Spaces for Transitions in Intergenerational Childhood Experiences

This chapter focuses on exploring spaces given to children’s voices in the discourse of intergenerational interactions through a review of literature done systematically. Particular focus is given to voices of young children – where are the children’s voices in these interactions? How are they listened to? How are their voices collected? The decision to focus on children’s voices in the realm of intergenerational experiences draws from the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC, 1989) which upholds the view that children are competent, strong, active, participatory, meaning-makers, and fellow citizens that have a right to be involved in decisions affecting them and have the freedom to express their thoughts and opinions. Literature on intergenerational interactions was reviewed systematically through a PRISMA-inspired workflow process. Specific inclusion and exclusion criteria were utilised for database searches. Content analysis of the methodologies used in identified literature was conducted to see analyse recurring themes, trends or issues. A matrix has been developed and presented to summarise results. Results revealed potential spaces for transformations in intergenerational research to make a bigger space for younger children’s voices to be heard. A promising trend observed through an increase in use of qualitative participatory methodologies seems to be venue where children’s voices are acknowledged. This is a transitional and transformational space for intergenerational research with children, and not on or of them.


Introduction
In exploring spaces given to children's voices in the realm of intergenerational interactions through a review of literature done systematically, this chapter will discuss recurring themes concerning interactions of older adults and young children. What do we already know, and what else do we need to know? What spaces are available for these intergenerational interactions to happen, flourish and prosper? What transitions and transformations occur in these spaces? Voices of young children is given focus -what transitions and spaces are available for children's voices to be acted upon?

Intergenerational Interactions in Popular and Social Media
The topic of intergenerational learning and experiences particularly between younger children and older adults is one that is gaining more attention in the recent years. Browsing through social media platforms like Facebook, YouTube and even in online newspapers and magazines like Nordre Aker Budstikke in Norway and Independent.co.uk, there have been numerous features of intergenerational interactions of younger children and older adults from all over the world. Basing on the number of likes, the amount of comments and the number of times these features have been shared, it can easily be said that it is a topic that interests general public viewers. In fact, because of interest in the topic, two television shows were produced and aired primarily in United Kingdom. These are Channel 4's Old People's Home for 4-year olds, and BBC's Toddlers Who Took on Dementia, which aired in 2017 and 2018 respectively.

Old people's home for 4-year olds a Toddlers who took on dementia b
If four-year-olds and 84-year-olds work and play together, will it improve the health and happiness of the older group? Ten pre-schoolers welcome 11 pensioners into their classroom.
In a bold new experiment, a group of toddlers head to a dementia day-care centre to share three days of time and activities with adults in their 70s and 80s.
As the experimental questions (see Table 5.1) were stated in a way that called for children as variable and means to get the desired outcome and while older adult's health and well-being are as equally important, it would seem that children's voices are not given as much importance. Beyond being cute and entertaining for adults, where are the children's voices in these interactions? How are they listened to? How are their voices collected?

Intergenerational Interactions in Research
Growing interest in intergenerational interactions and experiences does not only exist in popular and social media. As part of their initiative to work towards achieving the 2030 Agenda and 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) set forth by their institution, United Nations has also included intergenerational work in their repertoire. Of the 17 SDGs, five are closely linked to intergenerational research: SDG 1 No Poverty, SDG 2 Zero Hunger, SDG 3 Good Health and Well-Being, SDG 4 Quality Education and SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions. With particular focus on the context families and family policies, these Sustainable Development Goals can be attained if different generations work with each other. Further, in the General Assembly resolution 73/144 adopted in 17 December 2018, it is explicitly stated that members states are encouraged to invest in inclusive, family-oriented policies and programmes, including early childhood development and education towards advancing social integration and intergenerational solidarity to support implementation of the 2030 Agenda.

