research paper on age discrimination in the workplace

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Published: 11 February 2021

Age discrimination in the workplace hurts us all

• Joo Yeoun Suh   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-1692-5959 1  

Nature Aging volume  1 ,  page 147 ( 2021 ) Cite this article

23k Accesses

3 Citations

19 Altmetric

Metrics details

When older workers are discriminated against, everyone is affected. Age discrimination negatively impacts not only individual workers but also their families and the broader economy, argues Joo Yeoun Suh.

As COVID-19 spreads throughout the United States and the rest of the world, the resulting disruptions to the economy mean that it is highly likely the incidence of age discrimination will increase. This may include employers laying off older staff members or not considering older candidates when rehiring. This short-term thinking ignores long-term consequences that will affect people of all ages.

Age discrimination takes an enormous toll on individual workers and their families, but it also has a substantial impact on the economy. According to the AARP’s recent report ‘ The Economic Impact of Age Discrimination ’, bias against older workers cost the US economy an estimated US$850 billion in gross domestic product (GDP), 8.6 million jobs and US$545 billion in lost wages and salaries in 2018 alone.

Meanwhile, previous experience points to an impending surge in age discrimination issues stemming from the current economic downturn. During the 2007–2009 Great Recession, age discrimination complaints related to hiring and firing increased by 3.4% and 1.4% , respectively, in concert with each percentage point increase in monthly unemployment rates. Unfortunately, the contraction the economy is undergoing as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic is even worse than that of the Great Recession.

Many older people believe that their age is a disadvantage when looking for a job. Evidence suggests that older job applicants get fewer callbacks than their younger counterparts with comparable resumes, contributing to extended periods of unemployment for many 50-plus jobseekers. This is especially true for women and minoritized racial groups, as incidents of age discrimination in the workplace often intersect with gender and racial discrimination. The reality is that those most likely to be affected by age discrimination are those least able to afford it. Lower-income workers may have fewer options to switch jobs, and historically disadvantaged racial and ethnic groups are more likely than others to feel trapped in their present role.

For months now, we have been seeing the impact of the pandemic on employment, with record-breaking numbers of unemployment claims filed in April and May of 2020 in the US. It is highly likely that age discrimination will persist after the pandemic if employers do not take steps to address it. To counteract these trends, federal and state anti-age discrimination laws must be vigorously enforced. Beyond that, we need to make changes in the way workplaces operate — changes that will help in the near term but will signal a permanent shift as well. Companies should implement robust practices that promote age-diverse work environments, and their workers of all ages should be provided the apprenticeship opportunities they need to thrive in the workplace as they age.

Access to job-protected paid sick leave or paid family leave will help older workers stay employed during the current health and economic crisis. Some states have temporarily broadened access to paid sick leave in response to the virus, and several major companies have taken action to provide their employees with paid sick leave to allow those who feel ill to stay home. Paid family leave is also important if a family member tests positive for COVID-19, potentially creating a need for quarantine and family caregiving.

Employers should consider how to make workplaces truly embrace age diversity and inclusion. They would be wise to do so, even from a business perspective. There are strong economic benefits for businesses to make such changes, including that an age-diverse workforce gives companies more insight into age-diverse marketplaces. AARP’s initiative, ‘ Living, Learning and Earning Longer ’, a collaboration with the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the World Economic Forum (WEF), advances the business case for age diversity and highlights promising practices from around the world. Efforts to cultivate multigenerational workforces, which span technology training and sharing career experiences and skills, have clear value for employers and employees alike.

If we are to benefit from the value that older workers bring to the workforce, businesses will need to make a serious commitment to concepts like the multigenerational workforce. Global executives are beginning to recognize that multigenerational workforces are key to business growth and success. However, more than half of global companies still do not include age in their company’s diversity and inclusion policy. Clearly more needs to be done to align systems to better respond to the demographics at large. Efforts to do so are necessary to create inclusive workplaces that take active steps to enable employees to realize their full and unique potential.

Company-sponsored programs that promote age diversity and inclusion in tangible ways would have encouraged 60% of those aged 50-plus who retired because of age discrimination to remain in the workforce longer . There is a compelling case for increasing age inclusion in the workforce beyond meeting legal mandates such as the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967. People are living longer and either want or need to continue working. Providing these people with access to incomes ultimately creates a population with the resources to continue consuming and generating impact on the economy. But perceptions that prevent the hiring and advancement of older workers need to shift in order for these benefits to be captured.

This is an astoundingly difficult time for employees and employers alike. As we fight against COVID-19, we must not lose sight of older workers. With the skills and knowledge they’ve acquired over a lifetime, they can make enormous contributions to the work of pushing national and global economies toward recovery.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Thought Leadership, Policy Research and International (PRI), AARP, Washington DC, USA

Joo Yeoun Suh

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joo Yeoun Suh .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The author declares no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Suh, J.Y. Age discrimination in the workplace hurts us all. Nat Aging 1 , 147 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43587-020-00023-1

Download citation

Published : 11 February 2021

Issue Date : February 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s43587-020-00023-1

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Achieving a three-dimensional longevity dividend.

• Andrew J. Scott

Nature Aging (2021)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

The impact of age stereotypes and age norms on employees’ retirement choices: a neglected aspect of research on extended working lives.

• 1 School of Social Policy, Sociology and Social Research, University of Kent, Canterbury, United Kingdom
• 2 Department of Sociology, VU Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands

This article examines how older workers employ internalized age norms and perceptions when thinking about extending their working lives or retirement timing. It draws on semi-structured interviews with employees ( n = 104) and line managers, human resource managers and occupational health specialists ( n = 52) from four organisations in the United Kingdom. Previous research has demonstrated discrimination against older workers but this is a limiting view of the impact that ageism may have in the work setting. Individuals are likely to internalize age norms as older people have lived in social contexts in which negative images of what it means to be “old” are prevalent. These age perceptions are frequently normalized (taken for granted) in organisations and condition how people are managed and crucially how they manage themselves . How older workers and managers think and talk about age is another dynamic feature of decision making about retirement with implications for extending working lives. Amongst our respondents it was widely assumed that older age would come with worse health—what is more generally called the decline narrative - which served both as a motivation for individuals to leave employment to maximize enjoyment of their remaining years in good health as well as a motivation for some other individuals to stay employed in order to prevent health problems that might occur from an inactive retirement. Age norms also told some employees they were now “too old” for their job, to change job, for training and/or promotion and that they should leave that “to the younger ones”—what we call a sense of intergenerational disentitlement. The implications of these processes for the extending working lives agenda are discussed.

Introduction

In this article we address how age relations in organisations impact on the willingness of older workers to extend their working lives. Internationally, an important policy phrase has been “live longer, work longer” ( OECD, 2006 ; Street and Ní Léime, 2020 ). Policymakers are trying to stimulate older people to extend their working lives, for example in the context of the United Kingdom (UK) by abolishing mandatory retirement ages, increasing the State Pension Age, and by introducing age discrimination legislation (see e.g., ILC-UK, 2017 , and Lain, 2016 , for an overview). These policies are introduced in response to predicted increased population aging and worries about increasing dependency ratios and the affordability of welfare states. There are various problems with this policy narrative as well as its proposed solutions, including that it appears to be a “one-size-fits-all” approach that ignores the different realities of various groups of older workers (for more detail see e.g., Street and Ní Léime, 2020 ). Another issue is that such policy changes occur in social contexts of considerable ageism.

Ageism is commonplace and embedded at all levels: in public policy narratives when talking about older workers, in popular narratives about baby boomers stealing prosperity from younger generations; in organisational regimes which favor the ideal fit and healthy worker (aka not “the old”) and in workplace banter about older workers being put out to pasture. Although there is a long history of research that shows that negative images of older workers are related to discrimination against these employees (see e.g., Chiu et al., 2001 ; Macnicol, 2006 ; Hurd Clarke and Korotchenko 2016 ; Earl et al., 2018 ), there is less attention to how older workers may themselves make labor market decisions based on internalization of these narratives. Recent reviews have asked for more qualitative research on ageism ( Harris et al., 2018 ) and we seek to begin to address this gap in the literature.

Theoretical Considerations

We are seeking to extend our understanding of various components that are part of ageism. Ageism involves active discrimination, but also stereotyping and age norms. The latter two may operate against people as well as being internalized by those subject to them. It is typical in organisational studies to research ageism as perpetrated by managers against employees (for example, Chui et al., 2001 ; Henkens, 2005 ; for an overview of the workplace literature see Naegele et al., 2018 ). Whilst there is evidence for discriminatory behavior by managers against older (and younger) employees this is a limiting view of the impact that ageism may have in the work setting.

Conceptually we see “age” “as a socially and culturally constructed category” ( Krekula et al., 2018 , p.37; see also Calasanti and Slevin, 2001 ; Calasanti, 2020 ). Regarding older workers, we need to understand how age is constructed and performed in the workplace. Age stereotypes identify what is routinely attributed to particular age groups. Prevalent stereotypes about older workers include that they are “(a) less motivated, (b) generally less willing to participate in training and career development, (c) more resistant and less willing to change, (d) less trusting, (e) less healthy, and (f) more vulnerable to work-family imbalance” ( Ng and Feldman, 2012 , p. 821; see also Posthuma and Campion, 2009 ). In their meta-analysis, Ng and Feldman (2012) only found some evidence for (b), though this does not say why they would be less willing to participate in training and career development. Hurd Clarke and Korotchenko (2016) summarize existing literature as follows: “the research suggests that ageism is often deeply internalized as individuals accept stereotypes that depict later life as a time of poor health, cognitive impairment, dependence, lack of productivity and social disengagement” (p. 1759). Part of this is an internalized health-decline-narrative, which has been referred to as “health pessimism” (see e.g., Brown and Vickerstaff, 2011 ). It has been claimed that because workers themselves believe the stereotypes, many cases of age discrimination go unnoticed ( Laczko and Phillipson, 1990 ). Recent research suggests that stereotypes about motivation, mental and physical health remain very persistent ( Kleissner and Jahn, 2020 ) and age and health perceptions might also have an impact on older workers’ motivations to continue or leave work ( Van der Horst, 2019 ).

Next to age stereotypes, age norms (at which age should you do what?) are also important to take into account. In an employment context, ageist ideas will play out in interpersonal interactions but also institutionally through policies and routine practices ( Martin et al., 2014 ; see also Krekula (2009) on age coding practices). Age norms are frequently normalized (taken for granted) in organisations and condition how people are managed and how they manage themselves. Age norms are related to how people manage themselves because they will inform people’s understanding of their own age and its implications in the work context. Ageism exists through social relations rather than primarily being a characteristic of individual behavior (cf. Van der Horst and Vickerstaff, 2021 :4), which is exemplified by the fact that: “older workers” are only “old” in relation to other presumably “younger workers” and vice versa. The rise of narratives about intergenerational fairness (see Willetts, 2010 ; Wildman et al., 2021 ) may feed into concerns about older workers job blocking younger generations. This may in turn have increased the impact of age norms on labor market considerations in recent years.

Few studies have specifically researched the impact of internalized ageism on older workers but some studies do refer to cases of self-exclusion or what Romaioli and Contarello (2019) in a different context have referred to as a self-sabotage narrative: being “too old for”. Minichiello et al. (2000) show with an Australian sample that “older people may adjust their lives so as to accommodate problems they encounter” and that “older people may simply “drop things out of their life” once access becomes difficult rather than lobby for improved resources” (p. 263), Gaillard and Desmette (2010) showed using a Belgian sample that positive stereotypes of older workers were related to lower early retirement intentions and a higher motivation to learn and develop, and in 2008 that identifying as an “older worker” was related to higher early retirement intentions ( Desmette and Gaillard, 2008 ). Brown and Vickerstaff (2011) suggested that health pessimism may be a factor in retirement planning.

