What Happens to Retirement Plans,and Does This Affect Retirement Satisfaction?

Abstract

This study examines the role of planning and plan fulfillment for retirement satisfaction using a dynamic resource theory approach. A 3-year qualitative longitudinal design was deployed with interviews conducted first on the cusp of retirement, then 1 and 2 years after retirement. The final sample comprised 41 individuals from England, 40 from Italy, and 30 from the United States. Realizing plans was found to be linked to retirement satisfaction. However, many retirees adjusted well to retirement without planning in advance, or when plans were thwarted, and sometimes retirement did not live up to expectations despite fulfillment of plans. Psychological resources and resilience were key dimensions of satisfaction regardless of planning. Retirement satisfaction was also associated with social integration, adoption of new social roles, and opportunities to be active within and beyond the private sphere, such as volunteering or participating in leisure oriented clubs or activities. Regardless of planning, the quality of family relationships was a particularly important element for retirement satisfaction or dissatisfaction.

Keywords

retirement transition retirement plans plan fulfillment older workers retirement satisfaction

Introduction

From a life course perspective, aging is a process that unfolds throughout life with transitions and outcomes influenced by a complex interplay between socioeconomic environment, working histories, networks of relationships (linked lives), and individual choices made within these broader structural constraints and opportunities (Elder, 1997; Riley, 1979). One particularly important transition in later life is the shift from work to retirement, with specific pathways influenced by both context and individual choices (Cahill, Giandrea, & Quinn, 2015; Settersten, 2003). The transition has been described as a process that entails forethought and preparation (Black, 2014; Curl & Ingram, 2013), and previous studies have suggested that people engage in anticipatory planning in relation to roles, activities, and time use (DeVaney & Kim, 2003; Ekerdt, Kosloski, & De Viney, 2000; Reitzes, Mutran, & Fernandez, 1998; Winston & Barnes, 2007). Other research has found that plans to occupy the time previously filled by work tend to be less refined, as people react to the circumstances they encounter (Byles et al., 2013; Hedges & Sykes, 2009) or are reluctant to seek out information, or make detailed decisions about retirement (Weyman, Wainwright, O’Hara, Jones, & Buckingham, 2012). A lack of lifestyle planning could also be due to a dearth of institutionalized templates and so the postretirement years remain unscripted, associated with social marginalization, few opportunities for meaningful productive engagement, and the risk of reduced physical activity (Moen, 2005; Pittman, 2013).

Hewitt, Howie, and Feldman (2010) have described retirement as unfolding over three stages: (a) preparation for retirement, (b) worker-retiree transition, and (c) adjusting to retirement. Although there is no universally accepted definition of retirement adjustment (Price, 2003), satisfaction with retirement has been identified as one of the most studied retirement adjustment indicators (Potočnik, Tordera, & Peiró, 2013; Price, 2003; van Solinge & Henkens, 2008), other indicators include life satisfaction, well-being, and quality of life (Sim, Bartlam, & Bernard, 2011; Snyder & Lopez, 2009).

Previous studies have demonstrated a positive association between retirement planning and retirement satisfaction (e.g., Moffatt & Heaven, 2017). This study focuses on the mechanisms that link retirement planning and retirement satisfaction; in particular, we explore whether the achievement or failure to fulfill plans has consequences for retirement satisfaction. This topic is largely unexplored in the literature and could allow for the identification of moderators between retirement plans and retirement satisfaction.

Theories on Retirement

Retirement decisions and transitions have been studied using several theoretical approaches, with none emerging as a dominant perspective (Beehr, 2014). Feldman and Beehr (2011) suggest that retirement decision-making implies three different stages (i.e., imagining future life as a retired individual, deciding when to retire, actually retiring) and that each stage could be understood through various theoretical approaches. In the present study we note several of these approaches as ways to understand the pathways from retirement planning to retirement satisfaction.

Rational choice theory (Gustman & Steinmeier, 1986; Hatcher, 2003) conceptualizes individuals as rational decision-makers who, in relation to retirement, will make plans for postretirement life and for the timing of the retirement transition to optimize personal utility. In doing so, the individual takes into account the multiple competing costs and benefits associated with paid employment compared with retirement, as well as their current expectations regarding the various uncertainties surrounding retirement and their valuation of future outcomes. The notion of retirement planning underpins this approach.

Other theoretical perspectives employed to explain the retirement transition, with implications for the role of planning, include continuity theory and activity theory. Continuity theory indicates that retirement plans will be made such that the individual will remain the same after retirement as she was before retirement (Atchley, 1999). Activity theory (Havighurst, 1961) emphasizes the extent to which successful aging, plans, and positive adaptation are associated with finding new activities and remaining socially engaged to replace the structure of work. Rather than emphasizing activities, role theory (Ashforth, 2001; Riley & Riley, 1994) stresses the importance of new social roles for identity and well-being with those most invested in their jobs with strong work identities seen to be most at risk of compromised well-being over the retirement transition, unless new, alternative roles are valued and adopted.

All of these theoretical approaches imply a positive individual agency and, as such, one can argue that retirement plans coming to fruition will positively affect retirement satisfaction.

In contrast, sociological perspectives place greater emphasis on embedded choices, the role of normative expectations and the constraints which steer choices and outcomes. The significance of individual rationality is accordingly downplayed (Weyman et al., 2012). This approach could be particularly useful to explain differences between countries with different social norms. In the case of planning, older employees may feel pushed by social norms (Feldman & Beehr, 2011), and make retirement plans accordingly (e.g., to act as grandparent, informal caregiver, etc.). This approach may also concern the life course perspective, which focuses on the development of behaviors across life transitions. Life course transitions may be shaped by, among other factors, the sociohistorical context and influence (Elder, Johnson, & Crosnoe, 2003). In this case, retirement satisfaction could depend to a lesser extent on fulfilling (or not fulfilling) retirement plans, as these plans could be influenced by social-normative influences in addition to individual wishes.

By contrast, and in opposition to continuity and activity perspectives, disengagement theory (Cumming & Henry, 1961) conceptualizes retirement as a process of withdrawal from roles and relationships (Nimrod, Janke, & Kleiber, 2008). As a theoretical approach, disengagement has become less central in recent years, as withdrawal from social life is not viewed as a sign of successful aging. Instead, being embedded socially in later life is increasingly recognized as a positive value (Johnson & Mutchler, 2014). The disengagement perspective, therefore, is linked to the notion of planning less than the continuity and activity perspectives and could imply dissatisfaction with the retirement experience.

