This article was downloaded by: [Richard Douglass]

On: 30 August 2014, At: 08:35

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The Journal of Positive Psychology: Dedicated to

furthering research and promoting good practice
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rpos20

Meaning in life and work: A developmental perspective

a a a
Blake A. Allan , Ryan D. Duffy & Richard Douglass
a
Department of Psychology, University of Florida, PO Box 112250, Gainesville, FL
32611-2250, USA
Published online: 26 Aug 2014.

To cite this article: Blake A. Allan, Ryan D. Duffy & Richard Douglass (2014): Meaning in life and work: A developmental
perspective, The Journal of Positive Psychology: Dedicated to furthering research and promoting good practice, DOI:
10.1080/17439760.2014.950180

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2014.950180

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the
Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and
are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and
should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for
any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever
or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of
the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 The Journal of Positive Psychology, 2014
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2014.950180

Meaning in life and work: A developmental perspective

Blake A. Allan*, Ryan D. Duffy and Richard Douglass
Department of Psychology, University of Florida, PO Box 112250, Gainesville, FL 32611-2250, USA
(Received 4 February 2014; accepted 9 July 2014)

This study examined linear and nonlinear relations between age and the presence and search for meaning in life and
examined if these relations were moderated by the presence of meaning in work. Age did not significantly relate to the
presence of meaning in life, but age had a significant, negative linear relation with the search for meaning in life. More-
over, work meaning moderated the quadratic relation between age and life meaning. Specifically, people high in work
meaning demonstrated negative quadratic curves, with high life meaning during middle adulthood, and people low in
work meaning had positive quadratic curves, with low life meaning during middle adulthood. Work meaning also moder-
ated the linear relation between age and the search for meaning in life with people highest in work meaning showing the
strongest negative relation between age and the search for meaning in life. Limitations and implications for future
Downloaded by [Richard Douglass] at 08:35 30 August 2014

research are discussed.

Keywords: life meaning; work meaning; lifespan development; positive psychology

Researchers in positive psychology have increasingly
become interested in meaning in life as a fundamental
component of human well-being (Dik, Duffy, &
Eldridge, 2009; Pratt & Ashforth, 2003; Steger, Dik, &
Duffy, 2012). Studies have also begun to examine how
the presence and search for life meaning change and
develop over the lifespan (e.g. Steger, Oishi, & Kashdan,
2009), and some studies have employed Erikson’s
(1950) theory of psychosocial development to understand
differences in life meaning across different age groups
(Ang & Jiaqing, 2012). However, no studies have exam-
ined nonlinear relations of the presence or search for
meaning in life to age or how meaning in specific life
domains might alter these relations. This study aimed to
address these deficits by testing nonlinear curves of life
meaning and investigating if meaning in work moderates
the relation between age and the presence and search for
meaning in life. The goal was to provide a more reliable
understanding of the amount of life meaning in different
age groups and to gain further insights into factors that
help or hinder people’s ability to live meaningful lives.
Theoretical framework
The presence of meaning in life is broadly defined as the
subjective experience that one’s life is significant and
valuable (Steger, Frazier, Oishi, & Kaler, 2006).
Although many studies have examined the relation
between age and meaning in life, few have incorporated
a theoretical framework to understand why experiences
of meaning may differ across the lifespan. However,
some studies have used Erikson’s (1950) theory of
psychosocial development as a guide (e.g. Ang &
Jiaqing, 2012), because it suggests that middle adulthood
may be a particularly salient period in which meaning
can be cultivated. During middle adulthood (defined by
Erikson as ages 40–60), Erikson argues that people enter
the developmental period of generativity vs. stagnation.
During this stage, people struggle to find a way to con-
tribute and give back to the world. Generative adults
dedicate themselves to activities that will outlive the self
and successfully find ways to contribute to the next
generation (Kotre, 1984; McAdams, de St. Aubin, &
Logan, 1993). Supporting this argument, studies have
found adults in midlife are more likely than younger and
older adults to have generative concerns and actions
(McAdams et al., 1993).
Creating generative projects that outlive the self may
provide a unique conduit to experienced meaning in life
and, not surprisingly, some researchers consider gener-
ativity a crucial source of life meaning (Emmons, 2003;
Schnell & Becker, 2006). This suggests that people may
experience a boost in meaning in life during middle
adulthood when they are focused on generative concerns
and actions. Furthermore, the increase in the presence of
life meaning could in turn decrease people’s search for
meaning in life. This prediction has been partially sup-
ported in the literature. Empirical studies in this area
have found positive relations between age and meaning
in life, with older adults reporting higher levels of life
meaning than younger adults (Reker, 2005; Steger et al.,
2009; Van Ranst & Marcoen, 1997). However, Steger