The main aim of this article is a qualitative exploration of the role of internalized age stereotypes and norms in employment decisions of older employees in the United Kingdom. As much is already known about which stereotypes exist, we focus more on how older workers and their managers deploy these stereotypes and age norms when talking about their working lives; we are interested in the social relations of age; how ageism is performed and reproduced through interactions and how this affects thinking about retirement.

Data and Method

This article is based on individual semi-structured face-to-face employee interviews ( n = 104), as well as interviews with line managers, human resource and occupational health managers ( n = 52) divided over four organizations. The organizations were located in different sectors, with varying workforces, and in different regions in the United Kingdom (the South East, North West, West, Wales and the Home Counties; for further details see Table 1 ). Interviewees were selected out of employees aged 50 or over who volunteered to participate using a maximum variation sampling strategy ( Patton, 1990 ; Flyvbjerg, 2016 ). Managers were selected because they had responsibilities for workforces which included some older workers. In this article we concentrate primarily on the interviews with employees. The data were collected between 2014 and 2016 and interviews were held at the work location during working hours, but in a setting that ensured confidentiality. The average length of interview was between 45 and 50 min, they were digitally recorded, and transcribed verbatim.

TABLE 1 . Number of participants by case study organization and employee details.

Employees were interviewed about their retirement plans, experiences of age discrimination at work and their views on policy changes around extending working lives. Questions were open ended encouraging respondents to articulate issues salient to them. Interviews with managers centered on how their organisations managed older workers. The focus in this paper is an analysis of how people talk, the language used, about age and ageing. Though the focus of the interviews was not on internalized age norms and how this affected work decisions, these topics emerged in many interviews when people gave their views on changes in policies, experiences at work, and/or their plans for the future. It may be that the data contains many examples of internalized age-stereotypes because it was not directly questioned. Spedale (2018) notes in her study how the identification as “an older worker was predominantly unconscious and informed by age-related hidden assumptions and taken-for-granted beliefs” (p. 41). By identifying age norms and stereotypes when talking about different topics, the data may contain a more “natural” discussion of age at work. The qualitative data were analyzed thematically. An initial deductive coding frame was developed based on the larger project’s research aims and empirical and theoretical interests. In addition, an inductive open coding approach was taken so that themes and issues could arise from the data. After identifying internalized ageism as an emerging theme, the interviews were thematically recoded in NVivo 12 using the framework for analysis in Table 2 and read and reread for comments on the relationship between ageism and employment decisions (on framework analysis see Ritchie et al., 2003 ).

TABLE 2 . Framework for qualitative analysis.

Our approach here is part of the discursive turn in gerontology ( Previtali et al., 2020 ). Through our focus on talk we hope to both expose the ageist narratives in society and in organizations but also to explore how people actively construct their own understandings of reality. Our purpose is not to attempt to replace other explanations of the dynamics of retirement decisions but rather to add another layer to our understanding. The direct quotations from interviews below are selected as indicative for the identified category. Employee interviewees are identified by gender and age; managerial employees by their role.

In all of the organizations the overwhelming majority of employees said there was little direct age discrimination for example in access to training. There were some individuals who felt they had been passed over for opportunities or targeted for redundancy because of their age, but in general employees agreed with managers that their organizations were not overtly ageist.

I’ve not come across any discrimination, other than the banter around your desk kind of thing, you know. (Male, 57).

I get as much abuse as I think we dish out, the old fart in the office, but no I don’t see any different treatment. (Male, age undisclosed).

As these two quotes demonstrate people think of ageism as about direct discrimination and do not see that age stereotypes and norms are embedded in everyday interactions. Both managers and employees regularly employed ageist stereotypes when talking about older workers or about themselves, what we might refer to as casual or normalized ageism. These reflected the standard negative stereotypes about memory issues, physical capability, productivity, attitudes toward training and development and IT:

I’m just cast as a scatty old lady, you know. (Female, 52).

Although people live longer they don’t necessarily—it’s hard to predict at what point they’re no longer going to be really capable of doing their job, to be blunt. (Male, 56).

I suppose might be that some of the older people might be more kind of dinosaurs in terms of technology and slower to pick up the latest, you know, electronic tools and things. (Male, age undisclosed).

There were also more positive stereotypes about dependability, expertise, knowledge, warmth:

I think as you get older you get more of a sense of responsibility. You don’t like letting people down. You tend to work your way round problems rather than think, oh no, I’m not doing this, I’ll go somewhere else. (Female, 61).

You know, when there’s a problem they come running to us first, we’ll get it sorted. Yeah, I suppose I think they do look at it like that, yeah. (Male, 54).

Managers made explicit comparisons between older and younger workers:

I think certain individuals, as they get older and more established in their role, choose not to pick up on every opportunity that’s put before them, but the excitement comes for us as managers for the younger guys who are, “Yeah, what can I do? Give us more, can I do that, can I do this?” and that keeps that process going. […] if the older guys don’t want to pick up on it, it’s not because it’s not available and we would hold it back for them, it’s definitely available but sometimes their attitude or their energy towards it is less so than the guys further down the chain. (Male, 50 interviewed as an employee but with line manager responsibilities)

The prevalence of age based stereotypes was recognized by some employees and to a degree resisted.

Now training, I think it was perceived, and I think it was a wrong perception, that these people had no experience of working on computers, which is completely wrong because those guys like everybody else were going down Tesco’s and Curry’s buying laptops and desktops and playing around on Facebook and YouTube just like everybody else. (Male, 51).

Sometimes it was not the stereotype itself that was resisted, but the degree to which it would apply to them. They considered themselves as not yet “old” as stereotypes about what it means to be “old” did not apply. Many of the employees interviewed said that they did not “feel” their chronological age and felt that they were valued but at the same time many expressed concern about how others might see them or overlook them:

you do become invisible … but it’s like you are cannon fodder in a way, you’re just there to keep the wheels turning. (Female, 57)

Categorizing Talk About Age

Two conceptual categories developed from the analysis of how managers and employees deployed ageist stereotypes and age norms when talking about work opportunities, retirement timing and extending working lives: 1) the prevalence of a decline narrative, namely the widely held assumption that ageing inevitably brings worsening physical and cognitive health, and 2) the prevalence of an intergenerational narrative. The latter had two dimensions: one about being “too old for” something and the second related to intergenerational disentitlement; the need to step away and privilege younger workers.

Both narratives involve a comparison. The decline narrative conditions how people view the implications of getting old and has a role in how they think about continuing or ending work; here people compare themselves with an imagined future self. The intergenerational narrative is how people place themselves in relation to other generations in the workforce, here people compare themselves (and are compared) to others.

Decline Narrative

In discussing future retirement, the health and mortality of colleagues, family, and friends were constant topics leading to something which may be referred to as the decline narrative ( Gullette, 2004 ) or “health pessimism” (cf. Brown and Vickerstaff, 2011 ). This was expressed repeatedly as not knowing when “one’s time is up” or being able to predict how long decent health would last. For many, this expected age related decline in health translated into a desire to retire in time to enjoy some leisure:

One lady, she retired, she was only retired two months and she passed away. And, you know, you think, I don’t want that to be me. And I know you can never say, but I don’t want to work my whole life just to retire and then die. I’d like to enjoy a bit of free time. (Female, 50).

There was a strong sense of not wanting “to run out of time” and instead wanting to “maximize enjoyment of their remaining years in good health” (cf. Pond et al., 2010 ). In relation to the raising of the state pension age in the United Kingdom some felt that policy might force people to work too long, prejudicing their ability to enjoy retirement, this was especially true for those in manual occupations.

I can understand that you shouldn’t have to retire at 65 or whatever age they want to choose, because there’s lots of people perfectly capable of working and they want to, but I do think we’re in danger of keeping people in work who are not fit, because your bodies do start to wear out a bit and the older you get the more susceptible you are to things going wrong and then what are we going to do with those people, what are they going to do? (Female, 58).

For some others the decline narrative worked the other way around and they saw work as a means for staving off the inevitable decline. Paid work was for them a way to stay active and this would be necessary to stay healthy (longer):

Inside I still feel 35 [laughs], shame that the mirror doesn’t agree with me, but [both laugh], yeah, I mean the job is very physical, so but I look on that as being like keep fit, I’m a great believer in use it or lose it, and I think if I’d have given up work at 60 I’d have been a little old lady by now, probably about three stone heavier and gray haired. (Female, 64).

Not all decisions to stop working or extend working life are related to age stereotypes; some look forward to a period in which they have time for hobbies as they are in a financial position to stop working. Others have more negative reasons to give up their job such as health problems and being unable to continue working. Again others are happy to continue working or are not financially able to retire even though they would prefer to. Next to these push and pull factors, which have been identified in previous research, our data does suggest that the decline narrative also plays a role in how people weigh up the factors encouraging or discouraging continued employment. Many employees talked about a fear of being viewed as old and used pejorative language such as “pottering about”, “being a dinosaur”, “doddery” in describing other older people or their future selves.

Intergenerational Narrative

A second narrative expressed by some of our interviewees is about comparisons between age-groups in the labor market. The interviewees are comparing themselves with younger workers and either consider themselves as now “too old” for certain opportunities, or younger workers more worthy for these opportunities. This comparison can be made implicitly or explicitly. The first dimension of this narrative is the “too old for” (TOF)-narrative, which is based on an implicit comparison, where the older worker now considers themselves “too old for” their job or development:

I’ve spoken to other people and they’ve said it’s a young person’s game. […] multitasking in your head and you’ve got three—, no, 20, 30, 40 tickets coming through and you’re trying to mentally keep hold of it all. […] I’m not a woman I can’t multitask (both laugh). So it would be very hard to keep on doing that. (Male, 52)

TOF was most clearly and commonly expressed in relation to training:

I just feel at 60 now, is that really too old for me to be able to, you know, go on all these courses? And there’s quite a few that they want me to do. (Female, 59).

In the TOF-narrative the younger “other” is implicit. But other times intergenerational comparisons are made more explicitly. Many believed that in straightforward competition organizations preferred younger over older workers and that once you are over 50 opportunities in the labor market diminish markedly:

I continually look online, in the papers, I look in places, but when you are 57 and there’s a 30 year old applying for the same job, they’re not going to take me, are they? They’re not. (Female, 57).

Whilst the lack of opportunities for older people was lamented there was a very strong feeling among many of the interviewees that rising state pension ages and the urge to extend working lives was bad for younger generations:

Give the young people who are out there a chance to get into work, because there’s a lot of people unemployed. And I think the longer we go on, the less chance there is for them to get into work, because there’s less people retiring. That’s how I look at it any road. That’s my point of view. (Male, 60).

I actually have a problem with people working longer cause—, guilt’s not the right word, but there are lots of young people who can’t get jobs, you know. (Male, 69).

A number of employees thought that it was right that opportunities should go to younger people. Age norms were internalized by older workers who expressed the view that they were now ”too old” for training and/or promotion and that they should leave that “to the younger ones”:

I’m not particularly after getting promoted, I’ll leave that for the younger ones. I’m just happy where I am and for me I would rather be in this kind of job. (Female, 56).

I don’t want to improve. I don’t mean I don’t want to improve. I will do what I’m doing. I want to give the chance to the young people. […] I’m very, very sorry, I am not interested. Give the chance to the young people. (Male, 54).

Older workers here are wrestling with it being unfair that older workers may be discriminated against whilst also feeling that they have less entitlement to work when younger groups are unemployed, are still building a career or have young families to support. Many people mentioned their children or grandchildren and how difficult the labor market and work was for them.

With an increasing call for employees to extend their working lives, it is important to explore all the factors that are likely to limit this policy goal. The research reported here focused on a hitherto neglected aspect that of the role of internalized age stereotypes and norms in inhibiting older workers. There is a rich literature on direct discrimination against older workers and to a large extent our managers and employees were thinking about this kind of prejudice in relation to ageism. Age discrimination legislation has been around long enough in the United Kingdom for managers and many employees to know that it is proscribed in law and hence when asked our respondents in the majority said that there was no different treatment based on age.

