Role Models of Aging among Older Men: Strategies for Facilitating Change and Implications for Health Promotion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding later-life role model choice and motivations, particularly for older men in sport, exercise, and health contexts, is complex and heterogenous, making it difficult for health and exercise promotion initiatives. This qualitative study examined: (1) whether older men have aging role models, and if so, their characteristics; and (2) older men’s reasons for role model choice, or lack thereof, and how role models can influence meaningful change in perceptions and practices associated with aging, sport, exercise, and health. Through in-depth interviews and photo-elicitation with 19 Canadian men aged 75 years and over, thematic analysis determined two key themes: Role model choice, and Processes of role models facilitating change. Four key strategies for role models facilitating change in older men were determined: elite (biomedical) transcendence; valued exemplary endeavours; alliance connections; and disconnect and caveats. Ultimately, while promoting the biomedical achievements of role models may resonate with many older men, when applied too closely in sport or exercise contexts (e.g., using Masters athletes as role models), there is potential for unrealistic standards and overmedicalization that could miss uncovering the latent importance that older men place on the diverse experiences and perspectives of aging that go beyond traditional masculine ideals.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".