Older but wiser?

Older but wiser

Here we tackle some incompatible generalizations: older people are wise except when they are acting like suckers or making overly cautious decisions. Can all of this be true? We argue that all of this is mostly untrue. First, old age does not guarantee wisdom. Second, just because they are polite does not mean that older people can be suckered out of their savings any more than people of any age. Third and finally, older people frequently make decisions more rapidly than younger people, not more slowly and cautiously.

Myth #14 Wisdom comes with age, so older adults are wise

There is a common belief that wisdom increases with age and that, as a group, older adults are wise, or at least they are wiser than younger adults. This makes sense if we accept the premise that a person is not born wise; rather, wisdom must be honed with life experience. If it takes time to develop wisdom, and if time and age covary (change together), then the expectation is that wisdom will increase over the lifespan.

Before we can determine whether wisdom increases with age, it is important to address the question of what constitutes “wisdom.” There is no simple answer to this question. According to one school of thought, a wise person has expert knowledge that provides him or her with insight about the practicalities and vicissitudes of life, termed pragmatics of life by the late Paul Baltes (who was an international leader in the scientific study of wisdom) and his colleagues (e.g., Baltes & Staudinger, 1995; Smith & Baltes, 1990; Smith, Staudinger, & Baltes, 1994). Also, a wise individual understands how the conditions of life can vary from person to person depending on an individual's culture and developmental stage. Thus, when asked for advice, a wise person takes into consideration the context of the situation. Furthermore, a wise person can offer insightful advice, but also understands that human nature is far from perfect (Taranto, 1989). Finally, a wise person behaves admirably and morally (Birren & Fisher, 1990; Birren & Schroots, 1996).

Most people assume that wisdom is associated with intelligence (Kausler et al., 2007; Sternberg & Lubart, 2001). However, Birren and Fisher (1990) contend that wisdom is not so much how much information you have; rather, it is knowing what you do not have and being able to make good use of what you do have. The wise person weighs what is known and not known and reflects on the consequences of all the alternatives before selecting one of them. A wise person remains calm and impartial while considering all aspects of a problem because he or she understands that a reflective state of mind is needed to generate alternative solutions when confronting a problem. So wisdom requires keeping one's emotions in check and not making rash decisions. In addition, wisdom requires an appreciation that truth is not absolute; rather, truth may depend upon the perspective one takes (Sternberg & Lubart, 2001). A wise person is capable of integrating opposite points of view and considering multiple aspects of complex and uncertain situations.

Jeste et al. (2010) conducted a survey to determine whether there is any consensus among wisdom theorists regarding their conceptions of wisdom. Theorists were in agreement that wisdom is a distinct entity separate from intelligence and spirituality. They concurred that wisdom is a rare personal quality that indicates advanced cognitive and emotional development. Many also thought that wisdom requires experience.

Theories about wisdom are explicit or implicit. Explicit theories are the definitions of wisdom proposed by researchers (e.g., those interviewed by Jeste et al., 2010), whereas implicit theories refer to the conceptions lay people (that is, ordinary folks who are not researchers) hold about wisdom. Lay people's implicit theories also show considerable agreement (Ardelt, 2011), namely that wisdom is a multidimensional construct that includes being knowledgeable, having the ability to think reflectively and consider various perspectives, being concerned about others, and being capable of maintaining composure under trying circumstances.

According to Ardelt (2011), Western and Eastern implicit theories about wisdom are not that different from one another. However, the cognitive aspect (having a good knowledge base and the ability to reason abstractly) is more prominent in the Western concept of wisdom, whereas the reflective-compassionate aspect (being benevolent and having concern for others) is more prominent in the Eastern concept of wisdom. Adding further to the complexity of defining wisdom, Glück and Bluck (2011) contend that even within Western culture, people's implicit conceptions about what constitutes wisdom and how wisdom develops are not unitary and could depend on age. A large sample of lay people ranging in age from 13 to 93 (average age 47) rated the importance of various items concerning what wisdom is and also how it develops. Based on these ratings, Glück and Bluck derived two conceptions of wisdom, cognitive and integrative. In the cognitive conception, the importance of knowledge is central, as is the belief that wisdom develops mainly through learning experiences and exposure to wise persons. In the integrative conception, knowledge is important, but empathy and concern for others are equally so – there is greater emphasis on how affective factors, such as emotionally challenging life experiences, influence the development of wisdom. Glück and Bluck found that as people progress through their adult years, the affective aspects take on greater importance in their conception of wisdom – as people move beyond their early 20s, they are increasingly likely to endorse an integrative conception rather than a cognitive conception of wisdom.

