Threat or boost: Social comparison affects older people’s performance differently depending on task domain

Objectives. In this research, we investigate whether social comparison with younger people can result in either a stereotype-based threat or boost in older people’s performance. Methods. Study 1 used nationally representative data to establish domains of performance in which older people are either stereotypically disadvantaged or advantaged relative to younger people. Study 2 was an experiment to test how a potentially threatening versus control versus enhancing comparison with younger people would affect performance in negatively and positively stereotyped task domains. Results. As predicted, compared with the control condition, stereotype threat caused performance decrements in both task domains. This effect was partially mediated by anxiety. Moreover, the enhancing social comparison boosted performance, but only on a crossword task, a task on which older people’s abilities are favorably stereotyped. Discussion. The research demonstrates that a threatening comparison can result in underperformance by older people both in negatively and positively self-stereotyped task domains. It also demonstrates that social comparison with younger people can enhance older people’s performance in a positively stereotyped task domain. The implications for creating circumstances likely to enable older people to achieve their full potential are discussed

A Review and Meta-Analysis of Age-Based Stereotype Threat: Negative Stereotypes, Not Facts, Do the Damage.

Stereotype threat effects arise when an individual feels at risk of confirming a negative stereotype about their group and consequently underperforms on stereotype relevant tasks (Steele, 2010). Among older people, underperformance across cognitive and physical tasks is hypothesized to result from age-based stereotype threat (ABST) because of negative age-stereotypes regarding older adults’ competence. The present review and meta-analyses examine 22 published and 10 unpublished articles, including 82 effect sizes (N = 3882) investigating ABST on older people’s (Mage = 69.5) performance. The analysis revealed a significant small-to-medium effect of ABST (d = .28) and important moderators of the effect size. Specifically, older adults are more vulnerable to ABST when (a) stereotype-based rather than fact-based manipulations are used (d = .52); (b) when performance is tested using cognitive measures (d = .36); and (c) occurs reliably when the dependent variable is measured proximally to the manipulation. The review raises important theoretical and methodological issues, and areas for future research. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved

Supporting the Old but Neglecting the Young? The Two Faces of Ageism

Ageism is the most prevalent form of prejudice and is experienced by both older and younger people. Little is known about whether these experiences are interdependent or have common origins. We analyze data from 8,117 older (aged 70 and over) and 11,647 younger respondents (15–29 years) in representative samples from 29 countries in the European Social Survey. Using multilevel structural equation modeling, we test the hypothesis that older people are less likely, and younger people more likely, to suffer age discrimination if they live in a country with stronger structural support for older people. We also test the hypothesis that although stronger social norm against age discrimination reduce age discrimination suffered by older people it does not inhibit discrimination against younger people. These hypotheses are supported, and the results underline the neglected problem of ageism toward youth. Findings highlight that strategies for reducing age prejudice must address ageism as a multigenerational challenge, requiring attention to intergenerational cohesion and resource distribution between ages

Are they half as strong as they used to be? An experiment testing whether age-related social comparisons impair older people's hand grip strength and persistence

OBJECTIVE: To assess how age-related social comparisons, which are likely to arise inadvertently or deliberately during assessments, may affect older people's performance on tests that are used to assess their needs and capability. DESIGN: The study randomly assigned participants to a comparison with younger people or a no comparison condition and assessed hand grip strength and persistence. Gender, education, type of residence, arthritis and age were also recorded. SETTING: Age UK centres and senior's lunches in the South of England. PARTICIPANTS: An opportunity sample of 56 adults, with a mean age of 82.25 years. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Hand grip strength measured using a manual hand dynamometer and persistence of grip measured using a stopwatch. RESULTS: Comparison caused significantly worse performance measured by both strength (comparison =6.85 kg, 95% CI 4.19 kg to 9.5 kg, control group =11.07 kg, 95% CI 8.47 kg to 13.68 kg, OR =0.51, p=0.027) and persistence (comparison =8.36 s, 95% CI 5.44 s to 11.29 s; control group =12.57 s, 95% CI 9.7 s to 15.45 s, OR =0.49, p=0.045). These effects remained significant after accounting for differences in arthritis, gender, education and adjusting for population age norms. CONCLUSIONS: Due to the potential for age comparisons and negative stereotype activation during assessment of older people, such assessments may underestimate physical capability by up to 50%. Because age comparisons are endemic, this means that assessment tests may sometimes seriously underestimate older people's capacity and prognosis, which has implications for the way healthcare professionals treat them in terms of autonomy and dependency

The barriers to and enablers of positive attitudes to ageing and older people, at the societal and individual level

© Crown copyright 2015.In the light of social and economic challenges posed by rapid population ageing there is an increased need to understand ageism – how it is expressed and experienced, its consequences and the circumstances that contribute to more or less negative attitudes to age. Ageism is the most prevalent form of discrimination in the UK (Abrams et al., 2011a), estimated to cost the economy £31 billion per year (Citizens Advice, 2007). It restricts employment opportunities, and reduces workplace productivity and innovation (Swift et al., 2013). Ageism also results in inequality and social exclusion, reducing social cohesion and well-being (Abrams and Swift, 2012; Stuckelberger et al., 2012; Swift et al., 2012). Not only is ageism a barrier to the inclusion and full participation of older people in society, but it also affects everyone by obscuring our understanding of the ageing process. Moreover, by reinforcing negative stereotypes, ageism can even shape patterns of behaviour that are potentially detrimental to people’s self-interest (Lamont et al., 2015). Here we review national and some international research from the last 25 years to reveal what our core attitudes to ageing are and how they result in discrimination and other damaging consequences. We outline the prevalence of perceived age-based discrimination and its consequences for individuals and society, and then explore the individual and societal factors that contribute to more positive or negative attitudes to age and their application to reducing experiences of ageism. We conclude by considering areas that are likely to be key for policy, research and practice.Government Office for Scienc

Can caring create prejudice? An investigation of positive and negative intergenerational contact in care settings and the generalisation of blatant and subtle age prejudice to other older people

Caring is a positive social act, but can it result in negative attitudes towards those cared for, and towards others from their wider social group? Based on intergroup contact theory, we tested whether care workers’ (CWs) positive and negative contact with old-age care home residents (CHRs) predicts prejudiced attitudes towards that group, and whether this generalises to other older people. Fifty-six CWs were surveyed about their positive and negative contact with CHRs and their blatant and subtle at- titudes (humanness attributions) towards CHRs and older adults. We tested indirect paths from contact with CHRs to attitudes towards older adults via attitudes towards CHRs. Results showed that neither pos- itive nor negative contact generalised blatant ageism. However, the effect of negative, but not positive, contact on the denial of humanness to CHRs generalised to subtle ageism towards older adults. This ev- idence has practical implications for management of CWs’ work experiences and theoretical implications, suggesting that negative contact with a subgroup generalises the attribution of humanness to superor- dinate groups. Because it is difficult to identify and challenge subtle prejudices such as dehumanisation, it may be especially important to reduce negative contact