INTERGENERATIONAL PROGRAMMING: ATTITUDES OF CHILDREN AND
PERCEPTIONS OF OLDER ADULT PARTICIPANTS

by
Shannon Ableson-Toronitz
B.Sc., University of Victoria, 1993

A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF EDUCATION
in
COUNSELING

© ShannonAbleson-Toronitz
THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTHERN BRITISH COLUMBIA

May, 1997
All rights reserved. This work may not be reproduced
in whole or in part, by photocopy or other means
without the permission of the author.

Abstract
The purpose of this study was to extend the intergenerational research by examining
children's attitudes toward older adults and older adults' perceptions of children
following participation in intergenerational programs. The connection between
children's attitudes toward the elderly and the characteristics and perceptions of older
adults in intergenerational programs appears to be overlooked in the intergenerational
literature. The question arises whether intergenerational contact within long-term care
facilities can result in childrens' positive attitudes toward the elderly when participants
in nursing homes tend to fulfill the negative physical and behavioral stereotypes that
perpetuate negative attitudes toward the elderly. Thirty-six, elementary students and
twenty elderly institutionalized residents participated bi-weekly in two programs: (a) a
general program with residents in a main facility, and (b) a dementia program with
residents in a dementia unit. Students completed the modified Analysis of Attitudes of
Students for the purpose of deductively examining the relationships between the
variables of gender, program affiliation, and number of years of participation.
Statistical analyses identified that: (a) there was no significant difference in attitude
between students in the general and dementia programs, (b) there was no significant
difference in attitude between male and female students, and (c) students participating
for two years demonstrated a significantly more positive attitude than did those
participating for one year. Students in both the general and dementia programs
provided more positive than negative responses when they were asked what they liked
and did not like about the programs. Residents in the general program were
interviewed using the modified Older Adult Interview for the purpose of deductively
exploring the perceptions of the residents tow~rd the children and the program.
Residents in the general program provided more positive responses than either negative
or neutral responses in reference to the program and the children. In the general
program, both the residents and the students identified many aspects of the program
that they liked and only a few aspects they disliked.
lll

CONTENTS

Abstract ................................................................................................. iii
Contents ................................................................................................. iv
ListofTables ........................................................................................... vi
Acknowledgments ..................................................................................... vii
Chapter One

INTRODUCTION .............................................................. 1
lntergenerational Programming ........................................... 2
Purpose of Research ........................................................ 4

Chapter Two

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ........................................... 6
lntergenerational Contact in Society ...................................... 6
lntergenerational Programming ........................................... 9
Attitudes ...................................................................... 15
Childrens' Attitudes Prior to Intergenerational Programming ......... 15
Childrens' Attitudes and lntergenerational Programming .............. 21
Perceptions of Older Adults and Intergenerational Programming ..... 30
Summary of the Literature Review ....................................... 35

Chapter Three

MEfHOD ....................................................................... 38
Subjects ...................................................................... 39
Instruments .................................................................. 42
Research Design ............................................................ 43
Procedures ................................................................... 45

Chapter Four

RESULTS ........................................................................ 53
Item Analysis of the Modified Analysis of Attitudes
of Students Questionnaire ............................................. 53
Results of the Modified Analysis of Attitudes of Students
Questionnaire ........................................................... 55
Results of the Modified Older Adult Interview .......................... 59

Chapter Five

DISCUSSION ................................................................... 61
Overview of Study .......................................................... 61
Results ....................................................................... 62
Research Results and the lntergenerational Literature .................. 63
Limitations ................................................................... 65
Areas for Future Research ................................................. 68
Summary ..................................................................... 70

References ...................................................................................... : ....... 71

lV

Appendices

APPENDIX A- Items and Standard Explanations for the
Modified Analysis of Attitudes of Students Questionnaire ............. 78
APPENDIX B- Modified Older Adult Interview ........................... 81
APPENDIX C- Letter of Consent for Parents .............................. 82
APPENDIX D- Letter of Consent for Hillside School,
Valleyview Lodge, and School District #57 ............................. 84
APPENDIX E- Statistical Formulas and Formula Definitions
in Analysis ................................................................... 85
APPENDIX F- Item Analysis of Responses to the Modified
Analysis of Attitudes of Students Questionnaire ........................ 87
APPENDIX G- Proportion of Students Responding
Positively and Neutrally on the Modified Analysis
of Attitudes of Students Questionnaire ................................... 90
APPENDIX H- Summary of Codeable Responses to the
Modified Older Adult Interview ................................... . ....... 93
APPENDIX 1- Distribution of Codeable Responses to the
Modified Older Adult Interview ........................................... 94
APPENDIX J- Summary of Codeable Responses to
Question Eight of the Modified Older Adult Interview ................. 95
APPENDIX K- Summary of Codeable Responses to Question
Twelve of the Modified Older Adult Interview .......................... 96

v

TABLES

1.

Summary of General and Dementia Intergenerational Participants ...................... 39

2.

Summary of Characteristics of General and Dementia Programs ....................... 40

3.

Positive Descriptive Responses from General Program Residents
to the Question, "Can you describe your buddy for me?" ............................... 52

4.

A Summary of the Item Discrimination Results of the Modified
Analysis of Attitudes of Students Questionnaire ......................................... 55

5.

Distribution of Student Scores on the Modified Analysis of Attitudes of
Students Questionnaire ....................................................................... 56

6.

Frequencies for Responses to the Question, "What do you not like about
visiting with the senior citizens at the Valleyview Lodge?" ..... . ........................ 57

7.

Program Responses to the Question, "What do you like about visiting
. cttlzens
..
. Lod ge.?" . ................................................ . 58
semor
atthe all eyvtew

8.

Summary of Codeable Responses from Older Adults in the
General Program .............................................................................. 59

v

Vl

ACKNOWLEOOMENTS

Thank you to Bill Knudsen and Betty Rajotte at Valleyview Lodge as well as Diane
Rockwell and Jody Maher at Hillside Elementary for their participation in this study.
Thank you to Bryan Hartman for his consistently high standards of supervision and my
committee for their assistance and support throughout this research. Finally, a special
thank you to Serena Ableson for her technical support and Dale Toronitz for his ongoing
encouragement .

Vll

1

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCfiON

An increasingly aging society coupled with changes in family structure have led to
new strategies for individuals from different generations with diverse backgrounds and
interests to experience positive and mutually-beneficial interactions (Seefeldt, 1989;
Ventura-Merkel, Liederman & Ossofsky, 1989; Cherry, Benest, Gates & White, 1985).
Intergenerational programs, or intergenerational remotivational therapy (Allred & Dobson,
1987) brings together children and older adults to share mutual interests and "recreate the
once natural connections between old and young" (Seefeldt, 1989, p.186).
Intergenerational programming, based on activity theory, bridges the generational gap by
incorporating activities that encourage interactions between young and old (Haber & ShortDeGraf, 1990). By bringing old and young together through intergenerational programs,
both groups can benefit by having their physical and social needs met (Haber & ShortDeGraf, 1990; Seefeldt, 1989; Newman, Lyons & Onawola, 1985) while helping children
develop more positive concepts of aging (Allred & Dobson, 1987; Serock, Seefeldt, Jantz
& Galper, 1977).

It seems that the overall benefits of intergenerational programming outweigh the

negative findings (Haber & Short-DeGraf, 1990; Seefeldt, 1989; Newman et al., 1985).
However, there is conflicting evidence as to the usefulness of intergenerational programs in
promoting children's attitudes towards the elderly (Fox & Giles, 1993; Haber & ShortDeGraf, 1990; Seefeldt, 1987a) and the value to the elderly participants (Kuehne, 1992).
This study will examine the attitudes of elementary school children involved in two longterm care intergenerational programs and the perceptions of the elderly participants
regarding their participation in the programs.

2
Intergenerational Programming
Defining Intergenerational Programs
Theoretical and operational definitions of intergenerational programs across studies
have resulted in inconsistencies among research outcomes. Seefeldt ( 1989) describes
intergenerational programs as recreating "the once natural connections between the young
and old" (p. 186). Kuehne (1992), Hill (1987), and Henkin and Sweeney (1989) define
intergenerational programs in a similar manner. Allred and Dobson (1987) describe
"intergenerational remotivation therapy [as that which] involves the pairing of children with
older adults to discuss topics of mutual interest" (p. 217). More specifically,
intergenerational programs "challenge typical stereotypes and attempt to eliminate biases of
each generation about the other by facilitating situations for the young and old to interact"
(Haber & Short-De Graf, 1990, p. 37).
Keller (1990) defines intergenerational programming as, "opportunities to create
mutual support between generations and increase familiarity and understanding of human
development on the life continuum" (p. 314). Chapman and Neal (1990) and Fox and
Giles (1993) identify intergenerational programs as organized activities established to bring
together two generations for the purpose of attitude change. Finally, a guidebook for
intergenerational programming published by the Government of Ontario (1983) defines
intergenerational programming as, "the deliberate organization of non-age specific program
opportunities of both a structured and non-structured nature" (p. 13). The diversity in
theoretical definitions of intergenerational programs reflects the diverse operational
definitions used to empirically define this construct.
Intergenerational programs range from education curriculums in the classroom
without intergenerational contact to day care facilities within long-term care facilities.
Settings for intergenerational contact include long-term care facilities, day care centers for

3
children and older adults, schools, churches, and the outdoors. Participants in
intergenerational programs range from pre-school children to university students, and
elderly residents in long-term care facilities to independent elderly persons in retirement
complexes. Contact directly or indirectly with the elderly ranges from a single session to
several years while the purpose of contact ranges from attitude change to the alteration of
social distance. The multidimensional representation of intergenerational programming in
the literature makes conclusive and consistent results difficult to observe.

Research Findings
Counselors, teachers, recreational therapists, day care supervisors, and nurses are
some of the individuals involved in facilitating intergenerational programs. Counselors and
teachers utilize intergenerational programs to develop social skills and positive self esteem
among children and older adults. Intergenerational programs can focus on intergenerational
theory, interage contact, or a combination of theory and contact. Through carefully
developed intergenerational programs, teachers and counselors can address the social and
emotional strands of the curriculum while positively affecting children's academic
performance (Newman & Riess, 1992; Haber & Short-deGraf, 1990; North York Board of
Education, 1987).
In a critique of intergenerational research, Fox and Giles (1993) examined a sample
of 48 studies involving four categories: (a) unmanipulated contact; (b) manipulated
contact; (c) manipulated contact and classroom units on aging; and (d) units on aging
without intergenerational contact. Of the 48 studies reviewed, only four studies involved
school-aged children despite the theory that attitudes developed early in life remain
influential throughout an individual's lifetime (Weinberger, 1979). If this is indeed correct
then the examination of attitudes among this population is important and appears to be
overlooked in the intergenerationalliterature. Institutionalized or less independent older

4
adults also seem to be largely absent in the intergenerationalliterature. An examination of
the limited inclusion of children and the predominant presence of "healthy" older adults in
the literature follows in a comprehensive review of the literature.
Fox and Giles (1993) found that among those studies involving naturally occurring
contact with older adults, a significant directional relationship between attitudes and
intergenerational contact failed to be identified. Programs included in their analysis that
involved manipulated contact with and without classroom units on aging generally
demonstrated significant positive relationships between attitudes and intergenerational
contact when including "healthy elderly", "independent elderly", and "senior citizens in the
community" (Fox and Giles, p. 430). Those programs based upon educational units on
aging that were presented in isolation generally supported positive attitudes toward older
adults. The participation of "healthy" older adults in those intergenerational programs
including manipulated contact and/or aging curriculums appear to reflect positive attitudes
among participating children. The absence of older adult long-term care residents in the
studies reviewed limit the overall results. While this population remains small within the
general population, they are nonetheless an important part of the older adult community,
particularly as the length of post-retirement increases.

Purpose of Research
The absence of research on attitude measurements of children in intergenerational
programs with specific populations including those with dementia evokes the question
whether positive attitudes in children can exist within such programs. In reporting positive
attitudes in children, the intergenerationalliterature appears to be based on intergenerational
programs that include cognitively- and physically-active older adults. The activities and
interactions in the dementia program that are based on the abilities of the participating
residents may perpetuate negative stereotypes of the elderly residents that may contribute to

5

the children's negative attitudes towards the elderly participants. The role of gender and
children's attitudes following intergenerational programs also appears to be overlooked in
much of the current literature. Finally, the limited research addressing the positive or
negative perceptions of older adult participants toward children and the intergenerational
~o r

leaves unanswered, the question whether older adults respond positively to

participation in such programs?
This study will explore the connections between children's attitudes and the
characteristics of the older adult population in two intergenerational programs. In addition,
the positive or negative perceptions of elderly participants in an intergenerational program
toward the children and the program will be examined. This is accomplished through the
definition of characteristics of the elderly populations in both intergenerational programs,
examination of the children's attitudes' and elicitation of the residents' perceptions. Based
upon these limitations of the literature, the research questions for this study are as follows:

1.

Will significant differences between children's attitudes toward elderly residents in
the general program and the dementia program be observed?

2.

Will significant differences in children's attitudes be related to the number of years
they have participated in the intergenerational programs?

3.

Will significant differences in attitudes between male and female children in the
general and dementia programs be observed?

4.

Will long-term care residents provide positive or negative responses as measured by
the modified Older Adult interview?

6
CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Three assumptions have generally provided the framework upon which
intergenerational programs have developed (Chapman & Neal, 1990). First is the
assumption that older and younger generations have little contact in society. Second, older
adults and youth have negative attitudes towards each other. The third assumption is that
more positive attitudes will occur by increasing intergenerational contact. The following
review of the literature examines each of these assumptions and the theoretical structure of
intergenerational programs.

lntergenerational Contact in Society
Demographics
The Canadian population has increased by over7.5 million people since 1901 and
the percentage of individuals over age sixty-five has increased from five percent to ten
percent (Marshall, 1980). Currently, more than eleven percent of the Canadian population
is sixty-five years of age or older (Statistics Canada, 1991). Estimates suggest that by the
year 2000, more than twelve percent of the American population and between twelve and
eighteen percent of the Canadian population will be 64 years and older (Marshall, 1980;
Serock et al., 1977). Additionally, the average age of the population is increasing (Himes,
1992). Children of advanced-aged parents, who are themselves aging, are becoming more
prevalent (Seelbach, 1989; Brubaker & Brubaker, 1984) as mortality rates decline (Gee,
1987). This change is resulting in increasing numbers of three, four, and five generation
families (Seelbach, 1984). Demographic adjustments in the characteristics of families and
their size, including rates of marriage, mortality, and fertility , affect the type and quality of
care as well as the intergenerational contact these individuals will receive as older adults.

7
Family Structure
In mainstream North American society we have moved away from the traditional
idea of the extended family living together (Center for Human Settlements, 1983 ). The
increase in the occurrence and social acceptability of divorce in recent times has potentially
negative consequences for the aged. Exchange theories of family relationships suggest
that those children having little contact with a parent because of divorce may feel little
responsibility for the care of that parent in old age (Himes, 1992). While the literature
indicates that filial support is being provided to most older adults (Newman & Reiss, 1992;
Seefeldt, 1987b; Tindale, 1986; Hook, Sohal, & Oak, 1982; Sheehan, 1978), Seelbach
( 1984) suggests that, "adult children often are physically, emotionally, or economically
unable to provide long-term care" (p. 98). Therefore, a complex support system involving
family and social agencies may be required to meet the needs of the increasing number of
older adults in our society. Intergenerational programs may supplement emotional support
received from family and agencies for older adults.

Institutionalization of Older Adults
With advanced age occurs an increasing susceptibility to debilitating illnesses that
require increased levels of care (Masciocchi, Thomas, & Moeller, 1984). Approximately
five percent of those individuals aged 65 years or older will experience long-term care in an
institution while twenty to twenty-five percent of older adults will receive care through a
variety of community services (Brubaker & Brubaker, 1984). These investigators as well
as Seelbach (1984) further identify that families continue to support older adults within the
institutional setting and provide more emotional support than in previous societies.
McFarland (1985) cites research indicating the existence of a significant positive
relationship between informal activities with non-familial relationships and life satisfaction
in older adults. It would appear that relationships with both relatives and non-related

8

individuals may contribute to the positive well-being of institutionalized older adults as they
adapt to social loss including retirement, loss of spouses, and friends.

Intergenerational Contact
In a study conducted by Sheehan ( 1978), twenty-three percent of his sample
reported interacting with an elderly person for at least one hour during the previous year,
thirty percent reported at least twelve interactions, and eighteen percent reported at least
fifty-two interactions. The elderly people that children reported having the most contact
with were grandparents and great-grandparents. Seefeldt (1987b) identified eighty percent
of preschool children having contact with older adult relatives while Hook et al., ( 1982)
reported that eighty-seven percent of institutionalized residents received visits from
relatives, seventeen percent from friends, and three percent from other individuals.
Seventy-five percent of older-adult child-care workers reported having contact with a
family member at least once per week (Newman & Riess, 1992) and eighty percent of older
adults having living children had contact with them at least once per week (Tindale, 1986).
The results of Sheehan's study (1978) indicate that, "the extended family is still in
existence and that intergenerational contact is occurring" (p. 572). It appears that
intergenerational contact is occurring contrary to Chapman and Neal's (1990) first
assumption that older and younger generations have little contact in society.