*Corresponding author. Email: ballan3@ufl.edu

© 2014 Taylor & Francis

 2 B.A. Allan et al.
et al. (2009) qualified this relation by reporting a rise in
meaning in life during the ages of 45–64, consistent with
Erikson’s generativity vs. stagnation stage. Curiously, in
Steger, Oishi, and Kashdan’s study, meaning in life con-
tinued to climb into older adulthood, when generative
behaviors are hypothesized to decline (McAdams et al.,
1993), and there was a dip in meaning in life during
young adulthood (i.e. 25–44). Other studies have found
this life meaning dip to occur during midlife, defined as
40–59 by Morgan and Robinson (2013) and 40–49 by
Fegg, Kramer, Bausewein, and Borasio (2007). Finally,
only one study evaluated the search for meaning in life
across the lifespan and found it to peak in young adult-
hood then steadily decline throughout life (Steger et al.,
2009). In summary, these studies provide somewhat
mixed results about middle adulthood being a peak stage
for experiencing meaning in life.
Downloaded by [Richard Douglass] at 08:35 30 August 2014
Although these studies provide insight into the devel-
opment of life meaning across the lifespan, they collec-
tively have two limitations. First, the studies have
created somewhat arbitrary age categories. For example,
although Steger et al.’s (2009) categories of 18–24,
25–44, 45–64, and 65+ fall nicely into Erikson’s stages,
they necessarily lose information and do not allowing
the testing of nonlinear curves. This may be one expla-
nation as to why contradictory information exists regard-
ing the dip of meaning in life during some point in
midlife. Specifically, there may be a core group of peo-
ple who are being captured in different groups. For
example, the midlife dip has been observed in 25–44,
40–59, and 40–49 years old (Fegg et al., 2007; Morgan
& Robinson, 2013; Steger et al., 2009), which all include
the ages 40–44. Therefore, this could potentially be the
typical age when meaning in life is lower. Although age
groupings are consistent with evaluating stage theories,
the testing of nonlinear curves could further this knowl-
edge by investigating the shape of the relation between
age and meaning in life with years being the variable of
interest. This would also help clarify exactly when mean-
ing in life is higher or lower. For example, a nonlinear
curve may show a dip around the ages of 40–44. Sec-
ond, none of these studies have evaluated the impact that
subdomains of meaning might have on the development
of life meaning. This gives a one dimensional view of
the development of life meaning, without considering
how this might be different for diverse individuals.
Specifically, meaning in work may play a role in altering
life meaning’s trajectory across the lifespan.
Life meaning and work meaning
Meaning in work refers to the subjective experience that
one’s work has significance, facilitates personal growth,
and contributes to the greater good (Steger et al., 2012).
Conceptually, meaning in work is considered a
sub-domain of meaning that acts as a potential source of
meaning in life (Ebersole & DePaola, 2001; Emmons,
2003; Fegg et al., 2007; Steger & Dik, 2009). This is
supported by several studies that have asked participants
the sources of their life meaning, finding common
responses including relationships, religion, service, and
work (Baum & Stewart, 1990; DeVogler & Ebersole,
1981; Emmons, 2005; Fegg et al., 2007).
Following from this conceptualization, researchers
have argued that experiencing meaning in work trans-
lates into greater meaning in life (Steger & Dik, 2009),
an assertion supported by several studies showing that
participants consistently report work as a major source
of meaning (e.g. Fegg et al., 2007). Few studies have
examined both life meaning and work meaning in the
same study, but Duffy, Allan, Autin, and Bott (2013)
found a correlated of 0.49 between the two variables in
working adults. Several studies have also illustrated how
well-being in the work domain can affect meaning in the
life domain. For example, workaholism and work–life
conflict are negatively associated with purpose in life,
and work enjoyment is positively associated with pur-
pose in life (Bonebright, Clay, & Ankenmann, 2000).
Finally, adolescents who report purposeful career goals
also report higher meaning in life (Yeager & Bundick,
2009). Therefore, there is some reason to suspect that
meaning in work may translate into higher meaning in
life.
The present study
Building off Erickson’s theory and previous mixed find-
ings, this study had two main goals: (i) to test linear and
nonlinear relations of age and the presence and search
for meaning in life, and (ii) to examine if work meaning
moderated the relation between age and the presence and
search for meaning in life. These goals were assessed by
studying a large and diverse group of employed adults.
First, in two hierarchical regressions, we regressed the
linear, quadratic, and cubic terms of age onto the pres-
ence of meaning in life and the search for meaning in
life. We hypothesized that, similar to patterns found in
other studies, a positive quadratic curve would be signifi-
cant (Steger et al., 2009). Specifically, life meaning
would start at moderate levels, dip in young adulthood
between ages of 25 and 45 then begin to rise steadily
thereafter. In contrast, we hypothesized that the search
for meaning in life would show the mirror image: a neg-
ative quadratic curve peaking in young adulthood (Steger
et al., 2009).
