Socioemotional selectivity theory explains how people reorganize their priorities when they perceive their remaining time as expansive or limited. Developed principally by psychologist Laura L. Carstensen, the theory proposes that an expansive future time horizon promotes goals associated with knowledge acquisition, exploration, and preparation, whereas a more limited horizon increases the motivational value of emotionally meaningful experiences and relationships in the present. Aging is one common context in which future time comes to feel limited, but age itself is not the proposed causal mechanism. Perceived time, goals, available relationships, and the opportunities afforded by a person's environment form the explanatory chain. The theory therefore offers a framework for interpreting developmental changes in social preferences and emotion without assuming that older adulthood follows a fixed psychological script. Carstensen, Isaacowitz, and Charles (1999); Carstensen (2021).
At its core, socioemotional selectivity theory, commonly abbreviated SST, concerns motivated choice. An individual with decades of anticipated opportunities may willingly enter uncertain social situations to meet unfamiliar people, collect information, and establish possibilities for the future. Someone who believes an important period is ending may place greater immediate value on spending time with people whose emotional significance is already established. These are changes in the relative value of goals under different temporal conditions, not definitive categories of personality or universal descriptions of young and old people. Time perspectives are subjective, can vary across domains, and respond to health, institutions, relationships, and historical events. Carstensen (2006); Liao and Carstensen (2018).
Definition and Central Propositions
What socioemotional selectivity means
The term socioemotional selectivity refers to the motivated allocation of social attention, affiliation, and effort toward goals whose rewards are especially valuable in a person's perceived time horizon. Social relationships may serve multiple functions: learning what is possible, gaining information, experimenting with identities, securing resources, receiving affection, providing care, preserving intimacy, and sharing emotionally meaningful moments. SST argues that their relative motivational weights change as people's implicit answers to the question “How much time is left for this?” change. The resulting selectivity can influence which contacts people seek, how they evaluate social interactions, and which information captures attention. Carstensen, Isaacowitz, and Charles (1999).
The theory distinguishes two broad and interacting classes of goals. Knowledge-related goals include gathering new information, building a broad social network, exploring unfamiliar possibilities, and investing in benefits whose value may accrue later. Emotion-related goals include experiencing warmth, intimacy, belonging, and meaningful connection, often through relationships whose value can be realized in the present. In real life, a single decision can serve both goals: a friendship can bring emotional closeness while supporting learning, and an unfamiliar experience can be deeply meaningful. The model predicts a shift in priority rather than a categorical replacement of one goal with another. Carstensen (2021).
Subjective future time perspective
Future time perspective refers to a person's perception of future opportunities, limits, and the amount of time available for valued action. Chronological age is correlated with remaining lifetime on average, yet two people the same age can experience very different future horizons, and the same person can perceive time differently across career, health, relationships, or a particular life transition. A graduation, impending relocation, terminal prognosis, impending retirement, or anticipated end of a shared project may narrow the horizon relevant to a decision. Conversely, a new opportunity may enlarge a person's perceived possibilities in a particular domain. Researchers therefore distinguish how long the future seems from how open or constrained its opportunities appear. Liao and Carstensen (2018).
The critical theoretical proposition is that temporal expectations shape motivational priorities. Aging may often make life's limits more salient, yet age-related preferences are probabilistic and context-dependent. The theory becomes scientifically informative because it predicts that changing perceived time should sometimes change preferences even when chronological age stays constant, and that expanding perceived time can sometimes alter the preferences of older adults. This makes experimentally manipulated or naturally changed time horizons important tests of the account. Fung, Carstensen, and Lutz (1999).
How Time Horizons Influence Goals
Expansive horizons and future-oriented exploration
When individuals expect substantial time to achieve distant outcomes, gathering information and enlarging options can produce a meaningful future return. Meeting unfamiliar people may lead to friendships, professional connections, novel perspectives, or experiences whose benefits are uncertain at first. The person need not prefer shallow relationships; rather, social breadth may serve a wider portfolio of anticipated future goals. This logic can be particularly relevant in periods of educational transition, early career development, migration, or entry into unfamiliar communities. SST proposes a general motivational relation to time, not a requirement that younger people choose novelty in every setting. Carstensen (2006).