Summary
Changes in the structure of society and increasing stress upon families require new
and creative ways of meeting human and organizational needs (Henkin & Sweeney, 1989).
In today's society, intergenerational programming has become a way of, "bridging the gap
between the young and old and encouraging alternate forms of social organization to
supplement the family structure from which both age groups are becoming increasingly

9

withdrawn" (Haber & Short-DeGraf, 1990, p. 37). While intergenerational programming
cannot replace financial and medical support from family and governmental agencies,
intergenerational programs can supplement the emotional support provided to older adults
in today's society. Examination and evaluation of intergenerational programs can speak to
the changing population demographics in our society; in particular, increasing family
mobility, increasing periods of retirement, and increasing numbers of older adults
depending upon a decreasing proportion of younger adults in the work force.

Intergenerational Programming
Intergenerational programs incorporate aspects of several theories in their structure
and organization. Activity theory and disengagement theory provide support for
intergenerational contact while human development theories, in particular Erikson's
psycho-social development stages (ReVille, 1989), assist in identifying the developmental
needs of the younger and older generations that intergenerational programs should meet.
Systems theory provides the structure for intergenerational programs to meet the program
objectives and garner support from the larger community to facilitate long-term success for
the program. Finally, program evaluation models provide evidence of a program's success
as well as provide constructive comments upon which to alter intergenerational programs
and better serve the needs of the participants. lntergenerational programs that consider
activity and disengagement theories, human development theories, systems theory, and
program evaluation models, are more likely to be successful for all participants involved.

Activity Theory
Activity theories postulate that social activities are necessary for individuals to
function at optimal levels and sustain acceptable levels of psychological well being (Haber
& Short-deGraf, 1990; McFarland, 1985). Haber and Short-deGraf (1990) suggest that

10
from activity theory arise three major themes:

That active participation with family and social organizations should provide a sense
of usefulness to the elderly, that a replacement for work and associations must be
provided at retirement for successful adjustment, and the development of interests
and personal contacts must be continued (p. 36).

Intergenerational programming provides older adults with opportunities to interact
with the younger generation in settings and activities that consider the cognitive and
physical abilities of the elderly participants. Social interactions limited by
institutionalization or distance from family, can be supplemented in non-competitive,
positive programs where the elderly are not judged but respected. Intergenerational
programs that discourage the myth of the elderly as participating in their second childhood
(Seefeldt, 1987a) and where the elderly and younger persons c<rexist in non-competitive
environments (Fox & Giles, 1993) promote successful relationships and positive attitudes.

InsengagementTheory
Lane (1964) suggests that negative attitudes may reflect the, "tendencies of a culture
to reject its elders, to neglect and discard the symbolic representatives of authority" (p.
230). Insengagement theories propose that the elderly become increasingly isolated from
society and as a result, become less physically and emotionally involved in the community
(Haber & Short-DeGraf, 1990). This isolation combined with scattered extended families
and the development of retirement communities, discourages intergenerational contact
(Kidwell & Booth, 19TI) through the development of an age-segregated society. As
children become further removed from interactions with older adults, myths and
misinformation about the elderly and the aging process develop (Allred & Dobson, 1987).

11

Intergenerational programs serve to counteract disengagement by providing opportunities to
engage in mutually satisfying intergenerational relationships, an effective strategy for
altering stereotypical attitudes (Aday, Sims, & Evans, 1991).

Erikson's Psycho-Social Theory of Human Development
Human development is an important influence upon the development of
intergenerational programs. Erik Erikson's psycho-social perspective on human
development (Erikson, 1963) lends support as well as a theoretical framework for the
implementation of intergenerational programs. According to Erikson, children proceed
through six stages between birth and age twenty-five: trust versus mistrust, autonomy
versus shame or doubt, initiative versus guilt, industry versus inferiority, identity versus
role confusion, and intimacy versus isolation (Bee, 1992; ReVille, 1989; Erikson, 1963).
From birth to age three, children develop trust within their environment as well as self
confidence. During the preschool years, children continue to develop autonomy as well as
plan and take the initiative to reach particular goals. Academic achievement and self
confidence are the central tasks during the middle school years while self identity and
relations with peers are the developmental tasks of adolescence and early adulthood.
Between the ages of twenty-five and forty, adults proceed through the stage of generativity
versus stagnation while beyond forty, ego integrity versus despair is the final
developmental stage for adults (Erikson, 1963).
Opportunities for children to engage in relationships with older adults, observe and
participate in new activities, and experience new environments facilitate the achievement of
early developmental stages. Meaningful roles for older adults that provide opportunities to
extend caring to others as well as sharing knowledge and experiences with younger
generations facilitates achievement of the middle and later adulthood developmental stages.
Intergenerational programs such as day care centers staffed by older adults, older adults as

12
volunteers with dysfunctional families to prevent child abuse and neglect, (Newman &
Reiss, 1992; Crites, 1989), and child care centers in long-term care facilities (VenturaMerkel et al. , 1989) address these developmental stages. These and other forms of
intergenerational programs facilitate the achievement of Erikson's developmental stages in
young, middle and later adulthood. As Keller ( 1990) has noted, "an understanding of the
aging process, the roles that older adults can play in communities, and the value of shared
experiences with older adults ... can be a stimulus for the promotion of generational equity
and understanding" (p. 313).

Systems Theory
The systems approach to intergenerational programming has recently emerged from
the need to utilize human resources efficiently and effectively (Henkin & Sweeney, 1989).
While taking into account the intergenerationalliterature, intergenerational programming,
according to systems theory, should develop from identified needs of the community.
Sharing of resources and collaborating with other agencies is necessary to increase
awareness about the benefits of intergenerational programming and therefore increase the
longevity of the program. The establishment of clearly developed and refined goals for the
program increase the replicability of the program for other facilities or communities.
Hands-on training and regular evaluation of intergenerational programs are essential if
programs are to add to the quality of life within the community as identified by the initial
needs assessment. The systems approach to intergenerational programming, "allows
organizations to address issues related to an organizational mission while ensuring a longrange commitment to solving the problems of multiple organizations and the generations
they serve" (Henkin & Sweeney, 1989, p. 172).

13
Evaluation
In their discussion of intergenerational program evaluation, Bocian and Newman
(1989) identify several purposes for evaluation including assessing individual programs,
defining areas of change, increasing public awareness about programs, soliciting
community support, ascertaining potential for replicability of programs, and identifying
support for continuation and maintenance of programs. An effective evaluation study is
useful for the involved participants or agencies, is feasible and realistic in setting and costeffectiveness, protects the rights of participants in the study, and provides accurate
information (Borg & Gall, 1989). Components of an effective evaluation as identified by
Bocian and Newman ( 1989) include demographic data about the samples included, specific
programmatic data, and impact data based upon the study. The current study examines
demographic data, programmatic data, and impact data at various points throughout the
study. While meeting the criteria for effective evaluation studies, this study utilizes
descriptive and inferential procedures of evaluation to examine and describe the attitudes
and perceptions of the children and the elderly involved in the programs.

Characteristics of Successful Intergenerational Programs
Successful intergenerational programs in the literature share many attributes.
Successful intergenerational programs provide opportunities for participants to plan and
implement activities (Fox & Giles, 1993; Aday et al. , 1991 ; Hill, 1987; Newman et al. ,
1985). Contact between participants is intimate in nature as opposed to casual (Aday et al.,
1991; Chapman & Neal, 1990; Keller, 1990; Seefeldt, 1987a), and activities have integrity
and function for both generations through careful planning (Newman & Riess, 1992;
Haber & Short-DeGraf, 1990; Keller, 1990; Henkin & Sweeney, 1989; Seefeldt, 1989;
Ventura-Merkel et al., 1989; Seefeldt, 1987a). Positive attitudes in younger participants
occur more frequentl y in programs where the emphasis is on the quality versus quantity of

14
intergenerational contact (A day et al., 1991; Chapman & Neal, 1990; Seefeldt, 1987a,
Knox, Gekoski, and Johnson, 1986; Baggett, 1981; Drake, 1957). Younger and older
participants demonstrate positive attitudes more frequently in those programs where
interage relationships are based upon equal status between participants (Fox & Giles, 1993;
Seefeldt, 1987a; Seefeldt, 1987b; Roberto & Scott, 1986; Caspi, 1984). Finally,
successful intergenerational programs provide contact between the generations that is
pleasant and rewarding (Newman & Reiss, 1992; Haber & Short-DeGraf, 1990; Keller,
1990; Ventura-Merkel et al., 1989; Hill, 1987; North York Board of Education, 1987;
Seefeldt, 1987a; Newman et al., 1985; Streitfield, 1976). Successful intergenerational
programs, "should be spontaneous, consistent contact that is mutually satisfying and
beneficial to the old and young alike" (Aday et al., 1991).

Summary
Intergenerational programming can promote successful passage through the
developmental life stages when programs are critically and conscientiously developed.
Programs where activity theory, disengagement theory, human development theory, and
systems theory serve as the foundation, provide opportunities that promote healthy psychosocial development, demystify the aging process, promote respect between the generations,
and reward and fulfill all involved. Successful intergenerational programs build upon the
theories by including contact that promotes equal status among participants. This contact is
intimate and pleasant. It focuses on the quality and not quantity of intergenerational
contact. Activities evolve from the ideas and planning of the participants and they have
both integrity and function for participants. Improvements in the quality of the programs,
the effectiveness of the staff involved, the community's understanding of and support for
the programs, and their long-term successes in meeting the needs of two generations result
from effective evaluations (Bocian & Newman, 1989).

15
Attitudes
A universal definition of attitude is nonexistent. Instead there are a multitude of
diverse definitions found in the literature. Cognitive contents as defined by Fishbein &
Ajzens (1975) are defined as perceptual responses and verbal statements of belief. Verbal
responses of affect represent affective contents while verbal statements about behavior
define intentional contents. Marks, Newman, and Onawola (1985) expand on these
components of attitudes by broadening Fishbein and Ajzen's discussion of the
multicomponent view of attitude. Marks et al., (1985) propose the definition of cognitive
or descriptive attitude components as that information an individual has in relation to the
attitude object or in this study, the intergenerational program participants. Evaluative or
affective attitude contents represent an individual's feelings and subjective evaluations of
the attitude object while intentional or conative attitude contents represent the actions
proposed by an individual based upon his or her beliefs and subjective evaluations towards
the attitude object. These components of attitude, while not being accepted by all
researchers, are the basis of attitude measures in much of the literature on attitudes of
children toward the elderly (Aday et al., 1991; Seefeldt, 1987b; Dellman-Jenkins, Lambert,
Fruit, & Dinero, 1986; Knox et al., 1986; Marks et al., 1985; Baggett, 1981; Jantz,
Seefeldt, Galper, & Serock, 1977; Seefeldt et al., 1977a; Thomas & Yamamoto, 1975;
Rosencranz & McNevin, 1969; Golde & Kogan, 1959).

Childrens' Attitudes Prior to Organized Intergenerational Contact
It is believed that how we think about individuals influences how we will perceive

them and how we perceive them influences how we will behave toward them (Lippa, 1990;
Seltzer & Atchley, 1971). Research indicates that attitudes obtained during childhood and
early adolescence remain an influence throughout the life cycle (Aday et al., 1991; Jantz et

16
al., 1977; Seefeldt et al., 1977a).

The attitudinal and behavioral repertoires acquired in childhood have at least
threefold importance: (1) they have a direct effect upon the manner in which
children perceive and relate to the elderly; (2) they may influence children's
attitudes and behavior when they themselves reach young and middle-aged
adulthood; and (3) they may help to mold the type of self-image to which
they will subscribe in old age (Weinberger, 1979, p.132).

If attitudes influence how a person responds toward others either in a positive or negative
way throughout the life cycle, then children's attitudes toward the elderly are important to
examine.

Negative Attitudes Toward the Elderly
Research on children's attitudes toward the elderly prior to organized
intergenerational contact finds that stereotypical and negative attitudes are common (Marks
et al., 1985; Jantz et al., 1977; Seefeldt et al., 1977b; McTavish, 1971). Cowgill (1986)
asserts that, "societies in which older peoople are rare appear to hold them in higher esteem
than societies in which they are commonplace" (p.194). In a review of research
methodologies and findings, McTavish ( 1971) identifies that the majority of society-level
studies support the view that, "attitudes toward the elderly are most favorable in primitive
societies and decrease with increasing modernization to the point of generally negative
views in industrialized Western nations" (p. 91). Among individual-level studies, the
majority reported negative attitudes toward old people. In a meta-analysis of studies
excluding children under age fifteen, non-American subjects, and unhealthy (mentally and
physically) target groups, Kite and Johnson (1988) found that the studies taken as a group

17
indicated more negative attitudes toward older adults than toward any other age group.
While neither of these studies represent all studies nor all target groups on attitudes between
young and old, they do include comprehensive examinations of the intergenerational
literature and both examinations support the assertion that the attitudes of children toward
the elderly are generally negative.
Early research by Drake (1957) tested the hypothesis that acceptance of stereotyped
ideas about the elderly held by undergraduate students would vary according to closeness
of physical contact, frequency of contact, and intimacy of intergenerational contact. It was
his finding that students currently living among older adults but who did not have intimate
or frequent contact with them demonstrated the greatest agreement with stereotyped
statements. Those students demonstrating the least agreement with stereotyped statements
reported having frequent but casual or impersonal contact with older adults. Finally,
students who reported never having lived among older adults but who had frequent
intergenerational contact demonstrated more favorable attitudes toward the elderly than did
those students who reported having lived with older adults. These findings may suggest
that both frequency and closeness of intergenerational contact may contribute to more
positive attitudes among young adults. However, these results also seem to indicate that
there may be a ceiling effect in that overexposure to older adults may contribute to negative
attitudes among young adults.
Seefeldt et al., (1977b) and Kratochwill and Goldman (1973) found a positive
relationship between ability to order photographs in chronological order and grade level in
school-aged children. Using photographs, Weinberger (1979) found five to eight year olds
demonstrated that the ability to assign accurate ages to the pictures was accompanied by
negative stereotypes of the aged. In a study by Seefeldt et al., (1977b), children between
preschool and grade nine reported physical and behavioral reasons for their use of negative
statements to describe older adults using drawings. The majority of children provided

18

negative responses toward older adults with younger children providing more negative
responses than did children in the intermediate grades. Britton and Britton (1969) found
similar results among preschool children and Baggett ( 1981) among five to nine year olds
when using drawings.
The results of studies by Weinberger (1979), Seefeldt et al., (1977b), and
Kratochwill and Goldman (1973) would seem to indicate that ability to judge age correctly
is a function of age, a result that may or may not be linked to the linear relationship between
negative attitudes and age found in several studies (North York Board of Education, 1987;
Baggett, 1981; Serock et al., 1977; Britton & Britton, 1969). Kratochwill and Goldman
( 1973) caution that the more realistic the stimuli used for age-discrimination tasks, the
easier it is for children to assign correct ages to the stimuli. If this hypothesis is correct,
findings from those studies using drawings as the age-discrimination stimulus should be
accepted with reservation.
Assessments of children's attitudes through evaluations of story writing have been
used to measure children's attitudes toward older adults (Thomas & Yamamoto, 1975;
Hickey, Hickey, & Kalish, 1968). Hickey et al., (1968), evaluated third-grade students'
writing assignments about "old people". Differences in physical characteristics of
ambulatory abilities and general feebleness were most common, while social characteristics
of kindness accounted for the majority of students' descriptions of old people. Children
from higher income groups provided more favorable descriptions of older adults and were
more likely to perceive them positively than were students from lower income groups.
Overall, the students' attitudes were negative.

Positive Attitudes Toward the Elderly
Thomas and Yamamoto ( 1975) evaluated stories written by children from grades
five, seven, nine, and eleven in a public school system. Students were shown three

19

newspaper photographs in random order and students were asked to estimate the age of the
individual in each photograph and then write a story about each individual. Findings
indicated that variation in assignment of ages to the photographs was larger when estimated
for the older person and the variation decreased inversely with grade level. Across both
gender and grade level, the majority presented stereotyped content in their stories with a
slight increase in the affective content in their stories about the oldest man. While children
in this study presented overall positive attitudes toward older adults, positive attitudes
increased with age on some attributes and decreased on others. As age increased, children
perceived older adults with increasing degrees of goodness and wisdom. Older adults were
perceived as becoming less exciting, more unpleasant, and less happy in comparison to
younger adults. These findings appear to contradict the earlier findings of Hickey et al.,
(1968).

