IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v19y1984i11p1181-1187.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Age and capacity devaluation: A replication

Author

Listed:
  • Greenblum, Joseph

Abstract

This study replicates and extends an earlier study of disabled men based on 1996 national survey data which supported the hypothesis of capacity devaluation among older persons who considered themselves disabled, by finding that age was related to self-reported severity of work disability independent of several measures of functional capacity loss and prior job requirements. We analyzed data from a 1972 national survey of disabled persons in the U.S. aged 20-64 for women as well as men, utilizing more comprehensive and direct measures of capacity loss and prior work situation. Cross-tabular and logit analyses largely confirm the finding in the earlier study and extend them to disabled women: age independently affected self-perceived severity of work disability. Capacity devaluation among the near-aged occurred particularly among less incapacitated blue-collar men but its occurrence was not greater among those with more specific exertional requirements in the prior job. The results generally support the conclusion that older persons with work limitations devalue their residual capacities for work. Older persons' evaluations of their work abilities appear to be influenced by social expectations of declining capacities with age and by social sanctions permitting premature withdrawal from work for reasons of health.

Suggested Citation

  • Greenblum, Joseph, 1984. "Age and capacity devaluation: A replication," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 19(11), pages 1181-1187, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:19:y:1984:i:11:p:1181-1187
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0277-9536(84)90368-X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:19:y:1984:i:11:p:1181-1187. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.