Viewing Younger Children and the Older Adults
In searching for children's voices in this discourse, this review would like to highlight the young children's ability to participate in matters that involve them and their path on being to becoming. Congruently, the research would also like to recognise the younger adults' wisdom, strengths that they could contribute to the society, most especially to younger children. Both age groups are similar in that they have their own unique cultures that the other age group could benefit from, and that both age groups seek empowerment from their position as dependents of society (The TOY Consortium, 2013).
This review considers younger children and older adults to be in a sociocultural context where they prosper and make meaning through interactions with their environment and each other (James & Prout, 1990). Framed in a relational sociology of childhood, this chapter views children as active social agents, who participate in knowledge construction and daily experience of childhood (James & Prout, 1997a;James et al., 1998;Alanen & Mayall, 2001;Mayall, 2002;Alanen, 2009). In such a frame, children's points of views, opinions, perspectives, perceptions and aspirations are recognised and respected (Alanen, 2014). Further, in seeing children as more than just becoming, Uprichard (2008) has written about a perspective to view children as both 'being and becoming.' She wrote that "perceiving children as 'being and becoming' does not decrease children's agency, but increases it, as the onus of their agency is in both the present and future" (Uprichard, 2008, p. 311). In such a perspective, young children are viewed as agents who are deemed capable and are active authors of their own narratives and lived experiences (Garvis, Ødegaard, & Lemon, 2015).
For the purposes of this chapter, I will define some terminologies used. Intergenerational experiences refers to engagements between younger children and older adults and could be deemed as the stories lived and told by individuals as they are embedded within cultural, social, institutional, familial, political, and linguistic narratives (Clandinin, 2013). It also necessarily situates one in a social, cultural and historical situation with motives within activities and practices situated in traditions and cultures (Hedegaard & Fleer, 2008). Intergenerational experiences, then, from a narrative inquiry and cultural-historical points of views is an acknowledgement of the phenomenology of childhoodor childhoods, intentionally pluralised in order to highlight that there is no one universal childhood, but instead there are different social and cultural life worlds and experiences of individual children within that particular social space of childhood (Alanen, 2014). This terminology is used concurrently and alternatively with intergenerational interactions and intergenerational activities.
As this framework situates children in social, cultural and relational situations, settings and circumstances, and as such occurs naturally in a familial setting where generational ordering is necessarily in place, the discourse of intergenerational interactions of younger children and older adults is one that includes familial settings but also takes it further to include intentional nonfamilial intergenerational interactions. Accordingly, henceforth, older adults will refer to the members of the older generations, ages 50 years and above, regardless of their relationship with the younger children. This terminology was purposefully selected as it is deemed the more respectful term in reference to people of this age group (Walker & Gemeinschaften, 1993;UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, 1995;Falconer & O'Neill, 2007). On the other hand, younger children will refer to children in the earliest stage of the human life cycle and generational ordering, which typically includes children from birth until adolescence, encompassing early childhood and primary school years.
Particular to this study, we refer to voice as children's participation in intergenerational research where feedback was obtained from them and not just from adults. These voices can be oral/verbal but may also be in the form of body language captured in photos, drawings and video recordings during intergenerational interactions as represented in research.

