Successful aging and its discontents: A systematic review of the social gerontology literature

For over two decades, researchers in aging have grappled with the ways in which successful aging models have failed to capture the personal, social, economic, and political contexts of aging. Nevertheless, successful aging models hold a prominent position in research, policy, and practices in aging and health. The purpose of this study was to analyze the range of critiques of successful aging models and the suggestions for improvement within the social gerontology literature. We conducted a systematic literature review of journal articles retrieved from Abstracts in Social Gerontology, published 1987-2013, that included critiques of successful aging models. Qualitative methods were used to identify key themes and inductively configure meanings across the range of critiques. The critiques and remedies fell into four categories. The Add and Stir group suggested a multidimensional expansion of successful aging criteria and offered an array of additions. The Missing Voices group advocated for adding older adults’ subjective meanings of successful aging to established objective measures. The Hard Hitting Critiques group called for just and inclusive frameworks that embrace diversity, avoid stigma and discrimination, and intervene at structural contexts of aging. The New Frames and Names group presented alternative ideal models often grounded in Eastern philosophies. The vast array of criteria that gerontologists collectively offered to expand Rowe and Kahn’s original successful aging model is symptomatic of the exclusionary nature of a normative model. There is ample evidence to suggest that greater reflexivity and reflection about the concept “successful aging” and its ramifications are needed.