Under the Currents of Generational Myths

"Let's first get this out of the way: generational stereotypes don't stand up well to scrutiny. The psychological evidence is clear. The variation within generations far outweighs any average difference between them. Grouping people by birth year may be a popular shorthand, but it rarely tells us much about a host of important psychological factors like personality, intelligence, motivation and values."

"And yet, these labels are everywhere in marketing decks, political speeches, family arguments, and newspaper headlines. They aren't disappearing anytime soon. We can debunk stereotypes, and research can highlight real age-related trends. For instance, differences linked to life stage rather than generation can be important differentiators. But stereotypes have a stubborn grip because they serve another purpose: they simplify complexity into a story we can easily share."

"Human cognition depends on these shortcuts. Without them, the sheer complexity of culture, history, and interpersonal variation would be paralyzing. We automatically group people to make sense of them. Psychologically, this is categorization, which is one of the most basic functions of the mind. From infancy, we divide the world into patterns: safe vs. unsafe, familiar vs. unfamiliar, us vs. them. These classifications allow us to make quick decisions based on limited information,"

Research shows that variation within a generation far exceeds average differences between generations, so birth-year categories rarely predict personality, intelligence, motivation, or values. Knowing someone is labeled a Boomer or Zoomer provides minimal insight into individual psychology and is a poor tool for understanding a person. Generational labels remain widespread across marketing, politics, families, and media because they simplify complex social information into shareable stories. Some measurable age-related trends exist, often tied to life stage rather than cohort. The mind uses heuristics and categorization to reduce social complexity, trading individual accuracy for speed in judgment.

Read at Psychology Today