Inconclusive Research on Childrens' Attitudes Toward the Elderly
Marks et al., (1985) measured the cognitive, affective, and intentional attitudes of
children aged eight to ten years who responded to a series of open-and close-ended
questions and semantic differential scales. Their findings indicated that despite the children
identifying positive behavioral intentions toward older adults, they had negative perceptions
of the aging process. Old people were evaluated more positively on the affective dimension
but more negatively on the cognitive dimension than were young people. Similarly,
Seefeldt et al. , (1977a) and Jantz et al. , (1977) found among children three to eleven years
of age, positive affective feelings but negative physical attributes towards the elderly and
overall negative attitudes toward older adults. These results are supported by Serock et al. ,
(1977) where children attributed more negative physical qualities and more positive
affective qualities to the elderly.
A variety of studies have used photographs and drawings to assess children's

20

multidimensional attitudes toward older adults. Fill mer ( 1984) asked students in grades
four to six to respond to pictures of a young man and woman, and an older man and
woman. Students also responded to a series of questions describing types of
intergenerational contact. While the children positively described the photographs, they
indicated that they would prefer to associate with younger adults. Fillmer also found that
students rated the young man and woman more favorably than the older man and woman.
Additionally, the male subjects in the pictures received significantly higher ratings than did
the female subjects. Interestingly, male students rated female subjects higher than male
subjects, and female students rated male subjects higher than female subjects. These
fmdings may have implications for the organization and structure of intergenerational
relations.

Summary
The multi-component view of attitudes has served as the basis of attitude measures
in much of the literature on attitudes of children toward the elderly. Early research by
McTavish (1971) and later meta-analysis by Kite and Johnson (1988), identified the
majority of research findings as reporting negative attitudes toward older adults. Other
researchers have provided support for these fmdings (Baggett, 1981; Weinberger, 1979;
Seefeldt et al., 1977b; Britton and Britton, 1969; Hickey et al., 1968; Drake, 1957).
Thomas andY amamoto ( 1975) found overall positive attitudes expressed by children
toward older adults while Marks et al., (1985), Fillmer (1984), Jantz et al., (1977),
Seefeldt et al., (1977a), and Serock et al., (1977) reported inconclusive findings. Among
those studies demonstrating inconclusive findings, positive components of attitude toward
the elderly included behavioral (Marks et al., 1985), affective (Marks et al., 1985; Jantz et
al., 1977; Seefeldt et al., 1977a; Serock et al., 1977), and cognitive attributes (Thomas &
Yamamoto, 1975). Negative components included cognitive (Marks et al., 1985),

21
behavioral (Seefeldt et al., 1977b), and physical attributes (Seefeldt et al., 1977b). These ·
results have important implications for the development and implementation of
intergenerational programs, particularly those programs where older adult participants are
"unhealthy" either cognitively or physically.
Lippa ( 1990) states that, "the people in their overwhelming majority are so feminine
by nature and attitude that sober reasoning determines their thoughts and actions far less
than emotion and feeling" (p. 220). If we are to subscribe to this statement, then the
success or failure of intergenerational programs impinges upon the attitudes of both the
children and the elderly. Lippa (1990) goes on to describe attitudes as being learned,
enduring, and influential evaluative responses directed at specific objects. If children
engage in intergenerational programming with predisposed negative attitudes toward the
elderly (Marks et al., 1985; Jantz et al., 1977; Seefeldt et al., 1977b; McTavish, 1971;
Lane, 1964), can positive attitudes result from intergenerational programs?

Childrens' Attitudes and Intergenerational Programming
A core assumption underlying intergenerational programming is that
intergenerational programming has positive effects upon young and old participants
(Bocian & Newman, 1989). While the literature suggests that it is difficult for children to
maintain stereotypic and negative attitudes toward the elderly when they have contact with
elderly individuals (Seefeldt, 1987a; Knox et al., 1986; Newman et al., 1985; Rosencranz
& McNevin, 1969), there remains limited evidence that intergenerational programs are

beneficial in promoting positive attitudes in children toward the elderly (Fox & Giles, 1993;
Haber & Short-DeGraf, 1990) particularly those programs involving institutionalized older
adults. The North York Board of Education ( 1987) cautions, "for some age groups,
perhaps and possibly for a certain percentage of students, exposure to the world of aging
might generate particularly sharp negative images" (p. 151). Considering the different

22
operationalizations of contact across studies, differing characteristics of the program
populations, differing data collection and analysis procedures and the limited
intergenerational research completed with school-aged children, the absence of clear-cut
results in terms of children's positive or negative attitudes following intergenerational
contact is not surprising.
The literature would seem to indicate that intergenerational programming is largely
a positive experience for the younger generation (Newman & Riess, 1992; Chapman &
Neal, 1990; Haber & Short-deGraf, 1990; Keller, 1990; Seefeldt, 1989; Allred & Dobson,
1987; North York Board of Education, 1987; Seefeldt, 1987a; Seefeldt, 1987b; Cherry et
al., 1985; Newman et al., 1985; Pratt, 1984; Sheehan, 1978). From a developmental
perspective, children can only recognize their full potential when they come to terms with
their own aging and develop healthy relationships and attitudes towards older adults
(Newman et al., 1985; Jantz et al., 1977; Seefeldt et al., 1977b; Kratochwill & Goldman,
1973; Rosencranz & McNevin, 1969; Hickey et al., 1968). Through participation in
intergenerational programs, children develop interpersonal skills, practice social
responsibility and improve academic skills depending on the individual program (Newman
& Riess, 1992; Haber & Short-DeGraf, 1990; North York Board of Education, 1987).

Children receive love, attention, and social and emotional growth from elderly participants
(Haber & Short-DeGraf, 1990). Within the elderly population, students find role models,
educators and companions. Intergenerational programs can meet the developmental needs
of older adults and children (Crites, 1989; ReVille, 1989). The question remains, do
intergenerational programs promote positive attitudes toward older adults?

Negative Attitudes and Intergenerational Programs Including Non-Institutionalized Older
Adults
Several studies have shown that negative attitudes toward the elderly developed

23

following children's participation in intergenerational programs (Seefeldt, 1987b; Baggett,
1981). Baggett (1981) found that forty-five children in kindergarten to grade three
expressed negative attitudes when measured following twenty hours of intergenerational
experiences in the classroom. Baggett's initial hypothesis that, "realistic experiences with
active older adults, acting as volunteers in the school setting, would help to eliminate
children's stereotyping of the characteristics of age" (p. 22) was not supported. However,
Baggett suggests that the visible signs of aging apparent to children and adults that are
expressed in their responses may be a reflection of their knowledge of the physical or
cognitive changes associated with aging and not necessarily negative nor stereotypical.
Studies reporting negative attitudes of children toward older adults need to be examined
closely. The responses may represent their factual knowledge of aging as opposed to
negative, stereotypical attitudes.

Positive Attitudes and Intergenerational Programs Including Non-Institutionalized Older
Adults
Studies involving youth have demonstrated positive attitudes toward the elderly as a
consequence of intergenerational contact. Chapman and Neal (1990) examined the Elderlyyouth Exchange program (EYE) where youth and older adults participated in two distinct
programs: youth helping older adults in an employment program, and older adults helping
youth in an education and recreation program. Youth participating as paid "helpers"
demonstrated more positive affective responses, behavioral intentions, and self-assessed
changes in attitude than did those youth in the education and recreation program. This
finding lends support to similar findings by Fox and Giles (1993) that "volunteers" are
more likely to demonstrate more positive responses to their involvement. Positive attitude
change occurred more frequently in youth helpers who identified having close relationships
with older adults prior to the study than it did for those youth helpers without such

24

relationships. Similar findings have been reported by others (Aday et al. , 1991; Chapman·
& Neal , 1990; Seefeldt, 1987a; Knox et al., 1986; Baggett, 1981; Drake, 1957). This

study provides evidence that quality of intergenerational contact as well as the degree of
personal investment youth have in the intergenerational program through their role as a
volunteer or a paid employee, may promote positive attitudes among youth participants.
The generalizability of these results is limited by the inclusion of only "healthy" older adults
in this study.
Several studies demonstrate positive changes in attitudes among younger
participants in intergenerational programs. The North York Board of Education ( 1987) in a
post-test study of 763 elementary students, 106 secondary students, and 115 older adults,
found that both the experimental and control groups demonstrated generally positive
attitudes toward older adults. Students involved in intergenerational programs for two
years presented more positive responses in their descriptions of older adults, expressed
more positive attitudes toward growing old, and demonstrated greater interest in choosing
older adults as companions than did students participating for their first year. Researchers
concluded that time and continuity in intergenerational programming may be associated
with positive attitude formation. Finally, negativism decreased as the grade levels and ages
of students increased. The results of this study, while seeming to include a majority of
"healthy" older adults, identify important components of intergenerational program
research: consideration for prior intergenerational contacts, continuity, and grade level/age
upon attitude formation.
Aday and colleagues (1991) studied the effect of a multifaceted intergenerational
program on fourth-grade students using a posttest design. After completing an attitude
inventory, students in the intergenerational program indicated significantly greater positive
attitudes than did students in the control group. One year following completion of the
program, students in the experimental group expressed significantly greater positive

25
attitudes than did students in the control group. While this study described two older adult
participants as having "minor disabilities" , the majority of the sample was "healthy". This
study provides support for intergenerational programs promoting positive attitudes in
children toward the aged when healthy older adults are included in the program. The
resiliency of students' attitudes beyond termination of the program suggested in this study
lends preliminary support to theories proposed by Aday et al., (1991), Seefeldt et al.,
(1977a), and Arthur, Donnan, and Lair (1973).
In a study conducted by Dellman-Jenkins et al., (1986), children aged three and
four years participated in an intervention program on aging. The eight week curriculum
provided daily classroom contact with older adult volunteers. The classroom activities
provided students with positive and accurate information regarding the aging process and
interaction with older adults from a local day-care facility for the elderly. As a consequence
of their participation in the intervention program, the perceptions of the children in the
experimental group about how older adults looked and behaved changed in a positive
direction. However, the intervention program; while including older adults from a semiinstitutional setting, took place in the classroom; therefore, the older adults were likely
"healthy" and relatively independent. Such is the case with many studies on
intergenerational programming (Fox & Giles, 1993; Aday et al., 1991). Therefore, the
positive findings in this study have limited generalizability to studies of intergenerational
programs that include institutionalized older adults.
In a study conducted by Caspi (1984), children aged three to six years participated
in two programs: an intergenerational child-care facility employing older adult teaching
aides, and a child-care program without intergenerational contact. The results indicated that
children with intergenerational contact in school discriminated age-group categories more
accurately as well as evaluated older adults more positively than did children having no
intergenerational contact in the school setting. Age was not found to be related to age

26
discrimination or attitudes among either group. Caspi (1995) and others (Fox & Giles,
1993; Seefeldt, 1987a; Seefeldt, 1987b; Roberto & Scott, 1986) contend that inter-group
contact should, "be based on equal status between the groups for it to reduce prejudice" (p.
79). However, the attitudes reported in this study like those of Chapman and Neal (1990)
and Newman et al., (1985) were positive despite the elevated status ofthe older adults as
teaching aides.
Finally, Cherry et al., (1985) describe a program where seventy youth participated
in training sessions and were placed in one of three programs, companions to homebound
or permanently institutionalized elderly, participation in activities with residents at a local
day-care facility, and participation in a community garden alongside senior-citizen
gardeners. The objectives of reducing the experiences of alienation by youth and older
adults as well as dispelling negative stereotypes portraying elders as unproductive members
of society were met by providing meaningful and ongoing roles within the community
(Cherry et al., 1985). The results of this study demonstrated positive intergenerational
relations within a program combining education with manipulated intergenerational contact,
lending support to similar findings by Fox and Giles (1993).

Negative Attitudes and Intergenerational Programs Including Institutionalized Older Adults
Research by Tuckman and Lorge (1952) found that as individuals become less able
to live independently in the community, they become more susceptible to the
misconceptions and stereotypes about aging. Drake (1957) suggests that, "among older
persons, those less able to function in society subscribe to the unfavorable conceptions
more frequently than do older people who are not institutionalized" (p. 267). In a review
of intergenerational program research, Fox and Giles ( 1993) found that negative attitudes
occurred in those intergenerational programs involving unhealthy nursing home patients.
Seefeldt et al., (1977b) support the conclusion of Fox and Giles (1993) that children's

27
positive attitudes are unlikely to occur in nursing home programs. They stated:

If children have contact with a variety of older persons who are healthy,

active, attractive and do not sit in wheelchairs all day, they will be forced to
give up their stereotypes of the elderly as a group of sick, passive and
unattractive people (p. 511).

Similarly, Caspi (1984) argued that intergenerational contact in nursing homes
"with feeble elderly" will probably foster negative stereotyping of the elderly by children.
Since many residents in long-term care facilities have been admitted based on physical
and/or cognitive decline that limits their ability to live independently in the community and
institutionalized older adults are expected to gradually decline in health (Newman et al.,
1985), they become dependent upon others for assistance. This circumstance reinforces
the negative stereotypes of old age including terms such as "tired", "isolated "ugly", and
"helpless" (Aday et al., 1991) as well as "sad" , "passive" , "unhappy" , "unable to enjoy
life", and "sick" (Seefeldt et al., 1977b). McTavish (1971) further includes descriptions of
older adults as generally being "sick" , "forgetful", "grouchy" , "unproductive" , and
"learning impaired" .
Seefeldt (1987b) found negative attitudes toward the elderly in preschool children
after participation in an intergenerational program for one year with residents of a long-term
care facility. Seefeldt (1987b) describes the majority of older adults as being, "infirm and
immobilized in some way in wheel chairs" (p. 229). When compared to a control group,
children participating in the intergenerational program held more negative attitudes toward
age and described the elderly as more passive, in need of more help, and having more
physical disabilities than did younger persons. These children described young people as
more helpful, healthier, friendlier, happier, and "more good" than did children in the

28
control group. In contrast, old people were described by the children as more unfriendly,
"more terrible", and "sicker". Twenty-five of the children felt "good", "fine", or "happy"
about visiting the residents and the majority identified that they liked to go because "it was
fun".
While considering the findings of Baggett (1981), we see that the responses of the
children participating in Seefeldt's study ( 1987b) are descriptions of the "infirm and totally
passive" (p. 231) older-adult population included in the program. Therefore, whether these
findings represent negative attitudes or simply the children's observations can be
questioned. Additionally, it can be questioned whether these children provided responses
based upon their experiences with a wide range of older adults or were their responses
simply generalizations based upon their experience with this sub-population of older adults
with whom they were in contact (Knox et al., 1986). Prior to initiating this study, the
potential for positive attitudes may have been limited by the lack of intimate contact between
the children arid the older adults (Aday et al., 1991; Chapman and Neal, 1990; Seefeldt,
1987a; Knox et al., 1986; Baggett, 1981; Drake, 1957), as well as the unequal status ofthe
children and the residents (Caspi, 1995; Fox & Giles, 1993; Seefeldt, 1987a; Seefeldt,
1987b; Roberto & Scott, 1986). While Seefeldt identified largely negative attitudes in these
preschool children, the responses of the children during interviews support the conclusion
that contact between young and old is generally a positive experience for children (Newman

& Riess, 1992; Chapman & Neal, 1990; Haber & Short-deGraf, 1990; Keller, 1990;
Seefeldt, 1989; Allred & Dobson, 1987; North York Board of Education, 1987; Seefeldt,
1987a; Seefeldt, 1987b; Cherry et al., 1985; Newman et al., 1985; Pratt, 1984; Sheehan,
1981).

