Ageism against Older Adults: How do Intersecting Identities Influence Perceptions of Ageist Behaviors?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most ageism research has focused on prejudice against older people without considering their multiple intersecting identities. We investigated perceptions of ageist acts that targeted older individuals with intersecting racial (Black/White) and gender identities (men/women). Both young (18-29) and older (65+) adult Americans evaluated the acceptability of a variety of instances of hostile and benevolent ageism. Replicating prior work, benevolent ageism was seen as more acceptable compared to hostile ageism, and young adults rated ageist acts as more acceptable than older adults. Small intersectional identity effects were observed such that young adult participants perceived older White men to be the most acceptable targets of hostile ageism. Our research suggests that ageism is viewed differently depending on the age of the perceiver and the type of behavior exhibited. These findings also suggest intersectional memberships should be considered, but further research is needed given the relatively small effect sizes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".