Limited horizons and emotional meaning
As remaining time for a goal appears restricted, delayed benefits may lose value relative to experiences that can be emotionally rewarding now. People may prioritize confidants, family members, longstanding friends, and encounters with a known sense of intimacy or purpose. A limited horizon can also increase the importance of resolving tension, expressing affection, or experiencing a satisfying shared activity. The relevant outcome is the emotional significance of a relationship or experience, rather than its familiarity alone. An unfamiliar person can become the preferred partner when that contact offers immediate meaningful connection; an established tie can become less desirable when it repeatedly causes distress or violates one's values. Carstensen, Fung, and Charles (2003).
Goal trade-offs in ordinary decisions
Consider an adult invited to one of two evening gatherings. One offers a large number of unfamiliar contacts who could expand future opportunities; the other offers unhurried time with a few deeply trusted people. SST predicts that the individual's anticipated future and current goals help determine which option appears more attractive. The same logic can apply to choosing between an exploratory trip and a familiar gathering, taking on a demanding new role and nurturing a current relationship, or pursuing future instrumental benefits and protecting a rare emotionally significant moment. These examples illustrate possible motivational trade-offs. No single preference establishes a person's time perspective, and observable behavior also depends on income, health, caregiving, accessibility, and available choices.
The Origins and Development of the Theory
From social network observations to a time-based explanation
Research on aging had long documented changes in the size and composition of social networks. Carstensen and colleagues offered a motivational account of some of these changes: people may actively reorganize relationships to maximize rewards that are most relevant to their evolving goals. Social narrowing can thus reflect selective investment in close connections instead of solely a loss of social competence or opportunities. Their 1999 synthesis presented the theory as a way to connect time perception, motivational goals, and age-related socioemotional processes. Carstensen, Isaacowitz, and Charles (1999).
The subsequent research program sharpened the distinction between aging and future time perspective by testing predictions through imagined endings, political events, social partner choices, experience sampling, and longitudinal observations. This sequence matters because an explanation based merely on chronological age would struggle to account for young adults who temporarily prefer emotionally close partners when the future is constrained, or older adults who become more open to unfamiliar partners when they imagine an expansive future. The strongest version of SST treats perceived endings as motivationally consequential across adulthood. Fung, Carstensen, and Lutz (1999); Carstensen (2021).
Relationship to lifespan developmental psychology
SST fits within the broader lifespan position that psychological development remains multidirectional and context-dependent. Adults can simultaneously encounter changing physical capacities, accumulated expertise, new social obligations, losses, and gains in emotional knowledge. Choosing valued social goals is one mechanism of adaptation to changing resources and circumstances. Unlike an age-stage theory that assigns the same task at each birthday, SST specifies a variable—future time perception—that can vary within age groups and can change with experience. That mechanistic focus makes the theory compatible with lifespan perspectives emphasizing plasticity and selective investment, while preserving its distinctive prediction about horizons and emotional goals. Carstensen (2006).
Evidence From Social Partner Choice
Studies that change perceived time
Experimental research provides one of SST's most recognizable tests. In studies reported by Fung, Carstensen, and Lutz, preferences for spending time with familiar rather than unfamiliar social partners varied with the future time context. Imagining an imminent ending could shift younger adults toward emotionally close contacts. When older adults were invited to imagine unusually expanded futures, their social preferences became less strongly weighted toward familiar partners. Work surrounding the political transition in Hong Kong also provided a distinctive naturally occurring context in which perceived future endings could be examined. These findings are evidence that the perceived time horizon contributes to preferences, although hypothetical choices and historically specific circumstances should not be equated automatically with enduring real-world behavior. Fung, Carstensen, and Lutz (1999).
Correlational and individual-difference findings
In research with adults spanning much of the adult lifespan, Lang and Carstensen examined the relationships among future time perspective, social goals, and age. Their findings are consistent with the claim that time perspective carries motivational information beyond simple chronological categorization. The study's cross-sectional features also matter: correlations across adults of different ages cannot by themselves isolate the causal influence of aging from cohort, cultural norms, health, or other variables that differ between participants. A stronger interpretation emerges when correlational findings are considered together with studies that manipulate time horizons and those that observe within-person development. Lang and Carstensen (2002).
What experiments establish
The experimental evidence supports a central theoretical mechanism: perceptions of a constrained future can alter the attractiveness of emotionally meaningful social partners, including among younger people. It does not show that people always know the time available to them, that every preference becomes behavior, or that a narrowed horizon is the only determinant of network composition. Preferences in experimental scenarios are sensitive to the framing of alternatives, the characteristics of the available partners, and the immediate meaning of the ending being imagined. The ecological task for subsequent research is to connect these motivational shifts to actual social interaction over time.
