The Generation Game: Is the generational divide an appropriate means of segmenting a demographic within scholarly journals?

According to Generational Gaps in Political Media Use and Civic Engagement, published by Routledge this year, Generation Z are growing up in an environment that ‘would have been inconceivable to their parents’ (Andersen et. al., 2021). But while a divide between generations is expected, with the rapid development and accessibility of technology, there appears to be a growing divide within generational segments. Such rapid advancement is a ‘generation-shaping consideration’, according to Michael Dimock, the president of Pew Research Centre, an institute dedicated to analysing attitudes across demographic groups (Dimock, 2019). This divide is growing so much so that if you were to talk to two members of Generation Z, born in 1995 and 2003, both of whom are now classed as adults, the experiences of the latter would have been inconceivable to the former in their formative years. With the rapid advancements in technology providing drastically different life experiences to members of the same generational demographic, it is essential to analyse whether our perceptions of a generation as a unified segment of a demographic is accurate enough to base further research upon within scholarly publishing?

While generational demographics can be useful to an extent within scholarly research, as each generation would receive ‘a distinct imprint from the social and political events’ (Schuman and Scott, 1989), depending on the age of the individual, the level of imprint from such events would be different, or entirely missed, depending on when the individual was born, relative to the generational group they are attached to. This becomes important when looking at major world events, as some members of the same generation could be born on opposite sides of the event. According to Dimock, ‘anyone born between 1981 and 1996 is considered a millennial’ (Dimock, 2019), but to say that they have equal experiences would be wrong. The way in which an individual born in 1981 would have experienced 9/11 as a 20-year-old adult would be vastly different to a 5-year-old born in 1995. Moreover, the effect of understanding the greater impact of living in a post-9/11 world, could massively affect the views of two individuals regarded as members of the same demographic. This means that perhaps generational segmentation is too broad, and it is worth considering other factors to utilise in research with generational demographic segmentation.

In the context of research within the publishing field, according to researchers at the University of Michigan, to use generation as the sole demographic for predicting future behaviour can only be met with ‘mixed success’ (Schuman and Scott, 1989). In a report on the impact of major events on long-term wellbeing, BBC reporter Arianne Cohen stated that other outside factors such as personal events or experiences that could be dictated by income, job stability or geographical location, can have a ‘holistic impact’ on an individual’s habits, actions and beliefs (Cohen, 2020). As such, large life events from global pandemics to political actions can ‘combine to create a complex psychological experience in which just looking at one event doesn’t tell the whole story of their impact’ (Cohen, 2020).

As such, generational demographics are more suitable for looking at views over a long period of time, where the differing views of those at the outer edges of the demographic can all be included and show validity. In using this demographic to ‘describe how the trajectory of views might differ across generations’ (Dimock, 2019), researchers can utilise the strengths of the demographic, without negatively affecting research with its short-comings.

While generational demographics are appropriate at dividing a populace to some extent, perhaps researchers should only utilise such data in conjunction with other factors that have the ability to affect an individual’s habits, behaviours and opinions.

Andersen, K., Ohme, J., Bjarnoe, C., Bordacconi, M. J., Albaek, E. and de Vreese, C. (2021) Generational Gaps in Political Media Use and Civic Engagement: From Baby Boomers to Generation Z. London: Routledge

Cohen, A., (2020) ‘How major life events impact our long-term wellbeing’ BBC Worklife Available at: : https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20200929-how-major-life-events-impact-our-long-term-wellbeing [Accessed: 15/02/21]

Dimock, M., (2019) ‘Defining generations: Where Millennials and Generation Z begins’ FactTank, Available at: https://www.acecollegehomework.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/20201112224624dimock___where_millennials_end_and_generation_z_begins___pew_research_center.pdf [Accessed: 15/2/21]

Mannheim, K., (1927) Essays in the Sociology of Knowledge, London: RKP, pp.98–110

Markert, J., (2004) ‘Demographics of Age: Generational and Cohort Confusion’, Journal of Current Issues & Research in Advertising, 26(2), pp. 11–25

Prakash, K. and Tiwari, P. (2021) ‘Millennials and Post Millennials: A Systematic Literature Review’ Publishing Research Quarterly 36 (4) Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-021-09794-w [Accessed: 15/02/21]

Schuman, H., and Scott, J., (1989) ‘Generations and Collective Memories’ American Sociological Review, 54(3), pp. 359–381