While these theories can provide insight into specific aspects of retirement adjustment, the resource-based dynamic perspective provides an integrated theoretical framework to explain the transition (Wang, Henkens, & van Solinge, 2011). The reason is that, given its dynamic longitudinal implications, retirement can be explored as a process that includes the mechanism from retirement planning to adjustment (including what is in-between). This perspective reveals that retirement adjustment depends on available resources (physical, cognitive, motivational, financial, social, and emotional) and changes in these resources (because the latter are fluctuating), with high resource availability allowing faster and better adjustment to retirement. Retirement planning was identified as a key motivational resource in this context. In light of these characteristics, we employ the resource-based dynamic perspective for the purposes of this study. We view retirement adjustment as a dynamic process that evolves over time according to resource availability and may imply alternating periods of stability, change, and readjustment (Moffatt & Heaven, 2017; Reitzes & Mutran, 2004; Sterns & Subich, 2004; Wang et al., 2011). The enactment of retirement plans and retirement satisfaction depend on the available resources and changes in them.

From Retirement Planning to Retirement Satisfaction: What Happens In-Between?

Previous studies have identified a range of factors which contribute to retirement satisfaction including human capital (Fouquereau, Fernandez, Fonseca, Paul, & Uotinen, 2005; Heybroek, Haynes, & Baxter, 2015; Noone, Stephens, & Alpass, 2009; Potočnik et al., 2013), social resources (Price, 2003; Price & Nesteruk, 2015), environmental resources (Moffatt & Heaven, 2017), psychological factors (Barbosa, Monteiro, & Murta, 2016; Price & Balaswamy, 2009; Taylor, Goldberg, Shore, & Lipka, 2008; van Solinge &Henkens, 2005), and characteristics of former work or the circumstances of withdrawal from the labor market (De Vaus, Wells, Kendig, & Quine, 2007; Muratore & Earl, 2015; van Solinge & Henkens, 2008; Wang, 2007). Retirement planning and the setting of goals have also been identified as important contributors to retirement satisfaction, adjustment, and well-being (Adams & Rau, 2011; Barnes & Parry, 2004; Curl & Ingram, 2013; Davis, 2007; Hewitt et al., 2010; Reitzes & Mutran, 2004; Topa, Moriano, Depolo, Alcover, & Morales, 2009). In some cases, planning factors have been identified as the largest contributors to satisfaction and health in retirement (Moffatt & Heaven, 2017; Noone et al., 2009; Schellenberg, Turcotte, & Ram, 2005; Zhu-Sams, 2004). Wang and Schultz (2010), in a review of employee retirement, acknowledge the importance of planning and highlight the need for more research on the factors that might mediate or moderate any relationship between retirement planning and postretirement outcomes to improve support for individuals during this life transition.

Despite a considerable body of literature examining the relationship between retirement planning and subsequent satisfaction, there remains a substantial gap in knowledge concerning what happens to plans made in the lead up to retirement: whether they come to fruition and their consequences with respect to retirement satisfaction. In essence, underlying mechanisms are poorly understood (Muratore & Earl, 2015; Taylor & Doverspike, 2003). One reason for this gap may be that most studies about retirement adjustment have not been conducted through a prospective longitudinal approach but rather based on retrospective recall (Davis, 2007; Principi et al., 2016). To fill this gap in knowledge, this study aims to investigate longitudinally the impact of thwarted and fulfilled plans on retirement satisfaction, and the main barriers to plan fulfillment, to assess how people adapt to unexpected retirement circumstances.

Retirement Planning: What Is Being Measured?

There is little consistency in the literature around the definition and the operationalization of retirement planning. The majority of studies consider retirement planning as financial planning (Hershey, Henkens, & van Dalen, 2007; Muratore & Earl, 2015; Phua & McNally, 2008). In some cases, retirement plans are defined in terms of planning the work exit (Heaven et al., 2016), so they are very short term. In other cases, the operationalization of retirement planning can scarcely be thought of in terms of concrete plans, for example, having talked about retirement with friends and family (Noone et al., 2009; Wang, 2007). Other studies have considered preparation as attending preretirement planning meetings or developing new interests or skills (Muratore & Earl, 2015; Noone et al., 2009). In some other cases, the operationalization is weakly explained, for example, defined as use of employer-sponsored retirement programs, pensions, and personal savings (Davis, 2007).

The plans of interest to the current study relate to the wide variety of aims and intentions for retired life, as described by individuals in the year before they retire. Aims may relate to activities, roles, and relationships and may be self or other oriented concerning the family, friends, marriage, being physically active, or socially engaged among other goals.

Aims of the Study

This article contributes to the evidence on the relationship between planning and outcomes by studying whether attainment of retirement plans is critical for retirement satisfaction. Prior research has shown that retirement planning is associated with retirement satisfaction but what happens then? The key research question is as follows: Is retirement satisfaction primarily associated with plan enactment or is retirement satisfaction dependent on other factors and largely obtainable despite a disruption of plans?

This study also examines the key obstacles to the attainment of plans and of satisfaction. In this respect and in line with Wang et al. (2011), it may be argued that resources dynamically mediate not only the relationship between retirement and satisfaction but also that between retirement plans and their attainment. A decline in resources may relate to one’s own health or that of a partner. Other unforeseen events with the potential to undermine the realization of plans could be unplanned caregiving responsibilities such as eldercare or grandparenting (Price & Nesteruk, 2015) or economic difficulties (Hewitt et al., 2010). Thus, other research questions are what are the main drivers and barriers to the enactment of plans and to retirement satisfaction?

This is an underexplored topic. Some authors have hypothesized that attainment of plans may be strongly tied to retirement satisfaction (Gall & Evans, 2000; Potočnik et al., 2013). However, the studies available investigating the link between retirement plans and retirement satisfaction have not considered the relationship between the successful execution of retirement plans and satisfaction outcomes (e.g., Barbosa et al., 2016; Clarke, Marshall, & Weir, 2012; Taylor, Shultz, Spiegel, Morrison, & Greene, 2007). An exception is one Australian qualitative study employing a retrospective approach, but while evidence was found for a possible positive, satisfied retired life, despite unmet plans, the study was based on a sample of just four retirees (Hewitt et al., 2010).

As highlighted by previous studies (Jex & Grosch, 2013; Moffatt & Heaven, 2017), due to a paucity of qualitative evidence on this matter, there is a need for further qualitative research into the relationship between attainment of retirement plans and satisfaction, especially given the suggestion by Jonsson, Borell, and Sadlo (2000) that only a minority of retirees realize their plans. The current study deploys a qualitative longitudinal research design, based on three interview waves: about 1 year before retirement, about 1 year after retirement, and about 2 years after retirement. A further strength of the study is that it has been carried out in three countries with different welfare regimes: England, Italy, and the United States. Italy represents the Mediterranean welfare regime where the role of the family is crucial (Ferrera, 1996), and although England and the United States both represent the liberal welfare model where de-familiarization and a private care model are usual (Bambra, 2004), these two countries present several differences in the institutional setting regulating the transition from work to retirement (Lain, 2011).

