PERSONALITY PROCESSES AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES

Generational Differences in Young Adults’ Life Goals, Concern for Others,

and Civic Orientation, 1966 –2009
Jean M. Twenge W. Keith Campbell
San Diego State University University of Georgia

Elise C. Freeman
San Diego State University

Three studies examined generational differences in life goals, concern for others, and civic orientation
among American high school seniors (Monitoring the Future; N ⫽ 463,753, 1976 –2008) and entering
college students (The American Freshman; N ⫽ 8.7 million, 1966 –2009). Compared to Baby Boomers
(born 1946 –1961) at the same age, GenX’ers (born 1962–1981) and Millennials (born after 1982)
considered goals related to extrinsic values (money, image, fame) more important and those related to
intrinsic values (self-acceptance, affiliation, community) less important. Concern for others (e.g., em-
pathy for outgroups, charity donations, the importance of having a job worthwhile to society) declined
slightly. Community service rose but was also increasingly required for high school graduation over the
same time period. Civic orientation (e.g., interest in social problems, political participation, trust in
government, taking action to help the environment and save energy) declined an average of d ⫽ ⫺.34,
with about half the decline occurring between GenX and the Millennials. Some of the largest declines
appeared in taking action to help the environment. In most cases, Millennials slowed, though did not
reverse, trends toward reduced community feeling begun by GenX. The results generally support the
“Generation Me” view of generational differences rather than the “Generation We” or no change views.

Keywords: birth cohort, generations, intrinsic and extrinsic values, civic orientation, concern for others

“People born between 1982 and 2000 are the most civic-minded since decline, with more Americans saying they have no one to confide in
the generation of the 1930s and 1940s,” say Morley Winograd and (McPherson, Smith-Lovin, & Brashears, 2006) and more having
Michael Hais, co-authors of Millennial Makeover: MySpace, You- children outside of marriage (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2011).
Tube, and the Future of American Politics. . . . “Other generations
How have recent generations been shaped by these trends? At base,
were reared to be more individualistic,” Hais says. “This civic gen-
eration has a willingness to put aside some of their own personal
generational differences are cultural differences: As cultures change,
advancement to improve society.’”—USA Today, 2009 their youngest members are socialized with new and different values.
Children growing up in the 1950s were exposed to a fundamentally
College students today show less empathy toward others compared different culture than children growing up in the 1990s, for example.
with college students in decades before. With different demands at Thus birth cohorts— commonly referred to as generations—are
work— hours answering and writing e-mail—people have less time to
shaped by the larger sociocultural environment of different time
care about others.—USA Today, 2010
periods (e.g., Gentile, Campbell, & Twenge, 2012; Stewart & Healy,
American society has undergone significant changes during the 1989; Twenge, 2006), just as residents of different cultures are shaped
past few decades. Opportunities for women and minorities have by regional variations in culture (e.g., Markus & Kitayama, 1991).
expanded, and beliefs in equality for all have become more common Many previous studies have examined generational differences in
(e.g., Koenig, Eagly, Mitchell, & Ristikari, 2011; Thornton & Young- personality traits and positive self-views (e.g., André et al., 2010;
DeMarco, 2001). On the other hand, societal cohesiveness is on the Gentile, Twenge, & Campbell, 2010; Stewart & Bernhardt, 2010;
Twenge, Campbell, & Gentile, 2011). Fewer studies, however, have
examined generational trends in values, life goals, and young people’s
relationships to their communities. For example, have young people’s
This article was published Online First March 5, 2012. life goals changed to become more or less community focused? How
Jean M. Twenge and Elise C. Freeman, Department of Psychology, San
concerned are they for others? How much do they wish to be involved
Diego State University; W. Keith Campbell, Department of Psychology,
University of Georgia. in collective or civic action? These questions about community feel-
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Jean M. ing are important, as they address crucial elements of social capital
Twenge, Department of Psychology, San Diego State University, 5500 Cam- and group relations (e.g., Putnam, 2000). As the epigraph quotes
panile Drive, San Diego, CA 92182-4611. E-mail: jtwenge@mail.sdsu.edu illustrate, there is a great deal of interest in—and disagreement
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2012, Vol. 102, No. 5, 1045–1062
© 2012 American Psychological Association 0022-3514/12/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0027408

