Journalists, researchers, and the public often view society through a generational lens, using terms like millennials and Gen Z to describe groups of people of the same age. This approach helps readers see themselves in the data and evaluate where we are as a country and where we’re heading.
Pew Research Center has long been at the forefront of generational research, documenting millennials as they mature politically and transition more firmly into adult life. In recent years, we’ve been eager to learn about Gen Z as the cusp of this generation transitions into adulthood.
But generational studies has become a competitive field. The field is filled with content sold as research but that is more like clickbait and marketing myth. There has also been a growing critique of generational studies, and of generational labels in particular.
Recently, as we were preparing to embark on a large-scale research project related to Gen Z, we decided to take a step back and consider how we could study the generation in a way that was aligned with our values ​​of accuracy, rigor, and providing a factual base that enriches the public dialogue.
A typical generation spans 15 to 18 years, and as many critics of generational studies point out, there is great diversity within generations in thinking, experiences, and behaviors.
We embarked on a year-long process to evaluate the current state of generational research. We spoke with experts outside Pew Research Center, including some who have publicly criticized our generational analysis, to hear their views on the strengths and weaknesses of this type of research. We invested in methodology testing to determine whether we could compare results from our previous phone surveys with results from the online surveys we currently conduct. We also experimented with more sophisticated statistical analyses that would allow us to isolate generational effects.
What emerged from this process is a clear set of guidelines that will frame our work going forward. Many of these are principles we have always followed, while others require a change in how we have done things for the past few years.
I will provide a brief outline of how I plan to approach generational studies in the future.
We only conduct generational analysis when we have historical data that allows us to compare generations at similar stages of life. When comparing generations, it’s important to consider age. In other words, researchers should look at each generation, or age cohort, at a similar point in their life cycle. (“Age cohort” is a fancy way of saying a group of people who were born around the same time.)
When conducting this type of research, the question is not whether today’s young people are different from today’s middle-aged or older people, but whether today’s young people are different from young people at a particular point in the past.
Answering this question requires data collected over a long period of time, spanning several decades. Standard surveys don’t allow for this type of analysis. They can look at differences between age groups, but they can’t compare age groups over time.
Another problem is that surveys we conducted 20 or 30 years ago aren’t fully comparable to surveys we conduct today. Our earlier surveys were conducted by phone, but we’ve since moved to the American Trends Panel, a national online research panel. In our internal testing, we found that for many topics, respondents’ answers vary depending on the interview method. As a result, we can’t use most of our surveys from the late 1980s to early 2000s to compare Gen Z to Millennials and Gen Xers at similar life stages.
This means that most of the generational analysis we do will use datasets that have followed similar methodologies over time, such as U.S. Census Bureau surveys. A good example is the 2020 report on millennial families, which used census data going back to the late 1960s. The report shows that millennials are marrying and starting families at a completely different pace than previous generations.
Even when historical data is available, we try to consider factors other than age when making generational comparisons. If we accept that there are real differences between generations, then we are essentially saying that people born at the same time share certain attitudes and beliefs, and that their thinking was influenced by outside forces that uniquely shaped them during their formative years. These forces could have been social changes, economic conditions, technological advances, or political movements.
If younger adults have different views than older adults, it may be driven by demographic characteristics rather than the fact that they belong to a particular generation.
The difficulty is in separating those forces from the events and circumstances that influenced them. all We see changes across all age groups, not just one generation. These are often called “period effects.” An example of a period effect is the Watergate scandal, which caused trust in government to decline across all age groups. The difference in trust between age groups after Watergate is not because the scandal had a greater impact on one age group than the other, but because the change was across the board.
Demographic changes may also affect patterns that may appear to be generational differences. The United States has become more racially and ethnically diverse in recent decades, and race and ethnicity have been found to be associated with certain important social and political views. If younger people hold different views than older people, this may be due to their demographic characteristics rather than the fact that they belong to a particular generation.
Controlling for these factors can require complex statistical analysis, which helps determine whether differences seen between age groups are truly generational. This additional step adds rigor to the process, which is unfortunately often missing in current discussions about Gen Z, Millennials, and other generations.
Even when generational analysis is not possible, we believe there is value in looking at differences across age groups, and will do so where it makes sense. Age is one of the most common predictors of differences in attitudes and behaviors. And even if age differences aren’t due to generational differences, they can still be meaningful. Age differences can help us understand how people of different ages are responding to major trends, innovations, and historical events.
Each stage of life brings with it unique experiences, and young people are often at the forefront of changing attitudes towards new societal trends, such as views on same-sex marriage and attitudes about gender identity.
Meanwhile, many middle-aged people face the challenges of caring for and supporting aging parents while also raising children. And older adults have their own obstacles and opportunities. All of these stories, rooted in life cycles rather than generations, are important and compelling, and can be told by analyzing research at any time.
When we have data to study a group of people of the same age over time, we don’t necessarily use standard generational definitions and labels. Generational labels are simple and catchy, but there are other ways to analyze age cohorts. For example, some observers suggest grouping people by the decade they were born in, which creates narrower cohorts whose members have more in common. You could also group people according to their age during important historical events (such as the Great Recession or the COVID-19 pandemic) or technological innovations (such as the invention of the iPhone).
By choosing not to use standard generational labels when they are inappropriate, we can avoid reinforcing harmful stereotypes or oversimplifying people’s complex lived experiences.
Existing definitions of generations may be too broad and arbitrary to capture the differences that exist between narrow cohorts: a typical generation is between the ages of 15 and 18. As many critics of generational studies point out, there is great diversity in thought, experience, and behavior. At the inner Generations. The key is to choose the lens that best suits the research question you are studying. For example, if you are looking at political views and changes over time, you might group people based on the first presidential election they were eligible to vote in.
By choosing not to use standard generational labels when they are inappropriate, we can avoid reinforcing harmful stereotypes or oversimplifying people’s complex lived experiences.
Given these considerations, readers should not expect to see a ton of new research coming out of Pew Research Center that incorporates a generational perspective. We only talk about generations when it adds value, advances important national conversations, and highlights meaningful societal trends.
Source: Generation Z – Research and data from Pew Research Center – www.pewresearch.org
