Big and Mini: A Promising Intergenerational Program for Social Connections
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Big and Mini Program
1.2. The Present Study
1.2.1. What Were the Experiences of Older and Young Adults in the Big and Mini Program? Specifically, the Study Aimed to Examine
1.2.2. What Were the Benefits and Lessons Learned While Participating in the Virtual Intergenerational Program, Big and Mini, for Dyads Participants? Especially, This Study Aimed to Explore
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Participants
2.2. Measures
2.2.1. Quantitative Survey
2.2.2. Qualitative Open Questions
- (1)
- Please explain why you chose to participate in the Big and Mini program? Or what are your expectations about this program?
- (2)
- What aspect of the program that you like/benefit the best?
- (3)
- What aspect of the program that you like the least?
2.3. Data Analyses
3. Results
3.1. Sample Characteristics
3.2. Quantitative Data Analyses
3.2.1. Correlation among Key Variables
3.2.2. Group Comparisons on Key Measurements
3.3. Qualitative Data Analyses
3.3.1. Reasons/Expectations to Join the Program
“As an elder, I have always wanted to have a diverse life, including intergenerational connections. When I saw Big and Mini, I knew this not only could be a great way to stay connected to people in general because of COVID, but it could also fulfill my desire to be interacting with someone a lot younger than I and keep in the youth loop.”(B4)
“I typically enjoy older people and feel that intergenerational exchange is healthy for everyone involved. I wanted to be there for an older person who may need some company right now, and also experience the benefit of listening to and learning from them.”(M45)
“I wanted to support young people who were experiencing social isolation and I also wanted to support the young people who took the initiative and created the program.”(B17)
“I felt that I could share my experience in life—have lived and worked in 5 countries, have traveled to almost 50 countries, have been involved in charity projects and have been working for almost 50 years.”(B12)
“I joined because I thought it would be a great way to not only gain wisdom about what would be a good career path for me (as a fresh graduate with lots of decisions to make), but also because it’s incredibly important right now that the high-risk community does not feel lonely.”(M13)
“I wanted to give back in some way during the pandemic, and this provided an easy option that was also beneficial for me. I’ve lost all of my grandparents, so having a connection with an older person was something that I was missing. I also strongly care about combatting loneliness in our society.”(M16)
“I’d like to do some volunteering over the summer, talk to someone who might experience loneliness because of their old age, tech unsavviness, or physical isolation. I’d like to learn something from a total stranger, too.”(M33)
3.3.2. Best Liked Aspects of the Big and Mini Program
“Connection of a young adult to an older adult and speaking and sharing your thoughts, knowledge, perspectives and mainly culture. And of course, meeting my BIG, was just the best thing ever.”(M8)
“I love how open it is with my Big they did a wonderful job matching us. The chat function is also very nice so we can still talk during the week if we think of each other.”(M4)
“Learning new things from my Mini, such as about the summers he spends in Peru with his cousins, Peruvians recipes (which I have cooked and enjoyed), information about ancient Roman history (his big interest), because he is bilingual, that has incentivized me to get serious about improving the limited Spanish I know (have a 150-day streak going on DuoLingo (have met my daily goal for 150 consecutive days), etc. My Mini has enriched my life in many ways. On our call this morning, we both lamented having to learn ‘Statistics’ in college.”(B5)
“My ‘mini’ is faithful in keeping our conversations going, and seems to be glad to talk with me. That means a lot. And I love getting to know her and being a listening, understanding—and maybe even helpful—ear.”(B31)
“I so enjoy my weekly meetings with my mini and that she e-mails me when she has some news. I actually feel that I am a part of her life now as she is a part of mine.”(B7)
3.3.3. Least Liked Aspects of the Big and Mini Program
“I think the online dashboard could be easier to use both for me and my Big. My Big wasn’t clear on exactly how to connect to our meeting, and we had trouble communicating on the dashboard because we never checked it. After my Big was a no-show the first time, I sent an email as instructed and never received a response. Thankfully my Big and I exchanged emails and were able to find a time to meet.”(M16)
4. Discussion
4.1. Study Limitations
4.2. Implications and Conclusions
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- National Council on Aging. NCA Annual Report. Available online: https://www.ncoa.org/page/ncoa-annual-report-2020 (accessed on 16 November 2020).