Second, in step two of the hierarchical regressions,
we entered the product terms of meaning in work and
each of the age terms (i.e. linear, quadratic, and cubic)
predicting both the presence of meaning in life and the
search for meaning in life. As discussed above, meaning
 The Journal of Positive Psychology
in work may contribute to higher levels of meaning in
life, which may decrease the search for meaning in life
(Steger & Dik, 2009). Following from this, we predicted
that participants reporting higher levels of meaningful
work would show no relation between age and life
meaning whereas people low in work meaning would
show a pronounced, positive quadratic curve (Steger &
Dik, 2009). In essence, we predicted work meaning
would provide a buffer against the young adulthood dip
in life meaning and explain the bump in midlife. We also
hypothesized that the search for meaning in life would
mirror this result: those high in work meaning would
have no relation between age and the search for mean-
ing, and those low in work meaning would have a pro-
nounced, negative quadratic relation between age and the
search for meaning in life (Steger & Dik, 2009; Steger
et al., 2009).
Downloaded by [Richard Douglass] at 08:35 30 August 2014
Method
Participants
The sample consisted of 926 adults recruited from
Mechanical Turk (MTurk). Participants ranged in age
from 18 to 67 (M = 32.57, SD = 10.56) and self-identi-
fied as female (N = 469, 50.6%), male (N = 450,
48.6%), and transgender (N = 6, 1%). In terms of race/
ethnicity, participants mainly self-identified as White/
European American/Caucasian (N = 720, 77.8%), with
remaining participants identifying as African/African-
American (N = 69, 7.5%), Hispanic/Latina/o American
(N = 54, 5.8%), Asian/Asian American (N = 37, 4.0%),
Asian Indian (N = 19, 2.1%), American Indian/Native
American (N = 11, 1.2%), Pacific Islander (N = 2,
0.2%), Arab American/Middle Eastern (N = 1, 0.1%),
and Other (N = 11, 1.3%). In terms of education, 10%
(N = 92) had a high school education or less, 2.7%
(N = 25) had a trade or vocational school diploma,
34.5% (N = 319) had some college, 37.4% (N = 346)
had a college degree, and 15% (N = 139) had a profes-
sional or graduate degree. Of the sample, 74% (N = 683)
of participants were employed fulltime and 26%
(N = 240) were employed part-time. The sample cap-
tured a wide range of occupations with 457 unique job
titles represented. The most frequently reported job titles
included manager/director (7.4%; N = 69), teacher
(4.2%; N = 39), administrative assistant (3.9%; N = 36),
salesperson (3.4%; N = 31), business owner (3.2%;
N = 30), analyst (2.9%; N = 27), engineer (2.4%;
N = 22), customer service representative (2.1%; N = 19),
researcher/scientist (1.7%; N = 16), server (1.5%;
N = 14), clerk (1.3%; N = 12), cook (1.3%; N = 12),
nurse (1.2%; N = 11), accountant (1.1%; N = 10), and
cashier (1.0%; N = 9).
3
Instruments
Life meaning
The degree to which participants perceived meaning in
life was measured by the Presence subscale of the five-
item Meaning in Life Questionnaire (MLQ; Steger et al.,
2006). Participants responded to items on a seven-point
scale ranging from 1 (absolutely untrue) to 7 (absolutely
true). Item responses were summed to calculate total
scores, where higher scores indicated greater perceived
meaning in life. Example items include ‘I have a good
sense of what makes my life meaningful,’ and ‘My life
has a clear sense of purpose.’ In regard to validity,
Steger et al. (2006) found the Presence subscale
positively correlated with life satisfaction, positive emo-
tions, extraversion, agreeableness, and intrinsic religios-
ity. The presence subscale has been shown to have high
internal consistency reliability with coefficient alphas
ranging from the low to high 0.80s (Steger et al., 2006;
Strack, 2007). In the present study, the estimated internal
consistency reliability was α = 0.92.
Work meaning
The degree to which participants felt their work was
meaningful was measured using the 10-item Work as
Meaning Inventory (WAMI; Steger et al., 2012). Sample
items include ‘I have found a meaningful career,’ and
‘The work I do serves a greater purpose.’ Participants
answered items on a seven-point scale ranging from 1
(strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). Points from
each item were summed to calculate a total score, with
higher scores representing higher levels of work mean-
ing. In the instrument development study, Steger et al.
(2012) found the scale to correlate in the expected direc-
tion with overlapping variables, such as career commit-
ment (0.68), presence of life meaning (0.57), job
satisfaction (0.56), and calling (0.54). Furthermore,
Steger et al. (2012) found the WAMI to have high inter-
nal consistency reliability (α = 0.93), and in the present
study, the estimated internal consistency reliability was
α = 0.95.
Procedure
Data for this study were collected as part of the Career
and Life Longitudinal Study (CALLS). The CALLS is a
five-wave survey that obtained data from working
American adults in three month intervals over the course
of one year. In the present study, we used data from only
the first wave. In total, 1034 participants completed the
first wave of the study. However, 83 participants were
missing data on at least one of the study variables (i.e.
age, life meaning, and work meaning). Given the large
 4 B.A. Allan et al.
sample size, these cases were deleted listwise. As
described below, one participant was also removed as an
