MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3173254504 · doi:10.3138/utq.90.2.08

Manifestations of Internalized Ageism in Older Adult Learning

2021· article· en· W3173254504 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marvin Formosa

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Toronto Quarterly · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAging and Gerontology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPsychosocialFeelingSocial psychologySuccessful agingContext (archaeology)Social alienationDevelopmental psychologyAlienationGerontologyPsychotherapistMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While ageism can be understood as an unconscious defence mechanism against a feeling of apprehension toward ageing on behalf of young and middle-aged groups, older persons themselves are not exempt from such internalized and implicit psychological machinations. Internalized ageism constitutes an insidious form of ageism that compels older adults to embrace social norms that devalue or marginalize same-aged peers by either acting in ways that reinforce the youth norm by battling the visible markers of ageing such as grey hair and wrinkles or denying any commonality and camaraderie with same-aged peers. This article explores that interface between internalized ageism and older adult learning by analyzing one of its hallmark institutions, the University of the Third Age (U3A), in the context of psychosocial interventions that are utilized by older people to defuse or counterbalance the noxious effects of negative self-perceptions of ageing. Research evidence demonstrated that U3A members generate counter-stereotypes by constructing a “third age” mental imagery and positioning themselves firmly in it while also practicing self-differentiation strategies to ameliorate or even prevent the negative impact of internalized ageism on their self-esteem and confidence. The U3A not only functions to meet the expressive and coping needs of older persons but also serves as a safe haven and buffer zone for older persons to stretch their middle-aged identity and at the same time distance themselves from being labelled as members of the “old age” cohort.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.010
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.278 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Toronto QuarterlySame topicAging and Gerontology ResearchFrench-language works237,207