Social Networks Across Adulthood
Selective narrowing and emotional closeness
Network size frequently changes across the adult lifespan, but the meaning of that change depends on which relationships remain, why others recede, and whether choice was involved. SST predicts relatively greater investment in close, emotionally rewarding ties as future time feels constrained. English and Carstensen examined longitudinal social-network patterns and daily emotional experience and found that selective narrowing was associated with improvements in emotional experience. The finding supports a selective-investment interpretation while leaving room for alternative causes, bidirectional influences, and the circumstances of each participant. English and Carstensen (2014).
Life events and structural constraints
A large meta-analysis by Wrzus and colleagues documented how social-network characteristics vary with age and major life events. Marriage, parenthood, employment changes, relocation, bereavement, retirement, and other transitions can alter the time and opportunities available for social contact. Such events can change network size independently of personal emotional preference, and they can also interact with preferences. Network reduction caused by the death of friends, inaccessible transport, economic hardship, discrimination, or lack of community infrastructure requires a different interpretation from a freely chosen shift toward deeper contact with fewer people. Wrzus, Hänel, Wagner, and Neyer (2013).
Voluntary selectivity and unwanted isolation
A smaller social network can be adequate and emotionally nourishing for one person and painfully insufficient for another. Loneliness concerns the perceived discrepancy between desired and experienced social connection; social isolation concerns objective patterns of limited contact or participation. SST offers a model of preference formation and selective investment. It does not make loneliness beneficial, treat the absence of social support as an optimal adaptation, or imply that practical barriers to companionship should be ignored. Scientific and applied assessments should ask about the quality of contact, availability of instrumental support, desired opportunities, and the person's own experience of belonging.
Emotional Goals, Well-Being, and the Positivity Effect
Why emotion may become more motivationally important
If emotionally satisfying goals yield immediate value, people who perceive time as limited have reasons to invest in interactions and information likely to produce that value. This motivational account can help explain why some older adults report relatively strong emotional well-being despite encountering stressors. The theory does not assert that older adulthood is uniformly happy. Financial strain, chronic stress, disability-related barriers, pain, discrimination, lack of support, and major losses can constrain opportunities to realize emotionally meaningful goals. The relevant prediction is about shifts in motivation, qualified by what circumstances allow. Carstensen, Fung, and Charles (2003).
Attention and memory for emotional information
One prominent research line examines the age-related positivity effect, a relative tendency in some circumstances for older adults to attend to or remember positive rather than negative material compared with younger adults. A systematic quantitative synthesis by Reed, Chan, and Mikels reviewed evidence across many studies and found an overall age-related positivity effect with meaningful moderation by study methods. Work on motivated cognition proposed that attention and memory may be deployed in service of emotional goals. SST supplies one possible motivational explanation; the positivity effect is an empirically studied pattern with its own measurement questions, boundary conditions, and competing interpretations. Reed, Chan, and Mikels (2014); Mather and Carstensen (2005).
Research on memory for emotionally valenced images also suggests that age comparisons can depend on whether stimuli are negative, positive, or neutral, and on the conditions under which they are encoded and recalled. These differences should not be turned into claims of universal positive thinking, immunity to distress, or inability to detect danger. The narrower scientific question is how motivational priorities interact with attention, cognitive resources, task demands, and emotional information in particular settings. Charles, Mather, and Carstensen (2003).
Emotion regulation and persistent stress
Emotion regulation involves the processes through which people influence emotional situations, attention, interpretation, and responses. SST focuses on why emotionally meaningful goals may receive more motivational weight under constrained horizons. Other models help specify the conditions under which experience can be managed effectively. The strength and vulnerability integration model, or SAVI, proposes that age-related advantages in emotional well-being can coexist with vulnerabilities when sustained physiological arousal or inescapable distress persists. It supplies a complementary explanation rather than a substitute for SST. Charles (2010).