outlier. Finally, 24 participants were not currently
employed so were removed for not meeting inclusion
criteria. The final sample was a total of 926 participants.
The CALLS used MTurk to collect data for all five
waves of the study. MTurk is an online participant
source that allows people to complete surveys for mone-
tary compensation, although most respondents reports
completing surveys mostly for enjoyment (Buhrmester,
Kwang, & Gosling, 2011). Recent reviews and studies
examining MTurk have largely concluded that it pro-
duces valid data that are comparable to laboratory and
other internet recruitment methods (Buhrmester et al.,
2011; Sprouse, 2011). A link including an informed con-
sent document and the survey itself was posted on
MTurk, and in order to participate, participants had to (i)
Downloaded by [Richard Douglass] at 08:35 30 August 2014
be over the age of 18, (ii) reside within the USA, and
(iii) be employed at least part-time. Participants were
given $0.50 for each wave of the survey completed,
which is on par with typical amounts offered to partici-
pants on MTurk.
Results
Preliminary analyses
None of the study variables had skewness or kurtosis
values over one, and all except age appeared normally
distributed upon visual inspection. Age was somewhat
positively skewed, but since skewness and kurtosis were
not unreasonably high, age was not transformed. All
variables were inspected for outliers. Only one variable
had a value greater 3.5 standard deviations from the
mean (age = 71). This outlier was removed.
As discussed above, this study required the creation
of quadratic and cubic age terms. In order to reduce mul-
ticollinearity among terms, the shared variance between
linear, quadratic, and cubic age was removed. This was
done for the quadratic curve by regressing age onto age-
squared and saving the unstandardized residuals. For the
cubic term, age and age-squared were regressed onto
age-cubed, and the unstandardized residuals were saved.
The residual variables were used as the quadratic and
cubic terms. This process ensures that these variables
represent only the variance unique to the quadratic and
cubic terms. In step two, we entered the product terms
of z-transformed age and the three age terms. Linear age
and quadratic age were unrelated to meaningful work
(0.04) and the presence of meaning (0.02) but was
significantly and negatively related to the search for
meaning (−0.15). Meaningful work was significantly
related to the presence (0.57) and search (−0.16) for
meaning in life.
Measurement invariance
Unlike the MLQ (Steger et al., 2009), the invariance of
the WAMI has not been tested with different age groups,
so conducting analyses of the WAMI is premature with-
out checking if the WAMI model is consistent for people
in various age groups. Therefore, as a preliminary analy-
sis, we tested the invariance of the WAMI with the same
Erikson age groups used by Steger et al. (2009). Testing
the measurement invariance of the WAMI involved
establishing the fit of the measure using confirmatory
factor analysis and successively constraining parameters
across age groups to evaluate if this reduces the fit of
the model (Little, 2008). A reduction in the fit of the
model suggests that the measure’s structure does not
operate consistently for different age groups (Little,
2008). The first step is to establish the configural model
where there are no constraints placed on the parameters.
This model represents the average fit of the model across
all age groups. Next, in weak factorial invariance, all
factor loadings are constrained to be the same for each
group. Finally, in strong factorial invariance, both the
factor loadings and the indicator means are constrained
to be the same for each group.
To evaluate the models we used confirmatory factor
analysis with maximum likelihood estimation in AMOS
18 (Arbuckle, 2007). We chose fit indices that minimized
likelihood of Type 1 and Type II error (Hu & Bentler,
1999). These included the chi-square test (χ²), the com-
parative fit index (CFI), the root mean squared residual,
and the root mean square error of approximation
(RMSEA). A significant χ² can indicate poor fit; how-
ever, this test is unreliable and inflated in larger samples
(Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007). Criteria for the CFI have
ranged from less conservative (CFI ≥ 0.90) to more con-
servative (CFI ≥ 0.95; Hu & Bentler, 1999; Quintana &
Maxwell, 1999; Weston & Gore, 2006). Similarly, crite-
ria for the RMSEA has ranged from less conservative
(≤0.10) to more conservative (RMSEA ≤ 0.08; Hu &
Bentler, 1999; Quintana & Maxwell, 1999; Weston &
Gore, 2006). Researchers have noted the need to be ten-
tative when using these criteria as strict cut-offs, and
other factors such as sample size and model complexity
should be considered (Weston & Gore, 2006).
We used the same age groups employed by Steger
et al. (2009): 18–24, 25–44, 45–64, and 65+. However,
since there were only four participants in the last group,
we combined it with the 45–64 group, which created
three final groups (young adulthood, middle adulthood,
and older adulthood). Items were loaded on their respec-
tive subscale factors (i.e. four items for the Positive
Meaning subscale, three items for the Meaning-Making
subscale, and three items for the Great Good subscale),
which then loaded on a second-order Work Meaning fac-
tor. For consistency, we allowed the same two errors to
 The Journal of Positive Psychology 5

