The Effects of Nostalgia and its Implications for Generation Z

Christofer Smith • April 10, 2025 • 2176 Words

INTRODUCTION

One older analysis of United Nations data estimated that Generation Z would have accounted for nearly a third of the global population (Miller and Lu) — representing an immense sum of humanity. While according to writers from the Pew Research Center, a nonpartisan and nonprofit organization dedicated to the gathering of empirical research for policymakers and the public, this generation participates in the influx of a myriad of new, unparalleled trends and demographics, including a constant connection to the internet, greater chances of higher education, and a greater desire for an activist government (Parker and Igielnik), it is one of many generations to experience nostalgia, with the term being coined in the 17th century. While a debate exists over whether this emotion is universal, it is certainly not a new emotion, as explained by the author of one of the provided stimulus materials (Norberg). This same article also goes on to eloquently define the term as a sad or bittersweet homesickness, and just as numerous other works have attempted to convey the emotion through words, there are many promising benefits that lay in the research and application of nostalgia. These positive impacts include uplifting one’s psychological standing, their social interactions, and the general well-being of said individual. It is due to these prospective interests we stand to gain that it is crucial to strive towards attempting to fully grasp what nostalgia means for a nostalgic generation like Gen Z. Thus, it can be argued that Gen Z’s idealization and nostalgia for the past opens the potential for extensive benefits.

ESTABLISHING CONTEXT

A thorough, in-depth understanding of nostalgia is more critical than ever because it is undeniable that Generation Z is experiencing it at this moment. As detailed and graphed by the aforementioned writers from the Pew Research Center, eighty-five percent of teens in this generation actively use the social media platform YouTube (Parker and Igielnik). While this statistic is often tied to depression and anxiety rates in analyses, associates of the university of Wollongong, Charles Areni and Mathew Todres, cited it as an explanation for a greater prevalence of nostalgic sentiments left in comments for more recent 2000s-2010s songs after identifying phrases that suggested nostalgia in comments left on YouTube videos featuring Billboard’s top thirty songs of each year from 1950 to 2019. Their findings align with the discussion and ideas posed by the stimulus material author Johan Norberg. A lecturer and senior fellow at the Cato Institute, his article explores the presence of nostalgia over multiple generations and how no single generation can claim to be the only to experience it. While this can serve to disprove the idea that nostalgia is present in Gen Z alone, Norberg’s conclusion supports the notion that this generation is capable of experiencing it at this moment. He concludes with the fact that researchers have analyzed the encoding of memories throughout life, finding the process to be most prevalent in adolescence and early adulthood when compared to any other segment of a lifetime. Norberg adds that this entails returning to this period of time when reminiscing about one’s life (Norberg). When these findings are paired with the knowledge that the oldest members of Generation Z are currently exiting this formative section of their lives (Parker and Igielnik), it becomes evident that this immense fraction of humanity is able to feel the weight of nostalgia. Beyond this are the more tangible effects of nostalgia, as partially documented by graduate assistant and political science researcher Ann Marie Lent and Karen Kedowski, whose research attests to the use of nostalgia to appeal to prospective voters through campaign messaging. This is only one of the implicit results that nostalgia’s influence over Gen Z entails, and thus, it is of vital importance that the effects of this prevalent emotion are understood in order to better analyze how Gen Z shapes the world it exists in.

NOSTALGIA’S PSYCHOLOGICAL EFFECTS

The nature of nostalgia directly results in multiple psychological effects that have been noted and analyzed. This was evident in a special issue of the peer-reviewed Journal Current Opinion in Psychology, where University of Surrey associate Erica G. Hepper and University of Bath affiliate Amelia Dennis explored the potential application of nostalgia as a resource for improving the contentment and meaningfulness one feels, examples of facets of general well-being, that one may experience. They demonstrated that the positive effects of nostalgia, including the sentiments of happiness and satisfaction, may be harnessed to overcome the psychological detriments of challenging periods of time, with the COVID-19 pandemic serving as an example in recent memory (Hepper and Dennis). Furthermore, the parsing of hundreds of survey responses by researchers from the Hong Kong Metropolitan University and the Nanyang Technological University from field hockey players in Singapore has indicated that leisure nostalgia positively influences perceived benefits, such as personal growth, with significant correlations to happiness being present (Cho et al.). These findings help to illustrate the psychological capabilities that proper application of nostalgia can entail for Generation Z.