Methods

Sampling Procedure and Fieldwork

This international longitudinal study explored the retirement transition from a number of perspectives, including impacts on health and well-being. As in several studies (e.g., Matthews & Nazroo, 2016), individuals were asked to self-report their retirement status, and in all countries, their retirement status was related to pension eligibility (state, occupational, or private) and separation from career employment. In each country, a recruitment agency screened older workers and selected them on the basis that they were working full time (30 hours or more, or at least 4 days per week) and that they intended to retire within about 1 year, at which point the focus on retirement plans and expectations peak (Evans, Ekerdt, & Bosse, 1985).

Purposive sampling techniques were deployed to achieve diversity in terms of occupational background (to include people from sedentary, stressful, and physically challenging jobs), living area (urban or rural), relationship status, household composition, income group, age, and gender. A total of 133 older workers (55 across England, mean age: 61 years; 40 in Central Italy, mean age: 60 years; 38 in northwest United States, mean age: 62 years) were interviewed at the baseline between May 2014 and early 2015. To investigate trajectories of retirement adjustment, individuals were reinterviewed about 1 year after retirement (Wave 2) and again 1 year later (Wave 3). The Wave 2 sample was composed of 31 respondents in England, 40 in Italy, and 30 in the United States; the Wave 3 sample included 39 in England, 40 in Italy, and 27 in the United States. The fieldwork ended in January 2017. Attrition was mostly due to the fact that, in England and the United States, some older workers did not change their employment situation (i.e., did not retire), so interviews were not performed in those cases. Consequently, a few individuals in this sample were interviewed twice instead of on three occasions, while others who were interviewed while working only were excluded from the study. The main reasons for attrition were that respondents were asked by their employer not to retire or that they could not afford to retire. The final longitudinal sample consisted of 111 individuals: 41 from England, 40 from Italy, and 30 from the United States.

Interviews were carried out using a common semistructured topic guide tailored for each wave to explore change in relation to jobs, retirement plans and circumstances, family and environmental circumstances, health, social activity, and lifestyles including physical activity, diet, smoking, and alcohol consumption. The research team included researchers with different backgrounds (i.e., sociologists, psychologists, and economists) with expertise in qualitative fieldwork. The team structured the three topic guides and carried out the interviews. Baseline interviews explored the decision to retire, plans for retirement, and expected changes to lifestyles. Examples of questions asked are “Do you have any particular plans for your retirement?” “(How) do you see retirement affecting your social activities? And how do you feel about that?” and subsequent interviews investigated the evolution of retirement plans, satisfaction, and adjustment. Examples of question asked are “When we met last time, you said that during retirement you wanted… [retirement plan]. How has that worked out in practice?” “Was there anything unexpected that came up since your last interview?” and “Overall, how satisfied are you with your life in retirement?” Interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed, and anonymized.

Analysis

Data management and analysis was conducted using NVivo or MAXQDA11 to thematically code interview transcriptions. To analyze the relationships between planning and subsequent outcomes, broad themes were identified at the preliminary stage of coding, such as “retirement motives,” “retirement plans,” and “aspirations.” Subsequent rounds of coding were oriented toward trajectories and outcomes to consider the fulfillment of plans, unexpected events, retirement satisfaction and adjustment, and which factors facilitated or prevented plan fulfillment. At the final stage of analysis, the data were reduced, and a framework matrix approach used to seek out patterns in the responses (Ritchie, 2013). The advantage of this visual platform is that it enables systematic comparison of differences across respondents.

When reporting findings below fictitious names are ascribed to individuals and where ages are indicated these refer to age at baseline.

Results

Four main groups were identifiable through the analysis of work to retirement trajectories. Two trajectories apply to individuals who expressed well-defined plans and aspirations for retirement, differentiated according to whether their plans were fulfilled or not and accordingly labeled “fulfilled planners” and “thwarted planners.” We observed that bridge employment (i.e., defined here as paid employment after retirement—see Beehr & Bennett, 2015 and Cahill, Giandrea, & Quinn, 2018 for definitions and features of bridge employment) was a fairly common plan among the American-interviewed individuals in particular, typically on a part time and casual or self-employed basis. However, as they were also drawing a pension, they saw themselves as primarily retired. We also found a group of individuals who did not make specific and focused plans for retirement. During the first interview, it was observed that some “non planners” had a positive attitude toward their imminent retirement while others exhibited anxiety. Nonplanners were therefore classified into two groups. The first group, “optimistic drifters” did not see any need to plan, largely assuming their life would be full of activity. These people were quite relaxed about the future, following a path of continuity, without the need for preparation and forethought. The second group, labeled “anxious drifters” did not make plans but were worried about their impending retirement and felt they were jumping into the unknown with a degree of trepidation. For descriptive purposes only—given the small-sample sizes—we provide an illustration of the four groups and their related satisfaction, as percentages. Within all country samples, individuals who had well-defined retirement plans were in the majority, especially in the Italian (67.5%) and the United States (63%) samples, and most planners (77.6%) fulfilled their aims later in retirement (Table 1). Among fulfilled planners, 96.1% were satisfied, while this percentage was 40.0% for thwarted planners. Among nonplanners, 60.0% of optimistic drifters were satisfied after retirement, whereas 47.4% of anxious drifters were. This broadly demonstrates that retirement satisfaction is an easier aim to achieve when plans are fulfilled, but also that retirement satisfaction could be possible despite thwarted plans. For the four groups, pathways to satisfaction or dissatisfaction with retirement were explored.

Table 1.

Retirement Trajectories, by Satisfaction With Retirement and Country (N).

Retirement trajectory	Retirement satisfaction			Retirement dissatisfaction			Total
Retirement trajectory	IT	EN	US	IT	EN	US	Total
Fulfilled planners	21	13	16	1	1	0	52
Thwarted planners	3	1	2	2	6	1	15
Optimistic drifters	7	5	3	0	6	4	25
Anxious drifters	3	5	1	3	4	3	19
Total	34	24	22	6	17	8	93

Note. IT = Italy; EN = England; US = United States.

Fulfilled Planners

The first trajectory “type” includes people for whom retired life conforms to expectations and plans established prior to retirement. This was the largest sample category in all the three country samples, composed of 52 individuals.