Despite efforts to define wisdom, being able to measure it remains challenging, but it is necessary to do so in order to determine whether wisdom increases with age. In one effort to measure wisdom, Smith and Baltes (1990) presented highly educated Berlin residents of various ages with a hypothetical family/work dilemma faced by a fictitious character (“target”) and asked them what advice they would give the target on how to resolve the predicament. For example, how would they advise a young adult male target who just lost his job, but whose wife recently returned to her well-paid professional job after spending time as a homemaker? Research participants were instructed to think aloud as they formulated a plan of action that the target could use to resolve the dilemma. Later, trained raters evaluated the wisdom of the advice each participant would give to the target. There is no single “correct” solution to this sort of dilemma, but some kinds of advice were considered wiser than others. To attain a high wisdom rating, the plan of action would have to (a) define and discuss many aspects of the target's problem; (b) offer several alternatives about what the target could do, stating the positive and negative aspects of each one; (c) recognize that all strategies hold some uncertainty and evaluate the risks of each; and (d) suggest that the alternative selected be monitored and revised if necessary. Only 5% of the study participants' responses received high wisdom ratings, supporting the view that wisdom is rare. However, the responses that were rated as wise were evenly distributed over the young, middle-aged, and older groups. In short, the older participants' responses were no wiser than were those of the younger participants, but neither was there any age-related decline in wisdom. In general, participants' responses showed special insight when dilemmas were faced by a similar-aged target. So for dilemmas faced by a young target, the young and middle-aged participants' advice received higher wisdom ratings than did the older participants' advice. In contrast, for dilemmas faced by an older target, the older participants' advice was rated somewhat higher than the advice given by the young and middle-aged participants. In this way, Jeste et al.'s (2010) wisdom theorists' conception that wisdom requires experience was upheld.

Ardelt (2000) approached the measurement of wisdom by asking clinically trained interviewers to rate the wisdom of a group of healthy, educated, financially well-off European American older women, all of whom had participated in the longitudinal Berkeley Guidance Study. Even among this highly select group, there was considerable variation in wisdom ratings. Interestingly, those participants rated by the interviewers as higher on cognitive, reflective, and emotional indicators of wisdom also rated themselves higher in life satisfaction. Clearly, wisdom is desirable, but even in this select sample, age did not automatically lead to wisdom.

In sum, unlike the majority of myths about aging, this one has positive connotations, so it seems rather mean-spirited to poke holes in it. Nonetheless, the evidence we have at the present time does not support the myth that older adults are wiser than young adults. Some older adults are wise, and when they are, they often have a high sense of well-being. However, old age does not guarantee wisdom.

Myth #15 Older adults are suckers and are easy prey for scam artists

Given the myth that wisdom necessarily increases with age, it may seem counterintuitive when we mention another myth, which is that older adults are suckers who are easily taken in by con artists. Reports abound regarding older adults' propensity to fall victim to scams. In fact, the monthly AARP Bulletin regularly includes a column called “Scam Alerts” that reports instances in which older consumers have been taken in by fraudulent practices. These alerts are intended to educate seniors on how to identify offers that are “too good to be true” so they can protect themselves against scam artists' aggressive and often dishonest business tactics. In one such column, Sacher (2012, October) describes a scam in which a large number of older Minnesotans were persuaded to purchase deferred annuities. Sales agents told them this would make it possible for their estates to avoid probate court legal costs upon their death. Unbeknown to these older Minnesotans, their estates most likely would not have been subject to probate court costs anyhow. But more importantly, consumers who purchased these annuities had an average age of 75, yet they were prohibited from withdrawing any of their money for up to 14 years without incurring stringent penalties. This type of financial product was hardly suitable for their age or stage of life! The good news: the firm marketing these annuities was ultimately fined more than $7 million. In most instances, however, older adults are not protected against shady sales tactics – once they purchase a product, they cannot get their money back.

In the AARP Magazine, Shadel (2012, October/November) interviewed a “reformed” scam artist about his strategies for convincing victims to fall for bogus deals (e.g., gold coins worth much less than victims paid for them, home equity and reverse mortgage scams, and fake business opportunities). He claimed that older adults were prime candidates for scams because they often have nest eggs of accumulated cash or paid-off homes, which this “reformed” scam artist considered equivalent to cash ready for the taking. Also, he claimed that seniors tend to share their fears and insecurities about their finances and/or health, which gave him leverage in his sales pitch. In what appeared to be a compliment, however, he did point out that the cash and assets his victims had accumulated spoke well of their intelligence – many of the older adults he “ripped off” had been doctors, lawyers, engineers, and professors.

It is possible that older people don't so much fall for more scams than do younger people, but rather they are targeted more. For example, the FBI (Federal Bureau of Investigation, n.d.) has reported a concern that older adults are targeted because they are seen as less likely than younger adults to report a fraud. Con artists may assume that older adults will not know whom to report it to, that they may be too ashamed they were victimized, or that they may be afraid that relatives may think they have lost some of their mental capacity. Furthermore, con artists expect that older adults will make poor witnesses against them, hoping that they will fail to remember important details by the time the case gets to court.

