Cited by 14Adult and Continuing Education TopicsEducational Leadership and InnovationAging and Gerontology Research

Does age matter? Informal learning practices of younger and older adults

Open access
Vermeylen, Laurie, McLean, Scott·2014·Canadian Journal for the Study of Adult Education

Abstract

Conventional wisdom in adult education suggests that processes of life cycle change make for differences in the learning experiences of younger and older adults. Popular demographers argue that generational differences exist between those born in distinct historical periods. Outside the realm of higher education, there are relatively few empirical studies of the learning practices of adults of differing ages. In this article, we present the results of qualitative interviews undertaken with 134 readers of self-help books. Half of these readers were thirty years of age or younger. We found modest age differences in learners’ engagement with self-help reading. Relatively older readers were more likely to define explicit learning goals, engage deeply in the learning process, experience linear learning pathways, and express disagreement with authors. We conclude that the modest nature of age differences found supports a maturational or life cycle interpretation rather than a generational interpretation, and that learning processes are more similar than different among people of various ages.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.56105/cjsae.v26i1.2837

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Jarvis, C. (1999). Love changes everything: The transformative potential of popular fiction. Studies in the Education of Adults, 31(2), 109-123.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vermeylen, L., & McLean, S.
Affiliations
University of Calgary (CA)
Venue
Canadian Journal for the Study of Adult Education
Published
2014-02-18
Volume
26
Issue
1
Pages
19-34
ISSN
  • 0835-4944 (ISSN-L)
  • 1925-993X
OpenAlex
W1495419819
Cited by
13
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2
FWCI
10.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Canadian Journal for the Study of Adult Education (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Adult and Continuing Education Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Educational Leadership and Innovation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Aging and Gerontology Research
Keywords
age differences, informal learning, self-help books, generational differences, life cycle, adult learning, learning objectives, learning trajectories, older adults, young adults

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review