Ageism toward older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic: Intergenerational conflict and support

IF 4 1区 社会学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL Journal of Social Issues Pub Date : 2022-09-24 DOI:10.1111/josi.12554
Alina Sutter, Mamta Vaswani, Patrick Denice, Kate H. Choi, Joanie Bouchard, Victoria M. Esses
{"title":"Ageism toward older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic: Intergenerational conflict and support","authors":"Alina Sutter,&nbsp;Mamta Vaswani,&nbsp;Patrick Denice,&nbsp;Kate H. Choi,&nbsp;Joanie Bouchard,&nbsp;Victoria M. Esses","doi":"10.1111/josi.12554","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>A cross-national representative survey in Canada and the U.S. examined ageism toward older individuals during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, including ageist consumption stereotypes and perceptions of older people's competence and warmth. We also investigated predictors of ageism, including economic and health threat, social dominance orientation, individualism and collectivism, social distancing beliefs, and demographics. In both countries, younger adults were more likely to hold ageist consumption stereotypes, demonstrating intergenerational conflict about the resources being used by older people. Similarly, young adults provided older people with the lowest competence and warmth scores, though adults of all ages rated older individuals as more warm than competent. Particularly among younger individuals, beliefs about group-based dominance hierarchies, the importance of competition, and the costs of social distancing predicted greater endorsement, whereas beliefs about interdependence and the importance of sacrificing for the collective good predicted lower endorsement of ageist consumption stereotypes. Support for group-based inequality predicted lower perceived competence and warmth of older individuals, whereas beliefs about interdependence and the importance of sacrificing for the collective good predicted higher perceived competence and warmth of older individuals. Implications for policies and practices to reduce intergenerational conflict and ageist perceptions of older individuals are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":17008,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Social Issues","volume":"78 4","pages":"815-841"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Social Issues","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/josi.12554","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

Abstract

A cross-national representative survey in Canada and the U.S. examined ageism toward older individuals during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, including ageist consumption stereotypes and perceptions of older people's competence and warmth. We also investigated predictors of ageism, including economic and health threat, social dominance orientation, individualism and collectivism, social distancing beliefs, and demographics. In both countries, younger adults were more likely to hold ageist consumption stereotypes, demonstrating intergenerational conflict about the resources being used by older people. Similarly, young adults provided older people with the lowest competence and warmth scores, though adults of all ages rated older individuals as more warm than competent. Particularly among younger individuals, beliefs about group-based dominance hierarchies, the importance of competition, and the costs of social distancing predicted greater endorsement, whereas beliefs about interdependence and the importance of sacrificing for the collective good predicted lower endorsement of ageist consumption stereotypes. Support for group-based inequality predicted lower perceived competence and warmth of older individuals, whereas beliefs about interdependence and the importance of sacrificing for the collective good predicted higher perceived competence and warmth of older individuals. Implications for policies and practices to reduce intergenerational conflict and ageist perceptions of older individuals are discussed.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
COVID-19大流行期间对老年人的年龄歧视:代际冲突与支持
在加拿大和美国进行的一项具有跨国代表性的调查调查了2019冠状病毒病大流行第一年对老年人的年龄歧视,包括年龄歧视消费刻板印象以及对老年人能力和热情的看法。我们还调查了年龄歧视的预测因素,包括经济和健康威胁、社会支配取向、个人主义和集体主义、社会距离信念和人口统计学。在这两个国家,年轻人更有可能持有年龄歧视的消费刻板印象,这表明了代际间关于老年人使用资源的冲突。同样,年轻人给老年人的能力和热情得分最低,尽管所有年龄段的成年人都认为老年人更热情而不是更有能力。特别是在年轻人中,关于基于群体的统治等级、竞争的重要性和社会距离成本的信念预示着更大的支持,而关于相互依存和为集体利益牺牲的重要性的信念预示着对年龄歧视消费刻板印象的更低支持。支持基于群体的不平等预示着老年人较低的感知能力和温暖度,而相互依存和为集体利益牺牲的重要性的信念预示着老年人较高的感知能力和温暖度。讨论了减少代际冲突和老年人年龄歧视观念的政策和做法的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.70
自引率
7.70%
发文量
73
期刊介绍: Published for The Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues (SPSSI), the Journal of Social Issues (JSI) brings behavioral and social science theory, empirical evidence, and practice to bear on human and social problems. Each issue of the journal focuses on a single topic - recent issues, for example, have addressed poverty, housing and health; privacy as a social and psychological concern; youth and violence; and the impact of social class on education.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Challenging the Status-Quo with Practical Theory: Introduction to John T. Jost's Kurt Lewin Award Address From oppressive to affirmative: Situating the health and well-being of LGBTIQ+ people as impacted by systemic and structural transitions in Russia, Turkey, Pakistan, and India Reimagining LGBTIQ+ research – Acknowledging differences across subpopulations, methods, and countries The damaging legacy of damage-centered LGBTIQ+ research: Implications for healthcare and LGBTIQ+ health
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1