Valuing the Various Ways Children Communicate
The decision to search for children's voices in the realm of intergenerational experiences draws from the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC, 1989). Ratified in most countries of the world, the UNCRC is a framework that has been the basis for changes in policy, research and practice in childhood studies. It plays a major role in how children are viewed and treated as there are stipulations as to what the role of the state, adults and of the children are (Hayes, 2002;Taylor, 2000). Article 16 of the UNCRC calls for protection of children, chiefly as regards their privacy and protection. While this is an important discourse, the UNCRC also upholds the view that children as being competent, strong, active, participatory, meaning-makers, and fellow citizens as highlighted in Article 12 and 13 in particular. These articles state that children have a right to be involved in decisions affecting them and their freedom to express their thoughts and opinions, as well as to receive information that is allowed by the law (UNCRC, 1989). These Articles of the UN Convention on the Rights of a Child have the potential to serve as an agent for change and action at policy level to give children the opportunity and a voice within society (Hayes, 2002).
In line with the transitional force in the past 20 years that saw a reconceptualisation of childhood studies, particularly in early childhood, there is now a focus on children's voices in research to better investigate their lived experiences (Einarsdóttir, 2014;Clark & Moss, 2011;Clark, Clark, 2007, 2010Harcourt & Mazzoni, 2012;Baird, 2013;Palaiologou, 2019). This transitional paradigm shift is particularly important especially since it has been noted that children continue to lack voice in policy and research contexts ( Pascal & Bertram, 2009), and most times, children 'have been the invisible and voiceless objects of concern, and not understood as competent, autonomous persons who have a point of view' (Smith & Taylor, 2000, p. ix). And while children's viewpoints are being sought and respected particularly in Nordic research, children's voices are still underrepresented despite claims of otherwise ( Emilson & Johansson, 2018).
Several systematic reviews of literature on intergenerational experiences have already been published. In 2013, a review of related literature was conducted by the Together Old and Young Consortium funded by the European Commission to examine intergenerational learning in seven European countries namely Ireland, Italy, Spain, Slovenia, the Netherlands, Poland and Portugal (The TOY Project Consortium, 2013). In their review, they discussed a phenomenon of growing separation between children and older adults, as well as the benefits intergenerational practices have for both young children and older adults. While their review included focus on interaction of younger children and older adults, there was not particular focus on children's voice. Rather, they described several intergenerational practices from the identified seven European countries.
Another group of researchers in Spain conducted a systematic review of related literature on the topic of intergenerational experiences. They focused primarily on the effectiveness of various intergenerational programmes by evaluating empirically based interventions, which they find have scarcely been done in the intergenerational context (Canedo-García et al., 2017). While their review methodology was largely variable analysis of intergenerational programmes, part of their findings encourage development and implementation of these programmes that would meet users' needs, break down communication barriers between generations and break down social isolation of age groups (Canedo-García et al., 2017).
Another review was published in 2017 to examine the benefits of intergenerational volunteering in long-term care (Blais et al., 2017). Their review framed interactions of youth volunteers, from high-schools and colleges, and older adults, and the perceived benefits and challenges of intergenerational volunteering in long-term-care homes in Canada. Another article in JIR sought a literature search on intergenerational learning programmes that follow conditions of the intergroup contact theory to reduce prejudice and achieve positive effects (Gendron et al., 2018). They found 10 programmes to analyse within the intergroup contact theory, which they deem is an appropriate theoretical framework to develop intergenerational programmes.
A review of different intergenerational care models that may inform the process of putting up an intergenerational care programme in Australia has also been published. They looked at a specific type of programme that involves caring for older adults and young children in a shared setting under the supervision of a formally trained caregiver where both the younger and older generations are receiving programmed care in an environment where activities and resources are shared between them, in Australia (Radford et al., 2016). They defined 'younger generations' as being 0-5 years old, while the 'elderly' were people 65+ years of age. Through the use of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines , they set forth criteria for their review and found three major intergenerational care model types -visitations, co-located, and single site (Radford et al., 2018). Visitations refer to intergenerational programmes across two separate institutions, typically with the younger group visiting the older group. For this type of programming to work in term of cost-effectiveness, the two institutions should be within close proximity with each other. The co-located type of intergenerational programming, on the other hand, can be further divided into two categories: co-located visitation, referring to care institutions that do not have specific and identified areas where intergenerational interactions can happen, and co-located shared space, where there are specific physical space as part of their facilities for intergenerational interactions to happen. These type of intergenerational programming benefits institutions in terms of shared overhead costs. However, Radford et al. (2016) pointed out that although there may be specific spaces allocated for unstructured intergenerational interactions, there is still a need for intentional and structured activities for more meaningful interactions to happen. The third type the review has identified is single-site, where intergenerational care is delivered in a single setting without a formal and structured [educational] programme underpinning interactions of the older and younger groups. Homes with groups or families of different generations can be considered part of this type. However, while this type of intergenerational setting offers practical solutions for care of both older and younger age-group, educational benefits are lost without formal, intentional and structured intergenerational programmes (Radford et al., 2016).
Another relevant systematic review of literature was conducted by a team in Torino, Italy summarising the effects of intergenerational programs and activities on both elderly and children (Gualano et al., 2018). They have considered papers reporting data about intergenerational programs involving older adults and children in the early years and in primary school. They have done their search in the PubMed and Scopus databases and summarised 10 studies discussing effects on children, and 17 studies discussing effects on the elderly. Their general conclusion yielded a positive impact on both the children and the elderly.
While all mentioned literature reviews have added important knowledge in the realm of intergenerational studies, most intergenerational reviews focus on intergenerational programmes -the development, effectiveness and types and models. A gap is seen in terms of intentionally seeking out a space for the end-users of these programmes as no review has focused on finding out spaces for children's voices to be heard. As such, in the succeeding portion of this chapter, there will be a discussion on a review of related literature done systematically focusing on these concerns.