Satisfaction

All but two of these cases reported feeling satisfied with retirement. A key characteristic of this group was high motivation. Their lives were not necessarily free of challenges, with examples of reluctant eldercare and deterioration of health, and so on, but, with a strong degree of resilience, these individuals were able to adapt to decreases in such resources. So for this group, the most frequently mentioned facilitator of plan attainment was a high level of motivation despite barriers. The significance of high self-efficacy was evident in the following example of Vincenzo, an Italian man age 61 years, who was very overweight (around 150 kilos) prior to retirement, and planned to use his retirement to do exercise and lose weight. Unfortunately, he had a range of health problems and pain which made physical activity a struggle. Nevertheless, despite the health barrier, 10 months after his retirement, he had lost 20 kilos and planned to lose a further 20 kilos. Two years later, Vincenzo regarded his retirement plans as attained and described himself as very satisfied:

Since starting my diet, I dropped 42 kilos ( … ) My blood pressure stabilized, I take half of the drugs I was taking before, I walk better ( … ) I go to the swimming pool ( … ) I go to the grocery store every day ( … ) I climb the stairs four times a day, a thing that for a year and a half I have never done ( … ) It truly was a turning point, I am very satisfied. (IT02)

Maggie (US24), a 59-year-old woman in the United States, after a 26-year career as a school teacher “had had enough” of working and was ready to retire. Financially, her years working in the public sector provided her with a stable pension income. As planned, after retiring, she began making soaps and selling them at a local farmer’s market. By Wave 3, it was clear that Maggie was overall very satisfied with her retirement. Her main plan for retirement was by and large fulfilled.

Dissatisfaction

Fulfilled plans, however, were not always sufficient for retirement satisfaction. Walter, who retired from teaching, planned long road trips on his motorbike and hoped to pursue voluntary work. Despite fulfilling his plans, he nevertheless remains somewhat dissatisfied—he feels there is nothing “substantial” in his life, he misses the schoolchildren more than anticipated and is experiencing some tensions in his relationship with his wife. Overall, he is disappointed not to be making more of his retirement:

It’s a bit frustrating, I’m frittering time away [and] I didn’t think I’d miss the kids so much … I suppose it’s difficult in a way because I’m becoming increasingly aware in terms of family they have very different demands, interests, you know, whatever … so I’m very outdoors and sports orientated and my wife is not. (EN03, age 60 years)

Pietro, a 64-year-old Italian man (IT11) who retired voluntarily from a public administration job, anticipated retirement enthusiastically as a time to devote to model building (train and boat models). Nevertheless, 2 years after the first interview, he described how his life was in accordance with his plans, but his model building and other activities were “not enough.” His hobby is enjoyable but it is a solitary activity and he lacks social contacts, especially as he is separated and as his grandchildren are growing he now sees them less often.

Thwarted Planners

The second trajectory consists of people who did not succeed in doing what they planned to do. Five individuals from the Italian sample, seven from the English and three from the U.S. sample belong to this group. Thwarted plans arose from both internal and external factors; due to a range of mostly unexpected circumstances including family commitments (e.g., grandparenting and elder care), health shocks, constrained opportunities for working or volunteering, lack of motivation, and poor psychological well-being.

Satisfaction

It was found that some of these individuals were satisfied with retirement despite not achieving aspirations having adapted to their new circumstances. For example, Nicoletta, an Italian woman who worked as a nurse in a Local Health Authority, planned to enroll on some University of the Third Age courses for the intellectual challenge, but this did not materialize. Instead she intensified her housekeeping activities, became a regular carer of her 6-year-old granddaughter and by Wave 3 also had additional eldercare responsibilities.

I wanted to enrol [in U3A] but did not succeed, because three days a week I look after my granddaughter. Her mother started full-time work again, and therefore it is a family necessity ( … ) And then on Saturday we have this 96 years-old aunt of my husband ( … ) she lives alone, she has no family. So for me this is a care task. (IT33, age 60 years)

However, she was happy to divert her plans and during the final interview described herself as satisfied in retirement. Although unplanned, she regarded her new roles within the family as important and fulfilling.

I feel satisfied ( … ) The most important thing is to have a quiet and united family situation. Maybe before an important part of my interests were work-related, while now I spill my energies on the family. (IT33)

Lucie, from the United States, was 65 years old at the time of the first interview, single, and a self-described “workhorse.” She had planned for retirement financially and aimed to stop working completely. However, after several months in retirement, she changed her mind. Lucie took on three part-time jobs primarily because her ex-husband had passed away and she wanted to help her son purchase his father’s property to keep it in the family. Despite this unexpected event and change in Lucie’s plans, she remained optimistic and satisfied with retirement, taking pride in being able to provide financial support to her son.

… After all, I don’t want to fall into the trap of being in my house and not seeing anyone for a number of days … you hear stories of people doing that … people spending all of their days sitting in front of the television and not doing anything … (US36)

Among the English sample, Alf (EN41, married, age 59 years) retired with concrete plans to find a new job, mainly in order to increase his social life. Despite several job rejections, unfulfilled assumptions of a fuller and more busy life, and lack of the desired structure in life, he is very satisfied overall. He continues to be involved in politics and, with an introverted personality, enjoys being alone or with immediate family.

Dissatisfaction

In other instances, and maybe not surprisingly, thwarted plans led to dissatisfaction with retirement. For example, Jacob (age 64 years) planned to become a volunteer, but the volunteer experience was disappointing and he gave up, in addition some unforeseen health problems contributed to his general state of dissatisfaction.

my life … it’s far emptier than I anticipated … I was very expectant of retiring and then becoming a volunteer for XXXX but it was a disaster [they] make you feel that they are doing me a favor for volunteering, not the other way round … it’s all very strange, lots of little things, disrespectful … then I had this kidney problem … (EN04)

Jacob’s retirement experiences highlight the limitations of using snapshot approaches, that is, cross sectional methodologies to study retirement which is essentially a continually evolving process over time rather than a one-time event with one-time outcomes. In his first year of retirement, Jacob described himself as happy, however, soon the “novelty wore off” and he found himself drifting, without desired structure or meaning in his life. Looking ahead to the future, he initially remained quite optimistic but, despite the high degree of planning, self-efficacy, motivation, and an upbeat outlook, by Wave 3 Jacob was largely disappointed with retirement due to circumstances over which he had little control.

The only U.S. case of this kind was that of Robert, age 64 years (US40), who planned to find a job (with certain specific characteristics) but was unable to find that job and faced several serious challenges, including weight gain, lack of motivation, and increased eating, plus struggling with a prior drug addiction, all of which have negatively impacted his satisfaction with retirement.

Isabella, a 66-year-old Italian woman (IT28) who was a janitor in a high school, was happy to retire from a job she did not like, with a clearly formulated plan to go and live abroad. By Wave 2, it was evident that her husband was fearful of the move and did not share her enthusiasm for a new life in a new country, although she was still hopeful. By Wave 3, she had become disillusioned, and her relationship with her husband was more strained, not helped by the fact that she was feeling isolated living on the outskirts of a small town.

Optimistic Drifters

One group (7 cases from Italy, 11 from England, 7 from the United States) entered retirement without concrete plans and aspirations but anticipated a positive life of activity in more abstract terms, optimistic that opportunities would present themselves. These people assumed they would live a life of relative continuity and were not worried, able to draw on strong resources in terms of social networks, hobbies, interests, families, and so on, which they assumed would seamlessly expand to fill their time.