The language managers used to talk about older workers and the way those older workers framed their own thoughts about, work, extending working lives and retirement tells a rather different story. Age stereotypes were routinely employed with respect to older workers capabilities and potential. Age norms about what was appropriate for different age groups were used to talk about training and development or extending working lives. In this sense ageism was normalized in all of the organizations, taken for granted and to a large extent unexamined. Ageist language did not seem to have the power to shock in the way that overtly racist or sexist language nowadays might.

The decline narrative—that with age comes inevitable physical and cognitive deterioration—was prevalent in how employees talked about extending their working lives and/or retirement. It was a factor in their thinking about the desirability of employment as they aged. This was true for those identifying as in good health as well as those with current health issues. As in other studies many people were concerned to retire early enough to still enjoy some health in retirement ( Pond et al., 2010 ; Brown and Vickerstaff, 2011 ). However, for a minority this decline narrative functioned as an incentive to stay in work as a means of maintaining social and physical activity and staving off the onset of ill-health. This latter view chimed more with the increasingly dominant public narrative of active and healthy aging: that work is good for you and keeps you physically and mentally fit ( Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), 2017 : 9; Moulaert and Biggs, 2012 ; Laliberte Rudman, 2015 ). In doing so of course it still takes the eventual and inevitable decline as its point of departure. The decline narrative has been discussed in the existing literature and our study confirms its ubiquity but we noted that it can play either a positive or a negative role with regard to extending one’s working life.

More distinctive were our findings about the intergenerational narrative. If we conceptualize age as social construct then it focuses attention on the relational aspects of age and how age relations are played out in specific contexts. A rather obvious statement is that older workers are only old in relation to some other younger reference group. However, we could clearly see in the comments of both managers and employees that such comparisons were very much alive in people’s minds. They were employed when they were thinking about career opportunities, training and development or the desirability of extending working lives. This was manifested in the “too old for” narrative, expressing a sense that there is a specific chronology for when things are appropriate in the working life. This is perhaps all the more remarkable in our sample as the majority were in the age category 50–59 (see Table 1 ), with presumably many years still in employment. This self-sabotaging narrative, as Romaioli and Contarello (2019) have characterized it, does lead to older people self-limiting. This means older workers potentially opting out of opportunities that are actually available.

The other dimension of the intergenerational narrative we have dubbed “intergenerational disentitlement”, as there was a strong element in our respondents’ comments that as older workers they were less entitled to training and development and possibly even to a job when compared to younger (potential) colleagues. Here many of our respondents were expressing a tension between a commitment to the fact that age discrimination is unfair and should be resisted whilst nevertheless worrying that by taking a promotion or staying in work they might be denying, by implication a more deserving, younger person. This sense of disentitlement could potentially be an important factor in a situation of redundancies, where both managers and employees may feel that if anyone should go it should be the older workers.

This sense of age-based disqualification for job opportunities might undermine formally equitable processes in the workplace; everyone may be entitled to apply for a job, a redeployment or a promotion but some older workers may define themselves as “too old” or think it should “be left for the younger ones”. Age management policies tend to focus on direct discrimination and formal equality but may do little to tackle underlying and normalized ageism of the sort uncovered here.

Individual decisions about whether to carry on working or retire are as we know complex and constrained. The interaction of health, wealth, marital status, employer action and government policy combine to structure what is possible and what is desirable ( Vickerstaff, 2006 ; Loretto and Vickerstaff, 2012 ; Hasselhorn and Apt, 2015 ; Lain, 2016 ; Phillipson et al., 2019 ). The study reported here seeks to include in the list of dynamic variables in retirement decision making, a full and rounded sense of the impact of ageism. It has added another layer to our understanding. The power of ageism to influence end of working life actions is not limited to direct discrimination, although this still certainly plays a significant role, it also encompasses normalized and taken for granted assumptions about age norms, what is suitable for different age groups and why, as well as internalized stereotypes about older workers abilities and aptitudes.

Limitations of the Current Research and Suggestions for Future Research

We have to acknowledge a note of caution about the generalizability of our findings. By the standards of much qualitative work we had a quite large and diverse data set. Our employee respondents covered a good spread of occupational levels in diverse organizations and the gender balance of the sample reflected the gender composition of the different organizations, with a slight over-representation of female respondents. With the weight and depth of interview material we were able to triangulate responses and have concentrated on oft repeated themes and tropes. The sample was however ethnically homogeneous with the overwhelming majority of our respondents identifying as white British. A more diverse sample including a range of the black and minority ethnic populations in the United Kingdom might have confirmed our findings or uncovered different ways of talking about age and generations. In this article we have not examined the gender differences in ageist talk but rather concentrated on the expressions and themes common to both genders. Further research could usefully delve into the subtle differences in how women and men talk about and experience age.

Our respondents were also interviewed in a particular time and place. We do not seek to diminish the importance of public policy and organizational contexts in setting parameters for what is possible for older workers. It would be interesting to see similar narrative analyses undertaken in different national contexts to see whether internalized ageism is as strong and has the same dimensions as identified here. It is also the case that public narratives of what is right or expected of older populations are in some flux as we shift progressively from a societal view of retirement as an earned right for a long working life to the duty on older people to carry on contributing to economic life. Individuals, with their own dispositions, life experiences and family contexts are wrestling with these changing new messages as are we as researchers. It would be interesting in further research to try to link more clearly the impact of public narratives about greedy baby boomers, intergenerational inequity and healthy aging on narratives in the workplace.

The Main Contributions of This Research

We have addressed the spirit of this special issue by identifying a new pathway in retirement research methodologically and conceptually. In so doing we have added another layer to our understanding of the factors that are in play in disposing early retirement or later working. Although we cannot specify the weight or percentage contribution internalized ageism plays in decisions about paid work we have highlighted that it cannot be ignored as a factor. Methodologically we have demonstrated that in addition to quantitative analyses, case studies of organizational practice, and assessments of the impacts of public policy changes, we need to look at how people talk and think about age in the work setting. Embodied stereotypes and taken for granted age norms make a profound contribution to individual and organizational practices around extending working lives. Conceptually we have tried to deepen our understanding of ageism in the work place. We extended the narrow and limiting focus on discrimination against older workers to investigate other components of ageism, namely how older workers respond to age stereotypes and age norms in how they manage themselves.

Data Availability Statement

The dataset analysed for this study can be found in the UK Data Archive, with reference SN852868. https://beta.ukdataservice.ac.uk/datacatalogue/studies/study?id=852868 .

Ethics Statement

The original data design and protocols received full ethical approval by the University of Kent. Further ethical review and approval was not required for the current study.

Author Contributions

These authors have contributed equally to this work and share first authorship.

In this paper we use part of the qualitative data from a larger United Kingdom Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) funded project (Ref. MRC/ESRC ES/L002949/1). The original data design and protocols received full ethical approval. For more information on this larger project, please see ILC-UK (2017) , Phillipson et al. (2019) , and Wainwright et al. (2019) . The re-analysis of interviews which forms the basis of this paper was funded by the ESRC (Ref. ES/S00551X/1).

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to members of the original research consortium who undertook the interviews: Joanne Crawford; David Lain; Wendy Loretto; Chris Phillipson, Mark Robinson; Sue Shepherd; David Wainwright and Andrew Weyman. We would like to express our gratitude to those who agreed to be interviewed as part of the study.

Brown, P., and Vickerstaff, S. (2011). Health Subjectivities and Labor Market Participation. Res. Aging 33 (5), 529–550. doi:10.1177/0164027511410249

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Calasanti, T. (2020). Brown Slime, the Silver Tsunami, and Apocalyptic Demography: The Importance of Ageism and Age Relations. Social Currents 7 (3), 195–211. doi:10.1177/2329496520912736

Calasanti, T., and Slevin, K. (2001). Gender, Social Inequalities and Aging . Walnut Greek, CA: AltaMira Press .

Chiu, W. C. K., Chan, A. W., Snape, E., and Redman, T. (2001). Age Stereotypes and Discriminatory Attitudes towards Older Workers: An East-West Comparison. Hum. Relations 54 (5), 629–661. doi:10.1177/0018726701545004

Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) (2017). Fuller Working Lives A Partnership Approach . London: DWP .

Desmette, D., and Gaillard, M. (2008). When a "worker" Becomes an "older Worker". Career Dev. Int. 13 (2), 168–185. doi:10.1108/13620430810860567

Earl, C., Taylor, P., and Cannizzo, F. (2018). "Regardless of Age": Australian University Managers' Attitudes and Practices towards Older Academics. Aging Retirement 4 (3), 300–313. doi:10.1093/workar/wax024

Flyvbjerg, B. (2016). Five Misunderstandings about Case-Study Research. Qual. Inq. 12 (2), 219–245. doi:10.1177/1077800405284363

Gaillard, M., and Desmette, D. (2010). (In)validating Stereotypes about Older Workers Influences Their Intentions to Retire Early and to Learn and Develop. Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. , 32 (1), 86–98. doi:10.1080/01973530903435763

Gullette, M. M. (2004). Aged by Culture . London: University of Chicago Press .

Harris, K., Krygsman, S., Waschenko, J., and Laliberte Rudman, D. (2018). Ageism and the Older Worker: A Scoping Review. Geront 58 (2), gnw194–e14. doi:10.1093/geront/gnw194

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Hasselhorn, H. M., and Apt, W. (2015). Understanding Employment Participation of Older Workers: Creating a Knowledge Base for Future Labour Market Challenges . Berlin: Research ReportFederal Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs (BMAS) and Federal Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (BAuA) .

Henkens, K. (2005). Stereotyping Older Workers and Retirement: The Managers' Point of View. Can. J. Aging 24 (4), 353–366. doi:10.1353/cja.2006.0011

Hurd Clarke, L., and Korotchenko, A. (2016). 'I Know it Exists … but I haven't Experienced it Personally': Older Canadian Men's Perceptions of Ageism as a Distant Social Problem. Ageing Soc. 36 (8). 1757–1773. doi:10.1017/S0144686X15000689

ILC-UK (2017). Exploring Retirement Transitions: A Research Report from ILC-UK and the Uncertain Futures Research Consortium . London: ILC-UK Available at https://ilcuk.org.uk/exploring-retirement-transitions/ (Accessed June 3, 2020).

Kleissner, V., and Jahn, G. (2020). Dimensions of Work-Related Age Stereotypes and In-Group Favoritism. Res. Aging 42 (3-4), 126–136. doi:10.1177/0164027519896189

Krekula, C. (2009). Age Coding: On Age-Based Practices of Distinction. Int. J. Ageing Later Life 4 (2), 7–31. doi:10.3384/ijal.1652-8670.09427

Krekula, C., Nikander, P., and Wilińska, M. (2018). “Multiple Marginalizations Based on Age: Gendered Ageism and beyond,” in Contemporary Perspectives On Ageism , International Perspectives on Aging 19 . Editors L. Ayalon, and C. Tesch-Römer (Berlin: Springer Open ), 33–50. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-73820-8_3

Laczko, F., and Phillipson, C. (1990). “Defending the Right to Work. Age Discrimination in Employment,” in Age: The Unrecognised Discrimination: Views to Provoke a Debate . Editor E. McEwen (London: Age Concern England ), 84–96.

