Scoping review separates meaning and purpose across retirement

A scoping review of 50 empirical studies involving 20,874 adults found that retirement research has assessed Meaning in Life far more often than Purpose in Life. While Meaning in Life was examined in 46 studies, only six used a dedicated instrument for Purpose in Life, indicating a marked imbalance in how the two constructs have been measured around retirement. The review examined adults aged 50 or older in pre-retirement, peri-retirement or early post-retirement phases, with early post-retirement defined as within five years.

Its evidence base comprised 31 qualitative studies, 16 quantitative studies and three mixed-methods studies. The authors used the scoping-review guidance of the Joanna Briggs Institute and the Arksey and O’Malley framework, and their protocol was registered on the Open Science Framework before screening. Four databases—PsycINFO, PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Science—were searched for studies published from 1995 through 2023, with the search updated in July 2026.

Three reviewers independently screened records, extracted data and assessed methodological quality using the 2018 Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Eligibility was limited to empirical investigations concerning adults in the specified stages of the retirement transition. One central result was semantic variety within the research literature.

The term “meaning” appeared in at least six semantic registers associated with different disciplinary traditions. The review therefore documented differences in how retirement researchers have conceptualized the word, rather than treating its use as uniform throughout the literature. The review distinguished Meaning in Life, defined as the perceived coherence and significance of a person’s existence, from Purpose in Life, defined as goal-directed intentions that organize future-oriented behaviour.

Most studies addressed meaning-related constructs, whereas purpose was rarely assessed with an instrument dedicated to it. The reported imbalance concerns measurement: the source summary does not show a corresponding difference in how the constructs were treated as independent variables. Longitudinal quantitative evidence indicated population-level stability in meaning-related constructs.

In contrast, qualitative studies reported existential disruption among specific subgroups. The authors interpreted these findings as potentially compatible: population averages can remain stable even when some people experience disruption during retirement. The supplied findings do not identify the particular subgroups or establish that retirement itself caused the reported disruption.

Based on the patterns in the evidence, the authors proposed a preliminary “Engine-Scaffold” framework. In this speculative model, Purpose in Life serves as a motivational driver of engagement, while Meaning in Life acts as an integrative structure through which experiences are incorporated into a coherent life narrative. The framework is presented as a hypothesis for reconciling the quantitative and qualitative findings, not as a tested causal model.

The authors conclude that retirement research would benefit from clearer conceptual and measurement distinctions between meaning and purpose. They explicitly state that the Engine-Scaffold framework requires validation through longitudinal designs, cross-cultural samples and randomized trials. As a scoping review, the study maps and categorizes evidence across the retirement transition; it does not report an intervention effect, a single pooled estimate or proof that either construct determines the other.

Subject of Research: Conceptualization and measurement of Meaning in Life and Purpose in Life across the retirement transition

Article Title: Meaning in life and purpose in life as distinct constructs in the retirement transition: a scoping review

Article References: Sánchez-Izquierdo, M., Mota, R., & Oliveros, L. (2026). Meaning in life and purpose in life as distinct constructs in the retirement transition: a scoping review. BMC Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-026-05276-w

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1186/s40359-026-05276-w

Keywords: retirement transition, Meaning in Life, Purpose in Life, scoping review, psychology, adults aged 50 and older, existential disruption, psychological well-being, construct validity, mixed methods, Meaning, life