Perhaps older adults are targeted because of the fraud opportunities that are inherent, given the needs they have at their stage of life. The reality is that older adults often face a combination of health problems and income constraints, and these offer appealing opportunities for questionable entrepreneurs (e.g., long-term care insurance, medi-gap insurance policies, life insurance policies, reverse mortgages). Sometimes pitches that older adults fall victim to are not swindles, strictly speaking. But older consumers may end up wasting their money and enriching a salesperson more than need be because of unreasonable costs or hidden fees. In addition to health care, health and life insurance, and housing scams, the FBI has made a point of warning older people to be mindful of another area in which they may be especially targeted: funeral and cemetery frauds (e.g., high-priced caskets sold for cremations when no casket is required).

But just for the sake of argument, let's assume that, all other things being equal, older adults are more likely than other age groups to fall for scams. According to research conducted by the insurer MetLife Mature Market Institute (2011), American seniors lose $2.9 billion a year to fraud, and the majority of scam victims are between the ages of 80 and 89. However, although it appears that older adults may be especially likely to fall for scams, we must be wary of concluding that their vulnerability is due to age when it could simply be due to factors associated with age.

But what characteristics of the older population (other than age per se) could render them more vulnerable to scams? As is mentioned under the next myth in this section, “Older people are extra cautious when they have to make decisions,” findings indicate that older adults tend to spend less time than younger adults do in considering a wide array of alternatives prior to making a decision. They tend to reach decisions more quickly than younger adults and they ask fewer questions along the way. If so, they may be more vulnerable to persuasion by scam artists who are pitching specific consumer products.

Another consideration is that cohort effects may render older adults more vulnerable to scams. One hypothesis is that older adults grew up in a time when people were more trustworthy, so that they are more likely than younger adults to assume that everyone who speaks to them is on the level. But Ponzi schemes and other fraudulent “opportunities” have been around for eons, and people of all ages, both now and in the past, have succumbed to the wiles of scam artists.

Perhaps older adults were brought up to be hospitable to strangers. Kirchheimer (2013, June) describes a retired couple in their 70s living on Social Security benefits of $2,200 a month. One day, the husband, who had early-stage dementia, answered a knock at the door and admitted two vacuum cleaner salesmen who said that they were also students at the local university. The wife did not have dementia but later claimed that she was raised to be gracious and felt she could not turn them away. The couple allowed the salesmen to wear them down until they agreed to finance a $4,400 vacuum cleaner over a six-year period to the tune of $8,000.

Factors related not just to age but also to stage of life could play a role in propensity to fall for scams. As a group, older people may be lonelier and less integrated into society compared with other age groups. Many live far from family members. Once retired, they are not plugged into a social network at work that would make it easy to check things out with colleagues. If they no longer work, older adults are at home more and thus available to take phone calls, a common way for scam artists to find victims. For these reasons, older adults may fall prey to people who are friendly to them, and they have no way, or little motivation, to check out the sincerity or validity of those people. According to research conducted by the Metlife Mature Market Institute (2011), most elderly victims live alone and require some help with either health care or home maintenance. Other signs that make their vulnerability obvious to strangers include limited mobility and confusion.

The majority of older adults are cognitively intact and do not suffer from dementia. Even so, there are age-related differences in how people process cognitive information. For example, older adults are more vulnerable to “false memories” (Jacoby & Rhodes, 2006), which means that they have greater difficulty than younger adults do with excluding misinformation from what they may actually remember. This tendency can render older adults vulnerable to scam artists who insist that the older adults had agreed earlier to listen to a sales pitch or had committed themselves to purchasing a product when this was not the case. If older adults have difficulty remembering what they did or did not agree to on a previous occasion, they may succumb to pressure from scam artists.

In research conducted by scientists at the UCLA Social Neuroscience Laboratory and the UCLA Brain Mapping Center (Castle et al., 2012), young adults (in their 20s) and older adults (aged 55 to 84) were first asked to look at facial photos selected to have either “trustworthy” cues (e.g., natural-looking smiles, straightforward gaze) or “untrustworthy” cues (e.g., fake-looking smiles, averted gaze) and rate them for both trustworthiness and approachability. The young and older adults made similar ratings, so had the same impression, when they looked at photos with trustworthy cues. However, the age groups did not agree on the photos with untrustworthy cues: the younger group rated such faces as untrustworthy and unapproachable, whereas the older group rated them as more trustworthy and approachable. In a follow-up study with a smaller sample of young and older adults, functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) was used to measure the brain activity in the anterior insula (a brain region linked to feelings of disgust that may warn us when something does not seem quite right) that occurred while people were viewing photos of faces. The fMRI showed greater brain activity in the anterior insula in young adults than in older adults. However, this age discrepancy was magnified when the faces had cues associated with being untrustworthy. It is as if younger adults' brains are putting them on notice that they should be wary, but older adults' brains do not react to these cues in the same way. The UCLA scientists contend that the lesser activation in older adults' brains may indicate they are not picking up on cues that could protect them from scams.