correlate as in the scale development paper (Steger et al.,

2012).
The configural model had acceptable fit indices,
χ²(90, N = 926) = 807.04, p < 0.001; CFI = 0.92; and
RMSEA = 0.09, p < 0.001. Moreover, the fit of the
model did not significantly erode for the weak invariance
model, χ²(108, N = 926) = 823.72, p < 0.001; CFI = 0.92;
and RMSEA = 0.09, p < 0.01, or the strong invariance
model, χ²(126, N = 926) = 880.59, p < 0.001; CFI = 0.91;
and RMSEA = 0.08, p < 0.01. Therefore, because the
factor structure of the WAMI was consistent across the
three age groups, we deemed it acceptable to continue
with the analyses.

The presence of meaning in life

As discussed above, we tested the relation between age
Figure 1. Work meaning moderating the quadric relation of
Downloaded by [Richard Douglass] at 08:35 30 August 2014

and the presence of meaning in life in a two-step, hierar-

chical regression. In step one, we entered the linear, qua-
dratic, and cubic age terms. In step two, we added the
work meaning and the work meaning by age product
terms. Table 1 displays the results of this regression. In
step one, the cubic relation between age and meaning in
life was positive and significant, although the omnibus
F-statistic was not significant. In step two, work meaning
and the work meaning by quadratic age term were signif-
icant. Therefore, work meaning moderated the quadratic
relation between age and the presence of meaning in life.
Figure 1 depicts this moderation.
The search for meaning in life
The same regression was conducted for the search for
meaning in life. As seen in Table 2, the cubic relation
between age and the search for meaning was significant
and negative. Figure 2 depicts this relation. In step two,
linear age, work meaning, and the linear age by work
meaning product term were all significant and negative.
age and the presence of meaning in life.
Therefore, the linear relation between age and the search
for meaning was moderated by work meaning. Figure 3
depicts this moderation.
Discussion
The goals of the current study were to (i) test linear and
nonlinear relations between age and the presence and
search for meaning in life and (ii) examine if work
meaning moderates the relation between age and the
presence and search for meaning in life. Building off
Erickson’s theory of lifespan development, findings from
the current study provide insight on how work meaning
and life meaning, and the interaction of the two, function
at different stages of life. These findings serve to repli-
cate previous research (Steger et al., 2009) but are also
novel in that they demonstrate the relation of age to life
meaning in linear, cubic, and quadratic fashions and

Table 1. Hierarchical regression examining work meaning as a moderator of the relation between age and the presence meaning in
life.

B β SE B R R² R²Δ F
Step 1
Linear age 0.01 0.01 0.02
Quadratic age −0.002 −0.03 0.002
Cubic age 0.000 0.06 0.000 0.06 0.004 0.004 1.21
Step 2
Linear age 0.001 0.01 0.02
Quadratic age 0.000 −0.002 0.002
Cubic age 0.000 0.02 0.000
Work meaning* 0.27 0.56 0.01
Linear age × work meaning −0.07 −0.01 0.21
Quadratic age × work meaning* −0.004 −0.07 0.002
Cubic age × work meaning −0.000 −0.01 0.000 0.57 0.33 0.32* 63.51*
*p < 0.05.
 6 B.A. Allan et al.

Table 2. Hierarchical regression examining work meaning as a moderator of the relation between age and the search meaning in
life.

B β SE B R R² R²Δ F
Step 1
Linear age* −0.11 −0.16 0.02
Quadratic age 0.000 −0.003 0.002
Cubic age* 0.000 −0.07 0.000 0.17 0.03 0.03* 9.01*
Step 2
Linear age* −0.10 −0.15 0.02
Quadratic age 0.000 0.004 0.002
Cubic age 0.000 −0.04 0.000
Work meaning* −0.08 −0.16 0.02
Linear age × work meaning* −0.54 −0.07 0.26
Quadratic age × work meaning −0.002 −0.03 0.002
Cubic age × work meaning 0.000 0.002 0.000 0.24 0.06 0.03* 7.73*
*p < 0.05.

