Abstract
The study evaluated the association of modernization (at the macro/societal-level) and modernity (at the micro/individual-level) with feelings towards older vs. younger adults. Analysis was based on the fourth wave of the European Social Survey, which includes a rotated module on ageism. The sample consisted of 28 countries and a total of 54,988 respondents. The outcome was based on two affective items measuring explicit feelings towards older vs. younger adults. Hierarchical linear modeling was used in the analysis. A small portion of the variance was attributed to cross-country differences. There was a trend towards more positive feelings towards older adults compared to younger adults. The findings provide support to the claim that modernity is associated with reports of affective ageism, but only minimal support to a relationship between modernization and affective ageism.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 888-901 |
| Number of pages | 14 |
| Journal | Educational Gerontology |
| Volume | 39 |
| Issue number | 12 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Dec 2013 |
Bibliographical note
Funding Information:Analysis was based on the fourth round of the European Social Survey ([ESS]; http://www.euro-peansocialsurvey.org/). The ESS is a biennial multicountry, cross-sectional survey covering over 30 nations. It is funded jointly by the European Commission, the European Science Foundation, and academic funding bodies in each participating country. The ESS is composed of a core questionnaire and two rotating questionnaires. The core questionnaire is administered every round and concerns a variety of variables including media use, human values, demographics, and socioeconomics. One of the rotating modules of the fourth round, administered in 2008, focused on ageism (Abrams & Lima, 2007). This module is the basis of the present study. The ESS is led by a center coordinating team, a multinational scientific advisory board, small, multinational methods groups, and a sampling panel. One of the main advantages of the ESS concerns its vigorous attempts to ensure equality or equivalence in sampling and translation of questionnaires in order to allow for cross-national comparisons. Target population is defined as all persons aged 15 years or older residing in private households within the borders of the nation regardless of nationality, citizenship, language, or legal status (Hader & Lynn, 2007). Each national sample should achieve a simple random sample of at least 1,500 respondents and a target response rate of 70% or greater. All interviews are conducted face to face.
Funding
Analysis was based on the fourth round of the European Social Survey ([ESS]; http://www.euro-peansocialsurvey.org/). The ESS is a biennial multicountry, cross-sectional survey covering over 30 nations. It is funded jointly by the European Commission, the European Science Foundation, and academic funding bodies in each participating country. The ESS is composed of a core questionnaire and two rotating questionnaires. The core questionnaire is administered every round and concerns a variety of variables including media use, human values, demographics, and socioeconomics. One of the rotating modules of the fourth round, administered in 2008, focused on ageism (Abrams & Lima, 2007). This module is the basis of the present study. The ESS is led by a center coordinating team, a multinational scientific advisory board, small, multinational methods groups, and a sampling panel. One of the main advantages of the ESS concerns its vigorous attempts to ensure equality or equivalence in sampling and translation of questionnaires in order to allow for cross-national comparisons. Target population is defined as all persons aged 15 years or older residing in private households within the borders of the nation regardless of nationality, citizenship, language, or legal status (Hader & Lynn, 2007). Each national sample should achieve a simple random sample of at least 1,500 respondents and a target response rate of 70% or greater. All interviews are conducted face to face.
| Funders | Funder number |
|---|---|
| European Commission | |
| European Science Foundation |