Rather than focusing solely on brain processing as the basis for older adults' vulnerability to scams, it is important to consider that as people grow older, they have a tendency to become more positive (Isaacowitz, 2012). Carstensen (1995) contends that with increasing age, people feel they have less time to live, so they tend to look at the brighter side of things and do not allow themselves to stress out as much on small things. Actually, this type of emotional regulation characterizes not only older adults, but also younger adults who have been diagnosed with terminal illness. So the basis for the positivity effect is not necessarily age, but rather may be perceived time left to live. In any case, positivity could prevent older adults from reacting to warning signs that would otherwise sound an alarm and help them to steer clear of scams. Positivity can be beneficial for mental health; at the same time, it could render older adults more subject to scams. However, another interpretation of the positivity effect is that with increasing age, selective neural degeneration in the amygdala may dampen emotional responses to negative but not to positive information (Reed & Carstensen, 2012). The amydala is located in the anterior portion of the temporal lobe and is responsible for processing emotions.

In sum, it is impossible to make an accurate determination of the number of people who have been victims of scams because many, both old and young, are too embarrassed to report or admit it. But even if we were able to get an accurate count showing that older adults have a higher rate of victimization, we cannot conclude that age in and of itself is the basis for this statistic. Propensity to fall for scams could be related to the fact that scam artists specifically target older adults because of their expendable assets and their need for products that lend themselves to the fraudulent schemes. There may be cohort effects (e.g., older adults are more polite) that render them vulnerable. Also, there may be age-related differences in decision-making styles and in cognitive processing that could increase their vulnerability. Finally, being more positive may make older adults better victims of scams.

Myth #16 Older people are extra cautious when they have to make decisions

It is a common myth that older adults are overly cautious, especially when they are faced with making a decision. It is certainly true that in laboratory studies on reaction time, older people can be slower than young adults. This slowness is often more pronounced when there is more than one stimulus to react to and more than one possible response. In general, age-related differences in reaction time tend to increase as the complexity of the reaction time situation increases. Clearly, laboratory-based choice and complex reaction time tests have found that older adults are considerably slower than young adults. As a real-life example of choice reaction time, think about when you are driving and you see a traffic light just ahead of you turn green, but you also see that there is a toddler playing near the curb. You have to choose between maintaining your speed and proceeding through the green light or applying the brake, so you slow down in case the toddler runs into the street – two stimuli (green light and toddler playing) and two possible responses (maintain speed or slow down).

But based on the results of laboratory-based reaction time studies, can we conclude that older adults are always slower than younger adults when it comes to making decisions? Even if older adults are slower, can this be attributed to cautiousness? Contrary to the assumption that older adults are more cautious than younger adults when decisions must be made, several recent studies using simulated real-life situations have reported that older adults tend to review less information than young adults do before settling on an alternative. Furthermore, older adults often reach decisions more quickly than do young adults. This tendency has been found in the health field when it comes to selecting a physician and a health-care plan (Löckenhoff & Carstensen, 2007). The same phenomenon has been noted when older women were asked to select from an array of breast cancer treatments (Meyer, Russo, & Talbot, 1995) and when older men were instructed to select a treatment for prostate cancer (Meyer, Talbot, & Ranalli, 2007). In these situations, the older women and men made decisions more quickly than did the young and middle-aged women and men.

Johnson (1990) asked young adult undergraduates and older retirees to make a consumer decision that many people are faced with during their lives – deciding which kind of car to purchase. Study participants could use a computer to access comparative information about the fuel economy, comfort, maintenance cost, safety record, styling, purchase price, and resale value of various automobiles. Overall, the two age groups took approximately the same amount of time to reach a final decision about which car to purchase. However, the older retirees viewed fewer pieces of information about the cars, although they spent more time on each one than the young adults did. In short, prior to making a decision, the older retirees did not consider all of the possible alternatives to the extent that the young adults did, which would indicate that they were less cautious.

In sum, it is important to distinguish between reaction time and decision-making. Rather than being overly cautious when faced with choosing between several alternatives that require thoughtful consideration, older adults sometimes review less information than younger adults do. They often make decisions, even when those decisions are far from trivial, without methodically considering all the information that is available. In some cases they seem to be in more of a hurry to make a decision – they reach a decision more quickly than do younger adults. Therefore, it is not warranted to assume that, as decision-makers, older adults are more cautious than young adults.