1045
 GENERATIONAL DIFFERENCES IN COMMUNITY FEELING 1053

tested the associated beta weights to see if the linear or curvilinear these items were included in the life goals analyzed in Study 1
models fit better. (“making a contribution to society” and “correct racial and eco-
The linear term was significantly larger than the quadratic term nomic inequalities”).5
(at p ⬍ .05) for the majority of life goals. In MtF, 10 of the life Two items are included in a list of items about job attributes
goals had stronger linear effects, two had linear and quadratic (␣ ⫽ .65): “Different people may look for different things in their
effects of equal strength (“getting away from this area of the work. Below is a list of some of these things. Please read each one,
country” and “discovering new ways to experience things”), and then indicate how important this thing is for you.” Among the
two had stronger quadratic effects (“having lots of money” and attributes are “A job that gives you an opportunity to be directly
“making a contribution to society”). The importance of money rose helpful to others” and “A job that is worthwhile to society,” with
between Boomers and GenX and then declined (␤ for year ⫽ .03;
choices of not important, a little important, pretty important, and
for year squared, ⫺.06; see Figure 1). Making a contribution to
very important. Another item asks “Apart from the particular kind
society declined from Boomers to GenX and then rose (␤ for
of work you want to do, how would you rate each of the following
year ⫽ .02; for year squared, ⫺.06, see also Table 1).
settings as a place to work?” with choices of not at all acceptable,
In AF, 10 life goals had stronger linear effects, seven had linear
and quadratic effects of equal strength, and three had stronger somewhat acceptable, acceptable, and desirable. One of the items
quadratic effects (“writing original works,” “creating artistic is “Working in a social service organization.”
work,” and “helping others in difficulty.”) Unlike the quadratic A section on activities begins, “The next questions ask about the
effect for money in MtF, “being very well off financially” showed kinds of things you do in your spare time, that is, time not spent in
a stronger linear effect, with the rise continuing between GenX and school, or on homework, or on a paid job. How often do you do
Millennials (though most of the change occurred between Boom- each of the following?” One of the items is “Participate in com-
ers and GenX). Helping others declined between the Boomers and munity affairs or volunteer work” with possible responses of
GenX and then increased again for Millennials, although the almost every day, at least once a week, once or twice a month, a
increase was small (d ⫽ .03). few times a year, or never. Data on this item are not available for
These results provide partial support for each of the three views. 1990, as the Form 2 datafile is missing for that year.
In support of the “Generation Me” view, the overall trend in life Nine items ask about charity contributions (␣ ⫽ .79): “If you
goals between the Boomers and the Millennials is toward less have at least an average income in the future, how likely is it that
community feeling, including less intrinsic, more extrinsic, and you will contribute money to the following organizations? If you
more narcissistic goals, with Millennials continuing the trends have already contributed, mark the last circle only. Are you likely
begun by GenX and not reversing them. The overall pattern of to contribute to . . .” Items are “The United Fund or other com-
trends does not support the “Generation We” view, though it munity charities, International relief organizations (CARE, UNICEF,
receives some limited support in the small reversals in some items etc.), Minority group organizations (NAACP, SCLS, etc.), Church
(e.g., money, making a contribution to society, helping others in or religious organizations, Political parties or organizations, Citi-
difficulty). The significant generational differences in life goals do
zen lobbies (Common Cause, Public Citizen, etc.), Charities to
not generally support the generational similarities view. However,
help fight diseases (cancer, heart disease, etc.), Organizations
the smaller changes between GenX and the Millennials and the
concerned with population problems (Planned Parenthood, ZPG,
similarities on some items do demonstrate that not all life goals
etc.), Organizations concerned with environmental problems (Si-
have changed at all time points.
erra Club, Friends of Earth, etc.).” The possible responses are
definitely not, probably not, don’t know, probably will, definitely
Study 2: Concern for Others will, already have.
In Study 2, we expanded our analysis to focus more specifically
on the value of helping others. The MtF codebook includes a 5
Because the MtF survey administrators independently classified these
specific list of items measuring “concern for others,” and the AF
items in their codebook as measuring concern for others, and most of
survey includes several similar items. These include questions these items are behavioral or face-valid, we did not undertake an extensive
about helping others, having empathy for outgroups, contributing validation as we did with the life goals items. However, we did validate
to society, understanding others, donating to charity, and volun- some of these items against the Aspirations Index in the sample from Study
teering and community service. 1B. The item “In the United States, we put too much emphasis on making
profits and not enough on human well-being” was positively correlated
with intrinsic values (r ⫽ .26, p ⬍ .01) and negatively correlated with
Method
extrinsic values (r ⫽ ⫺.28, p ⬍ .001), with the largest correlation with
Respondents. MtF asks questions across several different community feeling (r ⫽ .36, p ⬍ .001). The item “I would be willing to eat
forms each year, so ns vary somewhat from one set of questions to less meat and more grains and vegetables, if it would help provide food for
the next; all ns were between 90,000 and 94,100. For AF, ns starving people” was positively correlated with intrinsic values (r ⫽ .26,
p ⬍ .01) and negatively correlated with extrinsic values (r ⫽ ⫺.32, p ⬍
differed by question between 4.9 million and 7.7 million because
.01), with the largest correlation with community feeling (r ⫽ .39, p ⬍
some items were not asked during all years of the survey. .001). The two-item index about altruistic jobs (wanting a job “directly
Measures. The MtF codebook divides the items on the survey helpful to others” or “that is worthwhile to society”) was positively
into several sections, one of which lists 25 items asked in more correlated with intrinsic values (r ⫽ .22, p ⬍ .01) and negatively correlated
than one year under the heading “Concern for Others” (Johnston et with extrinsic values (r ⫽ ⫺.20, p ⬍ .01), with the largest correlation with
al., 2009, pp. 178 –180; concern for others is Section O). Two of community feeling (r ⫽ .32, p ⬍ .001).
 GENERATIONAL DIFFERENCES IN COMMUNITY FEELING 1055

