Abstract
Since most evaluations of intergenerational programs (IGPs) focus on the perspective of a single stakeholder group concerning the benefit for themselves, we compared perceptions of multiple stakeholders: older adults, younger adults, and IGP organizers concerning the impact of IGPs on older and young participants. Using a mixed-methods approach, we collected data from thirteen community-based IGPs. The quantitative analyses included a comparison of the different stakeholder groups via ANOVAs and chi-square analyses. In order to identify the reasons for different attribution ratings among stakeholders, we conducted a qualitative analysis of the stakeholders’ comments and responses to open-ended questions using a thematic analysis approach. Overall, participants rated benefits to themselves lower than attributed to them by their counterparts. Differences in ratings may be explained by differences in expectations and needs, cognitive dissonance, as well as a lack of awareness about other participants’ experiences. Given the discrepancies in perception of impact, it is vital to seek input from all stakeholders in order to understand their respective needs and expectations, construct a balanced evaluation, and improve IGP processes and outcomes. Studying a single stakeholder group for project evaluation is likely to provide only one perspective, whereas including all points of view provides a more complete picture.
Highlights
An aging population that is headed toward outnumbering younger generations raises a range of challenges and requires responses by communities and policymakers [1]
Among the goals of intergenerational programs (IGPs) are the promotion of intergenerational understanding, alleviation of negative stereotypes [2] and reduction in segregation of older adults (OAs) [3]
As reported elsewhere [35], OAs in the assistance type IGPs were less likely to be married in comparison to those in the topic-focused type IPGs, had fewer years of education, and reported worse health status (p ≤ 0.01 for all)
Summary
An aging population that is headed toward outnumbering younger generations raises a range of challenges and requires responses by communities and policymakers [1]. OAs reported benefits of community- and school-based IGPs, such as improved physical and cognitive activity [17,18], increased generativity [8,19], increased social activity [20], higher self-esteem or sense of accomplishment [8,15,21,22,23], decreased stress [24], and improved attitudes towards YAs and children [15,22,25,26]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: International journal of environmental research and public health
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