- Morrow-Howell, N.; Galucia, N.; Swinford, E. Recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic: A focus on older adults. J. Aging Soc. Policy 2020, 32, 526–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Heape, A. Loneliness and Social Isolation in Older Adults: The Effects of a Pandemic. Perspect. ASHA Spec. Interest Groups 2021, 6, 1729–1736. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. Social Isolation and Loneliness in Older Adults: Opportunities for the Health Care System; National Academies Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Andrea, P.; Stojanovic, J.; La Milia, D.I.; Duplaga, M.; Grysztar, M.; Moscato, U.; Onder, G.; Collamati, A.; Ricciardi, W.; Magnavita, N. Interventions targeting loneliness and social isolation among the older people: An update systematic review. Exp. Gerontol. 2018, 102, 133–144. [Google Scholar]
- Tamar, R.; Josiah, N.; Baptiste, D. Loneliness in the time of COVID-19: Impact on older adults. J. Adv. Nurs. 2021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cigna. Cigna Takes Action to Combat the Rise of Loneliness and Improve Mental Wellness in America. Cigna. Available online: https://www.multivu.com/players/English/8670451-cigna-2020-loneliness-index/ (accessed on 23 January 2020).
- Gregory, M.A.; Legg, N.K.; Senay, Z.; Barden, J.-L.; Phiri, P.; Rathod, S.; Turner, B.J.; Paterson, T.S.E. Mental Health and Social Connectedness across the Adult Lifespan in the Context of the COVID-19 Pandemic. Can. J. Aging/La Rev. Can. Du Vieil. 2021, 40, 554–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ellie, L.; Benjamin, K.S.; Chun, S.K.; Skalisky, J.; Hammond, L.E.; Mezulis, A.H. Loneliness among young adults during COVID-19 pandemic: The mediational roles of social media use and social support seeking. J. Soc. Clin. Psychol. 2020, 39, 708–726. [Google Scholar]
- Natasha, R.M.; Freeman, J.Y.A.; Rapee, R.M.; Richardson, C.E.; Oar, E.L.; Fardouly, J. Risk and protective factors for prospective changes in adolescent mental health during the COVID-19 pandemic. J. Youth Adolesc. 2021, 50, 44–57. [Google Scholar]
- Graham, W.; Volodarsky, S.; Hecht, S.; Saxe, L. Lonely in lockdown: Predictors of emotional and mental health difficulties among Jewish young adults during the COVID-19 pandemic. Contemp. Jew. 2021, 41, 141–159. [Google Scholar]
- Ong, A.; Burrow, A. As COVID-19 Spreads, so do Negative Stereotypes of the Young and the Old. Scientific American. Available online: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/as-covid-19-spreads-so-do-negative-stereotypes-of-the-young-and-the-old/ (accessed on 7 April 2020).
- Dean, J.; Goodlad, R. Supporting Community Participation: The Role and Impact of Befriending; Pavilion: Brighton, UK, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- Bethany, G.; Larkin, H.; Moorhouse, A.; Oomen, T. Intergenerational programs for persons with dementia: A scoping review. J. Gerontol. Soc. Work 2015, 58, 357–378. [Google Scholar]
- Kathy, L.; Jarrott, S.E.; Juckett, L.A. Documented outcomes for older adults in intergenerational programming: A scoping review. J. Intergener. Relatsh. 2020, 18, 113–138. [Google Scholar]
- Teresa, M.; Midão, L.; Veiga, S.M.; Dequech, L.; Busse, G.; Bertram, M.; McDonald, A. Intergenerational programs review: Study design and characteristics of intervention, outcomes, and effectiveness. J. Intergener. Relatsh. 2019, 17, 93–109. [Google Scholar]
- CDC. Loneliness and Social Isolation Linked to Serious Health Conditions. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/aging/publications/features/lonely-older-adults.html (accessed on 21 March 2022).
- “The Power of Friendship across Generations”. The Wall Street Journal. Available online: https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-power-of-friendship-across-generations-11614717112 (accessed on 2 February 2022).
