearing, retirement, and death. Trajectory methods are important tools for examining dynamics in the life course (Lynch et. al, George 2009). By definition, trajectory modeling refers to “a number of qualitatively different methods used to model even greater social phenomena” (Lynch et. al). Trajectory measurements utilize trajectory metrics, the types of trajectories: aggregate or disaggregated trajectories, and empirically deprived trajectories or those constructed by the investigator (Lynch et. al). Trajectory metrics are transition-based which rely on categorical measures, and level-based trajectories based on continuous measures (George 2009). A researcher’s question of analysis will determine which trajectory metric is applied. For example, research questions about depression may focus on depressive symptoms which require level-based trajectories whereas questions on depression recovery require transition-based trajectories. Secondly, considering aggregate trajectory means analyzing discrete patterns of change and stability within the sample compared to disaggregate trajectories which have substantial variability within the sample, and study distinctive patterns that are meaningful within the sample (George 2009). Finally, investigator construction of trajectories, researchers sort variable values into trajectory categories (George 2009). In contrast, empirically derived trajectories employ latent growth curve analysis (LCGA) and latent class analysis (LCA). In order to describe the sample effectively, latent growth curve analysis is executed and the analysis are presented in two stages. Comparing the two analysis models, LCA creates multiple disaggregate trajectories that fits on a longitudinal distribution (George 2009).
There are several limitations of constructed trajectories opposed to empirically derived trajectories. First, within the sample of constructed trajectories, a person can fit or cannot fit in each trajectory. Second, age-dependence and duration are ignored in the organization of trajectories in the sample (George 2009). Overall, researchers concentrate heavily on transitional sequencing, rather than changing components of transitions when constructing trajectories (Lynch et. al). Additionally, empirically derived trajectories have two limitations. First, empirically derived trajectories are not appropriate when testing claims about specific patterns of stability and change. Lastly, a trajectory can be unknown if the independent variable is opposing with multiple trajectories (George 2009). A solution would be to compare multiple different trajectories that are inversely related to the independent variables. Also, researchers should pay attention to the substantial effects that these three factors have on results of latent class analysis. The first factor is a change in the number and shape of the trajectories can occur in the length of follow-up and times of measurement. The second factor is the “duration and exposure length of independent variables can change the association between predictors and trajectories” (George 2009). The third factor is the shape of trajectories can alter the outcome with the inclusion of death. Moreover, results of LCA and LGCA may not capture all the variation that occurs in a sample over the time frame (George 2009).
The transition-based trajectory measurement is appropriate for my chosen topic of involuntary celibacy over the life course with the outcome of perceived likelihood of being sexually active later in the life course. Involuntary celibacy states “one who desires to have sex but is unable to find a willing partner” (Donnelly et. al 2001) (Carpenter 2010). This research explores the transitions in the sexual trajectories of involuntary celibates and how off-time the respondents are against normative sexual transitions perpetuated in a celibate life course. This literature has concluded three groups of involuntary celibates: virginal celibate, single celibate, and partnered celibate (Donnelly et. al 2001). The research study used transition-based trajectories meaning they created categories from major themes. Categories represented the variations in the themes removed from individual responses. When the categories were created, the researchers chose the most effective quotes to illustrate each category (Donnelly et. al 2001).
The conclusions of this study are all groups reported being “off-time” in their sexual behavior, however they are celibate for different reasons and consequences. For virgins, the timing issue was evident with the duration of their virginity lasting longer than their peers and were not normative in sexual activity. Singles accomplished the sex initiation, but the timing and sequencing of dating and relationship formation was different from the generalized sexual trajectory. They worry about the duration of their celibacy. Lastly, partnered celibates have achieved a normal sexual trajectory acceptable for older adults, however they expect the duration of sexual inactivity to last longer than their peers (Donnelly et. al 2001). This is consistent with the life course perspective, which emphasizes the significance of multiple transitions and trajectories.
