Beyond Social and Family Generations

  • Sakari TaipaleEmail author


Here the theoretical foundations on which the arguments in the book are built are developed. The chapter begins by introducing the concept of generation as both a cohort-based and a family-based construction. A discussion then follows of how various forms of intergenerational solidarity and conflict shape the relationships between family generations. Particular attention is paid to the need for an approach that goes beyond any strict generational division and is more sensitive to the ways in which individual lives are interconnected through the use of digital technologies. To assist in this task, a post-Mannheimian approach to generational identity is outlined.


Cohort Family generation Generation Intergenerational solidary Life course Linked lives 


  1. Bengtson, V., Giarrusso, R., Mabry, J. B., & Silverstein, M. (2002). Solidarity, conflict, and ambivalence: Complementary or competing perspectives on intergenerational relationships? Journal of Marriage and Family, 64(3), 568–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bengtson, V., & Roberts, R. E. (1991). Intergenerational solidarity in aging families: An example of formal theory construction. Journal of Marriage and Family, 53(4), 856–870.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bengtson, V., Rosenthal, C., & Burton, L. (1996). Paradoxes of families and aging. In R. H. Binstock & L. George (Eds.), Handbook of aging and the social sciences (pp. 253–282). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bennett, A. (2009). “Heritage rock”: Rock music, representation and heritage discourse. Poetics, 37(5–6), 474–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blieszner, R. (2006). A lifetime of caring: Dimensions and dynamics in late-life close relationships. Personal Relationships, 13(1), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bolin, G. (2016). Media generations: Experience, identity and mediatised social change. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brückner, H., & Mayer, K. U. (2005). De-standardization of the life course: What it might mean? And if it means anything, whether it actually took place? Advances in Life Course Research, 9, 27–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Buckingham, D. (2006). Is there a digital generation? In D. Buckingham & R. Willett (Eds.), Digital generations: Children, young people, and new media (pp. 1–13). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  9. Burnett, J. (2010). Generations: The time machine in theory and practice. Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  10. Dolničar, V., Grošelj, D., Hrast, M. F., Vehovar, V., & Petrovčič, A. (2018). The role of social support networks in proxy Internet use from the intergenerational solidarity perspective. Telematics and Informatics, 35(2), 305–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Edmunds, J., & Turner, B. (Eds.). (2002a). Generational consciousness, narrative and politics. Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  12. Edmunds, J., & Turner, B. (2002b). Generations, culture and society. Buckingham: Open University.Google Scholar
  13. Elder, G. H., & Shanahan, M. (1997). The life course and human development. In R. M. Lerner (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Theoretical models of human development (pp. 665–715). New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
  14. Elder, G. H. (1994). Time, human aging and social change: Perspectives on the life course. Social Psychology Quarterly, 57(1), 4–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Elder, G. H. (1998). The life course as developmental theory. Child Development, 69(1), 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Elder, G. H. (1974). Children of the great depression: Social change in life experience. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Fortunati, L., & Taipale, S. (2017). Mobilities and the network of personal technologies: Refining the understanding of mobility structure. Telematics and Informatics, 34(2), 560–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ganito, C. (2018) Gendering the mobile phone: A life course approach. In S. Taipale, T.-A. Wilska, & C. Gilleard (Eds.), Digital technologies and generational identity: ICT usage across the life course (pp. 87–101). London & New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Guzdial, M., & Soloway, E. (2002). Teaching the Nintendo generation to program. Communications of the ACM, 45(4), 17–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hammarström, G. (2005). The construct of intergenerational solidarity in a lineage perspective: A discussion on underlying theoretical assumptions. Journal of Aging Studies, 19(1), 33–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Helsper, E. J., & Eynon, R. (2010). Digital natives: where is the evidence? British Educational Research Journal, 36(3), 503–520.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hepp, A., Berg, M., & Roitsch, C. (2017). A processual concept of media generation. Nordicom Review, 38(1), 109–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Herring, S. C. (2008). Questioning the generational divide: Technological exoticism and adult constructions of online youth identity. In D. Buckingham (Ed.), Youth, identity, and digital media (pp. 71–92)., The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  24. Lohmeier, C., & Böhling, R. (2017). Communicating family memory: Remembering in a changing media environment. Communications, 42(3), 277–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lüscher K., Hoff, A., Lamura, G., Renzi, M., Sánchez, M., Viry, G., de Salles Oliveira, P. (2015). Generations, intergenerational relationships, generational policy. A multilingual compendium. Retrieved from
  26. Lüscher, K., & Pillemer, K. (1998). Intergenerational ambivalence: A new approach to the study of parent-child relations in later life. Journal of Marriage and Family, 60(2), 413–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mannheim, K. (1952). Essay on the Problem of Generations. In P. Kecskemeti (Ed.), Essays on the sociology of knowledge by Karl Mannheim (pp. 276–320). New York, NY: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  28. McDaniel, S. (2007) Why generation(s) matter(s) to policy. Working paper 2017-11-22. Institute of Public & International Affairs. Salt Lake City: University of Utah.Google Scholar
  29. Morgan, L. A., & Kunkel, S. (2011). Aging, society and life course. New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar
  30. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rainie, L., & Wellman, B. (2012). Networked: The new social operating system. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Roos, J. P. (1987). Suomalainen elämä. Tutkimus tavallisten suomalaisten elämäkerroista. Helsinki: SKS.Google Scholar
  33. Rosales, A., & Fernández-Ardèvol, M. (2016). Beyond WhatsApp: older people and smartphones. Revista Română de Comunicare şi Relaţii Publice, 18(1), 27–47.Google Scholar
  34. Sarpila, O. (2012). Minun sukupolveni, sinun sukupolvesi. Hyvinvointikatsaus: sukupolvien väliset suhteet (pp. 14–18). Statistics Finland: Helsinki.Google Scholar
  35. Shanahan, M. J., & MacMillan, R. (2008). Biography and the sociological imagination. New York, NY: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  36. Silverstein, M., & Bengtson, V. L. (1997). Intergenerational solidarity and the structure of adult child–parent relationships in American families. American Journal of Sociology, 103(2), 429–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Strauss, W., & Howe, N. (1991). Generations. New York, NY: Harper Perennial.Google Scholar
  38. Taipale, S. (2016). Synchronicity matters: Defining the characteristics of digital generations. Information, Communication & Society, 19(1), 80–94.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Taipale, S., Petrovčič, A., & Dolničar, V. (2018). Intergenerational solidarity and ICT usage: Empirical insights from Finnish and Slovenian families. In S. Taipale, T.-A. Wilska, & C. Gilleard (Eds.), Digital technologies and generational identity: ICT usage across the life course (pp. 68–86). London & New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Taipale, S., Wilska, T.-A., & Gilleard, C. (Eds.). (2018). Digital technologies and generational identity: ICT usage across the life course. London & New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  41. Tammelin, M., & Anttila, T. (2017). Mobile life of middle aged employees: Fragmented time and softer schedules. In S. Taipale, T.-A. Wilska, & C. Gilleard (Eds.), Digital technologies and generational Identity: ICT usage across the life course (pp. 55–68). London & New York, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tapscott, D. (1998). Growing up digital: The rise of the Net Generation. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
  43. van Dijck, J. (2008). Digital photography: Communication, identity, memory. Visual Communication, 7(1), 57–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Widmer, E. D. (2016). Family configurations: A structural approach to family diversity. Abingdon, Oxon, NY: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Zimmermann, O., & Konietzka, D. (2017). Social disparities in destandardization—Changing family life course patterns in seven European countries. European Sociological Review, 34(1), 64–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of JyväskyläJyväskyläFinland

Personalised recommendations