reveal work meaning as a moderator between age and

Downloaded by [Richard Douglass] at 08:35 30 August 2014

Figure 2. The cubic relation between age and the search for
meaning in life.
Figure 3. Work meaning moderating the linear relation of age
and the search for meaning in life.
meaning in life.
Partially mirroring findings from Steger et al. (2009),
the current study found no significant linear or nonlinear
relations between age and the presence of meaning in
life, but age had a negative linear relation with the
search for meaning in life. This result does not support
the theoretical predictions of Erikson’s (1950) generativi-
ty vs. stagnation stage and further adds to the mixed
results of several studies evaluating the relation between
age and meaning in life (Fegg et al., 2007; Morgan &
Robinson, 2013; Reker, 2005; Steger et al., 2009; Van
Ranst & Marcoen, 1997). These studies have found dif-
ferent peaks and valleys in meaning in life across the
lifespan, with almost all finding that meaning in life is at
its highest and the search for meaning it at its lowest for
older adults (Steger et al., 2009). The current study only
replicated the latter finding. Part of this confusion is
likely due to these studies using different measures of
meaning in life. However, this study’s results for the
presence of meaning in life were still different from
Steger et al. (2009), which also used the MLQ. This dif-
ference may be due to differences in samples. For exam-
ple, Steger et al. (2009) used an international sample of
adults, who may or may not have been working, while
this study used a sample of only working adults living in
the USA. Regardless, this nonreplication plus the fact
that meaning in life had no relation with age in our study
suggests that third variables may moderate the relation
between age and meaning in life.
The current study found that work meaning func-
tioned as one of these moderators, partially explaining
the lack of a basic relation between age and life mean-
ing. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, individ-
uals spend more time working on weekdays than any
other life activity, including sleep (8.7 h a day; BLS,
2013). Therefore, it is not surprising that the meaning
individuals experience at work would have a large effect
 The Journal of Positive Psychology
on overall life meaning. What might be surprising, how-
ever, is the manner in which these two variables are
related in different age groups. The relation of age and
life meaning for individuals with low work meaning was
U-shaped, with life meaning being low for individuals in
their prototypical working years (ages 20–50) and adults
over 50 reporting higher life meaning. An opposite pat-
tern existed with individuals high in work meaning, with
life meaning highest for those in their prototypical work-
ing years and lower for those over 50.
These results exemplify the role that the presence, or
absence of, work meaning may play in promoting an
overall sense of life meaning. For individuals high in
work meaning, work may represent the dominant way
one cultivates life meaning (Emmons, 2005; Steger
et al., 2012). Subsequently, it may be that during these
prototypical working years, people high work in meaning
Downloaded by [Richard Douglass] at 08:35 30 August 2014
have plenty of opportunities to contribute to their life
meaning through work. However, for both high and low
work meaning groups, participants in their 60s experi-
enced similar levels of life meaning. The reasons for this
finding are largely speculative, but people in the second
half of life may have more difficulty extracting meaning
from work, which in turn may result in this group expe-
riencing lower levels of life meaning. For example, the
sources of meaning associated with work, such as recog-
nition for achievement, meeting basic needs, and materi-
alism, are lower in older adults (DeVogler & Ebersole,
1981; Prager, 1996), and some sources outside of work,
such as maintaining values and religious practices, are
higher during this period (Prager, 1996). Similarly, older
adults may be less concerned with generative actions,
which may be primarily preformed at work, so work
might lose its potency to influence life meaning
(McAdams et al., 1993). In either case, work meaning
may be stronger for middle age and older adults, but the
relation between work meaning and life meaning may be
lower for older adults relative to those in middle age.
Future studies should explore different moderators and
mediators to further elucidate this finding.
Contrary to people high in work meaning, those low
in work meaning may not receive the same type of life
meaning benefit from work. Therefore, for people with
low work meaning in their prototypical working years,
work might be taxing and uninteresting. Perhaps, work-
ing in a low work meaning job almost nine hours a day
is a drain on overall life meaning. Intriguingly, life
meaning was higher for individuals older than 50. Our
data suggests that participants in their 60s (those high
and low in work meaning) display relatively the same
amount of life meaning. Like the high work meaning
group, older adults low in work meaning may be more
likely to find life meaning in other activities, perhaps as
sources of meaning change during this time (Ebersole &
DePaola, 2001; Prager, 1996).
7
The relation of work meaning to the search for life
meaning by age is also informative. Here, a linear rela-
tion best fits the data, with the search for life meaning
being lower for older adults regardless of an individual’s
level of work meaning. However, the slope of this rela-
tion is more pronounced for individuals high in work