PSYCHOLOGICAL COUNTERARGUMENTS

While these psychological benefits have been observed through study, there are potential faults that hinder the perception of these positive impacts; one of these is the historical understanding of nostalgia that predates this research, as explored by professor of psychology Jeffrey D. Green. In his short article, he addresses the proposition that nostalgia was associated and actually the culprit behind negative states and outward emotions, such as homesickness, sadness, or insomnia. While this does indeed paint nostalgia in a negative light, Green’s article serves to refute such by exploring the empirical error at play in these theories that predate the twentieth century. He also elaborates that more recent research demonstrates negative states activating nostalgia, opposite of these historical notions, while also including a wealth of information on benefits, like social connectedness, optimism, and empathy — positive impacts that parallel those that Hepper and Dennis mentioned previously (Green). This aforementioned duo also offer a point of contention that counters the argument that nostalgia provides psychological benefits. In their article, they pose that cross-sectional surveys, like those which their research integrates, are flawed at a fundamental level while analyzing that which can be both a cause and an effect, such as nostalgia. Furthermore, they affirm that more longitudinal research and experimentation is necessary to fully denote nostalgia’s promising ability to improve mental resilience (Hepper and Dennis). These counterarguments are rational and valid, since the nature of research implies that more empirical evidence is always desirable. That being said, the existing literature available undoubtedly demonstrates psychological benefits as a result springing from the experiencing of nostalgia, and as such, it must be considered because of the prospective benefits that Generation Z stands to gain from further exploration.

NOSTALGIA’S SOCIAL EFFECTS

Although this paper has discussed the internal psychological benefits that nostalgia poses for Gen Z, the external relationships between individuals also stand to benefit from experiencing the emotion. For these social aspects, multiple studies, such as one by Jacob Juhl and Marios Biskas, convey this. These authors, associates of the University of Southampton and the University of Sheffield, respectively, assert that the nature of nostalgia is innately social, and thus, it serves as a bridge for forming connections between others. Due to this, correlated internal benefits that mirror the psychological lens were observed, such as personal consistency through times of change, positivity, and inspiration, while also demonstrating interpersonal results that include elevated empathy, physical closeness, and an increased sense of prosociality (Juhl and Biskas). This mirrors the more broad implications of nostalgia on the social facet that are documented by Marius van Dijke, a professor of behavioral ethics at the Rotterdam School of Management, and Joost M. Leunissen, who holds positions at the University of Winchester as Co-Programme Leader for BSc Psychology and as a Senior Lecturer in Psychology. Their findings assert that nostalgia, as an emotion, is present in both personal and organizational levels. This results in counteracting and preventing the hindrance of both organizational identification, which is the sense of cohesion between individual members of a group, and the meaningfulness of the work that individuals partake in (van Dijke and Leunissen). Through these sources, it becomes evident that nostalgia not only benefits the mental aspect of individuals, such as the rising teenagers of Gen Z who have been found to be particularly expressive of anxiety in relation to the future, as reported by the reliable Pew Research Center (Tyson et al.) but that it also induces positive connections between members of the populace who experience it.

