Bibliographic record
Abstract
"The purpose of this study was to identify predictors of ageism. Ageism occurs when demeaning attitudes are directed toward individuals in a certain age group. Several theories have been postulated as to why ageism towards older adults occurs, such as contact theory (i.e., the quantity and quality of contact with older adults), terror management theory (i.e., anxiety and fear of mortality), and modernization theory (i.e., a belief that the skills of older adults are obsolete). Research in this area has selectively tested different theories of ageism; however, these studies have failed to examine multiple theories within one model. The current study examined contact theory, terror management theory, and modernization theory with respect to ageism. We examined survey data from 291 undergraduate students at a small university in Atlantic Canada. The survey was conducted online. Demographic characteristics, contact with grandparents and non-related older adults, and quality of interactions were measured using self-generated questionnaires. In addition, measures of personality, gratitude, ageing anxiety, and fear of death were administered. Also, older adults’ knowledge, burden/contributions to family/society, and attitudes toward the elderly were measured. A hierarchical multiple linear regression analysis was conducted predicting ageist attitudes. The overall model was statistically significant and accounted for 63% of the variance. Both age and gender were found to be significant predictors; younger adults and men had higher scores on ageism. As well, participants who reported lower quality of contact with grandparents during childhood, and lower scores on their current quality of contact with older adults were more likely to endorse ageist attitudes. Of the five personality factors, lower scores on Agreeableness were a significant predictor. Finally, anxiety towards ageing (measuring terror management theory) and perceiving older adults as a burden (measuring modernization theory) predicted ageism. According to these findings, all ageism theories had an impact on ageist attitudes, but modernization theory contributed the most unique variance to the model. Overall, further research should continue to investigate the multidimensional construct of ageism."
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".