Google Scholar

Lain, D. (2016). Reconstructing Retirement: Work and Welfare in the UK and USA . Bristol: Policy Press . doi:10.2307/j.ctt1t898mw

CrossRef Full Text

LaliberteRudman, D. (2015). Embodying Positive Aging and Neoliberal Rationality: Talking about the Aging Body within Narratives of Retirement. J. Aging Stud. 34, 10–20. doi:10.1016/j.jaging.2015.03.005

Loretto, W., and Vickerstaff, S. (2013). The Domestic and Gendered Context for Retirement. Hum. Relations 66 (1), 65–86. doi:10.1177/0018726712455832

Macnicol, J. (2006). Age Discrimination: An Historical and Contemporary Analysis . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press . doi:10.1017/cbo9780511550560

Martin, G., Dymock, D., Billett, S., and Johnson, G. (2014). In the Name of Meritocracy: Managers' Perceptions of Policies and Practices for Training Older Workers. Ageing Soc. 34, 992–1018. doi:10.1017/S0144686X12001432

Minichiello, V., Browne, J., and Kendig, H. (2000). Perceptions and Consequences of Ageism: Views of Older people. Ageing Soc. 20 (3). 253–278. doi:10.1017/S0144686X99007710

Moulaert, T., and Biggs, S. (2012). International and European Policy on Work and Retirement: Reinventing Critical Perspectives on Active Ageing and Mature Subjectivity. Hum. Relations 66 (1), 23–43. doi:10.1177/0018726711435180

Naegele, L., De Tavernier, W., and Hess, M. (2018). “Work Environment and the Origin of Ageism,” in Contemporary Perspectives On Ageism, International Perspectives on Aging 19 . Editors L. Ayalon, and C. Tesch-Römer ( Springer Open ). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-73820-8_3

Ng, T. W. H., and Feldman, D. C. (2012). Evaluating Six Common Stereotypes about Older Workers with Meta-Analytical Data. Personnel Psychol. 65 (4), 821–858. doi:10.1111/peps.12003

OECD (2006). Ageing And Employment policies . Live Longer Work Longer . Paris: OECD Publications .

Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods . 2nd edition. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage .

Phillipson, C., Shepherd, S., Robinson, M., and Vickerstaff, S. (2019). Uncertain Futures: Organisational Influences on the Transition from Work to Retirement. Soc. Pol. Soc. 18 (3), 335–350. doi:10.1017/S1474746418000180

Pond, R., Stephens, C., and Alpass, F. (2010). How Health Affects Retirement Decisions: Three Pathways Taken by Middle-Older Aged New Zealanders. Ageing Soc. 30 (3). 527–545. doi:10.1017/S0144686X09990523

Posthuma, R. A., and Campion, M. A. (2009). Age Stereotypes in the Workplace: Common Stereotypes, Moderators, and Future Research Directions†. J. Manage. 35 (1), 158–188. doi:10.1177/0149206308318617

Previtali, F., Keskinen, K., Niska, M., and Nikander, P. (2020). Ageism in Working Life: A Scoping Review on Discursive Approaches. Gerontologis 23, 121. doi:10.1093/geront/gnaa119

Ritchie, J., Spencer, K., and O’Connor, L. (2003). “Carrying Out Qualitative Analysis,” in Qualitative Research Practice . Editors J. Richie, and J. Lewis (London: Sage Publications ), 219–262.

Romaioli, D., and Contarello, A. (2019). “I’m Too Old for …” Looking into a Self-Sabotage Rhetoric and its Counter-narratives in an Italian Setting. J. Aging Stud. 48, 25–32. doi:10.1016/j.jaging.2018.12.001

Spedale, S. (2018). Deconstructing the 'older Worker': Exploring the Complexities of Subject Positioning at the Intersection of Multiple Discourses. Organization 26 (1), 38–54. doi:10.1177/1350508418768072

Street, D., and Ní Léime, Á. Á. (2020). “Problems and Prospects for Current Policies to Extend Working Lives,” in Extended Working Life Policies: International Gender and Health Perspectives . Editors J. Ogg, M. Rašticová, D. Street, C. Krekula, M. Bédiováet al. (Cham, Switzerland: Springer Open ), 85–113. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-40985-2_5

Van der Horst, M. (2019). Internalised Ageism and Self-Exclusion: Does Feeling Old and Health Pessimism Make Individuals Want to Retire Early?. Soc. Inclusion 7 (3), 27–43. doi:10.17645/si.v7i3.1865

Van der Horst, M., and Vickerstaff, S. (2021). Is Part of Ageism Actually Ableism? Ageing Soc. 12, 1–12. doi:10.1017/S0144686X20001890

Vickerstaff, S. (2006). 'I'd rather Keep Running to the End and Then Jump off the Cliff'. Retirement Decisions: Who Decides? J. Soc. Pol. 35 (3), 455–472. doi:10.1017/S0047279406009871

Wainwright, D., Crawford, J., Loretto, W., Phillipson, C., Robinson, M., Shepherd, S., et al. (2019). Extending Working Life and the Management of Change. Is the Workplace Ready for the Ageing Worker? Ageing Soc. 39 (11), 2397–2419. doi:10.1017/S0144686X18000569

Wildman, J. M., Goulding, A., Moffatt, S., Scharf, T., and Stenning, A. (2021). Intergenerational Equity, equality and Reciprocity in Economically and Politically Turbulent Times: Narratives from across Generations. Ageing Soc. 18, 1–20. doi:10.1017/S0144686X21000052

Willetts, D. (2010). The Pinch How the Baby Boomers Took Their Children’s Future- and Why They Should Give it Back . London: Atlantic Books . doi:10.4324/9780203834305

Keywords: ageism, age stereotypes, age norms, older workers, extending working lives, qualitative interviews

Citation: Vickerstaff S and Van der Horst M (2021) The Impact of Age Stereotypes and Age Norms on Employees’ Retirement Choices: A Neglected Aspect of Research on Extended Working Lives. Front. Sociol. 6:686645. doi: 10.3389/fsoc.2021.686645

Received: 27 March 2021; Accepted: 12 May 2021; Published: 01 June 2021.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2021 Vickerstaff and Van der Horst. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Mariska van der Horst, [email protected]

† These authors have contributed equally to this work and share first authorship

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Ageism and Age Discrimination at the Workplace—a Psychological Perspective

• First Online: 27 November 2019

Cite this chapter

• Maria Clara de Paula Couto 4 &
• Klaus Rothermund 4  

10k Accesses

11 Citations

We all have heard that the world population in industrialized countries has been—and will be—going through a stark demographic change. Specifically, such a shift in the age structure encompasses a decrease in the proportion of younger people coupled with an increased number of older adults in the population. How this resultant “aging world” affects different spheres of social and economic life has been a topic of discussion for years. The workforce and the labor force participation is one of those spheres that have been marked by changes in the age structure [ 28 , 66 , 67 ]. For example, younger and older adults are now working together as never before, leading organizations to work on strategies to deal with intergenerational tensions and to foster good relations between old and young co-workers. In this regard, questions arise such as what are the consequences of the increasing number of older adults for the work domain. Is it the case that older adults face more challenges in the workplace and in the job market? In this chapter, we address these topics by discussing the impacts of the shift in the age structure in the work context and the associated difficulties faced by older adults in the workplace. The topic of ageism and age discrimination in the workplace, their determinants and consequences, is specially relevant for this chapter.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Durable hardcover edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Older Workers, Stereotypes, and Discrimination in the Context of the Employment Relationship

Time for a Twenty-First Century Understanding of Older Workers, Aging, and Discrimination

Silenced Inequalities: Too Young or Too Old?

Abuladze, L., & Perek- Białas, J. (2018). Measures of ageism in the labour market in international social studies. In L. Ayalon & C. Tesch-Römer (Eds.), Contemporary perspectives on ageism (pp. 461–492). Switzerland: Springer Open. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73820-8 .

Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice . Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Google Scholar  

Avery, D. R., McKay, P. F., & Wilson, D. C. (2007). Engaging the aging workforce: The relationship between perceived age similarity, satisfaction with coworkers, and employee engagement. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 1542–1556. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.6.1542 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Ayalon, L. (2014). Perceived age, gender, and racial/ethnic discrimination in Europe: Results from the European social survey. Educational Gerontology, 40, 499–517.

Ayalon, L., & Tesch-Römer, C. (2018). Introduction to the section: Ageism—Concept and origins. In L. Ayalon & C. Tesch-Römer (Eds.), Contemporary perspectives on ageism (pp. 1–10). Switzerland: Springer Open. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73820-8 .

Bal, A. C., Reiss, A. E. B., Rudolph, C. W., & Baltes, B. B. (2011). Examining positive and negative perceptions of older workers: A meta-analysis. The journals of Gerontology, Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 66, 687–698. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbr056 .

Baltes, M. M., Burgess, R. L., & Stewart, R. B. (1980). Independence and dependence in self-care behaviors in nursing home residents: An operant-observational study. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 3, 489–500.

Baltes, M. M., & Reisenzein, R. (1986). The social world in long-term care institutions: Psychosocial control toward dependency? In M. M. Baltes & P. B. Baltes (Eds.), The psychology of control and aging (pp. 315–343). Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

Berger, E. D. (2009). Managing age discrimination: An examination of the techniques used when seeking employment. The Gerontologist, 49, 317–332. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnp031 .

Brandtstädter, J., & Rothermund, K. (2002). The life-course dynamics of goal pursuit and goal adjustment: A two-process framework. Developmental Review, 22 (1), 117–150. https://doi.org/10.1006/drev.2001.0539 .

Brauer, M., Wasel, W., & Niedenthal, P. (2000). Implicit and explicit components of prejudice. Review of General Psychology, 4 (1), 79–101. https://doi.org/10.1037//10S9-2680.4.1.79 .

Bugental, D. B., & Hehman, J. A. (2007). Ageism: A review of research and policy implications. Social Issues and Policy Review, 1, 173–216. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-2409.2007.00007.x .

Butler, R. (1969). Age-Ism: Another form of bigotry. The Gerontologist, 9, 243–246. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/9.4_Part_1.243 .

Bytheway, B. (1995). Ageism: Rethinking ageing series . Buckinghan: Open University Press.

Cameron, C. D., Brown-Iannuzzi, J. L., & Payne, B. K. (2012). Sequential priming measures of implicit social cognition: A meta-analysis of associations with behavior and explicit attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 16, 330–350. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868312440047 .

Casper, C., Rothermund, K., & Wentura, D. (2011). The activation of specific facets of age stereotypes depends on individuating information. Social Cognition, 29, 393–414. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2011.29.4.393 .

Dasgupta, N., & Greenwald, A. G. (2001). On the malleability of automatic attitudes: Combating automatic prejudice with images of admired and disliked individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 800–814. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.81.5.800 .

Davey, J. (2014). Age discrimination in the workplace. Policy Quarterly, 10 (3), 42–48. https://doi.org/10.26686/pq.v10i3.4502 .

de Paula Couto, M. C. P., & Wentura, D. (2012). Automatically activated facets of ageism: Masked evaluative priming allows for a differentiation of age-related prejudice. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 852–863. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.1912 .

de Paula Couto, M. C. P., & Wentura, D. (2017). Implicit ageism. In T. D. Nelson (Eds.), Ageism, stereotyping and prejudice against older persons (2nd ed., pp. 37–76). Cambridge: MIT Press.

Derous, E., & Decoster, J. (2017). Implicit age cues in resumes: Subtle effects on hiring discrimination. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1321. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01321 .

Diekman, A., & Hirnisey, L. (2007). The effect of context on the silver ceiling: A role congruity perspective on prejudiced responses. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 1353–1366.

Duncan, C., & Loretto, W. (2004). Never the right age? Gender and age-based discrimination in employment. Gender Work and Organization, 11, 95–115. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2004.00222.x .

Eagly, A. H., & Diekman, A. B. (2005). What is the problem? Prejudice as an attitude-in-context. In J. F. Dovidio, P. Glick, & L. Rudman (Eds.), On the nature of prejudice: Fifty years after Allport (pp. 19–35). Malden: Blackwell.

European Commission. (2011). Synthesis report I—2011. Older workers, discrimination, and employment. http://ec.europa.eu/justice/discrimination/files/sen_synthesisreport2011_en.pdf . Accessed 29 Sept. 2018.

Fazio, R. H., & Olson, M. A. (2003). Implicit measures in social cognition research: Their meaning and use. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 297–327. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145225 .

Fazio, R. H., Sanbonmatsu, D. M., Powell, M. C., & Kardes, F. R. (1986). On the automatic activation of attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 229–238.

Federal Statistical Office. (2016). Older people in Germany and the EU . Wiesbaden: Statistisches Bundesamt, Federal Statistical Office.

Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878–902. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.82.6.878 .

Garstka, T. A., Schmitt, M. T., Branscombe, N. R., & Hummert, M. L. (2004). How young and older adults differ in their responses to perceived age discrimination. Psychology and Aging, 19, 326–335. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.19.2.326 .

Gioaba, I., & Krings, F. (2017). Impression management in the job interview: An effective way of mitigating discrimination against older applicants? Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 770. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00770 .

Gordon, R. A., & Arvey, R. (2004). Age bias in laboratory and field settings: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 468–492. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02557.x .

Gow, A. J., Corley, J., Starr, J. M., & Deary, I. J. (2013). Which social network or support factors are associated with cognitive abilities in old age? Gerontology, 59, 454–463. https://doi.org/10.1159/000351265 .

Greenberg, J., Schimel, J., & Martens, A. (2002). Ageism: Denying the face of the future. In T. D. Nelson (Eds.), Ageism: Stereotyping and prejudice against older persons (pp. 27–48). Cambridge: MIT Press.

Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review, 102 (1), 4–27.

Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464–1480. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.6.1464 .

Greenwald, A. G., Poehlman, T. A., Uhlmann, E. L., & Banaji, M. R. (2009). Understanding and using implicit association test: III: Meta-analysis of predictive validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 17–41. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0015575 .

Harris, K., Krygsman, S., Waschenko, J., & Rudman, D. B. (2018). Ageism and the older worker: A scoping review. The Gerontologist, 58, e1–e14. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnw194 .

Hassell, B., & Perrewé, P. (1993). An examination of the relationship between older workers’ perceptions of age discrimination and employee psychological states. Journal of Managerial Issues, 5 (1), 109–120. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40604173 .

Hess, T. M., Auman, C., Colcombe, S. J., & Rahhal, T. A. (2003). The impact of stereotype threat on age differences in memory performance. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, 58, P3–P11. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/58.1.P3 .

Hofmann, W., Gawronski, B., Gschwendner, T., Le, H., & Schmitt, M. (2005). A meta-analysis on the correlation between the implicit association test and explicit self- report measures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 1369–1385.

Horton, S., Baker, J., Pearce, G. W., & Deakin, J. M. (2008). On the malleability of performance: Implications for seniors. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 27 (4), 446–65.

Hummert, M. L., Garstka, T. A., O’Brien, L. T., Greenwald, A. G., & Mellott, D. S. (2002). Using the implicit association test to measure age differences in implicit social cognitions. Psychology and Aging, 17, 482–495. https://doi.org/10.1037//0882-7974.17.3.482 .

James, J. B., McKechnie, S., Swanberg, J., & Besen, E. (2013). Exploring the workplace impact of intentional/unintentional age discrimination. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 28, 907–927. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-06-2013-0179 .

Kaufman, M. C., Krings, F., & Sczesny, S. (2016). Looking too old? How an older age appearance reduces chances of being hired. British Journal of Management, 27, 727–739. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.12125 .

Kaufmann, M. C., Krings, F., Zebrowitz, L. A., & Sczesny, S. (2017). Age bias in selection decisions: The role of facial appearance and fitness impressions. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 2065. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02065 .

Kite, M. E., & Johnson, B. T. (1988). Attitudes toward older and younger adults: A meta-analysis. Psychology and Aging, 3, 233–244.

Kite, M. E., Stockdale, G. D., Whitley, B. E., Jr., & Johnson, B. T. (2005). Attitudes toward younger and older adults: An updated meta-analytic review. Journal of Social Issues, 61, 241–266.

Kornadt, A. E., & Rothermund, K. (2012). Internalization of age stereotypes into the self-concept via future self-views: A general model and domain-specific differences. Psychology and Aging, 27, 164–172. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025110 .

Kornadt, A. E., Meissner, F., & Rothermund, K. (2016). Implicit and explicit age stereotypes for specific life-domains across the life span: Distinct patterns and age group differences. Experimental Aging Research, 42, 195–211.

Kroon, A. C. (2015). Age for change: Tackling ageism in the workplace. The European Health Psychologist, 17 (4), 179–184.

Levy, B. (2009). Stereotype embodiment: A psychosocial approach to aging. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18 (6), 332–336. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01662.x .

Lin, X., Bryant, C., & Boldero, J. (2010). Measures for assessing student attitudes toward older people. Educational Gerontology, 37, 12–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/03601270903534796 .

Malinen, S., & Johnston, L. (2013). Workplace ageism: Discovering hidden bias. Experimental Aging Research, 39, 445–465. https://doi.org/10.1080/0361073X.2013.808111 .

McCann, R., & Giles, H. (2002). Ageism in the workplace: A communication perspective. In T. Nelson (Eds.), Ageism—Stereotyping and prejudice against older persons (pp. 163–199). Cambridge: MIT Press.

Meissner, F., & Rothermund, K. (2013). Estimating the contributions of associations and recoding in the Implicit Association Test and ReAL model for the IAT. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104 (1), 45–69.

Miller, C. T., & Kaiser, C. R. (2001). A theoretical perspective on coping stigma. Journal of Social Issues, 57 (1), 73–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00202 .

Montepare, J. M., & Zebrowitz, L. A. (2002). A social-developmental view of ageism. In T. Nelson (Eds.), Ageism—Stereotyping and prejudice against older persons (pp. 77–125). Cambridge: MIT Press.

Moors, A., Spruyt, A., & De Houwer, J. (2010). In search of a measure that qualifies as implicit: Recommendations based on a decompositional view of automaticity. In B. Gawronski & K. B. Payne (Eds.), Handbook of implicit social cognition: Measurement, theory, and applications (pp. 19–37). New York: Guilford Press.

Nicholson, N. R. (2012). A review of social isolation: An important but underassessed condition in older adults. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 33, 137–152. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10935-012-0271-2 .

North, M. S., & Fiske, S. T. (2012). An inconvenienced youth? Ageism and its potential intergenerational roots. Psychological Bulletin, 138 (5), 982–997. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027843 .

North, M. S., & Fiske, S. T. (2013). A prescriptive intergenerational-tension ageism scale: Succession, identity, and consumption (SIC). Psychological Assessment, 25 (3), 706–713. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032367 .

Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M. R., & Greenwald, A. G. (2002). Harvesting implicit group attitudes and beliefs from a demonstration web site. Group Dynamics, 6, 101–115. https://doi.org/10.1037//1089-2699.6.1.101 .

Nosek, B. A., Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (2005). Understanding and using the implicit association test: II. Method variables and construct validity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2, 166–180. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167204271418 .

Nussbaum, J. F., Pitts, M. J., Huber, F. N., Krieger, J. R. L., & Ohs, J. E. (2005). Ageism and ageist language across the life span: Intimate relationships and non-intimate interactions. Journal of Social Issues, 61, 287–305.

OECD. (1998). Work force ageing: Consequences and policy responses . Ageing Working Paper, AWP4.1. Paris.

OECD. (2006). Live longer, work longer . Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264035881-en .

Book   Google Scholar  

Palmore, E. (1999). Ageism: Positive and negative (2nd ed.). New York: Springer.

Palmore, E. (2001). The ageism survey: First findings. The Gerontologist, 41, 572–575. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/41.5.572 .

Palmore, E. (2003). Ageism comes of age. The Gerontologist, 43, 418–420. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/43.3.418 .

Palmore, E. (2004). Research note: Ageism in Canada and the United States. Journal of Cross-Cultural Gerontology, 19, 41–46. https://doi.org/10.1023/B:JCCG.0000015098.62691.ab .

Pasupathi, M., & Löckenhoff, C. E. (2002). Ageist behavior. In T. D. Nelson (Eds.), Ageism: Stereotyping and prejudice against older persons (pp. 201–246). Cambridge: MIT Press.

Payne, B. K., Cheng, C. M., Govorun, O., & Stewart, B. D. (2005). An inkblot for attitudes: Affect misattribution as implicit measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 277–293. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.89.3.277 .

Posthuma, R. A., & Campion, M. A. (2009). Age stereotypes in the workplace: Common stereotypes, moderators, and future research directions. Journal of Management, 35, 158–188.

Posthuma, R. A., Wagstaff, M. F., & Campion, M. A. (2012). Age stereotypes and workplace age discrimination: A framework for future research. In W. C. Borman & J. W. Hedge (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Work and Aging (pp. 298–312). New York: Oxford University Press.

Rothbaum, F., Weisz, J. R., & Snyder, S. S. (1982). Changing the world and changing the self: A two-process model of perceived control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 5–37. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.42.1.5 .

Rothermund, K., & Brandstädter, J. (2003). Age stereotypes and self-views in later life: Evaluating rival assumptions. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 27, 549–554. https://doi.org/10.1080/01650250344000208 .

Rothermund, K., Teige-Mocigemba, S., Gast, A., & Wentura, D. (2009). Eliminating the influence of recoding in the implicit association test: The recoding-free implicit association test (IAT-RF). Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62 (1), 84–98.

Rothermund, K., & Wentura, D. (2007). Altersnormen und Altersstereotype. In J. Brandtstädter & U. Lindenberger (Eds.), Entwicklung über die Lebensspanne—Ein Lehrbuch (pp. 540–68). Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.

Rupp, D. E., Vodanovich, S. J., & Credé, M. (2006). Age bias in the workplace: The impact of ageism and causal attributions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 1337–1364. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0021-9029.2006.00062.x .

Schaie, K. W. (1993). Ageist language in psychological research. American Psychologist, 48, 49–51.

Schermuly, C. C., Deller, J., & Büsch, V. (2014). A research note on age discrimination and the desire to retire: The mediating effect of psychological empowerment. Research on Aging, 36, 382–393. https://doi.org/10.1177/0164027513508288 .

Steele, C. M., Spencer, S. J., & Aronson, J. (2002). Contending with group image: The psychology of stereotype and social identity threat. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 34, pp. 379–440). San Diego: Academic. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(02)80009-0 .

Stypińska, J., & Nikander, P. (2018). Ageism and age discrimination in the labour market: A macrostructural perspective. In L. Ayalon & C. Tesch-Römer (Eds.), Contemporary perspectives on ageism (pp. 91–108). Switzerland: Springer Open. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73820-8 .

Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.

Truxillo, D. M., Cadiz, D. M., & Hammer, L. B. (2015). Supporting the aging workforce: A review and recommendations for workplace intervention research. The Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2, 351–381. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032414-111435 .

Vogt Yuan, A. S. (2007). Perceived age discrimination and mental health. Social Forces, 86 (1), 291–311. https://doi.org/10.1353/sof.2007.0113 .

Voss, P., Bodner, E., & Rothermund, K. (2018). Ageism: The relationship between age stereotypes and age discrimination. In L. Ayalon & C. Tesch-Römer (Eds.), Contemporary perspectives on ageism (pp. 11–31). Berlin: Springer.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Voss, P., & Rothermund, K. (2018). Altersdiskriminierung in institutionellen Kontexten. In B. Kracke & P. Noack (Eds.), Handbuch Entwicklungs- und Erziehungspsychologie (pp. 509–538). Heidelberg: Springer.

Wentura, D., & Brandtstädter, J. (2003). Age stereotypes in younger and older women: Analyses of accommodative shifts with a sentence-priming task. Experimental Psychology, 50, 16–26. https://doi.org/10.1027//1618-3169.50.1.1 .

Wilkinson, J. A., & Ferraro, K. F. (2002). Thirty years of ageism research. In T. D. Nelson (Eds.), Ageism: Stereotyping and prejudice against older persons (pp. 339–358). Cambridge: MIT Press.

Wilson, T. D., Lindsey, S., & Schooler, T. Y. (2000). A model of dual attitudes. Psychological Review, 107 (1), 101–126. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.107.1.101 .