SOCIAL COUNTERARGUMENTS

While the researchers Juhl, Biskas, van Dijke, and Leunissen all introduce valuable data that portrays nostalgia as a powerful tool for increasing the sociality of Generation Z, their conclusions address limitations to their arguments that call into question the ideality of nostalgia. For instance, van Dijke and Leunissen state that in order for nostalgia to be invoked within the proper context for application, circumstances that threaten a group, such as organizational change or injustice, are necessary (van Dijke and Leunissen). While this may be true, such a time would see the most need for unity — a vocation which, as their work has demonstrated, can be answered by nostalgia. Another point of contention, this time supported by both duos and paralleled by Hepper and Dennis, is the call for more empirical research. Applied research that delves into the social aspects of nostalgia and how it may be focused for societal improvement (Juhl and Jacob) and a comprehensive synopsis of nostalgia’s array of roles in organizations (van Dijke and Leunissen) are among some of the explorations that these researchers name. Similarly to the last counterargument, it is a valid criticism that more research is needed to better understand the complexities of nostalgia and its application. That being said, this in particular is the reason why Marius van Dijke and Joost M. Leunissen authored their paper with the aim to help further this field of study through relevant review of available information on personal nostalgia. Therefore, while not fully envisioned by current research, the social effects of nostalgia and its potential for Gen Z can not simply be undermined.

NOSTALGIA’S EFFECTS ON GENERAL WELL-BEING

Beyond the more specific and focused research that examines the societal and psychological influences that nostalgia possesses for individuals and organizations, there exist more broad implications for the general well-being of those who experience the emotion. This is explained by Kristin Layous and Jamie L. Kurtz, who maintain credibility through association with the Department of Psychology of California State University and affiliation with James Madison University, respectively. Their work argues that nostalgizing, the act of experiencing nostalgia, qualifies and should be considered as a positive psychological intervention (PPI), akin to that of performing random acts of kindness or practicing gratitude. They further assert the logic that with substantial research backing PPIs as promoters of well-being, nostalgizing can be correlated with the same positive effects through the same known mechanisms (Layous and Kurtz). While closely related to the psychological facet of nostalgia’s benefits, the research that these partners have compiled helps further the notion that nostalgia stands to be constructive towards improving the quality of life for those who experience it, such as Generation Z.

GENERAL WELL-BEING COUNTERARGUMENTS

Although the aforementioned research is indicative of nostalgia’s efficacy in advocating for one’s well-being, the authors address some critical considerations throughout their argument. The first is that the correlation of nostalgia to the benefits of positive psychological interventions is limited in empirical testing. They refute this point, however, by contending their stance that nostalgic reflection is conducive to future success, and that further exploration into the topic may be undertaken (Layous and Kurtz). The second point that they consider is less blatant, however, but is in fact greatly intertwined with nostalgia, intrinsically embedded within its very function. It is that the nature of nostalgia includes its bittersweetness (Layous and Kurtz) — a perspective shared by the author of the stimulus source that was noted earlier (Norberg). Another piece of stimulus material serves to illustrate this aspect of nostalgia, it being the images provided by activist and photographer Seph Lawless. His images of abandonment and decay help capture the very essence of nostalgia by allowing a viewer to experience the juxtaposition of both positive and negative emotions, such as both reminiscing about one’s childhood experiences at their local mall while also realizing the weight of its current state of disrepair and neglect. This simultaneousness is termed affective ambivalence by the earlier-discussed author Leunissen (Leunissen), and does call into question whether nostalgia is effective in improving one’s well-being. Layous and Kurtz discredit this perspective, however, by asserting that this observation fails to hinder the mechanisms that they discuss (Layous and Kurtz). Therefore, it still stands as a testament to nostalgia’s potential for Gen Z that it can serve to improve the well-being in the lives of this generation.

CONCLUSION AND CALL TO ACTION

Throughout multiple studies, it is evident that nostalgia is palpable within Generation Z, and that despite the need for more research and narrowing, nostalgia can be harnessed to improve multiple aspects of this generation’s lives. With this in mind, further exploration should be undertaken to understand nostalgia’s potential to improve millions of lives.