Satisfaction

Among the Italian sample especially, this group was largely satisfied with retirement. As in the case of Sofia who had no plans preretirement:

I have not made concrete plans because I’m not used to planning things ( … ) I would like to be tranquil, to help my daughter, maybe walk a bit, and live a quiet life without big expectations. (IT29, age 59 years)

The following year Sofia described taking on various leisure activities and joining courses. After several months, a second grandchild was born, and Sofia shifted her orientations and retired lifestyle to almost fully devote to the family. Despite not having specific plans, by Wave 3, she was very satisfied with her retirement. This case illustrates how a strong family orientation and the roles of “mother” and “grandmother” especially for women in Italy, represent an unplanned, taken for granted and gratifying transition.

In the United States, Charles, age 62 years (US38), had worked as an attorney for nearly three decades and decided that he had “reached the end of the race” and wanted to retire. He was prepared to retire financially. Despite having “no concrete plans,” Charles’ view was positive, perceiving retirement as a time to relax and perhaps “do something different.” After retiring, Charles noted that the biggest challenge was finding enough activities. He missed the intellectual stimulus that came with his work. By Wave 3, he had joined a Board and shifted his focus from work to family, spending more time with his wife, in particular. Overall, Charles was satisfied with his retirement.

Dissatisfaction

Experiences of optimistic drifters who in Wave 3 were dissatisfied were found in the English and the U.S. samples. One English woman, Nadine, age 55 years, did not have concrete plans in Wave 1 but did have positive general aspirations to pick up a social life as her life has been dominated by work. In subsequent interviews, she was quite disappointed, mainly due to a gap in community provision for her age-group.

There’s a group advertised that came up for the over fifties in March. I thought ‘okay I’ll go to that.’ But I have to say it’s probably the over seventies. Also the U3A … I had a look in one day and I went past and I could only see elderly and I thought ‘oh’ and I emailed this guy and I said ‘at my age am I too young?’ and he said ‘well you will find that you are one of a few'. So there is definitely a gap. [in provision for people in their 50s] (EN27)

Among the U.S. sample, Susan, age 65 years (US13), had an optimistic drifter’s view of retirement but after retiring said that she frequently found herself not sure of what she should do on a daily basis and found it difficult to “break into new relationships.” Susan also reported being constrained for financial reasons. As of the third interview, she described herself as “being in limbo.”

I know a lot of people in [California] that are good friends but they’ve all moved on, it’s been twenty years since I lived here and they’re not waiting for me to knock on their door and say ‘oh yes let’s be friends and I’ve got all these wonderful things planned for us to do'.

Anxious Drifters

The last category, including 6 cases in Italy, 9 in England, and 4 in the United States, encompasses individuals who did not plan and for whom retirement was opaque. Retirement as an “unknown” was a source of considerable anxiety for some. Having given little thought to how their lives would change and the activities that might occupy their time, people in this group seemed bewildered, without being able or having inspiration to make any plans. Trepidation was a common theme, and for these individuals, retirement was often discussed less as the beginning of something new and more as an ending, as in the following example:

… that’s the fear of retirement … everything stops, all your habits, all your friends, all your patterns of behavior stop completely. (EN07, female, age 57 years)

Satisfaction

Disappointment with retirement does not inevitably follow from preretirement worries and lack of planning. Around half this group expressed satisfaction with their retired lives. In some cases, worries and lack of planning were due to having been so focused on work that it was hard to see beyond working life. In England, Peter, age 65 years (EN08), while still working was judgmental of retired people, who seem to be wasting their lives. However, to his own surprise, after retirement, he readily found avenues to increase his social life and started to forget his previous working life and was very satisfied in retirement.

Among the U.S. sample, Carl (age 62 years) characterized himself as being “forced” into retirement. Despite initial worries, 2 years later Carl described himself as being satisfied with retirement having made new friends and with a “more lively social life” than before.

[I] pretty much, do my own thing, you know, stay fairly active. You know, because of financial constraints I don’t go out to the movies like I used to. But, you know, like I said, I’ve got, there is a social group that I belong to. And you know, we meet at least once a month, you know, which I wasn’t doing before. You know, kind of, developing some, you know, some new friendships, new skills, you know, a little more lively social life than I had for a while. (US06)

Dissatisfaction

In many instances, people in this group were passive and dissatisfied once retired, often due to small social networks or marital tensions. Indeed these circumstances explained in part the lack of retirement planning. In the following example Luciana, a former primary school teacher discussed how narrow her life had become, overly focused on the home sphere. The quality of the relationship with her husband seemed to be a decisive factor:

I would say I’m not satisfied at the moment, mostly since I would like some commitments out of the home, or even inside the home but with other people. I am lacking in the social aspects of life. I cannot change things since this depends mostly on my husband. I counted very much on the company of my husband once retired but he has become lifeless. He does not want to do anything. (IT16, age 63 years)

In the case of Donna, in England, worries and lack of planning were attributed to economic concerns. After retirement, she was mostly unhappy and very pessimistic.

Happy in general? No. I just think my whole life now has peaked and I think to myself, ‘Is this what life is all about?’ Every day is the same and I am getting older and I thought, ‘I just want to die, it’s very easy, give all the house to my kids and I’ll just go’. (EN01, age 61 years)

Discussion

While a positive relationship between retirement planning and retirement satisfaction has been documented, there is a gap in knowledge concerning the possible effects of whether retirement plans are fulfilled, with underlying mechanisms poorly understood. In light of the call for more research on the factors that might mediate or moderate any relationship between retirement planning and postretirement outcomes, this study examined the incidence of planning and the extent to which satisfaction in retirement is conditional on fulfilling plans.

As expected, the results of this study suggest that the resource-based dynamic perspective integrates the other existing theories and represents an appropriate approach for studying the retirement trajectories identified in this study (Wang et al., 2011). In all cases, both plan fulfillment (in the case of planners) and retirement satisfaction are dependent upon the available resources and changes in them. In contrast, other theoretical approaches apply better to specific groups or their characteristics (Wang et al., 2011). Other theoretical approaches shed light on the main research questions of this study (i.e., whether among planners, retirement satisfaction is only possible with plan enactment) but provide less insight regarding the main determinants and barriers to the enactment of plans and retirement satisfaction.

To answer the main research question, our results suggest that among planners satisfaction is more widespread when plans were fulfilled, as expected. This underpins the theoretical approaches like rational choice, continuity, activity, and role theory (Atchley, 1999; Hatcher, 2003; Havighurst, 1961; Riley & Riley, 1994), with satisfaction linked to the ability to enact the plan. Key moderators resulted psychological resources as resilience and motivation, despite unexpected events, such as the need to provide eldercare and health shocks, that could decrease resources. The few cases of dissatisfaction despite plan enactment, in terms of main moderators, point in the direction of “not substantial” plan (e.g., an individual hobby with a related lack of social contacts, and of tensions in family relationships).