Methodology
Focused on finding young children's voices in the discourse of intergenerational research as an identified space for transformation, this review set forth a process for selecting studies to review. In order to make the selection process be systematic, inspiration was taken from the work-flow of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Although primarily used in the medical field for reporting systematic reviews particularly for randomised medical trials or interventions, the proponents of PRISMA have created a checklist and a flow diagram focused on transparent reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses that can be used for systematic reviews in other academic fields . They have prescribed a work-flow for selecting studies into the review that has four parts -identification, screening, eligibility towards a decision for final inclusion. This work-flow allows for systematic sifting through the resources leading to the decision of which studies to include or not.

6.1
Databases Databases used for searching literature for this review have been selected based on Creswell's (2014) list of suggested databases. Additionally, search from these databases have been conducted with the guidance of a university research librarian for appropriate search terms and techniques. As such, databases hosted by EBSCO have been utilised which include the following: ERIC, Medline, Teacher Reference Center, CINAHL, SocIndex, Academic Search Elite. The databases searched were a mix of sources for pedagogy and health care.

6.2
Key Terms for Identification As above, with the guidance of a university research librarian, the following key terminologies and search strategies have been used for initial identification of articles: -S1: intergeneration* -S2: interaction* -S3: communicate* -S4: S2 or S3 -S5: S1 and S4 -S6: older adults or elderly or geriatric or geriatrics or aging or senior or seniors or older people -S7: S5 & S6 -S8: child* -S9: S7 and S8 -S10: limited to date published from 2000 to 2019 Search from the databases using these terminologies brought back 464 articles (see Figure 5.1). The database automatically removed duplicates (n = 235). Afterwards, these articles were further screened for eligibility through an abstract review (n = 229). This step excluded n = 169 articles for reasons enumerated below. A total number of n = 60 articles were included for content analysis of the methods of listening to children's voices.

6.3
Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria for Screening Databases used for searching literature for this review have been selected based on Creswell's (2014) list of suggested databases. Additionally, search figure 5.1 PRISMA-inspired work flow (based on Moher et al., 2009) from these databases have been conducted with the guidance of a university research librarian for appropriate search terms and techniques. As such, databases hosted by EBSCO have been utilised which include the following: ERIC, Medline, Teacher Reference Center, CINAHL, SocIndex, Academic Search Elite. The databases searched were a mix of sources for pedagogy and health care.
Articles that have been included in the synthesis (n = 60) had to have the following: -Presence of interaction between children (early years until primary years) and older adults. -Voices of the children were documented through their reported methodologies. Initially, literature that had primary school children interacting with older adults were excluded in hopes to make the systematic review more focused in the early childhood years, to the voices of the youngest children. However, upon further consideration and realisation that early childhood is often lumped together in just one category, then literature with children ages 0-13 to also include primary school aged children as part of young children. This decision was brought on from the position that these literature would still prove to be relevant because childhood is an element of social structure according to their ages (Qvortup, 1987, as cited in Alanen, 2009) which positions children as a separate social category that is interrelated to other social categories (Alanen, 2009). Further, not taking childhood as one social category may be difficult especially since there is a system of social ordering that pertains to children as a specific social category circumscribed in particular social locations from which they act and participate (Alanen, 2009). Including this social category is important as it is a nod to children's involvement in the daily construction of their own lives through their relationships with other people.
A total of 169 articles were excluded from being synthesised for the following reasons: -While children were involved in interactions, only voices of the older adults, institution staff, older adolescents, teenagers, college students, parents, young adults were sought. Articles that have included voices of older children in highschool and college have been excluded to concentrate on the voices of the youngest children. -Program profiles, program planning and their benefits were highlightedchildren were present, but their voices were not sought. -Some articles have been written in languages other than English have also been excluded because of the author's incapability to read Chinese, Japanese, French, Portuguese and Spanish.