Works Cited

Areni, Charles S., and Mathew Todres. “How Long Ago Were the ‘Good Old Days’? Comparing the Prevalence of Nostalgia in YouTube Comments on Music Videos from Recent versus Distant Decades.” Applied Cognitive Psychology, vol. 37, no. 6, Wiley-Blackwell, Nov. 2023, pp. 1455–62, https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.4121. EBSCOhost. Accessed 14 Mar. 2025.

Cho, Heetae, et al. “Does Nostalgia Promote Personal Growth and Happiness? The Case of Field Hockey in Singapore.” Leisure Sciences, vol. 46, no. 4, Dec. 2021, pp. 1–23, https://doi.org/10.1080/01490400.2021.2016519. EBSCOhost. Accessed 14 Mar. 2025.

Green, Jeffrey D. “Nostalgia: Deploying the Past to Improve the Future.” Pathways to Research in Psychology, Oct. 2023, pp. 1–10, https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=6c7e3951-19cd-381f-8745-3b44b0fbc0ec. EBSCOhost. Accessed 14 Mar. 2025.

Hepper, Erica G., and Amelia Dennis. “From Rosy Past to Happy and Flourishing Present: Nostalgia as a Resource for Hedonic and Eudaimonic Wellbeing.” Current Opinion in Psychology, vol. 49, Dec. 2022, p. 101547, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101547. Elsevier. Accessed 27 Mar. 2025.

Juhl, Jacob, and Marios Biskas. “Nostalgia: An Impactful Social Emotion.” Current Opinion in Psychology, vol. 49, Feb. 2023, p. 101545, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101545. Elsevier. Accessed 27 Mar. 2025.

Lawless, Seph. “Seph Lawless.” Seph Lawless, https://sephlawless.com. Accessed 10 Apr. 2025.

Layous, Kristin, and Jaime L. Kurtz. “Nostalgia: A Potential Pathway to Greater Well-Being.” Current Opinion in Psychology, vol. 49, Feb. 2023, p. 101548, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101548. Elsevier. Accessed 14 Mar. 2025.

Lent, Ann, and Karen Kedrowski. Nostalgia and It’s the Same but Gen Z Is Traumatized so It’s Not. Iowa State University, 2024, https://dr.lib.iastate.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/99c8345c-5ff5-47d6-bf99-b6b8c0666ad8/content. Accessed 13 Mar. 2025.

Leunissen, Joost M. “Diamonds and Rust: The Affective Ambivalence of Nostalgia.” Current Opinion in Psychology, vol. 49, Dec. 2022, p. 101541, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101541. Elsevier. Accessed 10 Apr. 2025.

Miller, Lee J., and Wei Lu. “Gen Z to Outnumber Millennials within a Year: Demographic Trends.” Bloomberg.com, Bloomberg, 20 Aug. 2018, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-20/gen-z-to-outnumber-millennials-within-a-year-demographic-trends. Accessed 7 Apr. 2025.

Norberg, Johan. “False Nostalgia.” Reason, Reason Magazine, Jan. 2022, https://reason.com/2021/12/05/false-nostalgia. Accessed 10 Apr. 2025.

Parker, Kim, and Ruth Igielnik. “On the Cusp of Adulthood and Facing an Uncertain Future: What We Know about Gen Z so Far.” Pew Research Center, 14 May 2020, https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2020/05/14/on-the-cusp-of-adulthood-and-facing-an-uncertain-future-what-we-know-about-gen-z-so-far. Accessed 4 Apr. 2025.

Tyson, Alec, et al. “Gen Z, Millennials Stand out for Climate Change Activism, Social Media Engagement with Issue.” Pew Research Center, 26 May 2021, https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2021/05/26/gen-z-millennials-stand-out-for-climate-change-activism-social-media-engagement-with-issue. Accessed 10 Apr. 2025.

van Dijke, Marius, and Joost M. Leunissen. “Nostalgia in Organizations.” Current Opinion in Psychology, vol. 49, Feb. 2023, p. 101540, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2022.101540. Elsevier. Accessed 27 Mar. 2025.

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse