Interview A Relatively Old Friend Or Family Member. Describe ✓ Solved

Interview a relatively old friend or family member. Describe

Interview a relatively old friend or family member. Describe who this person is. Follow the attached Life Review and complete in essay format using APA, checking spelling and grammar and avoiding plagiarism. Answer all Life Review questions below; you may add or substitute questions to obtain useful information. Life review is a technique that helps people in late adulthood find meaning; interviews may be diagnostic, for reminiscence, or to create oral history; they can be formal or conversational. Listen to the Dignity Therapy podcast for background. The goal is to demonstrate your working knowledge of course concepts by applying them to a person’s life. Link each interview response to course material: each answered question should include a concept from the textbook and a citation, and you must document how the concept relates to the interviewee’s response. Each question must be answered in a well-constructed paragraph. Conclude with a final paragraph explaining how you could use the Life Review Interview technique professionally or personally. You should include at least 10 questions that lead to responses easy to link to course concepts and use different course concepts for each question.

Life Review Questions:

1. Introduce your interviewee. Who were you named after and why?

2. What did I learn? (important skills, knowledge, awareness, etc.)

3. What did I do that I am proud of? (accomplishments)

4. What would I have done differently? Why?

5. What did I accomplish or relinquish? What still feels incomplete to me?

6. What did I do right? What do I feel especially good about? What was my greatest contribution?

7. What were the fun things I did?

8. What were my biggest challenges/roadblocks/difficulties?

9. How am I different now than as a young adult?

10. For what am I particularly grateful?

Paper For Above Instructions

Introduction and interview context

I interviewed my aunt, Margaret L., age 78, a retired elementary school teacher and mother of three who volunteered for decades in literacy programs. She lives independently, maintains close family contact, and identifies as devoutly religious. The conversation lasted 90 minutes and followed the Life Review questions above. Responding to each question, Margaret offered reflections that I link explicitly to lifespan development concepts and research to illustrate how life review both elicits meaningful reminiscence and demonstrates theoretical constructs from the course literature (Butler, 1963; Santrock, 2021).

1. Introduce your interviewee / Who were you named after and why?

Margaret explained she was named after her maternal grandmother because the family wished to honor her caregiving role during hard economic times. This naming tradition reflects intergenerational transmission of values and social identity, consistent with research showing family naming and rituals strengthen social support and cultural continuity in later life (Santrock, 2021). In this way, the name links to social capital and perceived social support that buffer stress in aging (Santrock, 2021).

2. What did I learn?

Margaret emphasized learning patience, reading pedagogy, and persistence. Her description aligns with the concept of selective optimization with compensation (SOC): she optimized teaching strengths (literacy strategies) while compensating for energy declines by delegating physically demanding tasks (Baltes & Baltes, 1990). SOC explains how older adults prioritize and refine skills that sustain competence and purpose (Baltes & Baltes, 1990).

3. What did I do that I am proud of?

She identified establishing a school reading program that raised literacy rates as her proudest accomplishment. This reflects Erikson’s stage of generativity vs. stagnation—her focus on nurturing younger generations and contributing to community well-being exemplifies generativity, which often provides meaning in midlife and carries into old age as a source of pride and legacy (Erikson, 1950; Santrock, 2021).

4. What would I have done differently?

Margaret said she would have traveled more and worried less about others’ opinions. This counters regret-focused narratives and ties to socioemotional selectivity theory: as time horizons shorten, older adults prioritize emotionally meaningful experiences over peripheral concerns (Carstensen, 1992). Her reflection shows a later-life reordering of goals toward emotional fulfillment, consistent with Carstensen’s model (Carstensen, 1992).

5. What did I accomplish or relinquish? What still feels incomplete?

She noted accomplishments in parenting and teaching but relinquished a long-held dream of publishing a children’s book; that goal remains incomplete. Continuity theory suggests older adults adapt by preserving consistent patterns (Atchley, 1989). Margaret’s ongoing interest in writing demonstrates continuity of identity and goals even as roles change, supporting Atchley’s perspective on adaptive continuity (Atchley, 1989).