During the COVID-19 pandemic, Carstensen, Shavit, and Barnes found that older respondents reported relatively favorable emotional experiences compared with younger respondents in a study carried out under widespread threat. Such findings provide valuable evidence that the relationship between age and emotional experience can persist under some stressful conditions. They do not justify assuming the same advantage under all degrees of chronic stress, personal threat, or social deprivation, and pandemic surveys require attention to sampling, timing, and exposure differences. Carstensen, Shavit, and Barnes (2020).
Does Socioemotional Selectivity Theory Explain Aging?
Aging as an informative but imperfect proxy
Chronological age is often easier to measure than subjective time perspective, and age patterns helped motivate SST. Yet the theory predicts substantial within-age variability. A young person with a severe illness or an impending separation may prioritize immediate emotional meaning, while an older person embarking on an extended project may prize new connections, learning, and future investments. These examples illustrate the motivational logic without making claims about the preferences of all people living through any specific event. A well-designed study measures perceived horizons directly rather than treating age as their equivalent. Liao and Carstensen (2018).
Age, cohort, and historical period
Cross-sectional differences between adults who were born decades apart combine aging with birth-cohort and historical-period differences. A cohort socialized before widespread digital communication may organize contact differently from one that grew up with online networks. Economic security, gendered caregiving expectations, pension policy, migration patterns, and life expectancy also vary by place and historical period. Longitudinal observation improves the study of within-person changes but introduces selective attrition and historical changes that affect the same participants. A convincing theory evaluation must combine multiple designs, examine measured future-time beliefs, and interpret broad age trends cautiously.
The possibility of reverse and reciprocal effects
Temporal beliefs may shape goal selection, and a person's goals, relationships, or emotional state may in turn shape how open the future seems. Good health, successful relationships, retirement options, workplace opportunities, and available support can influence both future perspective and social behavior. A longitudinal association between time horizon and network size therefore leaves several possible causal pathways open. Experimental manipulations test a more targeted causal question, but they may capture short-lived states rather than the accumulated consequences of decisions. Researchers should avoid treating a single mediation analysis as final proof of the theory's full causal sequence.
Measurement and Research Methods
Measuring future time perspective
Researchers commonly assess future time perspective through statements about remaining opportunities, limitations, and the availability of future experiences. Yet the construct has multiple dimensions. A person may perceive long calendar time but limited opportunities in one setting, or short time accompanied by a sense of rich possibility. Liao and Carstensen argue for careful conceptual treatment of time horizons and related dimensions. Surveys need validated measures, interpretable factor structures, and attention to whether items mean the same thing across age, culture, language, and health conditions. Liao and Carstensen (2018).
Measuring goals and partner choices
SST studies have used hypothetical social-partner scenarios, ratings of potential companions, future-time questions, reports of social contact, and observations of daily emotional experience. Each method samples a different part of the theory. A hypothetical preference can reveal a motivational ranking without demonstrating that the person could act on it. A social-network inventory establishes contacts but may not measure subjective meaning. Experience sampling captures everyday affect but may miss infrequent events or long-term change. Combining measures can clarify whether a predicted relationship operates at the level of intention, choice, sustained interaction, or emotional outcome.
Longitudinal, experimental, and ecological triangulation
Cross-sectional surveys reveal population patterns; longitudinal designs reveal how patterns evolve within people; randomized time-horizon manipulations reveal whether making endings salient changes immediate preferences. Ecological methods examine the consequences of choices under actual social and institutional constraints. Evidence becomes stronger when the same broad prediction survives different research methods and when findings are replicated across settings. Even convergent findings leave open which psychological processes, such as emotional goals, perceived risk, or investment horizons, mediate specific outcomes. Fung, Carstensen, and Lutz (1999); English and Carstensen (2014).
Cultural and Social Context
The cultural meaning of closeness
The social meaning of family, friendship, obligation, intimacy, and autonomy is culturally patterned. In some settings, emotionally meaningful ties are sustained primarily through extended family and intergenerational obligations; elsewhere, friendship and chosen communities may be central. Social-partner experiments that contrast a familiar person with an unfamiliar acquaintance can capture different trade-offs depending on cultural expectations and how available choices are framed. Cross-cultural evidence, including the Hong Kong context examined by Fung and colleagues, underscores why temporal horizons should be studied in their historical and relational setting rather than assumed to operate identically across all populations. Fung, Carstensen, and Lutz (1999).