Our findings also suggest that satisfaction is not necessarily tied to plan fulfillment. While less common, examples of satisfaction in retirement were found despite unfulfilled plans (or planning at all). Many of these examples were due to unforeseen events linked to family issues (grandparenting, elder care, health problems, financial need, etc.), in which it was possible to “replace” expectations related to the original plan with, for example, an improved social life and new friends. These factors acted as moderators, together with having been able to engage in meaningful roles and activities in the community and within the family, consistent with activity theory and role theory (Ashforth, 2001; Havighurst, 1961).

Even if retirement plans could sometimes be driven by social norms more than by individual wishes, for example, bridge employment more widespread in the United States, family-related plans in Italy, and leisure activities in England (Principi et al., 2016), we did not find particular evidence that plans linked to social norms brought about dissatisfaction, as posed by a sociological perspective (Weyman et al., 2012). These plans seem to be positively embraced.

Broadly speaking, according to our results, planning the retirement experience helps but is not a precondition for retirement satisfaction. For many nonplanners (both with positive and negative expectations in terms of retirement experience), retirement is satisfactorily viewed in terms of continuity of lifestyles, core values, and a maintained or increased active role in society. This finding is consistent with an activity and continuity perspective, as in the cases of satisfaction despite plans disruption (Atchley, 1999; Havighurst, 1961).

Few respondents conformed to disengagement theory (Cumming & Henry, 1961)—by separating from roles and relationships—in early retirement. The related outcomes observed concerned mainly reluctant disengagement of nonplanners, which brought about a dissatisfactory retirement experience. The dissatisfaction was related to depleted resources, a lack of meaningful activities, social isolation (due to environmental features, gap in community provision, small social network, etc.), pessimistic attitudes, and tension in family relationships (especially marital tensions). Tension in family relationships, in particular, was conducive to retirement dissatisfaction in all of the observed trajectories. This phenomenon has been broadly observed (Kim & Moen, 2001; Price, 2003), but it is worth exploring in depth because being married is linked to retirement satisfaction (see in Price & Nesteruk, 2015).

Finally, the qualitative nature of the present study limits the extent to which these findings can be generalized to the broader population of retirees. Future studies based on quantitative data could explore how these findings mesh with the experiences of retirees in general.

Conclusion

The successful realization of retirement plans impacted retirement satisfaction positively in all three countries included in this study. However, we also found that plan enactment (or planning) was not a precondition for retirement satisfaction. Among fulfilled planners, moderators of plan enactment to retirement satisfaction or dissatisfaction are individual motivation, resilience, social versus individual dimension of the plan, and social isolation or contacts. Moderators of plan unfulfillment to retirement satisfaction are changes in social engagement and friendships, and the existence of carried-out valued and gratifying activities (both within the family and the in community). For planners, the main barriers to plan enactment were unexpected events, mainly in the familiar or personal sphere, and decreased human and social resources, such as eldercare, grandparenting, death of a family member, financial need, and health problems. Psychological resources seemed to be particularly important for retirement satisfaction, independent of the existence of retirement plans.

Many retirees faced a decline in some of their resources including failing health, unexpected caring responsibilities, and sometimes unexpected drops in income. For cases of retirement satisfaction under these conditions, a higher degree of resilience and motivation or a more optimistic outlook allowed them to adjust, keep on, or start again for a positive retirement experience. In contrast, dissatisfaction was often linked to low or decreased social contacts, or to factors that go beyond individual control such as local community strength. An important moderator in this respect is the existence of difficult relationships or tensions with family members (compared with family harmony and happiness).

In terms of policy implications, these findings suggest that more widespread provision is needed to support people both before retirement, at the planning and preparation stage, and in the postretirement period. These provisions could include opportunities to set and fulfill meaningful goals, support groups and other means of helping people to adjust to their new life stage.

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the research participants who kindly gave up their time and shared their experiences and thoughts.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the British Lifelong Health and Wellbeing Cross-Council Programme. The LLHW Funding Partners for this award are the Economic and Social Research Council and the Medical Research Council [grant number ES/L002884/1].

ORCID iDs

Andrea Principi

Sara Santini

Author Biographies

Andrea Principi is a social gerontologist and senior researcher at the Italian National Institute of Ageing (INRCA). His research interests concern active ageing, including work and the retirement transition, volunteering, and education in older age. He has participated in several European projects and published numerous scientific articles on these issues.

Deborah Smeaton is a principal research fellow at the University of Westminster. A mixed methods researcher, her interests span a variety of areas, with a focus on labour market issues, including the ageing workforce, change in the workplace, work–life balance and entrepreneurship. Her research has appeared in numerous journals.

Kevin Cahill is a research economist at the Center on Aging & Work at Boston College and a senior economist at ECONorthwest. Kevin writes on topics related to applied microeconomics, with a focus on the economics of aging and labor market transitions later in life.

Sara Santini is a social gerontologist working at INRCA (Italian National Institute of Health and Science on Ageing), at the Centre for Socio-Economic Research on Ageing. Qualitative researcher mainly, her interests are family caregiving; work-life balance; integrated care for older people, and intergenerational education and relationships.

Helen Barnes is a research fellow at at the University of Westminster. A qualitative specialist, she has wide-ranging research interests in labour market issues, disability, health and wellbeing and life transitions, and has published widely in these areas.

Marco Socci is a research fellow at the National Institute of Health and Science on Aging (INRCA), Italy. Involved in several international and national research projects, his research activity focuses on various socio-economic phenomena associated with ageing, as active ageing, labour market and older workers, work-life-balance, health and social policy.

References

Adams

G. A.

Rau

B. L.

(2011). Putting off tomorrow to do what you want today: Planning for retirement. American Psychologist, 66, 180–192. doi:10.1037/a0022131

Ashforth

B. E.

(2001). Role transitions in organizational life: An identity-based perspective. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Atchley

R. C.

(1999). Continuity theory, self, and social structure. In Ryﬀ

C. D.

Marshall

V. W.

(Eds.), Families and retirement (pp. 145–158). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Bambra

(2004). The worlds of welfare: Illusory and gender blind? Social Policy and Society, 3, 201–211. doi:10.1017/S147474640400171X

Barbosa

L. M.

Monteiro

Murta

S. G.

(2016). Retirement adjustment predictors—A systematic review. Work, Aging and Retirement, 2, 262–280. doi:10.1093/workar/waw008

Barnes

Parry

(2004). Renegotiating identity and relationships: Men and women’s adjustments to retirement. Ageing & Society, 24, 213–233. doi:10.1017/S0144686X0300148X

Beehr

T. A.

(2014). To retire or not to retire: That is not the question. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 35, 1093–1108. doi:10.1002/job.1965

Beehr

T. A.

Bennett

M. M.

(2015). Working after retirement: Features of bridge employment and research directions. Work, Aging and Retirement, 1, 112–128. doi:10.1093/workar/wau007

Black

(2014). Pre-tirement not retirement. A report from Zopa and Consumer Intelligence. Retrieved from http://cdn.zopa.com/pressrelease/2014/zopa-ci-pretirement-report.pdf

10.