meaning, especially compared to those low in work
meaning. Although having and searching for life mean-
ing are not mutually exclusive (studies have shown that
individuals can feel their life is meaningful and also be
searching for more of it; Steger et al., 2012), our results
suggest that individuals who have found meaning in
work are much less likely to be searching for general life
meaning, especially for middle and older adults. Work
may play such a central role in life meaning that the
need to find other sources of meaning is low. The slope
for those low in work meaning is almost flat, suggesting
the search for life meaning is relatively the same regard-
less of age group.
These results may have important implications for
the study of life meaning for people in different age
groups, particularly for individuals high in work mean-
ing. Although in our sample the presence of life meaning
did not differ as a function of age, individuals in their
prototypical working years (ages 20–50) who find mean-
ing in work were more likely to experience heightened
levels of life meaning. This age range encompasses a
period of life which, on average, is stressful for work
and family reasons. In this sense, work meaning might
be seen as a buffer, helping individuals maintain a high
sense of life meaning regardless of other pressures. How-
ever, older adults with high work meaning may not
experience the same heightened levels of life meaning as
younger adults. Work meaning may be less related to life
meaning at this time because other sources of meaning
are more impactful. As such, life domains that bring
individual meaning may differ by age group. But where
a potential blind spot occurs is how work meaning
relates to the search for life meaning.
As evidenced in our data, individuals highest in work
meaning are the lowest in searching for life meaning.
Work may be such an all-encompassing source of life
meaning for individuals high in work meaning that the
need to search for new sources is nonexistent. Older
adults in particular may never have developed the moti-
vation or skills to look for other sources of meaning.
The finding that older adults that are low and high in
work meaning have relatively the same level of life
meaning life suggests that no matter how much work
meaning an individual has, it may be important to be
continually searching for other meaning sources.
Finally, this study was based in a developmental per-
spective, namely, that individuals in different age groups
might experience different levels of work and life mean-
ing. This developmental perspective assumes that these
 8 B.A. Allan et al.
potential differences would exist for a single individual
as they enter different age groups (e.g. if we assessed a
40-year olds search for life meaning now, we would
assume that 30 year later when he was 70 it would be
lower). However, this perspective does not account for
potential generational or cohort effects. For example, it
might be that the older adults in our sample come from
a generation that is not prone to searching for meaning –
this variable is low now and would have been low if we
assessed these participants 30 years ago. Longitudinal
research would be required to understand whether a
developmental perspective offers the best explanation for
these differences, but considering a generational perspec-
tive as an alternative seems prudent given our cross
sectional data.
Limitations and future directions
Downloaded by [Richard Douglass] at 08:35 30 August 2014
The results and conclusions from this study need to be
considered in light of a number of important limitations.
First and foremost, as noted above, this study was cross
sectional and examined separate individuals at different
life time points. Doing so allowed the tracking of trends
between variables and age, but it is impossible to make
any claims about causality or the life track of specific
individuals. Only long-term longitudinal studies evaluat-
ing single cohorts as they age can address how meaning
in life truly develops of over time. Second, data from
this study were collected using an online data collection
service, MTurk. Although numerous articles have dem-
onstrated the validity of data collected using this method
(Buhrmester et al., 2011; Sprouse, 2011), it is difficult to
determine the generalizability of results gained form this
type of sample. Third, this study only examined work
meaning as a potential predictor of life meaning, limiting
our conclusions to the links between these two variables.
It will be important that future research examines how
work meaning links to life meaning after accounting for
other sources of life meaning.
References
Ang, R. P., & Jiaqing, O. (2012). Association between caregiv-
ing, meaning in life, and life satisfaction beyond 50 in an
Asian sample: Age as a moderator. Social Indicators
Research, 108, 525–534. doi:10.1007/s11205-011-9891-9
Arbuckle, J. L. (2007). Amos 18 user’s guide. Chicago, IL:
SPSS.
Baum, S. K., & Stewart, R. B. (1990). Sources of meaning
through the lifespan. Psychological Reports, 67, 3–14.
doi:10.2466/PR0.67.5.3-14
Bonebright, C. A., Clay, D. L., & Ankenmann, R. D. (2000).
The relationship of workaholism with work-life conflict,
life satisfaction, and purpose in life. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 47, 469–477.
Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011).
Amazon’s Mechanical Turk: A new source of inexpensive,
yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Sci-
ence, 6, 3–5. doi:10.1177/1745691610393980
DeVogler, K. L., & Ebersole, P. (1981). Adults’ meaning in
life. Psychological Reports, 49, 87–90. doi:10.2466/
pr0.1981.49.1.87