Socioeconomic inequality and disability
Choosing to concentrate on emotionally fulfilling relationships requires some access to those relationships. Poverty, housing instability, inaccessible transportation, unsafe environments, discrimination, digital exclusion, and insufficient care support can reduce available options. People with disabilities may also encounter structural barriers that shape network opportunities without changing their emotional goals. If a person's network shrinks because of inaccessible public spaces, a motivational account alone is incomplete. A rigorous application of SST therefore considers the choice architecture around the individual: what contacts are available, what connections are safe, and what practical resources allow the person to maintain them.
Gender, family roles, and unequal time
Caregiving responsibilities and family arrangements may influence both time perspective and opportunities to pursue goals. Some adults have extensive freedom to select relationships, while others maintain contact because of obligations to children, parents, partners, patients, or dependents. Such responsibilities can be meaningful as well as burdensome. Researchers should not assume that similar observed networks reveal similar subjective goals. They should measure gendered and economic differences in available time and test whether the same self-report items capture emotional selectivity across heterogeneous life histories.
Critical Debates and Limits of the Evidence
Is social narrowing always purposeful?
No. SST proposes a motivational contribution to patterns of social selection. Network change may also result from death, illness, retirement, geographic mobility, organizational exclusion, financial strain, or changing family structure. Meta-analytic evidence on social-network change and life events illustrates the scale of such alternative influences. Distinguishing deliberate preferential selection from involuntary contact loss is essential before interpreting a narrower network as an emotional adaptation. Wrzus, Hänel, Wagner, and Neyer (2013).
Is positive information always preferred?
No universal tendency is established. Positivity effects vary by tasks, stimulus properties, cognitive conditions, explicit instructions, and outcome measures. If negative information is relevant to an urgent decision, accurate threat detection and problem solving may take precedence over immediate mood protection. The research literature includes both supporting findings and methodological qualifications, and pooled effects cannot describe every task or person. SST is most informative when researchers specify which emotional goals are active and which resources allow participants to pursue them. Reed, Chan, and Mikels (2014).
Are the two goal categories sufficient?
The knowledge-versus-emotion distinction is an explanatory simplification. Human goals also involve obligation, safety, identity, status, reciprocity, fairness, spirituality, autonomy, creativity, and care for others. These can have both immediate and delayed rewards. A person might remain in a difficult relationship out of responsibility or seek new partners to find emotionally intimate connection. Rather than labeling every action after the fact, researchers should operationalize goals before measuring outcomes and test when the theory predicts choices more accurately than competing motivational accounts.
Methodological generalizability
Much of the evidence emerged from populations and instruments that may not represent the full global diversity of adults. Some research relies on college-student comparisons, imagined scenarios, convenience samples, or surveys conducted in relatively affluent settings. Selective longitudinal attrition can underrepresent participants with serious illness, economic hardship, or unstable housing. Future work should improve cultural measurement equivalence, integrate life-event and environmental indicators, and distinguish the perceived quantity of future time from the perceived quality and availability of future opportunities. These are limitations of generalizability and measurement, not grounds for reducing all findings to a single verdict.
Relationship to Other Theories
Selection, optimization, and compensation
The selection, optimization, and compensation approach describes how people choose goals, invest resources in them, and adapt methods when circumstances change. SST offers a specific prediction concerning which goals become motivationally salient when future time contracts. In combination, the perspectives suggest that a person may prioritize emotionally important relationships and then use selective strategies to maintain them. The combined interpretation remains a conceptual integration; individual outcomes still require empirical testing.
Social convoy and continuity approaches
Social convoy approaches emphasize networks of enduring and changing relationships that supply support over the life course. Continuity perspectives emphasize the persistence of identities, habits, and preferences. SST contributes a time-sensitive motivational mechanism that can operate within these broader social structures. A network may be stable because its ties are embedded in family and community institutions, and it may also be intentionally cultivated because intimacy is highly valued. Social stability alone does not distinguish the theories; tests must compare predictions about shifting horizons, perceived emotional rewards, and partner selection.
Strength and vulnerability integration
SAVI addresses the interaction among emotional regulation, exposure to stress, and age-linked physiological vulnerability. SST emphasizes goal priorities as a function of time perspective. Together they can illuminate why someone may seek satisfying contact yet struggle when conflict or chronic stress cannot be escaped. Each theory highlights different explanatory variables, and their relationships should be assessed through testable predictions rather than assumed equivalence. Charles (2010).
