There was a recent meta-analysis of hundredsof such studies. Such analyses Ageism comes from negative stereotypes. However
we hold many stereotypes of people. We will only use the generic “old”
stereotype in the absence of other information. Is ageism based on the roles
old people play rather than their age?
10 Minute Read
Subscribed
There are hundreds of studieslooking at ageism. Experimental studies looking at hiring decisions using
artificial resumes. Analysis is done of medical treatment regimens of the young
and the old. Performance evaluation and counselling are studied. There are
studies about perceived memory loss. All suggest that individuals are
discriminated against based on their age. The assumption is that the
discrimination happens because of prejudice. That comes from a negative
stereotype.
“pool” the results of all thestudies to look for robust patterns across them. It raised the
question of whether age was not the key variable after all.
The Nature of Ageism.
Looking across all studies it isclear that what we call “ageism” is multi-dimensional. Different studies have
used a collection of different measures.
EVALUATION measures such as judgements of whether people are “generous” or
“friendly”.
- COMPETENCE measures such as is someone “intelligent” or “a good decision maker”
- ATTRACTIVENESS measures such as “pretty” or “wrinkled”
- BEHAVIOUR measures of whether the respondent would “like to spend time with that
person” - AGE STEREOTYPE measures such as describing an older person as “old fashioned”
or “talks about the past” - All have been used to measurewhat we call ageism. Some alone but often in different combinations.
The “Combined View”
The meta analysis put all thestudies together and used all measures. They found ageism. Across all
five dimensions but to a different degree. Older people were viewed more
negatively compared to “the young”. The biggest negative biases were STEREOTYPE
beliefs and ATTRACTIVENESS. These are very descriptive. There were smaller
biases around action orientated prejudice, such as BEHAVIOUR and indeed
EVALUATION. COMPETENCE sat somewhere in the middle.
Perceptions of older adults aretherefore complex and multi-dimensional. Face evaluations of stereotypes
or attractiveness certainly show age bias. Less so for actual behavioural
intentions. The aggregate numbers may be disguising the reality. To further
understand ageism we need to understand the person doing the rating. We also
need to understand the nature of “the target” they are rating . Different
raters seem to have different degrees of ageism. Different types of targets
create different responses.
The Nature of the Rater
In in a previous Newsletter welooked at ageism over a lifespan from infant to grave. Older adults see fewer
differences between young and old (See Newsletter #099 “Age and Ageism”). In
this meta analysis young adults rate older ones down on COMPETENCE and
BEHAVIOUR. This is consistent with social identity theory. To the extent that
the young see themselves as a group called “the young” they will want their
group to be the best. They will thus “knock” any rival age group. Similarly
middle aged groups rate COMPETENCE and EVALUATION down for the old.
Women exhibit less ageist biasthan men. They have smaller differences between young and old scores.
Newsletter #099 suggested why. A disproportionate amount of care for the
elderly is contributed by women. Ageism is in the mind of the beholder and we
need to understand their characteristics.
The Target
If the target is female is theageism worse? Some studies duck the issue by specifying an “old person”. Those
that do provide a specification give us an interesting insight. Across most
dimensions of ageism women do suffer more. They are less highly rated than men.
On COMPETENCE ratings, there is little difference when rating older men and
women. This may not be as good news as it sounds. The sexist stereotype imbues
men with competency. They have agency. But when they retire they are thought to
lose that agency. However grim the idea might be, the men may have only “come
down” to the level of a woman.
Role NOT Age
This meta-analysis raises a morefundamental proposition. As the authors put it:
“Our analysis supportsour contention that it is not growing old, per se, that produces negative
perceptions but rather the role that older adults occupy.”
This conclusion comes from theiranalysis of the way that the “target” was described in different studies. This
had an impact on the resultant ageism. Was the question “Think of an old person
and answer these questions”. Was it instead “Think of a seventy year old”. Was
it an “old fellow employee” or an “old doctor”. Many of the studies they
analysed gave a lot more details of the target.
What they found was that themore detail given the smaller was the bias against the old. This is consistent
with earlier Newsletters. The generic stereotype of “the old” will only be used
in the absence of any other information. It can be modified with “counter
stereotype” information (see Newsletter #091 “..isms”). Describing someone’s
role conveys information about their personality and competence. There is a
stereotype for “a worker” or “a doctor”. No matter who fills the role its
stereotype rubs off on them. An older doctor will have both stereotypes and
ageism may be “diluted”.
Is Ageism Ageist?
By the very natural of the wayour mind categorizes we will have multiple stereotypes of people.. To assume
that there is only one “old” stereotype is to be ageist! We will only use our
most generic stereotype in the absence any other clues. Given clues we might
apply “the John Wayne Conservative” stereotype. We could use “the Liberal
matriarch” or “the Perfect Grandparents”. If we are more negative it might be
the “Shrew/Curmudgeon” or “The Inflexible Senior”.
All the data shows that if askedto rate ourselves we will make it more positive than the rest of “the old”. Our
own stereotype is very personal.
Does Ageism Really Exist?
Older people sufferdiscrimination. There is enough evidence from all aspects of life to say that
this is true. These Newsletters argue that firms discriminate against older
consumers. Discrimination and prejudice are bad for the “target”. They can
affect health and longevity.
Can we unpick this further tounderstand why discrimination happens? Is it simply the the passage of
chronological time? Is it instead the roles that old people play in the “play
of life”? We do not know. However the remedy is the same irrespective of the
detailed diagnosis. Older people need to be given valued roles to play. They
can be work roles. They can be social roles and the can be family roles.