References
George, Linda K. 2009. “Conceptualizing and Measuring Trajectories”. The Craft of Life Course Research, the Guilford Press, Chap. 8
Lynch, Scott M.
and Taylor, Miles. Forthcoming. “Trajectory Models for Aging Research”. Handbook of Aging and the Social Sciences, Academic Press, 8th Edition
Elder, Glen H., Johnson, Monica K., Crosnoe, Robert. 2003. “The Emergence and Development of Life Course Theory”. Handbook of Life Course, New York: Springer, pp. 3-19
House, James S. 1977. “The Three Faces of Social Psychology”. Sociometry, 40: 161-177
Donnelly, Denise, Burgess, Elisabeth, Anderson, Sally, Davis, Regina, and Dillard, Joy. 2001. “Involuntary Celibacy: A Life Course Analysis”. Journal of Sex Research, 38: 159-169
Carpenter, Laura M., 2010. “Gendered Sexuality over the Life Course: A Conceptual Framework”. Sociological Perspectives, 53: 155-177
Elder Jr., Glen H. 1994. “Time, Human Agency, and Social Change: Perspectives on the Life Course”. Social Psychology Quarterly, 57: 4-15
Alwin, Duane F. and Wray, Linda A. 2005. “A Life-Span Developmental Perspective on Social Status and Health”. Journals of Gerontology, 60B: 7–14
George, Linda K. 1993. “Sociological Perspectives on Life Transitions”. Annual Review of Sociology, 19: 353-373
Diewald, Martin and Mayer, Karl Ulrich. 2009. “The sociology of the life course and life span psychology: Integrated paradigm or complementing pathways?” Advances in Life Course Research, 14:
5–14
Thornton, James. 2003. “Life-Span Learning: A Developmental Perspective”. International Aging and Human Development Journal, 57: 55-76
perspective is that it is embedded in social structures and institutions in the form of social positions. This theoretical framework is driven by the role of social interactions, social organizations, and is hidden in the subsets of a society (Diewald 2009).
The life course perspective establishes three concepts of transitions, trajectories, and turning points that introduce changes in age structure and the social contexts in which people progress in a society. Transitions are changes in identities, roles, or contexts that occur on personal and social levels that bring opportunities for alternation of an individual’s behavior (Elder 1993). Transitions are established in trajectories which give them meaning and in the trajectories, have lifelong implications in shaping later events and experiences (Elder et. al 2003). Between transitions, there are durations defined as the distance between changes in the acquired role, thus long durations of time show stability in behavior and represent successive growth of the person in the transition. (Elder et. al 2003) (George 1993). Researchers focus on the mechanisms that historical and social events construct in life transitions (George 1993).
Trajectories are the sequencing of life experiences through the correlation between social and historical contexts (Elder et. al 2003) (George 2009). Trajectories identify between-individual experiences that predict within-individual trends of change and illustrate an individual’s stability (George 2009). The life course perspective reveals internal dynamics of the life course in which there is a dependence of forthcoming events on the life history in experiences, availability of resources, and turning points (Alwin et. al 2005). Turning points which are primarily referred to as “defining moments” from specific outcomes, alter the direction of the trajectory. For instance, becoming incarcerated, drafted into the military, or returning to school at an older age (Elder et. al 2003). In the words of Alwin and Wray (2005), “the life course is defined by events and transitions experienced by individuals and the sequences of roles followed by individuals over particular phases in their lives” (Alwin et. al 2005).
The social meanings of age impact the life course perspective through aging normative expectations and age markers like childhood or adolescence aging norms (Elder et. al 2003). Theorists such as Matilda Riley created a theory of age stratification which studies age cohort effects on social structures over the life span. In order to analyze historical effects on a cohort, the theory determines normative age-related patterns displayed in culture and social institutions that are responsive to social change (Elder 1994). Therefore, age represents a historical marker, including an understanding about the nature of life (Ryder 1965). The acknowledgement of age being attached to social and personal meanings brought greater attention to transitional timing and the life stage duration in the life course (Elder et. al 2003).
Trajectories depicts the timing and ordering of life events: graduation from school, employment, marriage, childbearing, retirement, and death. Trajectory methods are important tools for examining dynamics in the life course (Lynch et. al, George 2009). By definition, trajectory modeling refers to “a number of qualitatively different methods used to model even greater social phenomena” (Lynch et. al). Trajectory measurements utilize trajectory metrics, the types of trajectories: aggregate or disaggregated trajectories, and empirically deprived trajectories or those constructed by the investigator (Lynch et. al). Trajectory metrics are transition-based which rely on categorical measures, and level-based trajectories based on continuous measures (George 2009). A researcher’s question of analysis will determine which trajectory metric is applied. For example, research questions about depression may focus on depressive symptoms which require level-based trajectories whereas questions on depression recovery require transition-based trajectories. Secondly, considering aggregate trajectory means analyzing discrete patterns of change and stability within the sample compared to disaggregate trajectories which have substantial variability within the sample, and study distinctive patterns that are meaningful within the sample (George 2009). Finally, investigator construction of trajectories, researchers sort variable values into trajectory categories (George 2009). In contrast, empirically derived trajectories employ latent growth curve analysis (LCGA) and latent class analysis (LCA). In order to describe the sample effectively, latent growth curve analysis is executed and the analysis are presented in two stages. Comparing the two analysis models, LCA creates multiple disaggregate trajectories that fits on a longitudinal distribution (George 2009).