Positive Attitudes and lntergenerational Programs Including Institutionalized Older Adults
Newman et al., ( 1985) reported that psychology students who participated in

29

nursing-home intergenerational programs expressed positive attitudes toward the elderly.
Students were selectively admitted to the program by the instructor and these students in
tum selected the resident(s) they wished to visit based upon written profiles of the
residents. Fox and Giles (1993) suggest that in programs utilizing volunteers, positive
attitudinal changes may be facilitated by positive expectations on the part of the volunteer.
Selective admittance of the students along with student selection of elderly volunteers may
have facilitated the positive results found in this study by increasing the chances of
compatibility between students and residents. The design and results of this study are
valuable for intergenerational programs. They suggest that by allowing the participants to
be involved in the organization of intergenerational programs, the likelihood of positive
attitudes occurring from inter-age contact may increase.
Among studies including younger children, Allred and Dobson (1987) reported that
sixth grade students' perceptions of the elderly improved with increased intergenerational
contact at a nursing home. Students participated in training sessions to prepare them for
contact with institutionalized older adults followed by ten sessions at a nursing home.
Topics for each session were determined by the counselor while the children developed
questions and visual aides for the ten sessions. The authors suggest that the results may
have occurred because students' opinions may have changed as a result of discovering they
shared mutual interests with the residents; thereby, prompting the development of
emotional bonding between the children and the elderly. They also suggest that
stereotypical ideas concerning institutionalized older adults may have been altered. The
results of this study are supported by the findings of Fox and Giles (1993), who reported
that studies involving intergenerational contact and an educational curriculum on aging have
generally found more positive attitudes in participating children. Several studies also
support the finding of this study that positive attitudes are facilitated by including
participants in the organization of individual sessions (Fox & Giles, 1993; Chapman and

30
Neal, 1990; Newman et al.,1985).

Summary
Attitude research suggests that some intergenerational programs can counteract
children's negative perceptions by promoting their ability to differentiate among age groups
and consequently develop more accurate perceptions of the elderly. Positive attitudes have
been identified in studies including institutionalized and non-institutionalized older adults
(Aday et al., 1991; Chapman & Neal, 1990; Allred & Dobson, 1987; North York Board of
Eduation, 1987; Dellman-Jenkins et al, 1986; Cherry et al, 1985; Newman et al. , 1985;
Caspi, 1984). Yet some research has identified negative attitudes towards the elderly in
children following intergenerational programming (Fox & Giles, 1993; Seefeldt, 1987b;
Baggett, 1981). While intergenerational programs appear to provide positive experiences
overall and meet the developmental needs of children, not all programs promote children's
positive attitudes toward the elderly.

Perceptions of Older Adults and Intergenerational Programming
As a result of financial and time constraints, many care facilities for the elderly have
difficulty meeting the psycho-social needs of the residents (Newman et al., 1985).
Residents reside in long-term care facilities as a result of deteriorating health, absence of
family caregivers or personal preference. People other than those who work within the
residence become links to the outside world for the elderly resident. Professionals working
with older adults see intergenerational programming as opportunities for the elderly to share
their knowledge and experiences with the young, as well as to develop aspects of meaning
and purpose in their lives (Kuehne, 1992; Haber & Short-DeGraf, 1990). Limited
research on the impact of intergenerational programs upon the elderly supports their value
(Kuhne, 1992; Newman et al. , 1985; Seefeldt et al. , 1982). On the basis of a review of the

31
literature, it would seem that intergenerational programs fill the gap for residents between
visitation from family members and attention from staff. Haber and Short-DeGraf (1990)
suggest that, "the feelings of importance, increased happiness, and smoother adaptation to
the aging process experienced by the elderly who participate in intergenerational programs
indicate that such programs involving a variety of age groups not only make sense but are
extremely worthwhile" (p.47).

Positive Perceptions and Intergenerational Programs Including Non-Institutionalized Older
Adults
In their study of the effects of intergenerational contacts on adolescents and older
adults, Chapman and Neal (1990) found that prior to participation five percent of older
adults disliked intergenerational contact. Following completion of the program, older adult
participants on average spoke positively about the program and its effectiveness in
increasing understanding of and attitudes toward the other generation. Older adults were
more likely than youth to report that they enjoyed contact with the other generation. In
response to a series of open-ended questions, older adult participants identified increased
trust of teenagers, the importance of patience in intergenerational relations, and enjoyment
of their interactions with the youth following participation in the program (Chapman &
Neal, 1990).
In a study of older adult workers in intergenerational child care settings, Newman
and Reiss (1992) found that seventy-five percent of workers reported an increase in feeling
needed and self-worth, sixty percent felt more valued, fifty percent observed increased
social contact, and over ninety percent felt that the children benefited from their work. The
authors found a positive relationship between older workers' perceived attitude changes
toward children's development and their own personal growth and satisfaction. These
results seem to reflect the successful progression of the older adult employees through the

32
later adulthood developmental stages (Bee, 1992; Crites, 1989; ReVille, 1989). The
characteristics of this sample suggest that, "older workers choosing employment in
intergenerational child care seek and enjoy the presence of children in their personal lives
and employment setting" (Reiss, 1992, p. 58), which may or may not have contributed to
the positive findings reported in this study.

Negative Perceptions and Intergenerational Programs Including Institutionalized Older
Adults
Kuehne (1992) describes a study involving older adults from a long-term care
facility, a day center for older adults, and a retirement apartment complex. Ninety-five
percent of older adults in this sample identified being isolated from children in their
communities. This statistic is exceptionally high in comparison with that reported by other
researchers' (Newman & Riess, 1992; Rosenthal, 1987; Seefeldt, 1987b; Tindale, 1986;
Seelbach, 1984; Hook et al., 1982; Sheehan, 1978). Preschool and school-aged children
participated weekly over a period of six months in intergenerational contact. Older adults
with preschoolers helped children more and participated in more negative interactions than
did older adults with school-aged children. Older adults in the preschool program were
either nursing home or day care residents and those participants in the school-aged program
were retirement facility residents. Increased frustration may have resulted from the
decreased mobility and independence of older adults in the preschool program and the
limited degree to which the older adults could engage in the play behaviors with the
preschool children. The results of this research provide insight into the characteristics of
both the elderly and children involved in intergenerational programs that contribute to
responses from the older adult participants

33
Positive Perceptions and Intergenerational Programs Including Institutionalized Older
Adults
Early research involving young adults indicates that intergenerational programming
is beneficial to older adults. In a study on companionship therapy among institutionalized
older adults and undergraduate students over a ten week period, Arthur et al., (1973) found
significant improvements in morale in those residents receiving volunteer companion
therapy. Within the experimental group, those residents visited repeatedly by a variety of
students demonstrated greater improvement in morale and significant change in personal
adjustment than did those residents visited by the same students. Follow-up assessments
taken six weeks after termination of the program indicated greater improved personal
adjustment in the experimental group in comparison to the control group. While the results
of this study provide evidence of long-term benefits to older adults involved in
intergenerational programs, more important is the hypothesis proposed by the authors
based upon their findings that, "a variety of interpersonal experiences are more therapeutic
than a repeated similar experience" (p. 169). This hypothesis may provide insight into the
organization of interactions between young and old within intergenerational programs.
In their examination of an intergenerational program involving undergraduate
psychology students and institutionalized elders, Newman et al., (1985) found that all
residents reported enjoying students' visits. Forty-two percent of older-adult participants
reported that the program helped them become more friendly with their roommates while
forty-seven percent did not believe it affected their relationships with other residents. Fiftynine percent of older adult participants noted that the program helped them to leave their
room more often, forty-one percent felt that the program positively affected their feelings
toward young people, and eighty-eight percent would recommend the program to other
residents. The deliberate choice of residents to participate in the program and the selection
of residents by students at the outset of the program may have influenced the positive

34
findings in this study.
Streitfield (1976) qualitatively describes a program between children from a center
for behavioral difficulties and residents from a long-term care facility over a five month
period. This program provided opportunities for residents to teach the children new skills,
learn new skills from the children, and enhance their self-esteem through the mentorship
structure of the program. The program structure in this study met the developmental needs
of older adults by allowing them to share their knowledge and express care for the
students. The prestige of the older adults was protected by restricting the participation of
residents and students to formal , intimate activities. The result was a positive response
from the residents. However, Kuehne (1992) warns that where such helping relationships
between young and old are the primary basis for ongoing interactions, interpersonal
relationships are more likely to be that of a student-teacher than an egalitarian relationship.
Additionally, while this program took place in the long-term care setting, the older adult
population included in the program were higher functioning, "healthy" older adults. The
results fail to contribute to intergenerational programming involving institutionalized,
"unhealthy" older adults such as elderly persons with dementia.

Summary
The literature supports the involvement of older adults in intergenerational
programming. Well-developed intergenerational programs promote positive psycho-social
development and respect between the generations. Intergenerational contact promotes
feelings of self-worth, value, and self-esteem among older adult participants. While
Kuehne (1992) reports some negative responses from older adult participants, her results
seem to be an exception among the largely positive responses from intergenerational
program participants. While the negative responses provide important insights into
program organization considerations, intergenerational programming is largely a positive

35
experience for elderly participants.

Summary of the Literature Review
Chapman and Neal's assumptions (1990) provided at the outset of this discussion
have been met to varying degrees. The first assumption, that young and old have little
contact in today's society seems to be disproved in much of the literature. Demographic
information as well as information taken from individual studies indicates that
intergenerational contact, remains high within our society. Changes in demographics
including lower birth rates, higher divorce rates, and increasing numbers of very old
persons have implications for the care of older adults in terms of services and programs.
Intergenerational programs supplement rather than replace the current social and emotional
support provided by relatives, service agencies, and health facilities. They also strengthen
the connections between the young and older generations.
The second assumption, that older adults and youth have negative attitudes toward
each other was supported in part. The literature indicates that children have largely negative
attitudes toward older adults. Closer examination identifies that while overall attitudes are
negative, specific components of attitudes as defined by Fishbein and Ajzens (1975) and
later by Marks et al., ( 1985) indicate a mixture of positive and negative perceptions toward
older adults. The behavioral. intentional, affective, and cognitive components of attitude in
children were positive while the cognitive and physical components were negative. To
promote positive attitudes toward the elderly, intergenerational programs need to address
these findings in the development of these intergenerational programs.
In their third assumption, Chapman and Neal ( 1990) hypothesized that more
positive attitudes will occur by increasing intergenerational contact. This assumption was
supported in part. Several elements of intergenerational programming seem to contribute
more frequently to positive attitudes in children. These include emphasis on intimacy and

36
quality in intergenerational relations, inclusion of participants in planning and organization
of activities, incorporation of sound and functional activities, promotion of equal status
among intergenerational relations, and promotion of pleasant and rewarding interactions.
Several studies, despite failing to include one or more of these elements, identified
children's positive attitudes toward older adults (Chapman & Neal, 1990; Allred &
Dobson, 1987; Newman et al., 1985; Caspi, 1984).

Of the ten studies cited that examined intergenerational programs and childrens'
attitudes in non-institutionalized settings, six reported children and youth having positive
attitudes toward the elderly (Aday et al., 1991; Chapman & Neal, 1990; North York Board
of Education, 1987; Dellman-Jenkins et al., 1986; Cherry, 1985; Caspi, 1984). One study
reported negative attitudes of children (Baggett, 1981). Of those studies cited that occurred
in institutionalized settings, one reported positive attitudes among undergraduate students
(Newman et al., 1985) while a second study reported positive attitudes of children (Allred
& Dobson, 1987). In contrast, one study involving nursing-home residents reported

negative attitudes of children (Seefeldt, 1987b). Of the six studies cited that examined
intergenerational programs and older adults' perceptions in non-institutionalized settings,
two reported positive responses (Newman & Reiss, 1992; Chapman & Neal, 1990). Of
the four studies cited that occurred in institutionalized settings, three reported positive
responses (Newman et al., 1985; Streitfied, 1976; Arthur et al., 1973) while one reported
mixed results (Kuehne, 1992).
The literature it seems indicates that intergenerational programming can promote
positive attitudes in children and result in positive perceptions from the elderly. However,
qualities of individual programs may influence the success of these programs in developing
positive attitudes toward the elderly and positive perceptions of intergenerational programs
by older adult participants. The question arises whether intergenerational contact within
long-term care facilities can result in children's positive attitudes toward the elderly when

37
participants in nursing homes tend to fulfill the negative physical and behavioral stereotypes
that perpetuate negative attitudes toward the elderly. In tum, if positive attitudes by the
children are lacking, the question remains whether elderly individuals presenting the
negative physical and/or behavioral stereotypes common to nursing home populations
would report favorably or unfavorably on their involvement in an intergenerational
program. The connection between attitudes toward the elderly, the characteristics of the
participating elderly populations, and the perceptions of older adult participants appears to
be overlooked in the intergenerational programming literature.

38
CHAPTER THREE
MEfHOD

Children from two Montessori classrooms at Hillside Elementary 1 participated in
two intergenerational programs with residents from the V alleyview Lodge2. Students
attend the Montessori public school program because of a parental belief in the program's
philosophy, the location of the school and/or failure of the children to thrive in their
neighborhood school. The intergenerational programs between the school and Valleyview
Lodge have existed for two years. Intake for the Montessori programs occurred prior to
the beginning of each academic year. As a result, some students have participated in the
programs for one or two years regardless of age or program. Since elderly participants
enter the intergenerational programs throughout the academic year, their participation
ranged from several weeks to two years. Both programs outline their objectives as,
"maintaining regular contact, facilitating activities that encourage interaction with outcomes
that are realistically achievable, promoting one to one interaction between designated
residents and children, maintaining records of involvement, and including elements of
learning in all activities" (Knudsen, 1995, p. 1).
The general intergenerational program involved elderly residents defined as being
physically and cognitively active. The dementia intergenerational program involved elderly
residents diagnosed as having dementia and related characteristics. Twelve residents in the
general program and residents in the dementia program were unable to articulate responses
verbally during the modified Older Adult interview and/or recall the Montessori children.
Therefore, these residents were not included in the study. This study also did not include
those residents transferred from the dementia unit to the general unit who participated in the

1The name of the school has been changed to protect the identity of the children participating in the study.
2The name of the long term care facility has been changed to protect the identity of the residents
participating in thi s study.

39
general intergenerational program. One resident who participated in the general program
but was hospitalized for an indeterminate period of time was not included in the study.
Three students in the general program having experienced the death of a resident partner
were not included in the study. The numbers of subjects and their age ranges are seen in
Table 1.

TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF GENERAL AND DEMENTIA PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS
Participants in Programs

General Program

Dementia Program

Age Range of Children

6-8years

8-11 years

Total Number of Children

26

24

Children Participating in
Stud

20

16

Age Range of Elderly

65-100

43-90

Total Number of Elderly

33

18

Elderly Participating in Study

20

o3

Subjects
Children
Table 2 outlines the differences between the general and dementia programs.
Children in the dementia program spent three hours every other week in the classroom
participating in program-related activities and three hours during alternate weeks visiting
with residents of Valleyview Lodge. Children in the general program spent two hours
every other week in the classroom participating in program related activities and two hours
during alternate weeks visiting with residents. Individual pairing of students with specific
3Eighteen residents participated in the dementia program. However, residents in the dementia program were
unable to articulate responses verbally during the modified Older Adult interview and/or recall the
Montessori children. Therefore, these residents were not included in the study.

40

residents as "buddies" for the duration of the program occurred in the general program but
did not occur between students and residents in the dementia program (see Table 2).
TABLE 2
SUMMARY OF CHARACfERISTICS OF GENERAL AND DEMENTIA PROGRAMS
Program Components

General Program

Dementia Program

Total Hours in
Classroom

two hours biweekly

three hours biweekly

Total Hours at
Valleyview Lodge

two hours biweekly

three hours biweekly

Interactions with
Residents

individual assignment to
older adult resident

random assignment

Prior to intergenerational contact, the Recreational Therapist of Valleyview Lodge
led two orientation sessions with students in both programs to introduce them to the
program. The orientation sessions took place at the school and at Valleyview Lodge where
students were explained medical and behavioral situations they may encounter, strategies
for interacting with verbal and non-verbal residents, and the physical organization of
Valleyview Lodge. During the intergenerational programs, children from the dementia and
general intergenerational program learned songs from the 1920s and 30s, learned to dance,
made arts and craft projects as gifts for the residents, learned to communicate with verbal
and nonverbal residents, completed summaries of their visits, and studied the aging process
in class. Activities during visitation to the Valleyview Lodge included story book sharing,
presenting artwork, interviewing residents, singing, sharing common experiences (e.g.,
pets, houses, holidays), and participating in cooperative physical activities (e.g., parachute,
ball catching, balloon volleyball , basketball, rope skipping). Students participated in oneon-one activities with residents as well as whole group activities.

41
Residents
Residents in the dementia unit were assessed to have chronic progressive
Alzheimer's or associated geriatric dementias inclusive of significant behavior problems.
Admissible symptoms of dementia as defined by the Valleyview Lodge included loss of
short-term and long-term memory, impaired judgment, severe disorientation to person,
place or time, emotional lability, and inability to provide self care. Admissible behavior
problems included persistent elopement, disinhibition causing social incompatibility,
repetitive locomotive or verbal behaviors and physical aggression related to dementia.
Residents were placed in the general nursing home population when elopement was no
longer a care concern and when there was an absence of potential for endangering
themselves or others.
While some residents in the general program also demonstrated some of the
admissible symptoms of dementia, none demonstrated the behavior problems that were
present among residents in the dementia program. Residents were removed from the
general program when those behaviors found among residents in the dementia program
were observed. Some residents in both the general and dementia programs demonstrated
physical and mental impairments including limited vision, hearing deficits, limited mobility,
paralysis or aphasia, and loss of short-term and long-term memory. Wheelchairs and
walking assistant devices were utilized by residents in both programs.
Residents in the general program spent two to three hours biweekly completing
crafts or making snacks with the activities coordinators for the children. Residents in the
dementia program did not participate in program related activities beyond those that
occurred as part of the students' visits. The elderly participants were brought to the
activities rooms housed in their respective units each time that students visited. Residents
in both programs participated in the planned activities. Residents in the dementia program
participated in program activities much less than did residents in the general program due to

42
the characteristics of the older adult population that were previously discussed. Residents
in both programs participated in one-on-one activities with students as well as whole group
activities.

