MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6998470774

Ageism in the Workplace and Labour Market: The Experiences of Older Adults

2023· dissertation· en· W6998470774 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMacSphere (McMaster University) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRetirement, Disability, and Employment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThematic analysisQualitative researchDiversity (politics)Context (archaeology)Lived experienceCoping (psychology)Photo elicitationOlder people
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The traditional career arc is often organized around the assumption that the most productive “work years” are before the age of 65. As such, workplaces have the potential to engage in harmful age discrimination. As scholarly literature based in the Canadian context has been quite limited, this study aimed to gain a qualitative understanding of older Ontario workers’ lived experiences of ageism. Semi-structured interviews with 10 older adults (55+) who were either currently employed, recently retired, or looking to gain re-entry into the labour market were conducted. Using Braun and Clarke’s (2006) six-stage framework for thematic analysis, five key themes that each mediate the varying experience of ageism in the workplace and labour market were identified. Participants highlighted the complex nature of the ageist interactions as well as the gamut of psycho-social consequences that they have faced. Participants also discussed several different types of preferred coping mechanisms. Intersections with other forms of discrimination and the degree to which COVID-19 has impacted participants were also central in shaping the experiences of ageism in the workplace. The findings from this research shed light on the lived experiences of those who have faced age-based discrimination in the labour market, an area of research that is currently lacking. Additionally, results have the ability to inform employers’ equity, diversity and inclusion practices and policies that often do not include age-related issues. The findings from this thesis are positioned in terms of their implications for future research and policy. The results of this thesis contribute substantively to the current social gerontological literature. This work provides insight into the importance of age in the workplace and labour market, as well as the role that age segregation throughout the life course plays in the perpetuation of ageist attitudes and behaviours throughout one’s working life.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.157
Threshold uncertainty score0.312

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.010
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMacSphere (McMaster University)Same topicRetirement, Disability, and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207