- De Jong, G.J.; van Tilburg, T. The De Jong Gierveld short scales for emotional and social loneliness: Tested on data from 7 countries in the UN generations and gender surveys. Eur. J. Ageing 2010, 7, 121–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Diener, E.D.; Emmons, R.A.; Larsen, R.J.; Griffin, S. The satisfaction with life scale. J. Personal. Assess. 1985, 49, 71–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mariana, L.; Torres-Castro, S.; Rosas-Carrasco, O. Psychometric properties of the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS): Secondary analysis of the Mexican Health and Aging Study. Health Qual. Life Outcomes 2016, 14, 170. [Google Scholar]
- William, P.; Diener, E. Review of the satisfaction with life scale. In Assessing Well-Being; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2009; pp. 101–117. [Google Scholar]
- Maryann, F.; Saltstone, R.; Hughes, S. The Fraboni Scale of Ageism (FSA): An attempt at a more precise measure of ageism. Can. J. Aging/La Rev. Can. Du Vieil. 1990, 9, 56–66. [Google Scholar]
- Linda, J.A.; Johnson, J.A. Undergraduate attitudes toward the elderly: The role of knowledge, contact and aging anxiety. Educ. Gerontol. 2008, 35, 1–14. [Google Scholar]
- Robert, C.I.; Kurth, M.L. Racial differences in attitudes toward aging, aging knowledge, and contact. Educ. Gerontol. 2018, 44, 40–53. [Google Scholar]
- Mangen, D.J.; Bengtson, V.L.; Landry, P.H., Jr. Measurement of Intergenerational Relations; Sage Publications, Inc.: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1988. [Google Scholar]
- Kondracki, N.L.; Wellman, N.S.; Amundson, D.R. Content analysis: Review of methods and their applications in nutrition education. J. Nutr. Educ. Behav. 2002, 34, 224–230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Creswell, J.W.; Miller, D.L. Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Pract. 2000, 39, 124–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rachel, U.; Wu, L.; MacLeod, S.; Tkatch, R.; Huang, J.; Kraemer, S.; Schaeffer, J.; Yeh, C. The impact of COVID-19 on older adults: Results from an annual survey. Geriatr. Nurs. 2022, 44, 131–136. [Google Scholar]
- Evelina, S.; Hermida, A.P.; Gerberi, D.J.; Lapid, M.I. Emotional resilience of older adults during COVID-19: A systematic review of studies of stress and well-being. Clin. Gerontol. 2022, 45, 4–19. [Google Scholar]
- Wyatt, K.; True, S.; Biniek, J.F.; Cubanski, J.; Orgera, K.; Garfield, R. One in four older adults report anxiety or depression amid the COVID-19 pandemic. KFF-Medicare Retrieved Oct. 2020, 9, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Gallegos, M.I.; Zaring-Hinkle, B.; Bray, J.H. COVID-19 pandemic stresses and relationships in college students. Fam. Relat. 2022, 71, 29–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Caroline, G.; Bailly, N. Intergenerational programs: What can school-age children and older people expect from them? A systematic review. Eur. J. Ageing 2019, 16, 363–376. [Google Scholar]
- Ng, R.; Allore, H.G.; Trentalange, M.; Monin, J.K.; Levy, B.R. Increasing negativity of age stereotypes across 200 years: Evidence from a database of 400 million words. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0117086. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Thompson, E.H., Jr.; Weaver, A.J. Making connections: The legacy of an intergenerational program. Gerontologist 2016, 56, 909–918. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ayalon, L. There is nothing new under the sun: Ageism and intergenerational tension in the age of the COVID-19 outbreak. Int. Psychogeriatr. 2020, 32, 1221–1224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Whatley, M.C.; Siegel, A.L.M.; Schwartz, S.T.; Silaj, K.M.; Castel, A.D. Younger and older adults’ mood and expectations regarding aging during COVID-19. Gerontol. Geriatr. Med. 2020, 6, 2333721420960259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Barna Group. Two-Thirds of Americans Have Multigenerational Friendships. Available online: https://www.barna.com/research/multigenerational-friendships/ (accessed on 20 February 2022).