Instruments
Analysis of Attitudes of Students questionnaire
The Analysis of Attitudes of Students questionnaire (AASQ) consists of forty
alternate choice questions designed to indicate positive or negative perceptions of the
elderly (Lane, 1964). Twenty-five students from a grade two-three classroom in a different
school than those children sampled in this study participated in a pilot of the AASQ. Each
student received a copy of the questionnaire with the instructions not to include his or her
name on the questionnaire. As each question was read aloud by their teacher, each student
circled the answer he or she thought was appropriate on the questionnaire. Students were
asked to answ-e r the questions individually to the best of his or her ability.
Modifications to the questionnaire were based upon the students understanding of
the questions. Their teacher noted those questions that students asked to be repeated. The
teacher also observed students following the presentation of each question. When the noise
level among students increased, the teacher noted which question had been asked and
repeated the question for the students. She recognized that within her classroom, increased
discussion among students was an indication of the students' confusion or lack of
understanding. The teacher examined all the questionnaires for those questions where
answers had been changed by students one or more times. Student requests, teacher
observations and student responses were compared and examined for potential lack of
understanding. The researcher together with the teacher, modified the questionnaire based
on these observations, and the teacher's experience in the elementary school setting.
Standardized explanations were developed cooperatively based on the teacher's experience

43
with the population of interest (see Appendix A).

Older Adult Interview
The modified Older Adult interview (see Appendix B) was originally constructed by
Kuehne (1982) to identify perceptions on the part of the elderly participants in an
intergenerational program. Modification of questions occurred to suit the intergenerational
programs specific to this study as well as the particular objectives of this study. For
example, residents were asked to describe activities they participated in when the children
visited and to indicate those that they liked and disliked. This question, while not included
in Kuehne's original interview, was included in the modified interview to meet the
objective of examining the programs in relation to the residents' and the children's
responses. Residents were also asked to describe the children's behavior when they
visited. This was not included in Kuehne's original measure. It was included in response
to the age range of children in the general program and Kuehne's ( 1982) finding that more
negative child and older-adult interactions were reported by residents in intergenerational
programs with preschoolers. Finally, residents were asked how they thought other
residents felt about visiting with the children and how they were aware of this as a means
of accessing non-verbal indicators of enjoyment or unhappiness as identified by the
residents themselves. This question was not included in Kuehne's original interview.

Research Design
Children's Attitudes
To identify the relationships among children in the general and dementia programs
between a) program affiliation and attitudes, b) gender and attitudes, c) number of years of
participation in programs and attitude, and d) gender and number of years of participation,
a relational research design was undertaken. A representative sample is not the major

44
requirement for relational research. Instead, a reasonable degree of variability across all
variables is most important (Palys, 1992). Relational research also requires that the
measurement used to assess the phenomenon of interest demonstrates reliability and
validity. The objective of this study was to assess the interactions of a variety of variables
in relation to children's attitudes and not to identify causation. Therefore, a relational
research design was most appropriate for these research questions. The relationships
among these variables are analyzed quantitatively in Chapter Four.

Older Adult's Perceptions
To identify the positive or negative perceptions of the older adult participants
toward the children and the programs, an exploratory research design was undertaken. The
limited presence in the literature of assessment of perceptions of older adult participants in
intergenerational programming required an exploratory approach to, "gather as many
insights as possible about the phenomenon and the variables that influence it" (Palys, 1992,
p.85). Flexibility, open-ended techniques, and inclusion of atypical samples are important
elements to explorational research design. The perceptions of residents in the general
program are analyzed qualitatively in Chapter Four.

Summary
The attitudes of children in the general and dementia programs were quantitatively
analyzed using a relational research design while the perceptions of residents in the general
program were qualitatively analyzed using an exploratory research design. Both aspects of
the study followed a deductive or hypothetico-deductive method in order to challenge the
current theories in the literature. The research questions evolved from the current literature
on intergenerational programming and data were subsequently collected to test the
questions. Support for or lack of support for the research question can be examined in

45

Chapter Four.

Procedures
Students
The modified AASQ was administered to students in order to identify their positive
or negative attitudes toward the elderly in the general and dementia programs. The
researcher administered the modified AASQ to twenty-three students from the general
program and seventeen students from the dementia program over a three-day period after
receiving signed consent from their parents (see Appendix C), their two teachers, their
principal, and the school district (see Appendix D). The researcher administered the
modified AASQ during the course of a normal school day, near the end of the
intergenerational program for that academic school year. Students participating in the
general program completed the questionnaire on day one while students in the dementia
program completed the questionnaire on day two. Students absent from school in both the
general and the dementia programs as well as those students returning consent forms late
were administered the modified AASQ on day three.
The modified AASQ was administered in the school library and a school hallway.
Since students in the Montessori program do not regularly engage in testing as part of their
educational philosophy, it was the researcher's decision to conduct the questionnaires in
public areas within the school to alleviate anxiety students might have had prior to learning
of the nature and purpose of the test. The students completed the questionnaire in
alphabetical order from a class list provided by the teachers. Each student was numerically
coded both on the class list and on the questionnaire. The researcher retrieved the first
student from the classroom. That student was asked to retrieve the next student on the list
following completion of the test. This procedure was undertaken due to students moving
within the classroom and the school throughout the day. Each student took approximately

46

15 minutes to complete the questionnaire.
Upon arriving at the test site, the researcher greeted the student and proceeded to
ask if he or she had discussed the consent form with his or her parents. The researcher
explained that the permission form allowed her to complete the questionnaire with the
student and ask questions about senior citizens. The student was informed that he or she
could choose not to participate at any time during the test and return to class. It was
emphasized that the student could interrupt the researcher if he or she did not understand a
question and wished the question to be repeated. At this point, the student was provided
with an opportunity to ask questions about the information presented. The researcher
continued, explaining that the student's answers would only be shared with his or her
parents should the researcher be requested to share this information. The student was
asked not to share his or her responses or any questions from the modified AASQ with
other students. The student was again given the opportunity to ask the researcher any
questions about the information presented to this point.
Students were asked to describe what they knew about senior citizens. This
question served to inform the researcher whether students were cognizant of the age
segment of the population that was about to be discussed. The researcher did not challenge
their explanations but if they were not clear about the term, informed them that senior
citizens were like people at the Valleyview Lodge. Students identified the number of years
they had participated in the intergenerational program at Valleyview Lodge and identified
their resident partners if they were in the general program. This question served to identify
those students in the general program who had more than one resident partner as a result of
death or relocation. This information was confirmed by the activities coordinator and the
teachers. Three students in the general program having experienced the death of a resident
partner were not included in the study.
The researcher recorded students' responses as "yes" or "no" on the questionnaire

47
as each question was read aloud to the students. When the student provided justification
that neither a "yes" or "no" answer was appropriate, the answer "don't know" was
recorded. When a student was slow to give a response, the researcher repeated the
question and the student's answer and the student was asked to confirm that that was the
answer he/she had provided. The researcher then asked the student if he or she understood
the question. Based on the student's response, the researcher either repeated the original
question or continued to the next question on the questionnaire. When the student asked
the question to be explained, the researcher provided a standard explanation (see Appendix
A) to the student. If the student identified that he or she still did not understand the
question, the researcher left the question and returned to it after completing the remaining
alternate choice questions on the questionnaire. Following completion of the forty
questions, the student described what he or she liked and did not like about visiting
residents at the Valleyview Lodge. The student then sent for the next student on the class
list for his or her interview.
The children's scores were coded as 1 for a positive attitudinal response, 0 for a
negative attitudinal response and 0.5 for those responses that children justified as being
neither positive or negative. Male students were assigned as 1 and female students
assigned as 0. Student results were divided at the median and categorized into low,
negative scores and high, positive scores to maximize discrimination indices (Sax, 1989).
In the general program, nine students were assigned to the high group and eleven students
were assigned to the low, most negative group. Ten students were assigned to the low and
high groups in the dementia program.

Older Adult Participants
Interviews with residents in the general program occurred in order to identify their
positive or negative perceptions of the children and the program. Interviews with twenty

48
residents in the general program took place after written consent was received from the
Lodge administrator (see Appendix D) and verbal consent was obtained from the elderly
residents. For the purposes of this study, verbal consent from the residents included
residents was defined as verbal permission to be interviewed after being informed of the
interview topic, being made aware of the presence of a cassette recorder during the
interview, and having been told the measures that would be taken to protect their
anonymity. Numerical coding of audio tapes and transcripts occurred for each resident in
order to protect his/her identity. The names of school children were numerically coded
according to student identification from the modified AASQ. Relatives of the students or
employees of the Valleyview Lodge were abbreviated on transcripts if they were identified
during the interview.
A master list developed by the Activities Coordinators and the Recreational
Therapist of the V alleyview Lodge served as the basis for interviewing general program
residents. No resident failed to provide verbal consent. Residents in the dementia program
were unable to verbally communicate, unable to remember the children visiting from the
school and/or differentially respond to the interview questions. Residents in the dementia
program and 12 residents in the general program were not included in the study for these
reasons. One resident who participated in the general program but was hospitalized for an
indeterminate period of time was not included in the study.
Interviews occurred as residents were available at the residence in a variety of
locations within the facility including the residents' rooms, hallways, the dining area, the
activities room, or the inner courtyard of V alleyview Lodge. It was the researcher's
decision to restrict the degree of disruption for the residents by limiting relocation of the
resident from settings in which they felt comfortable. As a result, residents were
interviewed at the location where they were approached for the interview unless the
environment was not conducive to an interview. At no time were residents removed from

49
participation in organized activities, appointments or services provided by employees or
volunteers of the V alleyview Lodge.
Each resident responded orally to the questions (see Appendix B) and his/her
responses were recorded on audio tape. If the researcher perceived the resident to be
referring to children in general as opposed to the school children that visited the V alleyview
Lodge in their responses, the researcher reframed the question by specifically addressing
the question to the visiting school children. For example, question nine would be reframed
by the researcher to ask the resident whether he/she could describe activities that they
participated in with the children that visited from the school. The researcher repeated the
question if the resident's response did not specifically address the question asked. If after
repeating the question it was clear to the researcher that the resident did not understand the
question being asked, a response was not recorded and the researcher continued on to the
next question. The interview concluded when the resident had either answered all of the
questions or those that he/she was willing to answer.
Transcription of the interviews occurred within two days of the interview. In two
instances, interviews were conducted a second time due to poor audio quality or poor
communication skills on the part of the resident. Transcriptions of each interview included
both the resident's and the researcher's speech. Codes in capitalized letters inserted at the
beginning of each speaking tum identified the researcher and the resident. By transcribing
each speaker's response above the other, it was correctly implied that both the researcher
and the resident were equally involved in and important to the interaction (Edwards &
Lampert, 1993). Brackets indicated instances where overlap in speech occurred between
the resident and the researcher. Three consecutive periods indicated pauses occurring in
responses while inaudible portions of responses were noted by enclosing the word
"inaudible" in brackets within the transcribed response.
Qualitative analysis of the residents responses to the interview questions used

50
individual sentences as units of analysis. Analyzing and coding the content of those
sentences reflected the research objectives of summarizing the responses of the elderly
residents to their involvement in the intergenerational program. Edwards and Lampert
( 1993) suggest that by limiting what responses qualify as codeable cases, the researcher is
able to, "design the coding system specifically around that aspect of language that is of
interest... and provide for a more productive use of time" (p. 174). Edwards and Lampert
( 1993) also note that coding select cases do not allow for coding of the complete data set
and there exists the potential to overlook some aspects of the set. With consideration of
the advantages and disadvantages of restricting codeable cases as well as the research
objectives, only those sentences reflecting the content of the question asked and not every
sentence presented during the interviews were considered as codeable cases.
Codeable responses were analyzed according to the question that the response
followed. Responses that answered previous or subsequent questions or were appropriate
to more than one question in the modified Older Adult interview were analyzed for the
question in which they occurred. If the response failed to address the question presented,
the response was not coded. Codeable cases could be assigned to more than one category
based upon the content of the response but only within a single question from the modified
Older Adult interview.
A deductive coding system was developed from that coding system utilized by the
North York Board of Education (1987), the definitions of attitude by Fishbein and Ajzens
( 1975) and Marks et al., ( 1985). Codeable cases or sentences from each resident were first
sorted according to the question their responses addressed. Depending upon the context of
the sentence, codeable cases were assigned to the category "descriptive" or "evaluative".
Those responses including first-person pronouns were considered non-debatable personal
opinions and were classified as descriptive. Descriptive cases represented statements
describing directly-observable attributes of behavior, personality, appearance, or

51
miscellaneous statements. Those sentences containing third-person pronouns were
assigned to the evaluative category based upon their inability to hold true for all
respondents. Evaluative cases represented statements that evaluated behavior, personality,
appearance, or miscellaneous statements that were not representative of all residents'
perceptions.
Sentences were subsequently categorized within the main categories of description
and evaluation to reflect content addressing behavior, appearance, personality or miscellany
within each codeable case. In some instances, a codeable response contained more than
one content word within each sentence; therefore, a sentence was coded in more than one
of the sub-categories. For example, the response, "I look forward to them because they're
such a nice whole bunch of them you know" was categorized as descriptive miscellaneous
for the first portion of the response, "I look forward to them ... ". The second portion of the
response, "... they're such a nice whole bunch of them ... " was coded as evaluative
personality. Codeable cases containing similar content were grouped together (see Table
3). Each codeable case within the descriptive and evaluative categories was assigned to be
positive, negative or neutral within the categories of behavior, personality, appearance, or
miscellaneous in reference to the interview question. Table 3 provides illustrative examples
of responses coded in the positive descriptive category.

52
TABLE 3
POSITIVE DESCRIPfiVE RESPONSES FROM GENERAL PROORAM RESIDENTS
TO THE QUESTION, "CAN YOU DESCRIBE YOUR BUDDY FOR ME?"
aParenthesis indicate the number of times a response was presented by residents.

Appearance

Behavioral
Responses

Personality
Responses

Responses

Miscellaneous
Responses

students give
resident's gifts

(6)

neatness

(1)

(0)

residents give gifts
to students

(3)

actions of affection

(1) descriptions of

(l)

(0)

"I see the face and
the little girl."

(l)

proximity to
residents indicating
comfort with
resident partner

(4) smile on face

(1)

(0)

"She's fond of me."

(1)

student actions
indicating
attachment to
resident

(2)

(0)

(0)

"I'm happy to see
her."

(1)

behavior of students
indicating
recognition of
resident partners

(7)

(0)

(0)

"When she gets
older, I hope she
doesn't lose it
[thoughtfulness] ... "

(1)

residents watching
for student partners
to arrive

(2)

(0)

(0)

"She's just like my
little girl."

(1)

"I'd like to take her
home with me."

(1)

(0)

(0)

(l)
"I could take her as
mv own grandchild."

hair

53
CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS

The results of this investigation have been determined by several different types of
analysis. First an item analysis of the modified AASQ was conducted. This included the
calculation of discrimination indices and difficulty levels. Inferential statistics were
calculated to examine student attitude scores on the modified AASQ while descriptive
statistics were computed to examine the data from the modified older adult interview.
Independent sample t-tests were used to test the research questions of differences between
gender and differences between number of years participating in the programs. A phi
correlation coefficient was calculated to test hypothesized differences in the strengths of the
relationship between the variables gender and number of years in the intergenerational
programs. The final research question, concerning the perceptions of the older adult
participants, was qualitatively analyzed for positive and negative categories of descriptive
and evaluative behavior, appearance, personality, and miscellaneous responses. Each of
these analyses is described in detail below.

Item Analysis of Modified Analysis of Attitudes of Students Questionnaire
Rationale for Combining General and Dementia Program Responses
An independent samples t-test examined differences between mean item responses
for the general and dementia programs while a chi-square test of homogeneity tested the
hypothesis that the distribution of scores in the general program was proportionally equal to
the distribution of scores in the dementia program. The t-test for independent samples
(formula 4.1, Appendix E) indicated that the general group and the dementia group did not
differ significantly in their total positive responses: t (34) = 1.30, p > . 05. Since the t
ratio is robust to violations of the assumptions of normality and homogeneity of variance

54
(May & Masson, 1990; Glass & Hopkins, 1984), the t ratio calculated was accepted
because the assumption of independence of scores was not violated. The chi-square test of
homogeneity found no significant difference between score distributions; x2
(1, n

=1365) =7.19, p >. 01 (formula 4.2, Appendix E). The absence of a difference

between mean scores in each group as well as the absence of differences in distributions of
scores allowed the student scores in the general and dementia programs to be combined for
subsequent data analysis.