Figure 3. Concern for others among American high school students, 1976 –2008.

26% who intended to do so in college). This lower number for Method

college samples is consistent with findings from the National
Education Longitudinal Study of 1988, which found that 43% of Respondents. We again drew from the MtF and AF data-
students had performed community service work in the previous 2 bases. For MtF, ns varied between 90,000 and 94,100 depending
years at age 18, compared to 24% at age 20 (Planty, Bozick, & on the item. AF ns varied between 3.3 million and 8.3 million.
Regnier, 2006). Measures. We attempted to locate all items in MtF relevant
In regression equations, the linear term was larger than the to civic orientation and social capital. These included “Some
quadratic term for all items except making a contribution to society people think a lot about the social problems of the nation and the
and helping others in difficulty (discussed in Study 1) and being world, and about how they might be solved. Others spend little
above average in understanding others, which increased from time thinking about these issues. How much do you think about
Boomers to GenX and declined from GenX to the Millennials. For such things?” with choices of never, seldom, sometimes, quite
the most part, Millennials continued the downward trend in con- often, and a great deal.6
cern for others begun by GenX. Three questions tap trust in others (␣ ⫽ .61): “Generally speak-
In sum, Millennials generally score lower than previous gener- ing, would you say most people can be trusted or that you can’t be
ations in concern for others, but the differences do not approach too careful in dealing with people?” (with choices of most people
the large effect sizes found for the decline in empathy over time can be trusted; don’t know, undecided; can’t be too careful);
(Konrath et al., 2011). This is mostly consistent with the “Gener- “Would you say that most of the time people try to be helpful or
ation Me” view. The “Generation We” view, which posited that that they are mostly just looking out for themselves?” (Try to be
Millennials would be more concerned for others than GenX’ers helpful; Don’t know, undecided; Just looking out for themselves);
and Boomers, is consistent with the volunteer data but not most of and “Do you think most people would try to take advantage of you
the other measures or the overall effect size. If a cutoff of d ⫽ |.20| if they got a chance or would they try to be fair?” (Would try to be
is applied (Trzesniewski & Donnellan, 2010), the generational fair; Don’t know, undecided; Would try to take advantage of you).
similarities view receives some support from these items. How- One item measures interest in government: “Some people think
ever, a cutoff of d ⫽ |.10| may be more appropriate, as Cohen about what’s going on in government very often, and others are not
revised his previous cutoff of d ⫽ |.20| for a small effect to d ⫽ that interested. How much of an interest do you take in government
|.10| to more accurately reflect actual effect sizes in psychology and current events?” (No interest at all; Very little interest; Some
(Cohen, 1988). The generational similarities model receives less interest; A lot of interest; A very great interest).7 Five items (␣ ⫽
support if this revised cutoff is used. .72) measure trust in government: “Do you think some of the

