Intervention, Modifiability and Plasticity in the Lifespan Developmental Approach

Presenter: Cameron J. Camp, PhD

This presentation focuses on success and things that work. You have to see clear outcomes and examples. A case study of applied lifespan developmental psychology is the work of Maria Montessori. Her first job was working with unteachable children. She developed new approaches based on doing and procedural learning working with preschool children in 1907. This is similar to issues faced in memory care units today.

Today in dementia care, we find the pharmacological approach is not helpful. There are things that can be done. With a lifespan approach, we can use approaches that work with children and use them with older adults. We need to emphasize what people are capable of doing.

Problem behaviors are a major concern. We need to focus on the cause of particular behaviors and to create opportunities to engage in useful behaviors for older adults with dementia. A video is included that shows children cooking and serving a meal for parents, emphasizing what children can do. This same approach can be used with older adults with dementia.

There is a budget challenge in good dementia care. What would people like to learn? How to make a place where people have a home? Present approaches produce excessive dependency. We need to focus on what people can do by using location learning and the procedural approach. How do you find peace and conflict resolution? Through respect, dignity and equality. This approach changes the way that people live. Approaches such as resident-driven communities, where residents are making their own choices or residents are making food for their family. Another video is included that demonstrates how a person with significant disability can create art.

The emphasis needs to be on thinking and seeing in a different way — on capability versus disability, enabling rather than caretaking and creating better outcomes.

Cameron J. Camp’s Presentationopens in new window (PDF, 1.7MB)

Presenter: Sherry L. Willis, PhD

Willis emphasizes that this kind of research takes a set of colleagues and students. It started with Paul Baltes, John Nesselroad and Carolyn Nesselroad and many students at Penn State. The focus was on plasticity in aging using the magnification perspective. Research was carried out on changing behavior in age groups using cognitive training. Younger adults showed more improvement than older adults. A different approach was to focus on older adults and showed that older adults can improve, demonstrating neuroplasticity.

A general assumption is that treatment will lead to improvement. Many approaches that have been used are difficult to evaluate. Research found that with strategy training there was improvement, but it’s difficult to evaluate and the results do not always transfer. Component specific approach, such as UFOV, has had success.

Approaches that have been used include computers or mobile devices. This includes adaptive training with baseline and then following subject improvement.

We are not only concerned with behavior but also change in neural functioning and structure. With the use of neural imaging, there can be measurement of behavior and relationship with change in structure. The outcomes are not really clear. There are a variety of approaches to training, and all have shown some success. It is suggested to get out of the lab and focus on the real world, such as through job training and focus on complex tasks.

Sherry L. Willis’s Presentationopens in new window (PDF, 2MB)

Presenter: Boris Baltes, PhD

This presentation is from an industrial/organizational psychology perspective with evidence from a work/family perspective. The proportion of older workers is increasing. We want to hold on to existing workers, and we want to attract older workers to new jobs. We need to know more about the motivation for working for older adults and younger workers. There is no evidence for large age-related differences.

Evidence in motives for working are changing. Issues such as employee assessments show that older adults may be more engaged. The Sloan Center for Aging and Work at Boston College have found that younger adults focus on satisfaction and training and development while mature adults and older adults focus on perception of inclusion. Motivational issues include growth, social motives and security motives. There is a link between age and work motives.

Lifespan models have been proposed, such as Levinson’s, with growth need and future time perspective included. Other issues include time left at work. One can look to Social Emotional Selectivity Theory by Carstensen and Selective Optimization and Compensation Theory by Baltes and Baltes as approaches.

One can look to changes in motives over the lifespan. Work/family balance needs to be considered for workers at all ages. Organizations are interested in satisfaction and turnover. Older workers report lower levels of work/family conflicts. Younger adults focus on careers, while older adults focus on private life, coping and flexibility fit. Workers from 53 to 61 report lower flexibility fit and want more.

What do older workers want? What makes people work longer, if not financial motives? We look to examples, such as CVS, where older pharmacists can work at different locations, such as being near extended family part of the year. This has led to individuals delaying retirement. Older nurses are encouraged to continue by using flex-time and flex-place as well as making adjustments to physical demands on the job.

Boris Baltes’s Presentationopens in new window (PDF, 353KB)