Item Analysis
Item analysis was completed for the purpose of identifying the functional adequacy
of the items in the modified AASQ. Discrimination indices (formula 43, Appendix E)
were calculated to measure, "the extent to which items differentiate between those persons
with the highest and lowest scores on the total test" (Sax, 1989, p. 232). Difficulty levels
(formula 4.4, Appendix E) of items or, "the proportion of students responding correctly to
[an item]" (Sax, 1989, p.234) were also calculated (see Appendix F). Table 4 identifies
that the majority of items for the modified AASQ had positive discrimination indices while
the remaining items had either negative or zero discrimination indices. Of the 29 items that
were positively discriminating, 19 had p values of .50 or greater while 10 had p values
lower than .50. Of five items that were negatively discriminating, all had p values of .50 or
greater. Six items having discrimination index values of zero had p values of .72 or
greater.
Gronlund and Linn (1995) suggest that well-constructed examinations will contain
items with low discriminating power. Sax (1994) states that, "the number of students
composing upper and lower groups on many teacher-made examinations is often so small
that chance could account for at least some of these negative differences, particularly when
the D value is small" (p. 233). Both Sax, and Gronlund and Linn emphasize that the

55
TABLE 4
A SUMMARY OFTHEITEMDISCRIMINATIONRESULTS OFTHEANALYSIS OF
ATTITUDES OF STUDENTS QUESTIONNAIRE
Discrimination Indices

Items

Positive Discrimination

2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 15,
16, 17, 20, 21 , 23, 24, 26, 27,
28, 29, 30, 31 , 32, 34, 35, 36,
37,38,40

Zero Discrimination

4, 13, 14, 22, 33, 39

Negative Discrimination

1, 9, 18, 19, 25

elimination of items developed to measure a specified objective functions to reduce the
content validity of the examination. Those items demonstrating maximum discrimination
values that exceeded item difficulty (Sax, 1990, p. 235) were examined for mis-keying or
technical defects. Finding none of these present, all of the items were retained.

Results of the Modified Analysis of Attitudes of Students Questionnaire
Analysis of attitude differences between students in the general and dementia
programs began with the calculation of means, standard deviations and skew. Appendix G
indicates that students in the dementia program performed more positively on 22 of 40
questionnaire items than did students in the general program. Students in the dementia
program also provided more neutral responses than did students in the general program.
Examination of Table 5 indicates that the distribution of total scores in the general program
was more negatively skewed than was the total scores distribution for the dementia
program (equation 4.5, Appendix E). An earlier independent samples t-test indicated that

56
TABLE 5
DISTRIBUTION OF STUDENTS SCORES ON THE MODIFIED ANALYSIS
OF STUDENTS QUESTIONNAIRE
General Program

Dementia Program

Mean

28.00

30.44

Median

30

30.5

6.61

2.04

!!

20

16

skew

-0.91

-0.09

mean scores did not differ significantly (p > .05) between the general and dementia
programs.

Gender and Number of Years in Programs
The examination of gender and number of years in the programs for the modified
AASQ scores provided different results. An independent samples t-test failed to identify
significant gender differences, t (34) = 1.42, p >. 05. However, a second t-test
identified a significant difference for the variable, number of years in the program, t (34)

= 2.37, p <. 05. Students participating in the programs for two years (M = 30.39, SD =
4.17) responded significantly more positively than did those students participating for their
first year (M = 27.04, SD =6.80). A phi correlation coefficient was calculated to identify
the strength of the relationship between the two dichotomous variables, gender and number
of years in the program (see equation 4.6, Appendix E). The correlation was not
significant: U¢ (34) = .05, p > . 05.).

57
Overall Perceptions of Students in the General and Dementia Programs
In response to the question, "What do you not like about visiting senior citizens at
the Valleyview Lodge?", students in both the general and dementia programs provided a
total of 18 responses. This indicated a small number of dislikes associated with both the
activities and people involved in the intergenerational program (see Table 6). In contrast,
when the students were asked the question, "What do you like about visiting senior citizens
at the Valleyview Lodge?", those students in both programs provided a total of86
responses which indicated a positive opinion of the activities and people involved in the
two programs (see Table 7). This value was 4.8 times greater than the frequency of
negative responses.

TABLE 6
FREQUENCIES FOR RESPONSES TO THE QUESTION, "WHAT DO YOU NOT
UKE ABOUT VISITING SENIOR CITIZENS AT THE VALLEYVIEW LODGE?"
Dementia Program

General Program

Activities

People

Activities
type of snack

1

when resident buddy
isn't there

2

when it's time to
leave

la when students don't
visit

People
seeing residents
upset

1

1

when residents
physically hurt
students

1

residents leave
messy tables after
breakfast

1

when students get
scared during visits

1

when residents
received gifts,
students didn't

1

the appearance of
some residents

1

when residents
physically hurt
students

1

some residents are
stubborn

1

walking to the
residence

5

2
6
5
a These responses were provided by students with resident partners not interviewed.

Total Respanses

5

58
TABLE 7
FREQUENCIES FOR RESPONSES TO THE QUESTION, "WHAT DO YOU LIKE
ABOUT VISITING SENIOR CITIZENS AT THE VALLEYVIEW LODGE?"
General Program
Activities

Dementia Program
Activities

People

People

playing games

4

their buddies

2

talking to residents

4

visiting with
residents

9

reading

3

visiting buddies

3

asking residents
questions

5

helping residents

1

giving gifts

2

visiting old people

2

playing games

5

meeting people

1

eating snacks

I

feel comfortable
around old people

1

singing

5

making new friends

1

talking with
residents

1

the residents

1

doing crafts

1

resident's jokes

1

going with their
class

1

don't visit their
grandparents often

I

listening to
residents' stories

2

learning from
residents

1

going to the Lodge

1

residents are fun to
be with

1a doing things with
residents

I

the residents

1

singing

1

seeing their buddies

1a walking to the

1

making residents
happy

3

playing games

3a meeting new
residents

exercising the
residents

1

residents seem
happy seeing
students

1

visiting the Lodge

2a

shaking residents'
hands

1

residents aren't fussy

1

talking

Ia

smiling

1

residents are funny

1

eating snacks

la

eating snacks

1

I

learning how to act

I

residents remember
most things

residents like the
activities

1

Lodge

1

Total Responses
21
13
30
a These responses were provided by students with resident partners not interviewed.

22

59
Results of Older Adult Interview
Perceptions of Older Adult Participants
Residents in the genetal program provided a total of 619 codeable responses for
questions three through seven and ten through twelve of the modified older adult
interview.4 Each resident provided a mean of 4.1 responses per question (see Appendix
H). Of those codeable responses provided by residents during the interview, 68.9 % were
positive, 17.2 % were negative, and 13.7 % were neutral in tetms of desctibing and
evaluating aspects of the genetal program. The results in Table 8 indicate that descriptive
and evaluative responses contributed similarly to the total codeable responses. Table 8 also
indicates that behavioral and miscellaneous responses accounted for the majority of total
codeable responses while both appearance and personality responses were stated less
frequently.

TABLE 8
Sl.JMMARY OF CODEABIE RESPONSES FROM OlDER ADULTS IN TIIE
GENERAL PROGRAM
Codeable Responses

Percentage Accounted For

Descriptive

52.1

Evaluative

47.9

Behavioral

54.9

Appearance

5.4

Personality

3.6

Miscellaneous

35.9

4Questions 1, 2, 8, and 9 were not included in the calculation of these figures. Questions 1 and 2
functioned to assess the cognitive acuity of the older adult participants and consequently
eliminate those participants unable to identify or remember the children who visited.
Questions 8 and 9 were analyzed according to characteristics of interaction.

60
The majority of residents described and evaluated individual student partners and
other children in the program positively in terms of behavior, personality, appearance, and
miscellaneous comments throughout the interview. In response to question three, "Can
you describe your buddy for me?", the majority of residents described behaviors positively
and evaluated positively both personality and behaviors (see Appendix I). The residents
responded similarly to question four, "Can you describe the other children that visit?". The
majority of residents chose to describe the students behavior positively in response to
question five, "What do you think of the children's behavior?".
Residents provided largely positive descriptive and evaluative responses for
questions six and seven to indicate what they liked and did not like about the visiting
children. In response to question eight, "Can you describe some of the activities you
participate in with the children when they visit?", 34% of responses referred to activities
involving the interaction of students with each other. Sixty-six percent of responses
described activities involving the interaction of students with residents. When asked
question nine, the majority of residents failed to identify any activities they did not enjoy
(see Appendix J).
The majority of residents positively described and evaluated the behaviors of
residents around them during the students' visits in response to question ten, "How do you
think the other residents feel about visiting with the children?". In response to question
eleven, "What do you see when the residents are visiting with the children?", the majority
of residents provided positive descriptions and evaluations of the behaviors of other
residents and students during visits. Finally, when asked question twelve, "Is there
anything else you would like to tell me about visiting with the children?", residents
positively described and evaluated the children in the program more frequently than
residents did their individual student partners (see Appendix K).

61
CHAPTER AVE
DISCUSSION

Overview of Study
Subjects
As part of the Montessori curriculum, fifty Montessori students participated in two
ongoing intergenerational programs with fifty-one residents in a long-term care facility.
Twenty students ranging in age from six to eight years and 20 elderly residents participated
in the study from the general program. Sixteen students ranging in age from eight to eleven
years participated in the study from the dementia program that included elderly residents
diagnosed with dementia and dementia-related illness. Three students in the general
program having experienced the death of a resident partner were not included in the study.
Twelve residents from the general program and residents in the dementia program who
were unable to articulate responses verbally during the interview and/or were unable to
recall the Montessori children did not participate in the study. Some residents in both
programs demonstrated physical impairments, limited mobility, and loss of function as a
consequence of illness requiring wheelchairs, hearing aids, and walking assistance devices.

Program Characteristics
Students participated in the intergenerational programs for one or two years
depending on their year of entry into the Montessori program while residents participated
for one month to two years depending upon their arrival at the residence. Students visited
residents at the Valleyview Lodge on alternate weeks and participated in games, reading,
singing, and sharing gifts and snacks. Students in the general program were assigned to
resident "buddies" and participated in cooperative activities with their older adult partners.
Students in the dementia program were not assigned to individual resident but participated

62

in activities that involved all residents. Alternate weeks of the program included
examination of the aging process, construction of gifts for residents, and applied journal
writing in the classroom for students. Residents in the general program prepared snacks
and gifts for their student partners while residents in the dementia program did not engage
in program-related activities outside of student visits. Students and residents in both
programs participated in one-on-one and whole group activities during visits to the
Valleyview Lodge.

Results
Modified Analysis of Attitudes of Students Questionnaire
The results from the modified AASQ supported in part the research questions.
Significant differences between mean scores of students in the general and dementia groups
were not observed. Students in the general program did not have significantly more
positive attitudes than did those students in the dementia program. Males in the general and
dementia programs did not have significantly more positive attitudes than did females.
However, significant differences between number of years in the programs were identified.
Students participating in the programs for two years had more positive attitudes than did
students participating for one year. There was no relationship between the variables gender
and number of years participation in the programs.
Students from the general and dementia programs provided a majority of positive
responses in reference to the question, "What do you like about visiting with the senior
citizens at the Valleyview Lodge?". Students in both programs provided 4.8 times more
positive responses versus negative responses. Playing games, visiting, asking residents
questions, singing, reading to the residents, talking with residents, and giving gifts were
aspects of the programs that students in the general and dementia programs reported most
frequently when describing what they liked about the programs. When students were

63
asked the question, "What do you not like about visiting with the senior citizens at the
Valleyview Lodge?", there were few aspects of the programs that they did not like.

Modified Older Adults Interview
The largely positive responses from residents in the general program support the
limited research on the perceptions of older-adult intergenerational program participants.
Residents identified that they loved the children in the program, they loved children in
general, and visiting with students. When residents were asked to identify the activities
that they participated in when the children visited, 34% of responses referred to activities
involving the interaction of students with each other. Sixty-six percent of responses
described activities involving the interaction of students with residents. When residents
were asked to identify what they did not like about the general program, the majority
identified that there were few aspects of the program that they did not like.
Responses from residents in the general program to questions during the interview
were consistently positive. Of the total codeable responses provided by residents, 68.9 %
were positive, 17.2% negative, and 13.7% neutral. Of the positive codeable responses
that described and evaluated the children and program, 52.1 %accounted for descriptive
responses and 47.9 % evaluative responses. With regard to the frequency of the different
types of codeable responses, most frequent were those addressing behavior. These were
followed by miscellaneous, appearance and personality responses in that order.

Research Results and the Intergenerational Literature
The results ofthis study strongly demonstrate positive overall experiences for
students in both programs and residents participating in the general program. The majority
of residents in the general program and students in both programs idenfied few aspects of
the program that they disliked. The negative responses provided by residents and students

64
addressed external, environmental aspects of the programs as opposed to individual
participants or activities. Similar findings in the literature including Newman and Reiss
(1992) and others would suggest that intergenerational programs are perceived by young
and old to be generally positive and enjoyable experiences (Chapman & Neal, 1990; Haber

& Short-deGraf, 1990; Keller, 1990; Seefeldt, 1989; Allred & Dobson, 1987; North York
Board of Education, 1987; Seefeldt, 1987a; Seefeldt, 1987b; Cherry et al., 1985; Newman
et al. , 1985; Pratt, 1984; Sheehan, 1981).
Residents in both programs could be described as "unhealthy" in terms of their lack
of independence and health concerns. Residents in the dementia program demonstrated
less independence, mobility, activity, and cognitive ability than did residents in the general
program. Based upon the literature it was expected that children would demonstrate more
negative attitudes in programs that included older adults demonstrating greater degrees of
declining health (Fox & Giles, 1993; Aday et al., 1991; Chapman & Neal, 1990; Keller,
1990; Seefeldt, 1987a; Caspi, 1984; Seefeldt et al., 1977b; Drake, 1957; Tuckman &
Lorge, 1952). The absence of a significant difference in attitude between students in the
general and dementia programs fails to support these findings in the current literature.
The intergenerationalliterature identifies links between intimate intergenerational
contact and children's positive attitudes (Aday et al., 1991; Chapman & Neal, 1990; Keller,
1990; Seefeldt, 1987a) as well as informal contact and older adults' positive perceptions
(Drake, 1957). The absence of a significant mean difference between the attitudes of
students in the general and dementia programs indicates that the nature of intergenerational
contact, intimate verses casual, did not contribute to children's attitudes in this study.
Residents in the general program more frequently identified those activities that engaged
students and residents than those activities that engaged students with each other. This
result lends support to the link between the nature of contact and older adult perceptions.

65
The exclusion of older adult participants in the dementia program from this study did not
allow for examination of resident's perceptions in this program.
This study identified significant differences between the number of years in the
programs, lending support to the findings of the North York Board of Education (1987)
and others (Seefeldt et al. , 1977b; Serock et al. , 1977). The North York Board of
Education ( 1987) found that students participating in an intergenerational program for their
second year reported more positive attitudes toward growing old. Students participating in
the current study for a second year became more comfortable with and more accepting of
residents in the long-term care facility as a result of becoming more familiar with the
routines during the programs. While age was not controlled for in this study, age effects of
students may have also contributed to this result. Such effects were noted in the research
of Thomas and Yamamoto (1975).