6
Study 3: Civic Orientation and Social Capital Similar to the concern for others items, the civic orientation items were
face-valid and often behavioral; thus we did not validate all of the items.
In Study 3, we expand our analysis of community feeling further We validated the item on thinking about social problems against the
Aspirations Index. It was positively correlated with community feeling
to examine civic engagement, a crucial part of social capital and a
(r ⫽ .25, p ⬍ .01) and negatively correlated with extrinsic values (r ⫽
functioning democracy (e.g., Putnam, 2000). Community feeling ⫺.20, p ⬍ .01), though not significantly correlated with intrinsic values
includes an interest in collective action, including political in- overall (r ⫽ .14, ns).
volvement and interest in government and social affairs (Kasser & 7
Thinking about social problems and interest in government were asked
Ryan, 1993, 1996). We also examined items on helping the envi- across multiple forms in various years. We used only the data from the
ronment, a civic endeavor purported to be a special interest of lowest-numbered form for ease of analysis (For interest in government,
Millennials (Greenberg & Weber, 2008; Hasek, 2008). Form 2; for thinking about social problems, Form 3).
1056 TWENGE, CAMPBELL, AND FREEMAN

people running the government are crooked or dishonest?” that this last item was asked in only some years, and how many
(choices are Most of them are crooked or dishonest; quite a few were presidential election years varied by generation, so these
are; some are; hardly any are; none at all are crooked or dishon- results should be interpreted with caution. (The question was asked
est); “Do you think the government wastes much of the money we in 1971, 1978, and 1979 for Boomers, all nonpresidential years. It
pay in taxes?” (Nearly all tax money is wasted; A lot of tax money was asked in 1981, 1982, 1983, 1984, 1988, 1992, 1995, 1996, and
is wasted; Some tax money is wasted; A little tax money is wasted; 1997 for GenX, and in 2004, 2005, 2007, and 2008 for Millennials,
No tax money is wasted); “How much of the time do you think you about half presidential years.)
can trust the government in Washington to do what is right?”
(reverse; Almost always, often, sometimes, seldom, never); “Do
you feel that the people running the government are smart people Results
who usually know what they are doing?” (reverse: They almost
All of the items measuring civic engagement and social capital
always know what they are doing; They usually know what they
were lower among Millennials than among Boomers at the same
are doing; The sometimes know what they are doing; They seldom
age, and all but two were lower among Millennials than GenX’ers
know what they are doing; They never know what they are doing.);
(see Table 5 and Figure 4). Civic engagement declined an average
and “Would you say the government is pretty much run for a few
of d ⫽ ⫺.34 between Boomers and Millennials, with d ⫽ ⫺.11 of
big interests looking out for themselves, or is it run for the benefit
the decline occurring between GenX’ers and Millennials. Exclud-
of all the people?” (Nearly always run for a few big interests;
ing the outlier item about voting in a student election, the decline
usually run for a few big interests; Run some for the big interests,
was d ⫽ ⫺.28, with the rate of decline almost equal between
some for the people; usually run for the benefit of all the people;
Boomers and GenX and GenX and Millennials.
nearly always run for the benefit of all the people).
In contrast to the results for life goals and concern for others,
Six items measure political participation (␣ ⫽ .71): “Have you
several items on civic orientation declined faster or just as fast
ever done, or do you plan to do, the following things? Vote in a
between GenX and the Millennials than between the Boomers and
public election (I probably won’t do this; don’t know; I probably
GenX. Millennials reported thinking about social problems less,
will do this; I have already done this); Write to public officials;
having less interest in government, making less effort to conserve
Give money to a political candidate or cause; Work in a political