6.4
Data Analysis Upon having identified which research to include in the synthesis of related literature through the process described above, content analysis mainly of the methodologies used was conducted to see whether or not there are recurring themes, trends or issues. In order to summarise data from all the reviews of related literature, the matrix below has been developed to include the data seeking out young children's voices in the discourse of intergenerational relationships (see Table 5.2).

6.5
Limitations of the Study Although the researcher has taken a PRISMA-inspired workflow as the methodological process used to find and select studies in the hope to reduce bias and have results that are more likely to produce reliable and accurate conclusions, this study acknowledges some limitations. First, this study is not a systematic review of related literature. As such, there may be databases including pertinent journal articles that have not been covered by the search criteria. Second, choices in the databases used for the search only yields journals included within their archives. Third, book chapters and other academic texts such as theses and dissertation manuscripts have not been included as a delimitation in the search criteria. Because of these limitations, this study does not claim to be a conclusive and in no way can be considered generalizable. Rather, it can be viewed as a preliminary review done systematically.

Younger Children's Voices
As the search for children's voices in the discourse of intergenerational experiences was conducted through a literature review, the first paradox jumped out from the article selection process. Despite having 464 journal articles to review, only 60 articles (13%) have reported including children's voices. The 60 journal articles that were included in the review were synthesised into the matrix as shown in Table 5.2.

7.2
Profile of Child Respondents: Age, Country, Kind of Setting While the data shows that the age range of children who participated in the reviewed articles were from two until 24 years of age, the most common age range was from six to 12 years old for both quantitative and qualitative methodologies. Three researches included two year-olds as their participants (Davis  Davis et al. (2008), they were reported to have more participatory roles with their siblings and grandparents for exploring intergenerational play even though they live distances apart from each other through the Magic Box activity. On the other hand, the 24-year olds were clustered with the younger group than the older group for the Photovoice methodology (Pace & Gavel, 2018). The review features articles from 18 countries -Australia, Canada, China, Ethiopia, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Japan, Nigeria, Sweden, United Kingdom, Taiwan, South Africa, Jerusalem, Italy, Brazil and USA. Twenty-six of the articles were from the USA, six came from Canada, five came from Japan, three from Australia and the UK. Brazil, Ethiopia, Finland, and Germany each had two articles, and the rest of the countries were represented by one article each.
Most of the data in the reviewed articles were collected single-sites where intergenerational interactions occurred for the reports but does not have an institutionalised intergenerational program in place. Primary schools are part of this group, making up 55% of the 60 articles included in the review. This finding is congruent to the most common age-range of the child respondents. The second most common research locale were shared-sites (23%), where intergenerational interaction happens intentionally. Community and home made up 12% and 10% of the articles respectively.