Limitations
Study design as well as the intergenerational program structure limits the results of
this study. The samples in this study do not support the identification of causal inferences.
The results of this study can only be considered in the context of these two programs due to
the utilization of purposive sampling of the elderly and the absence of an initial
measurement to identify differences in Montessori students and non-Montessori students.
Confounding variables including two different teachers, different age groups in each
program, and two distinctly different older adult populations also limit these results. These
specific differences in each program limit the validity of comparisons of childrens' attitudes
in the general and dementia programs.
By controlling for age and increasing the range of number of years of participation
in subsequent intergenerational program research, the relationships between these factors
and attitudes among children can be more clearly defined. The structure of the programs

66
included in this study allowed children to participate in the intergenerational programs for ·
their first year irrespective of age or program. For example, a student in the dementia
program could potentially be the oldest among his or her peers yet be participating for his
or her first year in the intergenerational program. A younger student could be participating
for his or her second year in the same program. In addition, this study did not control for
gender differences between older adults and children. Despite the absence of differences in
attitudes between male and female students found in this study, the relationships between
gender, length of time of participation, and the attitudes of children and older adult
participants in intergenerational programs needs further exploration considering the trend in
population demographics and its relative absence from the intergenerationalliterature.
This study did not examine the relationship between children's attitudes toward
older adults and the quantity or quality of intergenerational filial and non-filial contact
children experienced outside the program. Sheehan (1978) and others ( Newman & Riess,
1992; Seefeldt, 1987b; Tindale, 1986; Hook et al., 1982) indicate that filial contact
between children and older adults remains high and Tindale ( 1986) suggests that filial
contact is normally of high quality. However, few studies examine the relationship
between prior filial contact and children's attitudes toward older adults following
participation in intergenerational programs. Current literature examines the perceptions of
older adult participants following intergenerational experiences and prior filial and non-filial
contact to a limited degree. The failure to examine prior intergenerational contact among
students in both programs does not allow attitudes based upon the modified AASQ to be
conclusively attributed to the students' participation in the programs.
Attrition required modifications to the elderly sample in this study. The
configuration of the elderly sample changed in both programs through the two-year period
because of death and the progressive nature of dementia and related illness. The death of
an elderly partner excluded three students in the general program from this study . The

67
structure of the dementia program resulted in no students being removed from the study as
a result of a death within the elderly population or removal of residents from the program.
The current study did not explore whether the death of a student's assigned "buddy"
influenced the student's attitude toward older adults or his or her perceptions of the
program. General program residents excluded from this study also included those
residents transferred from the special care unit and residents removed from the general
program due to cognitive or physical decline. The exclusion of some older adults from the
general program and all older adults from the dementia program did not permit examination
of their perceptions toward the children or the program.
An outbreak of Fifth's disease among the children canceled the remaining visits to
the Valleyview Lodge for the academic year. As a result, this study included only those
residents in the general program who were able to communicate their responses verbally
during the Older Adult Interview and recall the children who visited the facility. These
constraints curtailed an initial plan to systematically observe the interactions between the
students and the residents and monitor the nonverbal behaviors of the participants.
The exclusion of older-adult participants in the dementia program did not allow for
a comparison of perceptions between elderly participants in the general and dementia
programs. The instrument used in this study to assess perceptions of older adult
participants required the exclusion ofthose participants demonstrating cognitive disabilities
or the inability to articulate responses. Intergenerational programs include older adults with
a variety of physical and cognitive abilities. The use of assessment instruments that rely
upon both verbal and nonverbal observations in program evaluations would allow for the
participation of a larger number of older adults and more accurate representation of the
perceptions of the members of this sub-population.

68
Areas for Future Research
While Aday et al., (1991) and others (Seefeldt et al., 1977a; Arthur et al., 1973)
indicate that resiliency of attitudes in children can endure beyond termination of
intergenerational programs, more longitudinal work needs to be done to outline the
direction of students' attitudes over extended periods of time and beyond the programs
themselves. If attitudes developed in childhood remain influential throughout the life cycle
(Aday et al., 1991; Weinberger, 1979; Jantz et al., 1977; Seefeldt et al., 1977a),
longitudinal research on attitudes of children following participation in intergenerational
programs needs to be conducted to explore the durability of attitudes through early
adolescence, early adulthood, and later adulthood. Children's attitudes in ongoing
intergenerational programs and the evolution of attitudes prior to, during, and beyond
participation in such programs requires further research.
Streitfield ( 1976) suggests that many residents participating in an intergenerational
program with children, "were unaware of what the children's presence meant to them" (p.
102). Casual observations of students and older adults in both programs of this study and
comments of residents in the general program indicate that hugging, laughing, singing,
holding hands, joking, smiling, and children sitting in residents' laps and on their knees,
were commonplace during the children's visits. Intergenerational programs provide
opportunities for older adults to engage in activities with children that often do not require
verbal communication; thereby, allowing older adults of all capabilities to participate.
Assessment of attitudes of all participants requires further research of older adults and
intergenerational programming including examination of the perceptions of those
participants able to communicate and those not able to communicate their perceptions about
intergenerational programs.
As attrition among older adults, particularly residents in long-term care facilities, is
a natural part of intergenerational programming, research on the attitudes of children

69
concerning the social and emotional impacts of health decline and death are important issues
to explore. This study excluded those children who experienced the death of their "buddy"
while others excluded those children who experienced the death of a relative (Caspi, 1984).
As the average life span increases, a greater proportion of the younger generation will
experience interage contact and the death of older adult relatives. It is the responsibility of
intergenerational program facilitators to provide appropriate information and support
regarding the aging process. To assist in this task, it will be helpful to have research
information concerning the attitudes of children who experience the death of an
intergenerational "buddy". Future research needs to explore the relationship between death
experiences and children's attitudes towards older adults.
More extensive examination of relationships between gender and attitudes toward
older adults following intergenerational programs need to take place in the literature. The
correct impression of many children is that the majority of older adults are female (Baggett,
1977). Current demographic information indicates that females tend to have longer average
)

life spans than do males (Himes, 1992). If children are to question and challenge their own
ideas about aging and the elderly, exposure to equally-represented male and female older
adults during intergenerational programs is essential. As a result, the relationship between
gender and childrens' attitudes toward the elderly needs to be researched further.
lntergenerational programs and their incorporation into the education curriculum are
important areas for future research. Current demographic statistics indicate that increasing
numbers of children will experience interage contact and attitude theorists suggest that
attitudes remain relatively constant through life when learned in early childhood.
Intergenerational programs at the elementary school level can promote positive attitudes
among children in an aging society. Further research on curriculum-integrated
intergenerational programs and children's attitudes toward older adults may provide
direction for future curriculum development in the education system.

70
Summary
The positive perceptions of students and residents in this study support similar
results in the intergenerationalliterature and the implementation of intergenerational
programs for generally positive experiences among older and younger participants. The
failure to find significant differences in attitudes among students in the programs of this
study and the identification of children's positive and negative attitudes in some
intergenerational programs leaves room for further intergenerational research (A day et al.,
1991; Chapman & Neal, 1990; Allred & Dobson, 1987; North York Board of Education,
1987; Dellman-Jenkins et al., 1986; Caspi, 1984). The results of the present investigation
indicate the need for additional research on gender and the attitudes of children following
intergenerational programs. Further research is neccessary in the areas of assessment of
older-adult perceptions through verbal and nonverbal instruments, and resiliency of
children's attitUdes following intergenerational contact. As well, the effects of health
declines in older adult participants upon children's attitudes require further research.
The results of this study lend support to recent findings in intergenerational research
as well as extend the findings of other researchers of this topic. Intergenerational programs
including institutionalized older adults can provide positive experiences for young and old.
As part of the responsibility of elementary counselors is to promote social-emotional
development within children, intergenerational programs may facilitate positive attitudes
between children and older adults. Further research and intergenerational program
evaluations will refine the relationship between children's attitudes and specific features of
intergenerational contact including participant characteristics, settings of programs, and
program activities.

71
REFERENCES
Aday, R.H., Sims, C.R., & Evans, E. (1991). Youth's attitudes toward the elderly: The
qimpact of intergenerational partners. The Journal of Applied Gerontology, 10 ~
372-384.
Allred, G.B., & Dobson, J.E. (1987). Remotivation group interaction: Increasing
children's contact with the elderly. Elementary School Guidance and Counseling,
21' 216-220.
Arthur, G.L., Donnan, H.H., & Lair, C.V. (1973). Companionship therapy with nursing
home aged. The Gerontologist, 13, 167-170.
Baggett, S. (1981). Attitudinal consequences of older adult volunteers in the public school
setting. Educational Gerontology, 7 ~ 21-31.
Bee, H. (1992). The developing child (6th edition). New York: Harper-Collins.
Bocian, K., & Newman, S. (1989). Evaluation of intergenerational programs: Why and
~ 147-163.
how? Journal of Children in Contemporary Society, 20
Borg, W.R., & Gall, M.D. (1989). Educationalresearch. New York: Longman.
Britton, J.O. & Britton, J.H. (1969). Discrimination of age by preschool children.
Journal of Gerontology, 24 (4), 457-460.
Brubaker, T.H., & Brubaker, E. (1984). Family support of older persons in the long-term
care setting: Recommendations for practice. In W.H. Quinn, & G.A. Hughston
(Eds.), Independent aging: Family and social systems perspectives (pp. 106-113).
Rockville, MD: Aspen Systems.
Caspi, A. (1984). Contact hypothesis and inter-age attitudes: A field study of cross-age
contact. Social Psychology Quarterly, 47, 74-80.
Center for Human Settlements. (1983). An older workforce: Legal aspects and policy
implications (Occasional Paper No.28 [2]). Vancouver, Canada: University of
British Columbia, Faculty of Graduate Studies.
Chapman, N.J., & Neal, M.B. (1990). The effects of intergenerational experiences on
adolescents and older adults. The Gerontologist, 30 ~ 825-832.

72
Cherry, D.L., Benest, F.R., Gates, B., & White, J. (1985). lntergenerational service
programs: Meeting shared needs of young and old. The Gerontologist, 25, 126130.
Cowgill, D.O. (1986). Aging around the world. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.
Crites, M.S. (1989). Child development and intergenerational programming. InS.
Newman & S.W. Brummel (Eds.), Intergenerational programs: Imperatives,
strategies, impacts and trends (pp. 33-45). New York: Haworth Press.
Dellman-Jenkins, M., Lambert, D., Fruit, D., & Dinero, T. (1986). Old and young
together: Effect of an educational program on preschoolers' attitudes toward older
people. Childhood Education, 64, 206-212.
Drake, J.T. (1957). Some factors influencing students' attitudes toward older people.
Social Forces, 35, 266-271.
Edwards, J.A., & Lampert, M.D. (Eds.). (1993). Talking data: Transcription and coding
in discourse research. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Erikson, E.H. (1963). Childhood and society (2nd ed.). Toronto, Canada: W.W. Norton
&Company.
Fillmer, H. T. (1984). Children's descriptions of and attitudes toward the elderly.
Educational Gerontology, 10, 99-107.
Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I. (1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An
introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Fox, S. & Giles, H. (1993). Accommodating intergenerational contact: A critique and
theoretical model. Journal of Aging Studies, 7 (4), 423-451.
Gee, E.M. ( 1987). Historical change in the family life course of Canadian men and
women. In V.W. Marshall (Ed.), Aging in Canada: Social perspectives (2nd ed.,
pp. 265-288). Markham, Canada: Fitzhenry & Whiteside.
Glass, G., & Hopkins, K.D. (1984). Statistical methods in education and psychology.
Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

73
Golde, P.A.B., & Kogan, N. (1959). A sentence completion procedure for assessing
attitudes toward old people. Journal of Gerontology, 14, 355-364.
Government of Ontario, Canada. ( 1983 ). A guidebook for intergenerational programming.
Toronto, Canada: Ministry of Tourism and Recreation.
Gronlund, N. E. , & Linn, R. L. (1995). Educational tests and measurement (7th ed.).
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Haber, E.B., & Short-DeGraf, M. (1990). Intergenerational programming for an
increasingly age-segregated society. Activities, Adaptation, Aging, 14 ~ 35-52.
Henkin, N.Z. , & Sweeney, S.W. (1989). Linking systems: A systems approach to
intergenerational programming. InS. Newman & S.W. Brummel (Eds.),
lntergenerational programs: Imperatives, strategies, impacts and trends (pp.165173}. New York: Haworth Press.
Hickey, T ., Hickey, L.A. , & Kalish, R.A. (1968). Children's perceptions of the elderly.
The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 112, 227-235.
Hill, D. (1987). Promoting intergenerational programs: Triads with youth, elderly, and
students, a case example. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 10
~
165.
Himes, C.L. ( 1992). Future caregivers: Projected family structures of older persons.
Journal of Gerontology, 47 (1 ), S 17-S25.
Hook, W.F., Sohal, J., & Oak, J.C. (1982). Frequency of visitation in nursing homes:
Patterns of contact across boundaries of total institutions. The Gerontologist, 22,
424-428.
Jantz, R.K., Seefeldt, C., Gal per, A. , & Serock, K. ( 1977). Children's attitudes toward
the elderly. Social Education: A Journal of the National Council for the Social
Studies, 41, 518-523.
Keller, J.M. (1990). Intergenerational sharing: Teens and elderly for the arts (TEA). The
Journal of Applied Gerontology, 9 (3), 312-324.
Kidwell, I.J. , & Booth, A. (1977). Social distance and intergenerational relations. The
Gerontologist, 17, 412-420.

74
Kite, M.E. & Johnson, B.T. (1988). Attitudes toward older and younger adults: A metaanalysis. Psychology and Aging, 3 (3), 233-244.
Knox, V., Gekosk.i, W.L., & Johnson, E.A. (1986). Contact with and perceptions of the
elderly. The Gerontologist, 26, 309-313.
Knudsen, B. (1995, December). lntergenerational Programs. Paper presented at the
meeting of the Northern Interior Recreational Therapists, Prince George, Canada.
Kratochwill, T.R., & Goldman, J.A. (1973). Developmental changes in children's
judgments of age. Developmental Psychology, 9 (3), 358-362.
Kuehne, V. ( 1992). Older adults in intergenerational programs: What are their
experiences really like? Activities, Adaptation, Aging, 16 (4), 49-67.
Lane, B. ( 1964). Attitudes of youth towards the aged. Journal of Marriage and the
Family, 26, 229-231.
Lippa, R. A. (1990). Introduction to social psychology. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
McFarland, M.J .E. ( 1985). Activity theory: An empirical test among greater Victoria
residents 55 and over. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Victoria,
Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.
Mctavish, D.G. (1971). Perceptions of old people: A review of research methodologies
and findings. The Gerontologist, 11, 90-101.
Marks, R., Newman, S., & Onawola, R. (1985). The development of an
intergenerational service-learning program at a nursing home. The Gerontologist,
25, 130-133.
Marshall, V.W. (1980). Aging in an aging society. Multiculturalism.4 (3), 6-13.

75

Masciocchi, C., Thomas, A., & Moeller, T. (1984). Support for the impaired elderly: A
challenge for family care-givers. In W.H. Quinn & G.A. Hughston (Eds.),
Independent aging: Family and social systems perspectives (pp. 115-133).
Rockville, MD: Aspen Systems.
May, R.B., & Masson , M.E.J. ( 1990). Application of statistics in behavioral research.
New York: Harper & Row.
Newman, S., Lyons, C.W. , & Onawola, R.S. (1985). The development of an
intergenerational service-learning program at a nursing home. The Gerontologist,
25, 130-133.
Newman, S. & Riess, J. (1992). Older workers in intergenerational child care. Journal of
Gerontological Social Work, 19 (2), 45-61.
North York Board of Education ( 1987). Old and young together: Impact of
intergenerational programs on students and seniors in schools operated by the
North York Board of Education. North York, Canada: North York Board of
Education.
Palys, T .S. ( 1992). Research decisions: Quantative and qualitative perspectives.
Toronto, Canada: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Canada Inc.
Pratt, F. (1984). Teaching today's kids-tomorrow's elders. Aging (346), 20-26.
Reville, S. (1989). Young adulthood to old age: Looking at intergenerational possibilities
from a human development perspective. In S. Newman & S.W. Brummel (Eds.),
Intergenerational programs: Imperatives, strategies, impacts and trends (pp.
45-53). New York: Haworth Press.
Roberto, K.A. & Scott, J.P. (1986). Equity considerations in the friendships of older
adults. Journal of Gerontology, 41 (2), 241-247.
Rosenthal, C.J. (1987). Aging and intergenerational relations in Canada. In V.W.
Marshall (Ed.)., Aging in Canada; Social Perspective (2nd ed., pp. 311-343).
Markham, Ontario, Canada. Fitzhenry & Whiteside.
Sax., G. (1989). Principles of educational and psychological measurement and evaluation.
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

76
Seefeldt, C. ( 1989). Intergenerational programs-Impact on attitudes. Journal of Children
in Contemporary Society, 20 (3-4), 185-194.
___. (l987a). lntergenerational programs: Making them work. Childhood
Education, 64 (1), 14-18.
___. ( 1987b). The effect of preschoolers' visits to a nursing home. The
Gerontologist, 27 (2), 228-232.
Seefeldt, C., Bredekamp, S., Jantz, R.K., & Serock, K. (1982). How elders view
children. Children Today, 11 (2), 16-21.
Seefeldt, C., Jantz, R.K., Galper, A., & Serock, K. (1977a). Children's attitudes toward
the elderly: Educational implications. Educational Gerontology, 2, 301-310.
___. (1977b). Using pictures to explore children's attitudes toward the elderly. The
Gerontologist, 17 (6), 506--512.
Seelbach, W.C. (1984). Filial responsibility and the care of aging family members. In
W.H. Quinn & G.A. Hughston (Eds.), Independent aging: Family and social
systems perspectives (pp.92-106). Rockville, MD: Aspen Systems.
Seltzer, M.M., & Atchley, R.C. (1971). The concept of old: Changing attitudes and
stereotypes. The Gerontologist, 11, 226-230.
Serock, K., Seefeldt, C., Jantz, R.K., & Galper, A. (1977). As children see old folks.
Today's Education, 66, 70-73.
Sheehan, R. (1978). Young children's contact with the elderly. Journal of Gerontology,
36 (4), 567-574.
Statistics Canada (1991). Canadian Census Analyser [Online]. Available
HITP://datacenter.chass.utoronto.ca: SfRJJ/cgi-bin/censci.sh.
Streitfield, E. (1976). Young and old together. Social Policy, 7, 100-102.