Zebrowitz, L. A., Franklin, R. G., Jr., Boshyan, J., Luevano, V., Agrigoroaei, S., Milosavljevic, B., & Lachman, M. E. (2014). Older and younger adults’ accuracy in discerning health and competence in older and younger faces. Psychology and Aging, 29, 454–468. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036255 .

Rothermund, K., & Mayer, A.-K. (2009). Altersdiskriminierung – Erscheinungsformen, Erklärungen und Interventionsansätze . Stuttgart: Kohlhammer.

Bal, P. M., de Lange, A. H., Van der Heijden, B. I. J. M., Zacher, H., Oderkerk, F. A., & Otten, S. (2015). Young at heart, old at work? Relations between age, (meta-)stereotypes, self-categorization, and retirement attitudes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 91, 35–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2015.09.002 .

Cheung, C., Kam, P. K., & Man-hung Ngan, R. (2011). Age discrimination in the labour market from the perspectives of employers and older workers. International Social Work, 54, 118–136. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020872810372368 .

Degner, J., & Wentura, D. (2011). Types of automatically activated prejudice: Assessing possessor- versus other-relevant valence in the evaluative priming task. Social Cognition, 29, 182–209. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2011.29.2.182 .

Gawronski, B., Cunningham, W. A., LeBel, E. P., & Deutsch, R. (2010). Attentional influences on affective priming: Does theory influence spontaneous evaluations of multiply categorisable objects? Cognition and Emotion, 24, 1008–1025. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699930903112712-ks .

Golub, S. A., Filipowicz, A., & Langer, E. J. (2002). Acting your age. In T. D. Nelson (Eds.), Ageism: Stereotyping and prejudice against older persons (pp. 277–294). Cambridge: MIT Press.

Kistler, E., & Mendius, H. G. (2002). Demographic change in the world of work—Opportunities for an innovative approach to work—A German point of view . Stuttgart: Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung.

Kluge, A., & Krings, F. (2008). Attitudes toward older workers and human resource practices. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 67, 61–64. https://doi.org/10.1024/1421-0185.67.1.61 .

Maurer, T. J., Barbeite, F. G., Weiss, E. M., & Lippstreu, M. (2008). New measures of stereotypical beliefs about older workers’ ability and desire for development: Exploration among employees age 40 and over. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 23, 395–418. https://doi.org/10.1108/026839408108069024 .

Naegele, L., De Tavernier, W., & Moritz, H. (2018). Work environment and the origin of ageism. In L. Ayalon & C. Tesch-Römer (Eds.), Contemporary perspectives on ageism (pp. 73–90). Switzerland: Springer Open. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73820-8 .

Ng, T. W. H., & Feldman, D. C. (2012). Evaluating six common stereotypes about older workers with meta-analytical data. Personnel Psychology, 65, 821–858. https://doi.org/10.1111/peps.12003 .

Perdue, C. W., & Gurtman, M. B. (1990). Evidence for the automaticity of ageism. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 26, 199–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(90)90035-K .

Rabl, T. (2010). Age, discrimination and achievement motives: A study of German employees. Personnel Review, 39, 448–467. https://doi.org/10.1108/00483481011045416 .

van Dalen, H. P., Henkens, K., & Schippers, J. (2009). Dealing with older workers in Europe: A comparative survey of employers’ attitudes and actions. Journal of European Social Policy, 19, 47–60. https://doi.org/10.1177/0958928708098523 .

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Friedrich-Schiller-Universität, Jena, Germany

Maria Clara de Paula Couto & Klaus Rothermund

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria Clara de Paula Couto .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Institut für Personal und Arbeit, Helmut-Schmidt-Universität, Hamburg, Germany

Michel E. Domsch

Fachbereich Maschinenbau und Wirtschaft, TH Lübeck, Lübeck, Schleswig-Holstein, Germany

Désirée H. Ladwig

Ministerium für Energiewende, Landwirtschaft, Umwelt, Natur und Digitalisierung des Landes Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany

Florian C. Weber

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer-Verlag GmbH Deutschland, ein Teil von Springer Nature

About this chapter

de Paula Couto, M.C., Rothermund, K. (2019). Ageism and Age Discrimination at the Workplace—a Psychological Perspective. In: Domsch, M., Ladwig, D., Weber, F. (eds) Vorurteile im Arbeitsleben. Springer Gabler, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-59232-8_4

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-59232-8_4

Published : 27 November 2019

Publisher Name : Springer Gabler, Berlin, Heidelberg

Print ISBN : 978-3-662-59231-1

Online ISBN : 978-3-662-59232-8

eBook Packages : Business and Economics (German Language)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• My Bibliography
• Collections
• Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

• Create a new collection
• Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

• Search in PubMed
• Search in NLM Catalog
• Add to Search

Age discrimination in the workplace: The more things change …

Affiliations.

• 1 ARC Centre of Excellence in Population Ageing Research (CEPAR), Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
• 2 Ageing, Work and Health Research Unit, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
• 3 Centre for Research on Ageing, Health and Wellbeing (CRAHW), Research School of Population Health, Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
• 4 ANU Medical School, Australian National University, Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia.
• PMID: 28635095
• DOI: 10.1111/ajag.12429

Keywords: Australia; age discrimination; older workers; workplace.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

• Attitudes towards intergenerational equity: Preliminary Australian evidence. Kendig H, O'Loughlin K, Hussain R, Cannon L. Kendig H, et al. Australas J Ageing. 2017 Jun;36(2):107-111. doi: 10.1111/ajag.12430. Australas J Ageing. 2017. PMID: 28635086 No abstract available.
• Perceptions of health-care professionals' treatment of older people. Hussain R, Kendig H, O'Loughlin K, Cannon L. Hussain R, et al. Australas J Ageing. 2017 Jun;36(2):102-106. doi: 10.1111/ajag.12437. Australas J Ageing. 2017. PMID: 28635091 No abstract available.
• Everyday discrimination in the Australian workplace: Assessing its prevalence and age and gender differences. Taylor P, McLoughlin C, Earl C. Taylor P, et al. Australas J Ageing. 2018 Dec;37(4):245-251. doi: 10.1111/ajag.12597. Australas J Ageing. 2018. PMID: 30506815
• On the origins of ageism among older and younger adults. Bodner E. Bodner E. Int Psychogeriatr. 2009 Dec;21(6):1003-14. doi: 10.1017/S104161020999055X. Epub 2009 Jul 21. Int Psychogeriatr. 2009. PMID: 19619389 Review.
• Ageism, Aging and HIV: Community Responses to Prevention, Treatment, Care and Support. DeMarco RF, Brennan-Ing M, Sprague C, Brown SM. DeMarco RF, et al. Interdiscip Top Gerontol Geriatr. 2017;42:234-239. doi: 10.1159/000448567. Epub 2016 Nov 22. Interdiscip Top Gerontol Geriatr. 2017. PMID: 27875836 Review.
• Counting the costs of ageism: Discrimination and COVID-19. Curryer C, Cook PS. Curryer C, et al. Australas J Ageing. 2021 Sep;40(3):237-240. doi: 10.1111/ajag.12993. Epub 2021 Aug 17. Australas J Ageing. 2021. PMID: 34405524 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
• Effect of Discrimination on Presenteeism among Aging Workers in the United States: Moderated Mediation Effect of Positive and Negative Affect. Deng J, Guo Y, Shi H, Gao Y, Jin X, Liu Y, Yang T. Deng J, et al. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Feb 22;17(4):1425. doi: 10.3390/ijerph17041425. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020. PMID: 32098436 Free PMC article.
• Search in MeSH

LinkOut - more resources

Full text sources.

• Ovid Technologies, Inc.

Other Literature Sources

• scite Smart Citations
• MedlinePlus Health Information

• Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

Ageism in the Workplace

42 Pages Posted: 11 Aug 2022 Last revised: 25 Jul 2023

Alan S. Gutterman

Professional Website

Date Written: July 24, 2023

Older persons are entitled to all the recognized civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to work, since such rights are universal and thus belong to all human beings. However, older workers seeking to find their roles in the workplace are continuously challenged by ageism, which has been defined as the stereotyping, prejudice about and discrimination against people based on their age. Ageism is largely implicit and subconscious, often goes unchallenged and cuts across the life course. As a result, older workers are often devalued by prospective employers as being unproductive, slower and more prone to disease, unfit to learn and a burden to highly technological work environments. Research has consistently found evidence of work-related age discrimination and older persons are continuously faced with age-related stereotyping in the workplace based on unfounded assumptions and beliefs and faulty evidence (e.g., older workers are less motivated and competent at work; older workers are harder to retrain and thus inherently less valuable as employees; and older workers are more expensive to employ). Gendered age discrimination and ableism are both widespread in the workplace.

Keywords: Ageism, workplace, older workers

Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation

Alan Gutterman (Contact Author)

Professional website ( email ).

HOME PAGE: http://www.alangutterman.com

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics, related ejournals, discrimination, law & justice ejournal.

Subscribe to this fee journal for more curated articles on this topic

Employment Law eJournal

Labor: human capital ejournal, economic anthropology ejournal, elder law studies ejournal.

• Book a Speaker

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Vivamus convallis sem tellus, vitae egestas felis vestibule ut.

Error message details.

Reuse Permissions

Request permission to republish or redistribute SHRM content and materials.

New SHRM Research Details Age Discrimination in the Workplace

Nearly One-Third (32 percent) of HR Professionals Say Applicant's Age Played a Role in Decisions Their Organization Made During the Job Application Process

​ ALEXANDRIA, Va., –Today, SHRM released new research detailing the prevalence of age discrimination in the workplace and its impact on the U.S. workforce. The research shows that nearly a third (30 percent) of U.S. workers say they have felt unfairly treated due to their age at some point in their career. Of these workers, 72 percent say it even made them feel like quitting their job.

The data collected between February and April 2023 holds particular significance due to the current trend of delayed retirement. More individuals are choosing to work beyond traditional retirement years, resulting in the emergence of a multi-generational workforce. Understanding and addressing age discrimination is essential to fostering inclusive work environments that value employees of all ages.  

Other key findings include: 

• 11 percent of HR professionals agree that older employees are not always treated as fairly as younger employees.
• 26 percent of U.S. workers age 50 and older say they have been the target of age-related remarks in the workplace over the past six months.
• Among U.S. workers age 50 and older, 1 in 10 say in the past six months they have often or always felt less valuable at work compared to younger workers.
• Nearly 1 in 5 HR professionals (17 percent) say they have received reports of perceived ageism in their workplace.
• HR professionals who work for organizations that offer diversity, equity and inclusion training are significantly less likely to report that age has played a role in decisions made during the job application process (26 percent) compared to HR professionals who work for organizations that do not offer such training (40 percent).
• Common age stereotypes remain somewhat prevalent. According to people managers, older employees are more likely to be perceived by others as not competent with technology (49 percent), resistant to new ways of doing things (38 percent), and stubborn or grumpy (48 percent).

View more surveys and reports from SHRM Research here: https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/trends-and-forecasting/research-and-surveys/pages/default.aspx   

Methodology: In February 2023, SHRM Research surveyed a sample of 1,045 HR professionals using the SHRM Voice of Work Research Panel. HR professionals responded on behalf of their organizations, and the data were weighted to be representative of U.S. companies, with a margin of error of ±3.78 percentage points. In March 2023, SHRM surveyed a sample of 1,000 people managers using a third-party online panel. Lastly, in March and April 2023, SHRM surveyed a representative sample of 1,749 U.S. workers using a third-party online panel. Citation: Exploring Age and Weight Discrimination in the Workplace, SHRM, 2023.