7.3
Year of Publication and Methodologies While there has been at least one article that includes children's voices in intergenerational interactions per year, it is noteworthy that the most significant increase in number of articles to include children's voices was observed in 2018. It also noticeable that although both quantitative and qualitative methodologies were used since 2000 until the present, 2018 also saw an increase in the use of qualitative methodologies, particularly of participatory approaches, to listen to children's voices. This also shows the increasing trend for this type of research, especially with young children.
Upon closer look on the methods used to include children's voices, it has been found that questionnaires, checklists were the most common, particularly for primary school children.
Different kinds of tests have been conducted, some of which are experimental in nature. These include the following: -Child-Adolescent facts on Aging Quiz (CAFAQ), -Questionnaire including Newman's Children's Views of Aging and Polizzi's Semantic Differential, -Children's Attitudes to the Elderly Interview (CATI), Another interesting finding of the data collected from the literature review was the field of study of the journals where they have been published. It is very noticeable that majority of the publications came from allied health medical professions and geriatric studies rather than from education and pedagogy. This finding confirms that intergenerational interactions has had a long history in the field of gerontology as discussed by Brownell and Resnick (2005) as they dissected the terminology's its etymology as against 'multigenerational.' Both terminologies are frequently used in the context of the study of old age, or the processes concerning older adults and ageing, intergenerational interactions involve discussions of understanding generational differences in an effort to bring generations together.
In the realm of social studies and pedagogy, the concept of 'generational ordering' (Alanen, 2001(Alanen, , 2009) may be used more frequently as regards childhood studies in relation to the older generations. The concept of generational ordering and its derivatives (generationing, generational order), is rooted in the premises of the new sociology of childhoods (Alanen, 2019). Effectively, literature that uses these terminologies and concepts, put children's voice and views in high regard, but also works with concepts of children's agency, and power relations. As such, this concept is more often than not applied in studying childhood cultures because it is seemingly focused on distinctions between figure 5.3 Methods used childhood and adulthood -what makes the generations separate and different from each other. However, intergenerationality is a concept of the shared and of intersectionality -finding meaning in the experiences coming about from interactions of generations. It is, therefore, a conscious decision that the terminology 'intergenerational' was chosen to frame the search of children's voices because it is in a field dominated by discourses often coming from perspectives concerning the well-being of older adults. This is an identified transitional and transformational space for childhood culture, the new relational sociology of children and phenomenology of childhoods to be analysed and make an impact to transform further research.

Discussion: The Way Forward
Overall, the results seem to indicate the following points and paradoxes, leading to potential spaces of transformations for children's voices to be heard in the discourse of intergenerational experiences.

On Landscapes and Places
Intergenerational experiences happen all over the world, as reflected by the different countries, contexts and settings included in this review. While there are more publications coming from one country, which is the USA, this does not discount articles coming from other countries. This is an indication of more potential countries for voices, particularly of young children, to be sought and be heard. Future research from different countries and contexts, and hence interactions in landscapes and global and local, or glocal artefacts, would add to this existing pool of knowledge. Glocal artefacts is part of the conceptualisation that though there may be globalisation discourse in place in a landscape, it does not necessarily penetrate every aspect of the local culture, traditions and views (Ødegaard, 2016).

8.2
On Making Bigger Space There is space for young children to be heard in intergenerational experiences. Currently, the review seems to indicate that space seeking out young children's voices in the intergenerational research arena is not as substantial and popular as seeking out older children and adult voices. But there is a space, and with more research focusing on seeking out young children's voices in the intergenerational field would be a transitional and transformational move towards a bigger space for participation of children in a discourse dominated by adults.

8.3
Repercussions for Pedagogical Practices Additionally, there is space for the intergenerational discourse within pedagogy. Seeing as intergenerational interactions are mostly discussed within the field of allied health professions, it is a space that practitioners in childhood institutions such as schools, communities and the home can participate in. It is a concept that is seemingly often taken for granted because families and homes are naturally multi-generational in nature, but intergenerational interactions would necessarily go beyond the closest institutions around children's lives, such as the school and community centres. There is a need to talk about repercussions of having intentional intergenerational interactions in pedagogical practices.

