MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408720447 · doi:10.1080/00224545.2025.2479777

The relation of implicit age bias based on negative age stereotypes to the American state prevalence of older adult Alzheimer’s disease

2025· article· en· W4408720447 on OpenAlexaff
Stewart J. H. McCann

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Social Psychology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAging and Gerontology Research
Canadian institutionsCape Breton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiseasePsychologyGerontologyRelation (database)MedicineClinical psychologyInternal medicineComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study determined the relation of Implicit Age Bias among respondents aged 20–59 years of age to the 2020 Alzheimer’s disease (AD) prevalence among residents 65 years and over with the 48 contiguous American states as analytic units. This implicit measure of state ambient ageism correlated .69 with state AD prevalence and persisted in multiple regression equations considering several controls including older adult poverty rate, high school graduation, bachelor’s degree attainment, and multiple chronic conditions. Based on stereotype embodiment theory, the assumption is that the influence of external state-level age bias combined with the personal experiences of state residents leads to the general internalization of negative age stereotypes and ultimately to higher state AD prevalence. The speculation is that such internalization at the individual level leads to adoption of unhealthy behaviors and stress accumulation that eventually produces immunological deficiencies, infections, and inflammation conducive to AD onset and progression.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.849
Threshold uncertainty score0.416

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.374 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Social PsychologySame topicAging and Gerontology ResearchFrench-language works237,207