Byles

Tavener

Robinson

Parkinson

Warner Smith

Stevenson

… Curryer

(2013). Transforming retirement: New definitions of life after work. Journal of Women & Aging, 25, 24–44. doi:10.1080/08952841.2012.717855

11.

Cahill

K. E.

Giandrea

M. D.

Quinn

J. F.

(2015). Retirement patterns and the macroeconomy, 1992-2010: The prevalence and determinants of bridge jobs, phased retirement, and re-entry among three recent cohorts of older Americans. The Gerontologist, 55, 384–403. doi:10.1093/geront/gnt146

12.

Cahill

K. E.

Giandrea

M. D.

Quinn

J. F.

(2018). Is bridge job activity overstated?Work, Aging, and Retirement. Advance online publication. doi:10.109 3/workar/way006

13.

Clarke

Marshall

V. W.

Weir

(2012). Unexpected retirement from full time work after age 62: Consequences for life satisfaction in older Americans. European Journal of Ageing, 9, 207–219. doi:10.1007/s10433-012-0235-7

14.

Cumming

Henry

W. E.

(1961). Growing old. New York, NY: Basic Books.

15.

Curl

A. L.

Ingram

J. G.

(2013). Anticipatory socialization for retirement: A multilevel dyadic model. Clinical Gerontologist, 36, 375–393. doi:10.1080/07317115.2013.788117

16.

Davis

G. D.

(2007). Looking toward the future: Predicting retirement satisfaction. The New School Psychology Bulletin, 5, 107–127. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00891

17.

De Vaus

Wells

Kendig

Quine

(2007). Does gradual retirement have better outcomes than abrupt retirement? Results from an Australian panel study. Ageing & Society, 27, 667–682. doi:10.1017/S0144686X07006228

18.

DeVaney

S. A.

Kim

(2003). Older self-employed workers and planning for the future. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 37, 123–142. doi:10.1111/j.1745-6606.2003.tb00443.x

19.

Ekerdt

D. J.

Kosloski

De Viney

(2000). The normative anticipation of retirement by older workers. Research on Aging, 22, 3–22. doi:10.1177/0164027500221001

20.

Elder

G. H.

Jr. (1997). The life course and human development. In Lerner

R. M.

(Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Theoretical models of human development ( Vol.1, pp. 939–991). New York, NY: Wiley.

21.

Elder

G. H.

Johnson

M. K.

Crosnoe

(2003). The emergence and development of life course theory. In Mortimer

J. T.

Shanahan

M. J.

(Eds.), Handbook of the life course (pp. 3–19). New York, NY: Kluwer/Plenum.

22.

Evans

Ekerdt

D. J.

Bosse

(1985). Proximity to retirement and anticipatory involvement: Findings from the normative aging study. Journal of Gerontology, 40, 368–374. doi:10.1093/geronj/40.3.368

23.

Ferrera

(1996). The ‘Southern’ model of welfare in social Europe. Journal of European Social Policy, 6, 17–36. doi:10.1177/095892879600600102

24.

Feldman

D. C.

Beehr

T. A.

(2011). A three-phase model of retirement decision making. American Psychologist, 66, 193–203. doi:10.1037/a0022153

25.

Fouquereau

Fernandez

Fonseca

A. M.

Paul

M. C.

Uotinen

(2005). Perceptions of and satisfaction with retirement: A comparison of six European Union countries. Psychology and Aging, 20, 524–528. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.20.3.524

26.

Gall

T. L.

Evans

D. R.

(2000). Pre-retirement expectations and the quality of life of male retirees in later retirement. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 32, 187–197. doi:10.1037/h0087115

27.

Gustman

A. L.

Steinmeier

T. L.

(1986). A structural retirement model. Econometrica, 54, 555–584. doi:0012-9682(198605)54:3<555:ASRM>2.0.CO;2-U

28.

Hatcher

C. B.

(2003). The economics of the retirement decision. In Adams

G. A.

Beehr

T. A.

(Eds.), Retirement: Reasons, processes, and results (pp. 136–158). New York, NY: Springer.

29.

Havighurst

R. J.

(1961). Successful aging. The Gerontologist, 1, 8–13. doi:10.1093/geront/1.1.8

30.

Heaven

O’Brien

Evans

E. H.

White

Meyer

T. D.

Mathers

J. C.

Moffatt

(2016). Mobilizing resources for well-being: Implications for developing interventions in the retirement transition. The Gerontologist, 56, 615–629. doi:10.1093/geront/gnu159

31.

Hedges

Sykes

(2009). Extending working life: Changing the culture. Qualitative research into effective messages (Department for Work and Pensions Research Report No. 557). Leeds, England: CDS.

32.

Hershey

D. A.

Henkens

van Dalen

H. P.

(2007). Mapping the minds of retirement planners, a cross-cultural perspective. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 38, 361–382. doi:10.1177/0022022107300280

33.

Hewitt

Howie

Feldman

(2010). Retirement: What will you do? A narrative inquiry of occupation-based planning for retirement: Implications for practice. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal, 57, 8–16. doi:10.1111/j.1440-1630.2009.00820.x

34.

Heybroek

Haynes

Baxter

(2015). Life satisfaction and retirement in Australia: A longitudinal approach. Work, Aging and Retirement, 1, 166–180. doi:10.1093/workar/wav006

35.

Jex

Grosch

(2013). Retirement decision making. In Wang

(Ed.), The Oxford handbook of retirement (pp. 267–279). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

36.

Johnson

K. J.

Mutchler

J. E.

(2014). The emergence of a positive gerontology: From disengagement to social involvement. The Gerontologist, 54, 93–100. doi:10.1093/geront/gnt099

37.

Jonsson

Borell

Sadlo

(2000). Retirement: An occupational transition with consequences for temporality, balance and meaning of occupations. Journal of Occupational Science, 7, 29–37. doi:10.1080/14427591.2000.9686462

38.

Kim

J. E.

Moen

(2001). Is retirement good or bad for subjective well-being? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10, 83–86. doi:10.1111/1467-8721.00121

39.

Lain

(2011). Helping the poorest help themselves? Encouraging employment past 65 in England and the USA. Journal of Social Policy, 40, 493–512. doi:10.1017/S0047279410000942

40.

Matthews

Nazroo

J. Y.

(2016). Retirement, well-being, engagement and social status. In Banks

Batty

G. D.

Nazroo

Steptoe

(Eds.), The dynamics of ageing: Evidence from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing 2002-15 (pp. 57–100). London, England: Institute for Fiscal Studies.