Practical Applications
Supporting autonomy in later-life relationships
SST offers a useful question for individuals and those supporting them: which social activities and relationships feel meaningful given current goals? This question can help avoid equating good aging with a large number of contacts or compulsory participation in many programs. Some individuals benefit from meeting new people; others value reliable time with a few close companions; many value both at different times. A supportive environment offers genuine options, maintains accessibility, and respects the individual's preferences while attending to unwanted isolation.
Communication and health information
The theory suggests that communication emphasizing meaningful present outcomes may resonate in some contexts in which future time feels constrained. Carstensen and Hershfield discuss how SST can inform communication with older audiences while cautioning against stereotypes that assume one uniform preference across age groups. Such framing is a theoretically informed design approach, not proof that a particular message increases treatment adherence, changes health behavior, or benefits every older adult. Communications should remain accurate, transparent, and responsive to the intended audience. Carstensen and Hershfield (2021).
Care, family conversations, and transitions
An impending relocation, major change in health, retirement, or end of a shared arrangement can shift temporal attention toward what feels important now. Asking about preferred contacts and experiences may help families and services organize supportive choices. However, the experience of limited time can also involve fear, loss, uncertainty, and financial pressure. The theory does not prescribe one emotional response to illness or aging, nor should it be used to make decisions for a person on the basis of age. Respect for supported decision-making, personal priorities, and practical resources remains central.
Intervention evidence and responsible interpretation
SST is a theory of motivation and social preference, not a clinical treatment protocol. Studies of time-horizon manipulations test psychological mechanisms; they do not establish a standardized therapeutic intervention for loneliness, anxiety, depression, or cognitive disorders. Design proposals such as making meaningful social choices easier or communicating in an emotionally relevant manner have potential practical value but require outcome-specific evaluation. Evidence should be rated according to the question: the goal-shift mechanism has experimental support, while claims about a particular service or health intervention require direct trials and implementation research.
Socioemotional Selectivity in the Artificial Era
Digital communication can expand or constrain access to emotionally meaningful ties. Older and younger adults may use messaging, video calls, and accessible online communities to sustain intimacy or explore new networks. SST suggests that the value of a particular technology depends partly on the goals it serves, the perceived future, trust, usability, and available alternatives. This is a general application of the theory and should be evaluated empirically rather than assumed from chronological age. Clinical claims about digital mental-health interventions and distinct questions concerning relationships with artificial systems require their own evidence; they are separate from the core mechanism of SST.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is socioemotional selectivity theory in simple terms?
SST proposes that people's sense of how much future time is available influences what they want from relationships and experiences. When the future feels extensive, exploration and gathering information may be more valuable; when the horizon feels shorter, emotionally meaningful goals may become more important. These are tendencies shaped by circumstances, not universal age rules. Carstensen (2021).
Who developed socioemotional selectivity theory?
Psychologist Laura L. Carstensen developed the theory and elaborated it with colleagues including Derek Isaacowitz, Susan Charles, Helene Fung, and others. The foundational 1999 American Psychologist article set out the time-horizon explanation, and subsequent studies tested its motivational predictions. Carstensen, Isaacowitz, and Charles (1999).
Why can older adults prefer fewer social relationships?
Some older adults choose to invest more deeply in relationships that are emotionally rewarding, particularly when future time feels limited. Networks also change through death, relocation, disability, socioeconomic circumstances, and major life events. Network size alone cannot reveal whether the change is preferred, and individuals differ widely. English and Carstensen (2014); Wrzus and colleagues (2013).
Does SST apply to young adults?
Yes. The proposed mechanism is perceived future time, which can change independently of chronological age. Experiments that made imagined endings salient altered the social preferences of younger participants, providing an important test of the theory. Fung, Carstensen, and Lutz (1999).
What is the difference between SST and the positivity effect?
SST is a theory about how future time perspective influences motivational goals. The positivity effect describes patterns of relative preference for positive over negative material on particular attention or memory tasks. SST may help explain such patterns, but the positivity effect has separate measurement methods, moderators, and scientific debates. Reed, Chan, and Mikels (2014).
Does focusing on emotionally close relationships prevent loneliness?
Emotional closeness can be meaningful, but SST alone does not establish a preventive treatment for loneliness. People may prefer a small circle yet experience ample connection, or may have few contacts because of unwanted barriers. Understanding desired contact, relationship quality, and accessible support is more informative than assuming that fewer relationships are always good or bad.