8.4
On Methodologies, and Research WITH and Not ON Them While there are still various tests, questionnaires and checklists being developed to examine children's attitudes, biases and responses, the increase in use of qualitative participatory methodologies in 2018 seems to be an indication of a transitional and transformational space where children's voices are acknowledged not just through the more traditional methods of listening (e.g. interviews, focus group discussions), but also through emerging multi-modal approaches such as through mapping, and the use of photography and videos. The use of a multi-modal methodologies such as narrative inquiry and visual methodologies in intergenerational experiences of younger children acknowledges the many different ways the younger children and even the older adults can communicate to fully understand their lived experiences and shed light to relationships and interactions (Garvis & Pramling, 2017). Particular to listening to younger children's voices, the visual narrative methodology has been applied by a number of researchers to hear infants' and children's voices (Ridgway, Li, & Quinones, 2016;Sikder & Fleer, 2015;White, 2011;Sumsion et al., 2014). White (2015) has utilised this methodology and described it in length in her book titled Introducing Dialogic Pedagogy Provocations for the Early Years. Inspired by Bakhtinian principles to dialogism, she speaks of the importance of engaging with polyphonic videos alongside transcripts of the conversations because meaning-making and language is always concerned with the social space between people and artefacts (White, 2015). There is potential to this methodology in intergenerational experiences as it is a nod towards the direction of intergenerational research WITH children, and not just ON and OF them. Another possibility is for younger children and older adults to engage in co-creative activities such as collaborative narratives where older adults can build on children's interest and experiences are by engaging them in co-narrating conversations (Ødegaard & Pramling, 2013). In doing so, both are engaged in a linguistic and cultural tool for meaning making, as well as empowering children to become agents of their own learning (Ødegaard & Pramling, 2013;Garvis, Ødegaard, & Lemon, 2015). Engaging in intergenerational experiences and activities is a matter of participation -of something that they have a right to voice out and be involved in as it directly affects them (UNCRC, 1989).
Another approach to listening to young children was born as a response to the call for social researchers to use research methodologies that aid in listening to young children's voices and to understand their lived experiences and that is the Mosaic Approach (Clark & Moss, 2011). This approach is an integrated way of listening that acknowledges both children and adults as coconstructors of meaning through a combination of visual and verbal methods (Clark & Moss, 2011). It is particularly helpful for doing research with younger children because it is a framework that uses different methods in recognition of the different languages and voices of children through the use of participatory activities to highlight the children's role as experts and agents in their lives (Clark & Moss, 2011). The Mosaic Approach regards children as having an active role in research and pedagogy. Clark (2005) discusses this shift in the view of children as she discusses the conception of the Mosaic Approach through the use of child-friendly methodologies to listen to children acknowledges their role and part in the society. Such methodologies also give children a venue to voice their concerns and participate in a wider context that has been dominated by adults far too long.

8.5
On Matters That Affect Them As also observed from the synthesis of the review, topics within the intergenerational research seeking out children's voices are varied. There are articles focused on planning out intergenerational programs, some discuss potential intergenerational activities and play. Children's perceptions, attitudes and biases against older adults were also observed to be of interest to researchers. However, some topics are results of emerging discourses in intergenerational experiences. Alongside discussions of global phenomenon that have affected and transformed lives of people, particularly of childhoods, all over the world such as industrialisation, digitalisation, migration, technology for communication emerge topics like kinship care, frequency of intergenerational contact, possible intergenerational play despite being physically distant, the need to make use of digital tools to communicate with each other. Even changes in play spaces in the neighbourhood have been explored to find out just how different physical spaces for play are throughout the years. Repercussions from this finding is the realisation that as these topics are often too complex for just one field of expertise to make light of, and hence intergenerational research would benefit from interdisciplinarity.

8.6
Space for Empirical Research Ultimately, the data collected from this review speaks of a space for explorative and possibly transitional and transformative empirical research that would pave a bigger discourse of intergenerationality in institutions beyond the home, in different contexts, and through the use of multi-modal creative methodologies to listen to children's and older adults' voices. Doing so would also push forth UN's 2030 Sustainable Development Goals and Agenda in local and global contexts.

Conclusion
To conclude, this chapter has described and discussed the process and results of conducting a review of related literature done systematically focusing on children's voices in intergenerational experiences. It was deemed necessary to give this review a space in the research project because of a lack of recent systematic reviews of research particularly focused on the intergenerational experiences of younger children. In addition to this, it was important to synthesise what is currently known regarding the topic because of evidence of growing interest in this topic in different social media platforms all over the world. Results of the review speak of potential spaces of transformations in intergenerational research to make a bigger space for younger children's voices to be heard.