About SHRM  SHRM creates better workplaces where employers and employees thrive together. As the voice of all things work, workers and the workplace, SHRM is the foremost expert, convener and thought leader on issues impacting today's evolving workplaces. With nearly 325,000 members in 165 countries, SHRM impacts the lives of more than 235 million workers and families globally. Learn more at  SHRM.org

Related Content

Why AI+HI Is Essential to Compliance

HR must always include human intelligence and oversight of AI in decision-making in hiring and firing, a legal expert said at SHRM24. She added that HR can ensure compliance by meeting the strictest AI standards, which will be in Colorado’s upcoming AI law.

A 4-Day Workweek? AI-Fueled Efficiencies Could Make It Happen

The proliferation of artificial intelligence in the workplace, and the ensuing expected increase in productivity and efficiency, could help usher in the four-day workweek, some experts predict.

Advertisement

Artificial Intelligence in the Workplace

​An organization run by AI is not a futuristic concept. Such technology is already a part of many workplaces and will continue to shape the labor market and HR. Here's how employers and employees can successfully manage generative AI and other AI-powered systems.

HR Daily Newsletter

News, trends, analysis and breaking news alerts to help HR professionals do their jobs better each business day.

Success title

Success caption

• DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-69892-2_582-1
• Corpus ID: 197751494

Age Discrimination in the Workplace

• Piers Bayl-Smith
• Published in Encyclopedia of Gerontology… 21 May 2019
• Sociology, Law
• Encyclopedia of Gerontology and Population Aging

24 References

Age discrimination in the american workplace: old at a young age, no foot in the door: an experimental study of employment discrimination against older workers., age bias in the workplace: the impact of ageism and causal attributions1, age discrimination in simulated employment contexts: an integrative analysis., the longitudinal effects of perceived age discrimination on the job satisfaction and work withdrawal of older employees, age discrimination in the workplace: identifying as a late-career worker and its relationship with engagement and intended retirement age, the interaction between older workers' personal resources and perceived age discrimination affects the desired retirement age and the expected adjustment, age stereotypes in the workplace: common stereotypes, moderators, and future research directions†, how german employees of different ages conserve resources: perceived age discrimination and affective organizational commitment, stereotyping older workers and retirement: the managers' point of view*, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

College of Agricultural, Consumer & Environmental Sciences

Illinois Extension

• Beef Cattle
• Community Planning
• Environment
• Local Government Education
• Rainfall Management
• Fruit Trees
• Vegetable Gardening
• Newsletters
• Online Courses
• Publications
• Summer Resources
• Contact Staff
• Find an Office
• Social Media
• Administration and Educator Teams
• Geographic Organizational Leadership
• Communications and Information Technology
• Planning, Reporting, and Evaluation
• Volunteer and Career Development
• Energy Education Council
• Illini Science Policy Program
• Illinois Indiana Sea Grant
• Master Gardeners
• Master Naturalists
• Plant Clinic
• Research and Education Centers
• Home and Community Education
• Annual Reports
• Economic and Functional Impact
• 2024 Extension Collaboration Grants
• Agriculture and AgriBusiness Impact
• Community and Economic Development Impact
• Family and Consumer Sciences Impact
• Integrated Health Disparities Impact
• Natural Resources, Environment, and Energy Impact
• SNAP-Education Impact
• Extension Funded Research Projects
• Extension Councils
• FYI Internal Communications
• Professional Associations
• Partnerships
• Strategic Planning

Addressing Ageism in the Workplace

I have been tracking news articles that focus on aging and age discrimination over the past year. Some headline themes include stereotypes, institutional ageism, generation gaps, signs of ageism in the workplace, and new research on aging – among others. These headline themes are often juxtaposed with commercials about anti-aging products and memes about getting older. Messages about age and aging are across personal and professional spheres and are present within the work we do in Extension. 

What is ageism?

Age is a protected category in the workplace. However, the problem of ageism continues to resonate, and the importance of addressing this topic cannot be understated as workers continue to report experiences with age bias and discrimination. “Ageism refers to the stereotypes (how we think), prejudice (how we feel) and discrimination (how we act) towards others or oneself based on age” World Health Organization . Identifying ageism is important for understanding the experiences of all workers along the life course. 

The University of Michigan National Poll on Healthy Aging indicates that 93 percent of older adults say they regularly experience at least one form of ageism. These include the assumption that older people have difficulty with cell phones and computers and don’t do anything important or valuable. Older adults (45 percent) also reported experiences of interpersonal ageism where another person assumed they were having trouble using technology, seeing, hearing, understanding, remembering, or doing something independently. 

Research by Coulon and colleagues (2024) indicates younger and older employees are stereotyped at work. These researchers lead a daily diary study to learn about potential workplace events (e.g., interactions, comments, actions) that may affect workers' perceptions of age-based stereotypes they experience during work hours. They found that the accumulation of workplace events within a day affects feelings of stereotype threat (risk of confirming negative stereotypes). The days when employees experience greater feelings of stereotype threat, they also experience poorer outcomes such as greater stress and a poorer sense of belonging. In other words, when employees report experiencing negative comments or attitudes about their age, it affects their experiences in the workplace. These findings complement other work which suggests that societal messages about aging can affect people’s health and well-being, and perpetuate myths and misconceptions about age and aging that are harmful. 

Understand how age-based stereotypes may cause harm.

According to the American Psychological Association (APA) , older adults are mostly giving support through the contributions that make in the workplace, and through volunteering and caregiving than they require support. People of all ages have conscious and unconscious age biases, and the workplace is not immune to those biases. Falsehoods about age in the workplace can affect hiring processes and promotion decisions. How employees are treated by their colleagues and leaders may play a role in how the employee experiences age-based stereotype threat (Coulon et al., 2024). So, what can each of us do to help reduce age bias?

Change our language.

The language we use matters and is often influenced by the stereotypes we learn. Let us remove outdated terms that are harmful from our vocabulary. As an educator and facilitator who has worked closely with different centers and organizations that serve older adults, I have used outdated terms [or mirrored terms those agencies use] such as senior and elderly to refer to older adults. As research and practices change, so should our language. As a former member of the financial education team, a portion of our programming audience is older adults. By the time I came on board, the team had changed programs to reflect more cultural humility and inclusion (for example, changing one of my favorite lessons to Financial Exploitation among Older Adults). As you work with colleagues, volunteers, and communities adopt person-first language. 

Challenge the stereotypes.

We can challenge the stereotypes through intervention strategies to reduce age segregation in the workplace. The assumptions we have about who will collaborate with us can block intergenerational opportunities to work with colleagues with different experiences. Additional techniques to challenge these stereotypes may include:

• Examine personal beliefs and biases. 
• Reject underlying assumptions and myths about aging.
• Participate in professional development opportunities to build skills and knowledge.
• Avoid mirroring outdated terms and concepts in your language. 
• Build on opportunities for interdisciplinary collaborations. 
• Avoid “elderspeak” such as dear, sweetheart, and love which can be patronizing to older adults. 
• Encourage and support organizational processes.

Age and ageism are layered topics that are essential to address in the workplace. Each of us can play a role in reducing ageism in the workplace and dismantling it as a socially acceptable prejudice.

• Hofer, M., & Byers C. (2024, August 27).   Addressing Ageism and Promoting Inclusivity [video]. Illinois Media Space.  
• Informational video from Illinois Extension’s Chelsey Byers, Being Inclusive of the Older Adult . 

References:

• Coulon, S., von Hippel, C., & Peters, K. (2024). Age-based stereotype threat in the workplace: A daily diary study of antecedents and mechanisms. Psychology and Aging . Advance online publication. https://dx.doi.org/10.1037/pag0000839
• Weir, K. (2023). Ageism is one of the last socially acceptable prejudices. Psychologists are working to change that. Retrieved from https://www.apa.org/monitor/2023/03/cover-new-concept-of-aging .

Image Credit: 

• Unsplash; Sweet Life

Inclusive Extension

Related content.

Race, ethnicity, and discrimination at work: a new analysis of legal protections and gaps in all 193 UN countries

Equality, Diversity and Inclusion

ISSN : 2040-7149

Article publication date: 1 February 2023

Issue publication date: 18 December 2023

While only one aspect of fulfilling equal rights, effectively addressing workplace discrimination is integral to creating economies, and countries, that allow for everyone's full and equal participation.

Design/methodology/approach

Labor, anti-discrimination, and other relevant pieces of legislation were identified through the International Labor Organization's NATLEX database, supplemented with legislation identified through country websites. For each country, two researchers independently coded legislation and answered questions about key policy features. Systematic quality checks and outlier verifications were conducted.

More than 1 in 5 countries do not explicitly prohibit racial discrimination in employment. 54 countries fail to prohibit unequal pay based on race. 107 countries prohibit racial and/or ethnic discrimination but do not explicitly require employers to take preventive measures against discrimination. The gaps are even larger with respect to multiple and intersectional discrimination. 112 countries fail to prohibit discrimination based on both migration status and race and/or ethnicity; 103 fail to do so for foreign national origin and race and/or ethnicity.

Practical implications

Both recent and decades-old international treaties and agreements require every country globally to uphold equal rights regardless of race. However, specific national legislation that operationalizes these commitments and prohibits discrimination in the workplace is essential to their impact. This research highlights progress and gaps that must be addressed.

Originality/value

This is the first study to measure legal protections against employment discrimination based on race and ethnicity in all 193 UN countries. This study also examines protection in all countries from discrimination on the basis of characteristics that have been used in a number of settings as a proxy for racial/ethnic discrimination and exclusion, including SES, migration status, and religion.

• Discrimination
• Migration status

Heymann, J. , Varvaro-Toney, S. , Raub, A. , Kabir, F. and Sprague, A. (2023), "Race, ethnicity, and discrimination at work: a new analysis of legal protections and gaps in all 193 UN countries", Equality, Diversity and Inclusion , Vol. 42 No. 9, pp. 16-34. https://doi.org/10.1108/EDI-01-2022-0027

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2023, Jody Heymann, Sheleana Varvaro-Toney, Amy Raub, Firooz Kabir and Aleta Sprague

Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode

Introduction

Work plays a fundamental role in shaping the conditions of people's lives. Earnings from employment are the predominant source of income for most people; income in turn shapes access to a wide range of necessities including housing, transportation, and food, as well as non-essentials that impact quality of life and access to opportunities. In many countries where health insurance is partial or incomplete, work shapes access to healthcare. And by affecting where families live and whether caregivers can take time off to meet the developmental needs of children, the availability and conditions of work can have profound impacts on child development and education. Likewise, as adults age, as well as at the end of life, work histories can and do shape retirement income in most countries, and working conditions influence the ability of adults to care for aging family members.

As a result, when discrimination impedes work opportunities or results in loss of income, the consequences affect not only the quality and equality of work lives, but also of many other spheres of life. Moreover, when certain groups of workers routinely face bias in the workplace, this discrimination widens other inequalities in the economy, with ripple effects that have impacts on health, housing, children's access to quality education, and equal rights more broadly.

Given these vast and intergenerational impacts, the extent and persistence of workplace discrimination on the basis of race and ethnicity worldwide—which occurs at each stage of employment, including hiring, promotions, demotions, pay, working conditions, and terminations—represents a significant threat to both individual households and societies as a whole, as well as a clear violation of fundamental human rights. Moreover, studies in countries around the world have documented how employment discrimination on the basis of race/ethnicity commonly intersects with discrimination based on migration status, socioeconomic status, gender, and other characteristics, compounding other forms of inequality. While only one aspect of fulfilling equal rights, effectively addressing workplace discrimination is integral to creating economies, and countries, that allow for everyone's full and equal participation.

In this article, we review the research evidence on employment discrimination based on race and on the impact of anti-discrimination legislation, and then present the methods and results of the first study of anti-discrimination protections in all 193 UN countries.

