Generativity was first described by Erikson (1963) as an adult's concern for and commitment to promoting the welfare and development of future generations. Generativity is juxtaposed by stagnation in Erikson's stage of midlife (35-65 years old). The developmental hurdle faced at this point in the developmental cycle is whether a person will produce something of real value, both in the present and impacting future generations. Generative adults seek to give something back to society, generally behaving in a way to make the world a better place for others with no personal gain attached. The goal of the current study was to assess differences in levels of generativity at the final stage of adult life, and the potential functions that generativity can serve individuals. Results suggest that lowly generative individuals in older adult life tend to experience doubts about the impact they have had on the world and the lack of legacy they are leaving behind. Themes of highly generative participants included having felt they lived a purposeful and meaningful life, along with feeling fortunate and lucky in their lives. Also highly generative participants seemed to feel confident in the legacy they will leave behind after death. Results are discussed in light of the theories and findings of Erikson and McAdams.

ABSTRACT Perfectionism has been conceptualized as a relatively stable, independent, multidimensional personality construct in research during the last two decades. Despite general agreement that perfectionism is dimensional in nature, analyses using these instruments vacillate between a dimensional approach and a categorical approach (Broman-Fulks, Hill, & Green, 2008; Stoeber & Otto, 2006). The goal of the current study was two-fold. One aim was to examine the structural nature of two commonly used measures of perfectionism, the APS-R and the HFMPS. Latent class and factor analyses were conducted to determine the dimensions and categories that underlie the items of these two instruments. A second aim was to determine whether perfectionism classes or perfectionism factors better predicted 4 criterion variables of career indecision. Results lent evidence to the claim that both the APS-R and HFMPS are best used as dimensional, rather than categorical instruments. From a substantive perspective, results indicated that both positive and negative aspects of perfectionism successfully predicted career indecision factors. The study concludes with a discussion of limitations, and implications for future research and counseling individuals with career indecision concerns.