6. What did I do right? Greatest contribution?

Margaret felt she “did right” by modeling kindness and fostering children’s love of reading; she considers that her greatest contribution. This sense of accomplishment is central to Erikson’s later stage of integrity versus despair: acknowledging a life lived with purpose fosters integrity, reducing despair and promoting psychological well-being in old age (Erikson, 1950; Ryff, 1989).

7. What were the fun things I did?

She recalled community theater, family vacations, and weekend dances as highlights. Activity theory posits that sustained social and recreational engagement supports life satisfaction in later life; Margaret’s memories illustrate how leisure and social participation contributed to her subjective well-being (Havighurst as cited in Santrock, 2021). Remaining active helped maintain social roles and positive affect (Santrock, 2021).

8. Biggest challenges/roadblocks/difficulties?

Margaret described grief after her husband’s death and navigating retirement. Her experience reflects bereavement processes and the dual process model: she alternated between loss-oriented activities (mourning) and restoration-oriented coping (rebuilding routines) to adapt to change (Stroebe & Schut, 1999). Recognizing these oscillations helps explain her adaptive trajectory post-loss (Stroebe & Schut, 1999).

9. How am I different now than as a young adult?

She reports greater emotional regulation, perspective, and priorities centered on relationships rather than career ambition. This aligns with personality development research showing increases in agreeableness and emotional regulation across adulthood (Roberts & Mroczek, 2008) and with socioemotional selectivity theory’s emphasis on shifting goals toward emotionally meaningful connections (Carstensen, 1992).

10. For what am I particularly grateful?

Margaret expressed gratitude for family, health, and learning. Gratitude and meaning-making in late adulthood are linked to higher psychological well-being and resilience; Ryff’s dimensions of psychological well-being (purpose in life, positive relations) map onto her reflections and indicate sustained well-being resources (Ryff, 1989).

Conclusion: Using the Life Review Interview technique

Conducting this life review illustrated how structured reminiscence surfaces developmental themes—identity, generativity, coping, and meaning—central to lifespan theory (Butler, 1963; Santrock, 2021). Professionally, life review can be integrated into geriatric counseling, hospice, and community programs to enhance dignity and meaning (Chochinov, 2005). Personally, using life review with family preserves oral history and strengthens intergenerational bonds. The technique’s capacity to connect subjective narratives with developmental concepts makes it a valuable tool in both clinical and educational settings (Butler, 1963; Chochinov, 2005).

References

• Atchley, R. C. (1989). Continuity theory of normal aging. The Gerontologist, 29(2), 183–190.
• Baltes, P. B., & Baltes, M. M. (1990). Toward a psychology of successful aging: Selection, optimization, and compensation. In P. B. Baltes & M. M. Baltes (Eds.), Successful aging: Perspectives from the behavioral sciences (pp. 1–34). Cambridge University Press.
• Butler, R. N. (1963). The life review: An interpretation of reminiscence in the aged. Psychiatry, 26(1), 65–76.
• Carstensen, L. L. (1992). Social and emotional patterns in adulthood: Support for socioemotional selectivity theory. Psychology and Aging, 7(3), 331–338.
• Chochinov, H. M. (2005). Dignity-conserving care—a new model for palliative care: Helping the patient feel valued. JAMA, 294(2), 150–156.
• Erikson, E. H. (1950). Childhood and society. W. W. Norton & Company.
• Roberts, B. W., & Mroczek, D. (2008). Personality trait change in adulthood. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(1), 31–35.
• Ryff, C. D. (1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57(6), 1069–1081.
• Santrock, J. W. (2021). Life-span development (17th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
• Stroebe, M., & Schut, H. (1999). The dual process model of coping with bereavement: Rationale and description. Death Studies, 23(3), 197–224.
• World Health Organization. (2015). World report on ageing and health. WHO Press.