Article thumbnail

Intergenerational Communication Satisfaction and Age Boundaries in Bulgaria and the United States

By Howard Giles, Christopher Hajek, Tolya Stoitsova and Charles W. Choi

Abstract

This paper examines Bulgarian and American young adults’ perceptions of prior experiences of intergenerational communication. Irrespective of culture, as age of target increased from young adult to middle-aged and elderly adult, so did attributions of benevolence, norms of politeness and deference, and communicative respect and avoidance; conversely, attributions of personal vitality and communication satisfaction decreased linearly. However, American youth reported more of a tendency to avoid, but expressed more respect when communicating with, older adults than their Bulgarian counterparts. In both settings, young adults’ avoidant communication with older people negatively, and the norm of politeness positively, predicted intergenerational communication satisfaction. In Bulgaria only, age stereotypes also predicted communication satisfaction whereas only in the USA was communicative respect a predictor

Topics: Original Article
Publisher: Springer US
OAI identifier: oai:pubmedcentral.nih.gov:2871181
Provided by: PubMed Central

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (2006). About children, youth, violence and mass media. In E. Marinova (Ed.), Moral socialization of children and youth in Bulgaria (pp. 164–173). Veliko Turnovo: Faber.
  2. (2010). Age group identities, stereotypes, and communication. In
  3. (1998). Age identification: A comparison between Finnish and North American cultures.
  4. (2000). Age vitality across eleven nations.
  5. (2002). Aging, data show.
  6. (2005). Beliefs about intergenerational communication across the lifespan: Middle age and the roles of age stereotyping and filial piety.
  7. (2007). Brussels: “Strengthening the connections between generations”,
  8. (2007). Bulgarian Economy Threatened by Rapid Aging.
  9. (2002). Challenging intergenerational stereotypes: Across eastern and western cultures. In
  10. (1995). Changing the way we talk with elders: Promoting health using the communication enhancement model.
  11. (2004). Communication climates and practices.
  12. (2006). Crisis intergenerational distance. In E. Marinova (Ed.), Moral socialization of children and youth in Bulgaria (pp. 248–259). Veliko Turnovo: Faber.
  13. (2010). Cult Gerontol
  14. (2010). Cult Gerontol (2010) 25:133–147 145Drury,
  15. (2004). Cultural and gender influences on age identification.
  16. (2004). Cultural issues in communication and aging. In
  17. (2007). Culture and communication across age groups: People’s perceptions of intra- and intergenerational communication in Japan, the Philippines, and the United States.
  18. (2001). Cultures consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations. Thousand Oaks,
  19. (2002). Elderly living arrangements in Bulgaria, The Czech
  20. (2000). Evaluations by staff, residents, and community seniors of patronizing speech in the nursing home: Impact of passive, assertive, or humorous responses.
  21. (2008). from http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2004_2009/documents/pv/ 676/676788/676788bg.pdf (in
  22. (2006). From modern to post-modern moral socialization of children and youth. In E. Marinova (Ed.), Moral socialization of children and youth in Bulgaria (pp. 13–36). Veliko Turnovo: Faber.
  23. (2008). Half of the unemployed over 50 years—Discriminated. Retrieved on
  24. (2001). Harmoniesand tensionsin Chinese intergenerational communication: Younger and older adults’ accounts.
  25. (2006). Health of aging women in Hungary. In
  26. (2003). Helicobacter pylori infection in elderly Bulgarian patients.
  27. (2004). Immunological markers contributing to successful aging in Bulgarians.
  28. (2004). Inter- and intragroup perspectives on intergenerational communication.
  29. (2003). Intergenerational communication across cultures: Young people’s perceptions of conversations with family elders, nonfamily elders, and same-age peers.
  30. (2001). Intergenerational communication across the lifespan. Mahwah:
  31. (1999). Intergenerational communication across the Pacific Rim: The impact of filial piety. In
  32. (2007). Intergenerational communication beliefs across the lifespan: Comparative data from India. Communication Reports,
  33. (2005). Intergenerational communication beliefs across the lifespan: Data from Ghana and South Africa.
  34. (2010). Intergenerational communication practices. In
  35. (2009). National and organizational cultures. Sofia:
  36. (1994). Patronizing the young: forms and evaluations.
  37. (2008). Perceptions of intergenerational communication by young, middle-aged, and older Canadian adults.
  38. (2003). Perceptions of intra- and intergenerational communication among adults in Thailand, Japan, and the U.S.A. Communication Reports,
  39. (2001). Perceptions of patronizing speech by older women in nursing homes and in the community: Impact of cognitive ability and place of residence.
  40. (1978). Personality of the teenager. Sofia: South Publishing House.
  41. (2001). Psychology. (Textbook for 9th grade in secondary schools in Bulgaria). Sofia: Prosveta.
  42. (2007). Representation of the sexes in language. In
  43. (1996). Retrospecting intergenerational conversations: The perspective of young adults.
  44. (1998). Self-concept and psychosocial identity: Life transition to maturity. Sofia: South Publishing House.
  45. (2004). The role of age stereotypes in interpersonal communication.
  46. (2007). Understanding communication and aging. Thousand Oaks:
  47. (2009). What is hidden behind the newspapers’ content. In