41.

Moen

(2005). Beyond the career mystique: “Time In,” “Time Out,” and “Second Acts”. Sociological Forum, 20, 189–208. doi:10.1007/s11206-005-4100-8

42.

Moffatt

Heaven

(2017). ‘Planning for uncertainty’: Narratives on retirement transition experiences. Ageing & Society, 37, 879–898. doi:10.1017/S0144686X15001476

43.

Muratore

A. M.

Earl

J. K.

(2015). Improving retirement outcomes: The role of resources, pre-retirement planning and transition characteristics. Ageing & Society, 35, 2100–2140. doi:10.1017/S0144686X14000841

44.

Nimrod

Janke

M. C.

Kleiber

D. A.

(2008). Retirement, activity, and subjective well-being in Israel and the United States. World Leisure Journal, 50, 18–32. doi:10.1080/04419057.2008.9674524

45.

Noone

J. H.

Stephens

Alpass

F. M.

(2009). Preretirement planning and well-being in later life. A prospective study. Research on Aging, 31, 295–317. doi:10.1177/0164027508330718

46.

Phua

V. C.

McNally

J. W.

(2008). Men planning for retirement. Changing meanings of preretirement planning. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 27, 588–608. doi:10.1177/0733464808321885

47.

Pittman

(2013). Retirement may be “critical window” for getting active. Retrieved from https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-retirement-active/retirement-may-be-critical-window-for-getting-active-idUKBRE9A511C20131106

48.

Potočnik

Tordera

Peiró

J. M.

(2013). Truly satisfied with your retirement or just resigned? Pathways toward different patterns of retirement satisfaction. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 32, 164–187. doi:10.1177/0733464811405988

49.

Price

C. A.

(2003). Professional women’s retirement adjustment: The experience of reestablishing order. Journal of Aging Studies, 17, 341–355. doi:10.1016/S0890-4065(03)00026-4

50.

Price

C. A.

Balaswamy

(2009). Beyond health and wealth: Predictors of women’s retirement satisfaction. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 68, 195–214. doi:10.2190/AG.68.3.b

51.

Price

C. A.

Nesteruk

(2015). What to expect when you retire: By women for women. Marriage and Family Review, 51, 418–440. doi:10.1080/01494929.2015.1059784

52.

Principi

Santini

Socci

Smeaton

Cahill

K. E.

Vegeris

Barnes

(2016). Retirement plans and active ageing: Perspectives in three countries. Ageing & Society, 38, 56–82. doi:10.1017/S0144686X16000866

53.

Reitzes

Mutran

Fernandez

(1998). The decision to retire: A career perspective. Social Science Quarterly, 79, 607–619.

54.

Reitzes

D. C.

Mutran

E. J.

(2004). The transition to retirement: Stages and factors that influence retirement adjustment. The International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 59, 63–84. doi:10.2190/NYPP-RFFP-5RFK-8EB8

55.

Riley

M. W.

(1979). Introduction: Life course perspectives. In Riley

M. W.

(Ed.), Aging from birth to death (pp. 3–13). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

56.

Riley

M. W.

Riley

J. W.

(1994). Structural lag: Past and future. In Riley

M. W.

Kahn

R. L.

Foner

(Eds.), Age and structural lag: The mismatch between people’s lives and opportunities in work, family, and leisure (pp. 15–36). New York, NY: Wiley.

57.

Ritchie

(2013). Qualitative research practice. London, England: Sage.

58.

Schellenberg

Turcotte

Ram

(2005). Preparing for retirement. Canadian Social Trends, 78 (Autumn), 8–11.

59.

Settersten

R. A.

(2003). Invitation to the life course: The promise. In Settersten

R. A.

Jr. (Ed.), Invitation to the life course: Toward new understandings of later life (pp. 1–12). Amityville, NY: Baywood.

60.

Sim

Bartlam

Bernard

(2011). The CASP-19 as a measure of quality of life in old age: Evaluation of its use in a retirement community. Quality of Life Research, 20, 997–1004. doi:10.1007/s11136-010-9835-x

61.

Snyder

C. R.

Lopez

S. J.

(2009). Oxford handbook of positive psychology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

62.

Sterns

H. L.

Subich

L. M.

(2004). Counseling for retirement. In Brown

S. D.

Lent

R. W.

(Eds.), Career development and counseling: Putting theory and research to work (pp. 506–521). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.

63.

Taylor

M. A.

Doverspike

(2003). Retirement planning and preparation. In Adams

Beehr

(Eds.), Retirement: Reasons, processes and results (pp. 53–82). New York, NY: Springer

64.

Taylor

M. A.

Goldberg

Shore

L. M.

Lipka

(2008). The effects of retirement expectations and social support on post‐retirement adjustment: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23, 458–470. doi:10.1108/02683940810869051

65.

Taylor

M. A.

Shultz

K. S.

Spiegel

P. E.

Morrison

R. F.

Greene

(2007). Occupational attachment and met expectations as predictors of retirement adjustment of Naval officers. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 1697–1725. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2007.00234.x

66.

Topa

Moriano

J. A.

Depolo

Alcover

C. -M.

Morales

J. F.

(2009). Antecedents and consequences of retirement planning and decision-making: A meta-analysis and model. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 75, 38–55. doi:10.1016/j.jvb.2009.03.002

67.

van Solinge

Henkens

(2005). Couples’ adjustment to retirement: A multi-actor panel study. The Journals of Gerontology Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 60, S11–S20. doi:10.1093/geronb/60.1.S11

68.

van Solinge

Henkens

(2008). Adjustment to and satisfaction with retirement: Two of a kind? Psychology and Aging, 23, 422–434. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.23.2.422

69.

Wang

(2007). Profiling retirees in the retirement transition and adjustment process: Examining the longitudinal change patterns of retirees’ psychological well-being. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 455–474. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.92.2.455

70.

Wang

Henkens

van Solinge

(2011). Retirement adjustment: A review of theoretical and empirical advancements. American Psychologist, 66, 204–213. doi:10.1037/a0022414

71.

Wang

Shultz

(2010). Employee retirement: A review and recommendations for future investigation. Journal of Management, 36, 172–206. doi:10.1177/0149206309347957

72.

Weyman

Wainwright

O’Hara

Jones

Buckingham

(2012). Extending working life: Behavior change interventions (DWP Research Report No. 809). Leeds, England: Central Documents Services.

73.

Winston

N. A.

Barnes

(2007). Anticipation of retirement among baby boomers. Journal of Women & Aging, 19, 137–159. doi:10.1300/J074v19n03_10

74.

Zhu-Sams

(2004). Will pre-retirement planning affect post-retirement experience? Papers for the Western Family Economics Associations, 19, 51–57.