There are several limitations of constructed trajectories opposed to empirically derived trajectories. First, within the sample of constructed trajectories, a person can fit or cannot fit in each trajectory. Second, age-dependence and duration are ignored in the organization of trajectories in the sample (George 2009). Overall, researchers concentrate heavily on transitional sequencing, rather than changing components of transitions when constructing trajectories (Lynch et. al). Additionally, empirically derived trajectories have two limitations. First, empirically derived trajectories are not appropriate when testing claims about specific patterns of stability and change. Lastly, a trajectory can be unknown if the independent variable is opposing with multiple trajectories (George 2009). A solution would be to compare multiple different trajectories that are inversely related to the independent variables. Also, researchers should pay attention to the substantial effects that these three factors have on results of latent class analysis. The first factor is a change in the number and shape of the trajectories can occur in the length of follow-up and times of measurement. The second factor is the “duration and exposure length of independent variables can change the association between predictors and trajectories” (George 2009). The third factor is the shape of trajectories can alter the outcome with the inclusion of death. Moreover, results of LCA and LGCA may not capture all the variation that occurs in a sample over the time frame (George 2009).
The transition-based trajectory measurement is appropriate for my chosen topic of involuntary celibacy over the life course with the outcome of perceived likelihood of being sexually active later in the life course. Involuntary celibacy states “one who desires to have sex but is unable to find a willing partner” (Donnelly et. al 2001) (Carpenter 2010). This research explores the transitions in the sexual trajectories of involuntary celibates and how off-time the respondents are against normative sexual transitions perpetuated in a celibate life course. This literature has concluded three groups of involuntary celibates: virginal celibate, single celibate, and partnered celibate (Donnelly et. al 2001). The research study used transition-based trajectories meaning they created categories from major themes. Categories represented the variations in the themes removed from individual responses. When the categories were created, the researchers chose the most effective quotes to illustrate each category (Donnelly et. al 2001).
The conclusions of this study are all groups reported being “off-time” in their sexual behavior, however they are celibate for different reasons and consequences. For virgins, the timing issue was evident with the duration of their virginity lasting longer than their peers and were not normative in sexual activity. Singles accomplished the sex initiation, but the timing and sequencing of dating and relationship formation was different from the generalized sexual trajectory. They worry about the duration of their celibacy. Lastly, partnered celibates have achieved a normal sexual trajectory acceptable for older adults, however they expect the duration of sexual inactivity to last longer than their peers (Donnelly et. al 2001). This is consistent with the life course perspective, which emphasizes the significance of multiple transitions and trajectories.
References
George, Linda K. 2009. “Conceptualizing and Measuring Trajectories”. The Craft of Life Course Research, the Guilford Press, Chap. 8
Lynch, Scott M.
and Taylor, Miles. Forthcoming. “Trajectory Models for Aging Research”. Handbook of Aging and the Social Sciences, Academic Press, 8th Edition
Elder, Glen H., Johnson, Monica K., Crosnoe, Robert. 2003. “The Emergence and Development of Life Course Theory”. Handbook of Life Course, New York: Springer, pp. 3-19
House, James S. 1977. “The Three Faces of Social Psychology”. Sociometry, 40: 161-177
Donnelly, Denise, Burgess, Elisabeth, Anderson, Sally, Davis, Regina, and Dillard, Joy. 2001. “Involuntary Celibacy: A Life Course Analysis”. Journal of Sex Research, 38: 159-169
Carpenter, Laura M., 2010. “Gendered Sexuality over the Life Course: A Conceptual Framework”. Sociological Perspectives, 53: 155-177
Elder Jr., Glen H. 1994. “Time, Human Agency, and Social Change: Perspectives on the Life Course”. Social Psychology Quarterly, 57: 4-15
Alwin, Duane F. and Wray, Linda A. 2005. “A Life-Span Developmental Perspective on Social Status and Health”. Journals of Gerontology, 60B: 7–14
George, Linda K. 1993. “Sociological Perspectives on Life Transitions”. Annual Review of Sociology, 19: 353-373
Diewald, Martin and Mayer, Karl Ulrich. 2009. “The sociology of the life course and life span psychology: Integrated paradigm or complementing pathways?” Advances in Life Course Research, 14:
5–14
Thornton, James. 2003. “Life-Span Learning: A Developmental Perspective”. International Aging and Human Development Journal, 57: 55-76