- Bezich, L. Intergenerational Friendships Can Help Older Adults Stay Energized. PhillyVoice. 2022. Available online: https://www.phillyvoice.com/intergenerational-relationships-friendships-seniors-young-people-/ (accessed on 6 February 2022).
- Aguilera-Hermida, A.; Anderson, E.; Negron, V.; Sánchez-Alcalde, R.; Hackett, E.; Cunliffe, S.; Talamo, E. Loneliness and intergenerational activities between university students and older adults. Innov. Aging 2018, 2 (Suppl. S1), 966. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yoh, M.; Ohba, H.; Yasunaga, M.; Nonaka, K.; Takeuchi, R.; Nishi, M.; Sakuma, N.; Uchida, H.; Shinkai, S.; Fujiwara, Y. The effect of intergenerational programs on the mental health of elderly adults. Aging Ment. Health 2015, 19, 306–314. [Google Scholar]
- Bernstein, J. The Power of Intergenerational Connections to Reduce Loneliness. Next Avenue (2021). Available online: https://www.nextavenue.org/intergenerational-connections-loneliness/ (accessed on 30 January 2022).
- Teater, B. Intergenerational programs to promote active aging: The experiences and perspectives of older adults. Act. Adapt. Aging 2016, 40, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bosak, S. (n.d.). Benefits of Intergenerational Connections. Available online: https://www.legacyproject.org/guides/intergenbenefits.html (accessed on 4 February 2022).
- Belgrave, M.J.; Keown, D.J. Examining cross-age experiences in a distance-based intergenerational music project: Comfort and expectations in collaborating with opposite generation through “virtual” exchanges. Front. Med. 2018, 5, 214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
Variables | N | Percentage | Mean (SD) | Range | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Age | 61 | 68.97 (7.30) | 51–86 | ||
Educational level | |||||
Some college | 14 | 22.2% | |||
Bachelor’s degree | 17 | 27.0% | |||
Graduate or professional degree | 32 | 50.8% | |||
Gender | |||||
Man | 14 | 22.2% | |||
Woman | 46 | 73.0% | |||
Other | 1 | 1.6% | |||
Race | |||||
White | 55 | 87.3% | |||
Non-white | 7 | 11.1% | |||
Marital status | |||||
Never married | 10 | 15.9% | |||
Married/cohabiting | 25 | 39.7% | |||
Widowed | 10 | 15.9% | |||
Divorced | 16 | 25.4% | |||
Separated/Others | 2 | 3.2% | |||
People who live together now | |||||
Live alone | 31 | 49.2% | |||
Live with spouse | 19 | 30.2% | |||
Live with others | 10 | 15.9% | |||
Self-rated health | 62 | 3.65 (0.96) | 1–5 | ||
Financial hardship | 62 | 1.40 (0.66) | 1–5 | ||
ADL | 60 | 0.02 (0.13) | 0–7 | ||
IADL | 62 | 0.65 (1.28) | 0–8 | ||
Length in the program | 59 | 3.44 (2.09) | 0–8 | ||
Satisfaction with the program | 60 | 3.65 (1.44) | 1–5 | ||
Stress at the beginning of COVID-19 | 60 | 3.20 (1.23) | 1–5 | ||
Stress compared to before COVID-19 | |||||
Higher than usual | 24 | 38.1% | |||
About the same | 30 | 47.6% | |||
Lower than usual | 9 | 14.3% | |||
Frequency of support | |||||
Never | 35 | 55.6% | |||
A few times | 17 | 27.0% | |||
Once a week or less | 7 | 11.1% | |||
Several times a week | 4 | 6.3% | |||
Loneliness | 60 | 15.57 (4.18) | 6–30 | ||
Satisfaction with life | 57 | 23.79 (7.92) | 5–35 | ||
Intergenerational closeness | 53 | 7.25 (2.06) | 3–9 |
Variables | N | Percentage | Mean (SD) | Range | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Age | 45 | 24.36 (7.79) | 18–50 | ||
Educational level | |||||
Less than High School | 4 | 7.5% | |||
High School | 3 | 5.7% | |||