energy, and being less interested in taking “green” actions to
campaign; Participate in a lawful demonstration; Boycott certain
protect the environment, either personally or through government.
products or stores.” Data on these items are not available for 1990.
Millennials were also less likely than Boomers and GenX to
Five items inquire about taking action to improve the environ-
participate in the political process through voting, writing to a
ment. Four use the same scale (␣ ⫽ .53): “People will have to
public official, participating in demonstrations or boycotts, or
change their buying habits and way of life to correct our environ-
giving money to a political cause.
mental problems”; “Government should take action to solve our
The decline in wanting to take action to help the environment
environmental problems even if it means that some of the products
was particularly steep. Three times as many Millennials (15%)
we now use would have to be changed or banned”; “Government
than Boomers (5%) said they made no personal effort at all to help
should place higher taxes on products which cause pollution in
the environment, and only 40% as many Millennials (9%) as
their manufacture or disposal, so that companies will be encour-
Boomers (15%) said they made quite a bit of effort. Sixty-eight
aged to find better ways to produce them”; and “I wish that
percent of Boomers and 60% of GenX’ers said they made an effort
government would ban throwaway bottles and cans.” These have
to cut down on electricity use to save energy, compared to 51% of
the choices Disagree, Mostly disagree, Neither, Mostly agree, and
Millennials. Similarly, 78% of Boomers and 71% of GenX’ers said
Agree. The last item is “In your own actions—the things you buy
they made an effort to reduce heat usage during the winter save
and the things you do— how much of an effort do you make to
energy, compared to 56% of Millennials. AF respondents also
conserve energy and protect the environment?” with the choices
showed a generational decline in the life goal of “becoming
None, A little, Some, and Quite a bit.
involved in programs to clean up the environment.”
Three items ask about making an effort to conserve energy (␣ ⫽
In a few cases, Millennials reversed the downward trend begun
.60): “Do you make an effort to cut down on driving, in order to
by GenX (e.g., discussed politics), although Millennials’ responses
save gasoline?” “Do you make an effort to cut down on the amount
did not return to Boomer levels of civic engagement. In regression
of electricity you use, in order to save energy?” and “In the house
equations, the linear effect was stronger than the quadratic effect
or apartment where you live, is an effort made to reduce heat
for all variables except for discussing politics and working in a
during the winter, in order to save energy?” with the choices Not
political campaign, both in AF. However, the item on working in
at all, Not very much, Yes, to some extent, and Yes, quite a bit.
a political campaign was only asked in some years in AF, whereas
The AF survey also asks some questions about civic engage-
an item about planning to work or working in a political campaign
ment. These include the importance of keeping up to date with
was asked in every year in MtF (in the 4-item index of political
political affairs and becoming involved in programs to clean up the
participation). The MtF item shows a linear decline over the
environment (also included in Study 1) and three items under the
generations, with more Boomers (M ⫽ 1.83, SD ⫽ 0.92) reporting
heading “For the activities below, indicate which ones you did
interest in or participation in political campaigns compared to
during the past year:” “discussed politics,” “voted in a student
election,” and “worked in a local, state, or national political cam-
paign.”8 The report includes the percentage who engaged in the 8
AF included an item on demonstrations, but the wording changed over
activity frequently, for the first two items and frequently or occa- time (from “participated in organized demonstrations” to “participated in
sionally for the last item on working on a political campaign. Note political demonstrations”), so we excluded this item.