Dik, B. J., Duffy, R. D., & Eldridge, B. (2009). Calling and
vocation in career counseling: Recommendations for pro-
moting meaningful work. Professional Psychology:
Research and Practice, 40, 625–632. doi:10.1037/
a0015547
Duffy, R. D., Allan, B. A., Autin, K. L., & Bott, E. M. (2013).
Calling and life satisfaction: It’s not about having it, it’s
about living it. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 60,
42–52. doi:10.1037/a0030635
Ebersole, P., & DePaola, S. (2001). Meaning in life categories
of later life couples. Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplin-
ary and Applied, 121, 185–191. doi:10.1080/
00223980.1987.9712656
Emmons, R. A. (2003). Personal goals, life meaning, and
virtue: Wellsprings of a positive life. In C. M. Keyes &
J. Haidt (Eds.), Flourishing: Positive psychology and the
life well-lived (pp. 105–128). Washington, DC: American
Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/10594-005
Emmons, R. A. (2005). Striving for the sacred: Personal goals,
life meaning, and religion. Journal of Social Issues, 61,
731–745. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2005.00429.x
Erikson, E. H. (1950). Childhood and society. New York, NY:
W. W. Norton.
Fegg, M. J., Kramer, M., Bausewein, C., & Borasio, G. D.
(2007). Meaning in life in the Federal Republic of
Germany: Results of a representative survey with the sche-
dule for meaning in life evaluation (SMiLE). Health and
Quality of Life Outcomes, 5, 59–67. doi:10.1186/1477-
7525-5-59
Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes
in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria ver-
sus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Mul-
tidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55. doi:10.1080/
10705519909540118
Kotre, J. N. (1984). Outliving the self: How we live on in
future generations. New York, NY: W. W. Norton.
Little, T. D. (2008, April). Factorial invariance revisited: Are
we there yet? Invited 3-hour workshop at the society for
applied multivariate research, Kansas City, MO.
McAdams, D. P., de St. Aubin, E., & Logan, R. L. (1993).
Generativity among young, midlife, and older adults. Psy-
chology and Aging, 8, 221–230. doi:10.1037/0882-
7974.8.2.221
Morgan, J., & Robinson, O. (2013). Intrinsic aspirations and
personal meaning across adulthood: Conceptual interrela-
tions and age/sex differences. Developmental Psychology,
49, 999–1010. doi:10.1037/a0029237
Prager, E. (1996). Exploring personal meaning in an age-differ-
entiated Australian sample: Another look at the sources of
meaning profile (SOMP). Journal of Aging Studies, 10,
117–136.
Pratt, M. G., & Ashforth, B. E. (2003). Fostering meaningful-
ness in working and at work. In K. S. Cameron, J. E.
Dutton, & R. E. Quinn (Eds.), Positive organizational
scholarship (pp. 309–327). San Francisco, CA: Berrett-
Koehler.
Quintana, S. M., & Maxwell, S. E. (1999). Implications of
recent developments in structural equation modeling for
counseling psychology. The Counseling Psychologist, 27,
485–527. doi:10.1177/0011000099274002
 The Journal of Positive Psychology
Reker, G. T. (2005). Meaning in life of young, middle-aged,
and older adults: Factorial validity, age, and gender invari-
ance of the Personal Meaning Index (PMI). Personality
and Individual Differences, 38, 71–85. doi:10.1016/
j.paid.2004.03.010
Schnell, T., & Becker, P. (2006). Personality and meaning in
life. Personality and Individual Differences, 41, 117–129.
doi:10.1016/j.paid.2005.11.030
Sprouse, J. (2011). A validation of Amazon Mechanical Turk
for the collection of acceptability judgments in linguistic
theory. Behavior Research Methods, 43, 155–167.
doi:10.3758/s13428-010-0039-7
Steger, M. F., & Dik, B. J. (2009). If one is looking for mean-
ing in life, does it help to find meaning in work? Applied
Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 1, 303–320.
doi:10.1111/j.1758-0854.2009.01018.x
Steger, M. F., Dik, B. J., & Duffy, R. D. (2012). Measuring
meaningful work: The work and meaning inventory
(WAMI). Journal of Career Assessment, 20, 322–337.
doi:10.1177/1069072711436160
Steger, M. F., Frazier, P., Oishi, S., & Kaler, M. (2006). The
Downloaded by [Richard Douglass] at 08:35 30 August 2014
meaning in life questionnaire: Assessing the presence of
and search for meaning in life. Journal of Counseling Psy-
chology, 53, 80–93. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.53.1.80
Steger, M. F., Oishi, S., & Kashdan, T. B. (2009). Meaning in
life across the life span: Levels and correlates of meaning
9
in life from emerging adulthood to older adulthood. The
Journal of Positive Psychology, 4, 43–52. doi:10.1080/
17439760802303127
Strack, K. M. (2007). A measure of interest to logotherapy
researchers: The meaning in life questionnaire. The Interna-
tional Forum for Logotherapy, 30, 109–111.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate
statistics. Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2013,
June 20). American time use survey – 2012 results: News
release. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/news.release/
pdf/atus.pdf
Van Ranst, N., & Marcoen, A. (1997). Meaning in life of
young and elderly adults: An examination of the factorial
validity and invariance of the life regard index. Personality
and Individual Differences, 22, 877–884. doi:10.1016/
S0191-8869(97)00011-1
Weston, R., & Gore, P. A. (2006). A brief guide to structural
equation modeling. The Counseling Psychologist, 34, 719–
751. doi:10.1177/0011000006286345
Yeager, D. S., & Bundick, M. J. (2009). The role of purposeful
work goals in promoting meaning in life and in schoolwork
during adolescence. Journal of Adolescent Research, 24,
423–452. doi:10.1177/0743558409336749