77
Thomas, E.C., & Yamamoto, K. (1975). Attitudes toward age: An exploration in school
age children. The International Journal of Aging and Human Development,
§, 117-129.
Tindale, J.A. (1986). Successful intergenerational family relationships: Implications for
programming. Conference on Intergenerational Relationships and Programming,
Guelph, Canada: University of Guelph.
Tuckman, J., & Lorge, I. (1952) The effect of institutionalization on attitudes toward old
people. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 47,337-344.
Ventura-Merkel, C., Liederman, D.S., & Ossofsky, J. (1989). Exemplary
intergenerational programs. Journal of Children in Contemporary Society, 20 (34}, 173-180.
Weinberger, A. (1979). Stereotyping of the elderly: Elementary school children's
responses. Research on Aging, 1 ( 1}, 112-136.

78
APPENDIX A
ITEMS AND STANDARD EXPlANATIONS FOR THE MODIAED ANALYSIS OF
ATTITUDES OF STUDENTS QUESTIONNAIRE
Question
Number

Question (Do you think that senior
citizens ... )

Standardized Explanation

Response

1

think young moms and dads aren't
good parents?

Yes

No

2

have bad table manners?

Yes

No

3

are hard to look after when they are
sick?

Yes

No

4

think that young moms and dads are
good parents?

Yes

No

5

feel safe most of the time?

Yes

No

6

are bossy most of the time?

Yes

No

7

don't like changes in their schedules or
routines?

Yes

No

8

usually see the happy side of things?

Yes

No

9

don't spend their money when they
have it?

Yes

No

10

get upset easily?

Yes

No

11

are easy to care for when they are

Yes

No

12

don't take things that belong to other
people?

Yes

No

13

are grouchy most of the time?

Yes

No

14

like to gossip, spread rumors?

Yes

No

Schedules are what
Mrs. M. puts on the chalkboard that
tells you what you need to do during
the day.

sick?

Gossip means to tell stories about
other people without
their permission and without knowing
whether it is true
or not.

79
APPENDIX A - CONTINUED
Question
Number

Question (Do you think that senior
citizens ... )

15

think nothing good is going to happen
in their life?

16

like to be served and fussed over most
of the time?

17

Standardized Explanation

Response
Yes

No

Yes

No

are unhappy most of the time?

Yes

No

18

are fun to be with most of the time?

Yes

No

19

listen to ideas?

Yes

No

20

remember names well?

Yes

No

21

keep up with current ideas and events?

Yes

No

22

think bad things about people younger
than themselves?

Yes

No

23

hardly ever get upset?

Yes

No

24

think that other people must take care
of them?

Yes

No

25

like to learn new things?

Yes

No

26

think that their children don't take care
of them?

Yes

No

27

are picky about their food?

Yes

No

28

are very stubborn?

Yes

No

29

are able to do things on their own and
take care of themselves?

Yes

No

They like lots of attention.

Current events are things that are
happening today or
yesterday or last week that we read
about in the newspaper or hear about
on the news. Dinosaurs are old news,
not current events.

They are not very cooperative.

80
APPENDIX A - CONTINUED
Question
Number

Question (Do you think that senior
citizens ... )

30

poke their noses in other people's
business?

31

Standardized Explanation
When people ask us things that we
don't want to share or we want to keep
secret.

Response

Yes

No

are helpful around the house?

Yes

No

32

have good table manners?

Yes

No

33

are unsure of themselves, don't know
what to do?

Yes

No

34

think good things about people
younger than themselves?

Yes

No

35

like to look after themselves?

Yes

No

36

are in the way?

Yes

No

37

are easy to get along with?

Yes

No

38

find ways to take care of themselves?

Yes

No

39

are careful about how they look?

Yes

No

40

talk about and do more things from the
olden days instead of doing things that
people do today?

Yes

No

81
APPENDIX B
MODiflEDOLDERADULTINTERVIEW

1.

How long have you been a resident at the Valleyview Lodge?

2.

Who is your buddy that visits from the school?

3.

Can you describe your buddy for me?

4.

Can you describe the other children that visit?

5.

What do you think of the children's behavior?

6.

What do you like about visiting the children?

7.

What do you not like about visiting the children?

8.

Can you describe some of the activities you participate in with the children when
they visit?

9.

Are th_ere any activities that you don't enjoy participating in?

10.

How do you think the other residents feel about visiting with the children?

11.

What do you see when the residents are visiting with the children?

12.

Is there anything else you would like to tell me about visiting with the children?

82
APPENDIX C
LEITER OF INFORMED CONSENT FOR PARENTS

To Whom It May Concern:
As a graduate student at the University of Northern British Columbia I am studying
children's attitudes toward the elderly in connection with intergenerational programs such
as the program that your son/daughter has been participating in with residents of the
Valleyview Lodge. This research, I believe, will provide teachers, students and activity
program coordinators at long-term care facilities with information that will help them
review and improve programs between children and the elderly. I have been involved in
the HillsideN alleyview Lodge intergenerational programs for the past two years as a
volunteer with the Valleyview Lodge.
If you would like your child to be part of this research project, he/she will be asked
to respond to a questionnaire identifying children's perceptions of the elderly. He/she may
also be observed during their participation in the program at the Valleyview Lodge. At that
time, note taking will occur. Your child's questionnaire results or program observations
can be discussed with you at your request. Throughout this research project, all
information collected from your child will remain confidential and accessible only to
myself. Your child's identity will remain strictly confidential at all times. At your request,
your child's involvement in this research project will be stopped at any time.
This information may help your child's teacher and the activity coordinators at the
Valleyview Lodge improve the intergenerational programs. If you would like additional
information about this project, I would be glad to discuss it with you by phone (777-7777).

Shannon Toronitz

83
APPENDIX C - CONTINUED

I would like ...,........,..-:-:------,---------to participate in this project.
(child's name)

(signature of parent or guardian)

(date)

84
APPENDIX D
LEITER OF INFORMED CONSENT FOR HILLSIDE SCHOOL, VALLEYVIEW
LODGE, AND SCHOOL DISTRICf #57

To Whom It May Concern:

I have discussed the study of children's attitudes and intergenerational programming with
Shannon Ableson-Toronitz as she has described it in her request for ethical approval from
the University of Northern British Columbia. I give my permission for this study to be
carried out with students in the classroom of _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (name of teacher)
at _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _(name of school) and with residents at
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ (name of long-term care facility). I understand that all
participants are participating in this study voluntarily, and may withdraw at any time. I
understand that all data will be kept strictly confidential and will remain accessible only to
the researcher. I also understand that in the writing up of this project, the ideptity of all
participants will be kept strictly confidential and that my participation in this study will in
no way affect my employment or advancement.

(signature of teacher, school district administrator or activities coordinator)

(facility)

(date)

85
APPENDIX E
STATISTICAL FORMULAS AND FORMULA DEANITIONS IN ANALYSIS
Definition of Formula

Statistical Formula

( 4.1)

-Xi - X2 = differenee between means of each group
SX1_SX2 =standarderrorfrom two sample

estimates
(May & Masson, 1990)

(4.2)

n • = sum of all observations,
Pj = observed proportion
31j = hypothesized proportion
J

~ = sum total of all observations

j=l

(Glass & Hopkins, 1984)

Rh-Rl

D=--.5!1

( Pj - l'tj )2 =difference in the observed and
expected proportion for each of J categories squared

( 4.3)

(Gronlund & Linn, 1995))

R
T

P=-

(4.4)

(Gronlund & Linn, 1995)

3(M -Mdn)
skew = --'---==-

S.J2

(May & Masson, 1990)

(4.5)

Rh = number of students in the high group
positively responding to the item
Rl = number of students in the lower group
responding positively to the item
!!
= total number of students included in the
item analysis

R =number of students responding correctly to an
item
T = total number of students responding to the
item

M =mean
Mdn=median
SD =standard deviation

86
APPENDIX E- CONTINUED

Statistical Formula
rtj> = P2 - PxPy

Pxqxpyqy

(Glass & Hopkins, 1984)

Definition of Statistical Terms
(4.6)

px = proportion of students scored as 1 on X
(male)
q x =proportion scored as 0 on X (female)
pY = proportion of students scored as 1 on Y
(number of years in programs)
qy =proportion scored as 0 on Y (number of
years in programs)
pxy = proportion of students scored as 1 on both X
andY.
Qx and qy = 1 - Px and 1 - Py respectively

87
APPENDIX F
ITEM ANALYSIS OF RESPONSES TO THE MODiflED ANALYSIS OF ATTITUDES
OF STUDENTS QUESTIONNAIRE
Total Positive ResQQnses on the modified
~
Attitudes of Students Questionnaire

of

Item

Higha

Lowb

D

PValue

tf

t6

t8

-. t8

1.0

2e

17

t5

.11

.9t

3e

8

2

.34

.29

48

t7

t7

.0

1.0

sf

t6

9

.4t

.74

6e

t7

t6

.06

.94

7C

9

t

.50

.29

8f

t7

t5

.t8

.94

~

toe

11

-.06

.62

toe

11

3

.46

.40

11

9

t

.44

.28

tze

8

6

.11

.40

13e

t7

t7

.0

.97

t4e

17

17

.0

.97

tsf

t5

13

.t2

.82

t6

9

8

.06

.47

17

17

t5

.11

.89

tse

16

t7

-.06

.94

88
APPENDIX F - CONTINUED
Total Positive Resggnses on the modified Anal:ysis of
Attitudes of Students Questionnaire
Item

Hi ha

Lowb

D

PValue

1<)(:

16

18

-.11

.97

2rf!

10

3

.40

.37

21h

14

12

.13

.81

22e

17

17

.0

.97

23[

12

8

.24

.59

24e

10

7

.17

.49

25

17

18

-.06

.97

26[

15

13

.12

.06

~

17

13

.23

.86

2gg

17

15

.12

.97

291

9

4

.32

.42

30

17

14

.17

.86

31h

15

12

.19

.84

32

16

14

.11

.83

33[

13

13

.0

.72

34

17

16

.06

.71

3sf

15

9

.35

.65

36

16

15

.06

.89

~

17

12

.29

.83

3ge

17

11

.34

.80

89
APPENDIX F- CONTINUED
Total Positive ResQQnses on the Modified Analysis of
Attitudes of Students Questionnaire
Item

Higha

Lowb

D

P Value

~

11

11

.0

.63

40g

6

5

.06

.33

'11_ =11. b!!=lO . '12 = 8. '\! =8. e One student provided a neutral response to this question. f Two

students provided neutral responses to this question. g Three students provided neutral responses to this
question. h Four students provided neutral responses to this question. iFive students provided neutral
responses to this question.

90
APPENDIX G
PROPORTION OF STUDENTS RESPONDING POSITIVELY AND NEUTRALLY ON
THE MODIAED ANALYSIS OF ATTITUDES OF STUDENTS QUESTIONNAIRE
General Program
Item

Higha

Lowb

Dementia Program

Total Responses
Positive

Neutral

Highc

Lowd

Total Responses
Positive

Neutral

1

1.00

.91e

.95

.05

1.00

.sse

.94

.06

2

1.00

.82

.90

0.00

1.00

.7SC

.88

.06

3

.33

.09

.20

0.00

.63

.13e

.38

.06

4

1.00

.91

.95

0.00

.63f

.sse

.75

.19

5

1.00

.36

.65

0.00

.88

.63r

.75

.13

6

1.00

.82e

.90

.05

1.00

.88

.94

0.00

7

.67

.09

.35

0.00

.38

o.ooe

.19

.06

8

1.00

.91

.95

0.00

1.00

.63f

.81

.13

9

.56e

.45

.50

.05

.63e

.75

.69

.06

10

.67

.18

.40

0.00

.63e

.13

.38

.06

11

.56

0.00

.25

0.00

.50

.13

.31

0.00

12

.33

.27

.30

0.00

.63e

.38

.50

.06

13

1.00

0.00

.95

0.00

1.00

.sse

.94

.06

14

1.00

.73e

.85

.05

1.00

1.00

1.00

0.00

15

1.00

.73

.85

0.00

.7SC

.63e

.69

.06

16

.44

.55

.50

0.00

.63

.25

.44

0.00

17

1.00

.73

.85

0.00

1.00

.88

.94

0.00

18

~

.91

.90

.05

1.00

.sse

.94

.06

91
APPENDIX G -CONTINUED
Dementia Program

General Program
Item

Higha

Lowb

Total Responses
Positive

Neutral

HighC

Lowd

Total Responses
Positive

Neutral

19

~

.91

.90

.05

1.00

.sse

.94

.06

20

.67

.2?C

.45

.05

.50

0.00

.06

0.00

21

.78

.73e

.75

.05

.88

.50g

.69

. 19

22

1.00

.91e

.95

.05

1.00

.88

.94

0.00

23

.78

.45

.60

0.00

.63

.38f

.50

.13

24

.33

.09

.20

0.00

.88

.7SC

.81

.06

25

1.00

.91

.95

0.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

0.00

26

1.00

.55

.75

0.00

.75f

.88

.81

0.00

27

1.00

.64

.80

0.00

1.00

.7SC

.88

.06

28

1.00

.91

.95

0.00

1.00

.63g

.81

.19

29

.33

. 18

.25

0.00

.75

.2sh

.50

.25

30

1.00

.73

.85

0.00

1.00

.75

.88

0.00

31

~

.4sf

.65

.15

.88

.sse

.88

.06

32

1.00

.73

.85

0.00

.88

.7sf

.81

.13

33

.67

.45

.55

0.00

.88

.38f

.63

. 13

34

1.00

.73

.85

0.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

0.00

35

.78

.45

.60

0.00

1.00

.50f

.75

.13

36

.89

.73

.80

0.00

1.00

.sse

.94

.06

92
APPENDIX G - CONTINUED
Dementia Program

General Program

Total Responses

Total Responses

Item

Positive

Neutral

Positive

Neutral

37

1.00

.sse

.75

.05

1.00

.75

.88

0.00

38

1.00

.36

.65

0.00

1.00

.sse

.94

.06

39

1.00

.73

.85

0.00

.2.se

.38

.31

.06

.25e
.25e
.13
.25
.44
~
.35
.05
<lg=9 . brr= 11 . '11 = 8.
=8. e One student provided a neutral response to this question. fTwo
students provided neutral responses to this question. g Three students provided neutral responses to this
question. h Four students provided neutral responses to this question.
40

<\!

93
APPENDIX H

SUMMARY OF CODEABLE RESPONSES TO THE MODIAED OlDER ADULT
INTERVIEW
Question

Total Residents
Resoondin2

Total Codeable
Resoonses

Mean

Range

3

10

95

9.50

5·42

4

18

90

5.00

1. 13

5

19

80

4.21

1. 21

6

20

86

4.30

1. 15

7

18

33

1.83

1. 19

8

20

96

4.80

1. 20

9

18

22

1.22

1. 20

10

20

38

1.90

1. 5

11

14

28

2.00

1. 5

12

19

51

2.68

I • 13

Total

.

619

4.14

1.4. 17.3

94

APPENDIX I
DISTRIBUTION OF CODEABLE RESPONSES TO THE MODIFIED OLDER ADULT
INTERVIEW
Evaluative

Descriptive
Personality Misc.

Behavior

Personality Misc.

Question

Behavior

3

31

4

-

12

15

5

12

11

4

10

-

-

10

50

3

5

12

5

15

-

-

9

51

-

6

41

-

-

35

4

-

-

6

7

8

-

-

18a

1

-

1

5

10

4

-

-

9

11

-

-

14

11

21

2

-

3

-

-

-

2

-

11

A

A

12
10
1
18
8
3
Note. Questions eight and rune did not permit the application of this coding scheme.
a Codeable cases "no" were included in this calculation.

5

95

APPENDIX J
SUMMARY OF CODEABLE RESPONSES TO QUESTION EIGHT OF THE
MODIAEDOLDERADULT INTERVIEW

Activity

No recall of...
Codeable
Total
Response
Residents

Student to Student
Codeable
Total
Res nse
Residents

read books

3

2

play games

5

4

6

5

sing songs

1

2

10

6

Student to Resident
Codeable
Total
Res nse
Residents
7

4

2

2
1

2

sit in a circle

1

talk
ask questions

1

12

7

18

7

have a snack

2

give gifts

5

play

2

2

2
1

dance

draw pictures
leave

1

listen
assist residents

3

exchange books

2

homework
nothing

1
5

4

miscellaneous
Total

14

28

54

2

96
APPENDIX K
SUMMARY OF RESPONSES TO QUESTION TWELVE OF THE MODIAED OLDER
ADULT INTERVIEW
Descriptive
Category

Evaluative

Children Student Children Children Student Children
in
Buddies General
m
Buddies General
Program
Pro ram

Behavior

9

Appearance

1

8

1

3

Personality
Miscellaneous

16

2

11