Some College | 29 | 54.7% | |||
Bachelor’s Degree | 7 | 13.2% | |||
Graduate or Professional Degree | 9 | 17.0% | |||
Gender | |||||
Man | 10 | 18.9% | |||
Woman | 42 | 79.2% | |||
Race | |||||
White | 24 | 45.3% | |||
Asian | 20 | 37.7% | |||
African American/Hispanic/Others | 8 | 15.1% | |||
Marital status | |||||
Never married | 44 | 83.0% | |||
Married/cohabiting | 6 | 11.3% | |||
Others | 2 | 3.8% | |||
People who live together now | |||||
Live alone | 11 | 20.8% | |||
Live with parent(s) | 13 | 24.5% | |||
Live with roommate | 16 | 30.2% | |||
Live with spouse/Sibling/Others | 12 | 22.6% | |||
Employment | |||||
Full-time college student | 25 | 47.2% | |||
Full-time employee | 10 | 18.9% | |||
Part-time employee/part-time student | 5 | 9.4% | |||
Others | 12 | 22.6% | |||
Self-rated health | 52 | 3.79 (0.96) | 1–5 | ||
Financial hardship | 52 | 1.60 (0.85) | 1–5 | ||
Length in program | 49 | 3.49 (1.99) | 0–8 | ||
Satisfaction with program | 51 | 3.96 (1.17) | 1–5 | ||
Stress at the beginning of COVID-19 | 52 | 2.48 (1.00) | 1–5 | ||
Stress compared to before COVID-19 | |||||
Higher than usual | 20 | 37.7% | |||
About the same | 28 | 52.8% | |||
Lower than usual | 4 | 7.5% | |||
Frequency of support | |||||
Never | 18 | 34.0% | |||
A few times since pandemic | 21 | 39.6% | |||
Once a week or less | 11 | 20.8% | |||
Several times a week | 2 | 3.8% | |||
Loneliness | 50 | 15.24 (4.27) | 6–30 | ||
Attitude towards aging | 46 | 46.76 (8.16) | 29–116 | ||
Intergenerational closeness | 46 | 7.00 (2.08) | 3–9 |
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. Loneliness | 1 | |||||
2. Life satisfaction | −0.55 *** | 1 | ||||
3. High stress compared to before COVID-19 | 0.35 ** | −0.37 ** | 1 | |||
4. Length in program | −0.00 | 0.05 | 0.02 | 1 | ||
5. Program satisfaction | 0.22 | 0.18 | 0.00 | 0.25 | 1 | |
6. Intergenerational closeness | −0.20 | 0.18 | −0.12 | 0.24 | 0.58 *** | 1 |
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1. Loneliness | 1 | |||||
2. Ageism | 0.19 | 1 | ||||
3. High stress compared to before COVID-19 | 0.12 | −0.08 | 1 | |||
4. Length in program | −0.08 | −0.44 ** | 0.29 * | 1 | ||
5. Program satisfaction | −0.16 | −0.45 ** | 0.10 | 0.07 | 1 | |
6. Intergenerational closeness | −0.11 | −0.49 ** | 0.00 | 0.22 | 0.84 *** | 1 |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Xu, L.; Fields, N.L.; Chen, Z.; Zhou, A.; Merchant, A.; Zhou, A. Big and Mini: A Promising Intergenerational Program for Social Connections. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19, 4566. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19084566
Xu L, Fields NL, Chen Z, Zhou A, Merchant A, Zhou A. Big and Mini: A Promising Intergenerational Program for Social Connections. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2022; 19(8):4566. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19084566
Chicago/Turabian StyleXu, Ling, Noelle L. Fields, Zhirui Chen, Allen Zhou, Aditi Merchant, and Anthony Zhou. 2022. "Big and Mini: A Promising Intergenerational Program for Social Connections" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, no. 8: 4566. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19084566
APA StyleXu, L., Fields, N. L., Chen, Z., Zhou, A., Merchant, A., & Zhou, A. (2022). Big and Mini: A Promising Intergenerational Program for Social Connections. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(8), 4566. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19084566