Can perceived future time be changed?
Perceived future time can vary as circumstances, expectations, and salient events change, and experiments can temporarily alter how people imagine remaining time. Whether a particular intervention produces a lasting shift or improves well-being requires separate empirical testing. Liao and Carstensen (2018); Fung, Carstensen, and Lutz (1999).
Conclusion
Socioemotional selectivity theory identifies perceived future time as an organizing variable in adult motivation. Its central claim is that the subjective horizon within which people evaluate options helps determine the relative priority assigned to knowledge-seeking and emotionally meaningful goals. Experimental tests of imagined endings, studies of social-partner preferences, longitudinal network research, and investigations of emotional experience provide convergent but qualified support. The framework is most useful when it remains attentive to individual variation, cultural meanings, social opportunities, and the distinction between voluntary choice and constrained circumstances. Aging changes the contexts within which people choose, while time perspective helps explain why some goals become especially valuable at different moments of life. Carstensen (2021).
Related Articles
Cluster Adult Development, Aging and Later Life — Scientific foundations of adult development, psychosocial aging, lifespan change, and adaptation.
Big Five Personality Traits in Adulthood and Aging — A separate account of personality-trait development rather than temporal goal selection.
Marriage After Retirement: Intimacy, Identity, Routine, and Time Together — The couple-specific setting of later-life transitions and intimacy.
The Positivity Effect in Aging: Attention, Memory, and Emotion
Emotion Regulation in Older Adults: Changes, Strategies, and Evidence
Wisdom and Aging: Definitions, Measurement, and Research
References
Carstensen, L. L. (2006). The influence of a sense of time on human development. Science, 312(5782), 1913–1915. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1127488
Carstensen, L. L. (2021). Socioemotional selectivity theory: The role of perceived endings in human motivation. The Gerontologist, 61(8), 1188–1196. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnab116
Carstensen, L. L., Fung, H. H., and Charles, S. T. (2003). Socioemotional selectivity theory and the regulation of emotion in the second half of life. Motivation and Emotion, 27, 103–123. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024569803230
Carstensen, L. L., and Hershfield, H. E. (2021). Beyond stereotypes: Using socioemotional selectivity theory to improve messaging to older adults. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 30(4), 327–334. https://doi.org/10.1177/09637214211011468
Carstensen, L. L., Isaacowitz, D. M., and Charles, S. T. (1999). Taking time seriously: A theory of socioemotional selectivity. American Psychologist, 54(3), 165–181. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.54.3.165
Carstensen, L. L., Shavit, Y. Z., and Barnes, J. T. (2020). Age advantages in emotional experience persist even under threat from the COVID-19 pandemic. Psychological Science, 31(11), 1374–1385. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797620967261
Charles, S. T. (2010). Strength and vulnerability integration: A model of emotional well-being across adulthood. Psychological Bulletin, 136(6), 1068–1091. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021232
Charles, S. T., Mather, M., and Carstensen, L. L. (2003). Aging and emotional memory: The forgettable nature of negative images for older adults. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132(2), 310–324. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.132.2.310
English, T., and Carstensen, L. L. (2014). Selective narrowing of social networks across adulthood is associated with improved emotional experience in daily life. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 38(2), 195–202. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025413515404
Fung, H. H., Carstensen, L. L., and Lutz, A. M. (1999). Influence of time on social preferences: Implications for life-span development. Psychology and Aging, 14(4), 595–604. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.14.4.595
Lang, F. R., and Carstensen, L. L. (2002). Time counts: Future time perspective, goals, and social relationships. Psychology and Aging, 17(1), 125–139. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.17.1.125
Liao, H.-W., and Carstensen, L. L. (2018). Future time perspective: Time horizons and beyond. GeroPsych, 31(3), 163–167. https://doi.org/10.1024/1662-9647/a000194
Mather, M., and Carstensen, L. L. (2005). Aging and motivated cognition: The positivity effect in attention and memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(10), 496–502. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2005.08.005
Reed, A. E., Chan, L., and Mikels, J. A. (2014). Meta-analysis of the age-related positivity effect: Age differences in preferences for positive over negative information. Psychology and Aging, 29(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035194
Wrzus, C., Hänel, M., Wagner, J., and Neyer, F. J. (2013). Social network changes and life events across the life span: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 139(1), 53–80. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028601