Discrimination in hiring

A wide range of studies have demonstrated racial and ethnic discrimination in hiring, including studies in which researchers submit fictitious CVs and applications that reflect similar credentials and experience, but that vary with respect to photos, names, and/or experiences suggestive of different racial or ethnic identities. These “correspondence studies,” which improved on prior methods of testing for racial discrimination by making candidates substantively identical except for markers of race/ethnicity ( Bertrand and Duflo, 2017 ), find that presumed race/ethnicity influences the likelihood that a particular candidate receives an invitation to interview, with those representing historically marginalized racial or ethnic groups consistently receiving fewer callbacks ( Baert, 2018 ).

Other research approaches include direct interviews with hiring managers and simulations in which study participants rate the strength of hypothetical job candidates based on their photos and descriptions of their experience and characteristics where, again, the principal aspect varied is race/ethnicity, either on its own or together with intersectional characteristics like migration status or gender.

These research approaches also document the persistence of discrimination in hiring across jobs and geographies. For example, research in Nigeria found that managers of both public and private organizations were more likely to hire applicants from their own ethnic group ( Adisa et al. , 2017 ). A study spanning five European countries—Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, and the United Kingdom—demonstrated discrimination in the hiring of Black and Middle Eastern men ( Di Stasio and Larsen, 2020 ).

Discrimination based on common proxies for race or ethnicity can likewise shape job prospects. In Canada, for example, migrants from sub-Saharan Africa report that their accents can be a barrier to becoming employed and having career mobility ( Creese, 2010 ), while in the US, numerous court cases have illustrated how Black women commonly face barriers to employment because their natural hairstyles are found to violate “neutral” grooming codes ( Greene, 2017 ).

Discrimination is also often intersectional. In Germany, a 2020 study found that women with Turkish names were less likely than those with German names to receive interview invitations, and this gap widened further for women wearing headscarves ( Weichselbaumer, 2020 ). Similarly, in a Mexico study, both marital status and skin color affected women's chance of receiving an interview ( Arceo-Gomez and Campos-Vasquez, 2014 ). In Belgium, women from minority ethnic groups were less likely to be considered for a “high-cognitive demanding job” than either native women or minority ethnic men ( Derous and Pepermans, 2019 ).

Discrimination in promotions

Studies have also documented racial and ethnic discrimination in promotions across professions, from police forces to law firms to universities ( Tomlinson, 2019 ; Zempi, 2020 ). From Finland to South Africa to the United Kingdom and the United States, workers from marginalized racial and ethnic groups report discrimination in promotion, consistent with the research evidence based on multilevel multivariate studies of discrimination, as well as based on implicit bias testing of supervisors ( Hatch et al. , 2016 ; Mayiya et al. , 2019 ; Stalker, 1994 ; Yu, 2020 ; Zempi, 2020 ). In Canada, research has documented that visible minorities have less upward mobility even after controlling for education, work experience, time with the employer, and other factors ( Javdani, 2020 ), including both supply- and demand-side factors ( Javdani and McGee, 2018 ; Yap, 2010 ; Yap and Konrad, 2009 ).

Aside from direct discrimination in promotions, employer practices that evaluate employee conduct differently or otherwise deny opportunities for professional advancement based on race or ethnicity can affect opportunities within the workplace. For example, a study that experimentally changed the race/ethnicity of an employee in a photo while asking study participants to evaluate their performance demonstrated that simple acts such as being late for work led to a significantly greater negative impact on the appraisal of hypothetical employees when the photo showed a Black or Latinx employee than when the photo showed a white employee ( Luksyte et al. , 2013 ). Visible minorities are also less likely to receive training opportunities that can influence upward mobility in the labor force ( Dostie and Javdani, 2020 ).

Discrimination in terminations

Both direct discrimination by employers and structural discrimination that cuts across economies can make workers from marginalized racial and ethnic groups more vulnerable to terminations. For example, studies have found that during economic downturns, immigrants and workers from historically marginalized racial and ethnic groups face heightened risks of labor market discrimination and job loss ( Couch and Fairlie, 2010 ; Lessem and Nakajima, 2019 ). Moreover, the consequences of past discrimination and exclusion from economic opportunities mean that workers from underrepresented groups are less likely to have seniority within a given organization or company. As a result, in addition to direct racial/ethnic discrimination that may lead to higher rates of termination, “last hired, first fired” policies can result in indirect discrimination against workers from historically excluded groups.

Impacts of discrimination in hiring, job positions, and promotions on pay inequality

Discrimination in hiring can impact initial salaries and level and type of starting position. When individuals are hired into jobs below their skill level because of bias based on race and ethnicity, they earn less than they would have earned had there been no discrimination ( Coleman, 2003 ). Likewise, when discrimination results in the overrepresentation of workers from historically marginalized racial/ethnic groups in limited employment capacities, including temporary or seasonal jobs, gaps in both pay and benefits further widen. Survey research across 30 European countries showed that even after controlling for education, experience, occupation, and other categories, racial and ethnic minorities were more likely to end up in jobs where their skills were underutilized, leading to lower wages than if they were in a position more matched to their skills and offering reduced pathways for advancement ( Rafferty, 2020 ). In Chile, qualitative research has found that Peruvian migrants simultaneously experience limited employment trajectory due to their external migrant status alongside racialization by local Chileans who perceive them to be more fit for low-status and low-income positions due to assumptions about their physical and cultural traits ( Mora and Undurraga, 2013 ).

Direct pay discrimination

Even for the same job position, the “unexplained” wage differential after taking experience into account gives an indication of the amount of the wage differential that could be due to discrimination and bias. One-half to two-thirds of wage differences across racial and ethnic groups in some studies have been estimated to be due to bias ( Drydakis, 2012 ; Piazzalunga, 2015 ). While the data clearly demonstrates the existence of bias and discrimination in pay against specific groups in a range of countries, there has not been a comprehensive look across countries and racial/ethnic groups to document in detail when and where the wage gaps are greatest and lowest, before and after taking into account the impact of bias throughout the work lifecourse.

The documented and potential impacts of national laws addressing discrimination

Individual countries that have passed antidiscrimination laws have seen improvements including greater equality in hiring and lowering of wage disparities ( Leck et al. , 1995 ). While antidiscrimination laws alone do not eliminate discrimination in hiring, pay, promotions, or terminations, studies both across countries and across populations have demonstrated that antidiscrimination laws can make a difference. In Canada, for example, studies of the Employment Equity Act found that the share of visible minorities who were employed in the private sector increased to much closer to the percentage of the population following the law's adoption ( Agocs, 2002 ; Leck and Saunders, 1992 ). In the United States, studies have found that antidiscrimination laws contributed to wage and income increases for Black workers ( Collins, 2003 ; Donohue and Heckman, 1991 ) and a narrowing of the racial/ethnic pay gap ( Chay, 1998 ).

These findings on laws' impacts on employment outcomes by race parallel those observed for other groups of marginalized workers. For example, one study of 141 countries found that laws prohibiting gender discrimination in employment increased women's labor force participation in formal jobs ( del Mar Alonso-Almeida, 2014 ), while in the UK, legislation guaranteeing equal pay and non-discrimination in employment on the basis of sex resulted in a 19.4% increase in women's earnings and a 17% increase in women's employment rates relative to men's ( Zabalza and Zafiris, 1985 ). Moreover, explicitly prohibiting all forms of workplace discrimination matters to norms. In addition to their practical or applied value, laws prohibiting discrimination have important expressive value that can shape workplace expectations as well as societal views of equality more broadly, with the potential to affect rates of both explicit and implicit bias ( Sunstein, 1996 ). At the same time, the past several decades of antidiscrimination law have revealed important gaps to address. First, as many of the studies cited in the previous section illustrated, racial and ethnic discrimination commonly co-occurs with discrimination based on migration status, foreign national origin, social class, and other characteristics, highlighting the cumulative and often intersectional impacts of key facets of identity on work-related experiences around the world. Clearly banning all common grounds of discrimination, including those used as proxies for race or ethnicity or that commonly intersect with race or ethnicity, is a critical first step.

Second, prohibitions of indirect discrimination can offer important protection against racial/ethnic discrimination, including in instances where discrimination based on an unprotected ground has disparate impacts on the basis of race or ethnicity. This is true both for common grounds of discrimination that would ideally be explicitly covered by domestic labor laws (as they are by international treaties, e.g. national origin) ( Demetriou, 2016 ), as well as proxies for racial/ethnic discrimination that are not generally addressed on their own (e.g. accents and hairstyles) ( Justesen, 2016 ). In contrast, when discrimination laws take an overly formal approach to discrimination that only covers acts that were direct or intentional, they fail to account for the extensive evidence demonstrating that policies and practices that are racially neutral on their face may have disproportionate consequences for workers from historically marginalized groups.

Third and finally, while protections against employment discrimination are essential, more attention must be paid to implementation. While a range of actions are needed, evidence shows that having legal protections in place against retaliation may increase reporting rates by reassuring workers that their careers will be protected if they report discrimination ( Bergman et al. , 2002 ; Gorod, 2007 ; Keenan, 1990 ; Pillay et al. , 2018 ).

This is the first study to examine legislation in all 193 UN countries to map the extent to which each country in the world has protections against racial and ethnic discrimination in hiring, promotions, training, demotions, and terminations, as well as whether they proactively support implementation through clear legislative prohibitions of retaliation for reporting. Further, we examine to what extent countries not only address direct discrimination based on race/ethnicity, but also indirect racial/ethnic discrimination and/or direct discrimination based on grounds that can serve as proxies depending on the historical and societal context for racial discrimination, including religion, migration status, and socioeconomic status. Further, we highlight examples where countries explicitly address intersectionality. Finally, we examine whether there were gains over the past five years in the number of countries that are prohibiting each type of discrimination.

Methodology

Data source.

We constructed a database of prohibitions against discrimination in private sector labor in all 193 UN member states as of January 2021. Labor, anti-discrimination, and other relevant pieces of legislation were identified through the International Labor Organization's NATLEX database, supplemented with legislation identified through country websites. A coding framework was developed to systematically capture key policy features. This coding framework was reviewed by researchers, lawyers, and other leaders working on employment discrimination and tested on a subset of countries before database coding commenced.

For each country and protected characteristic studied, two researchers independently read legislation in its original language or a translation and used the coding framework to assess whether legislation specifically prohibited discrimination in each aspect of work or broadly, whether there were any exceptions to prohibitions of discrimination based on employer characteristics, and whether there were specific provisions in place to support effective implementation. In countries where anti-discrimination protections are legislated subnationally, the lowest level of protection across states or provinces was captured. Answers were then reconciled to minimize human error. When the two researchers could not arrive at an agreement based on the codebook framework, the full coding team met to discuss, and the coding framework was updated to reflect the decision. When updates were made, countries that had already been coded were checked for consistency with the update.

Once coding was complete, systematic quality checks were conducted of variables that proved challenging for researchers during the coding process. Randomized quality checks were conducted of variables that were more straightforward, checking first twenty countries to ensure no errors were identified and a larger subset of countries if there were errors. Finally, outlier verifications globally and by region or country income level were conducted for all variables. In order to assess whether legislative provisions have strengthened over time, similar methods were used to construct measures of laws in place as of August 2016.

Strength of prohibitions of discrimination

We examined legislation across six areas: hiring, pay, training, promotions and/or demotions, termination, and harassment. For each area, we assessed the strength of protection against racial and ethnic discrimination. We classified countries as having a “specific prohibition of racial or ethnic discrimination” if legislation either: 1) explicitly addressed racial and ethnic discrimination in that aspect of work (“racial discrimination in hiring is prohibited”); or 2) broadly prohibited racial discrimination at work (“there shall be no discrimination at work based on race”) and guaranteed equality in the specific area (“no one shall be discriminated against in hiring decisions”). For equal pay, we further distinguished between countries that guaranteed equal pay for equal work and those that had a stronger provision guaranteeing equal pay for work of equal value which would prohibit differences in pay when there is occupational segregation.

Countries were classified as having a “broad prohibition of racial or ethnic discrimination” if legislation broadly prohibited discrimination based on race or ethnicity, but did not address specific aspects of work. Countries were coded as having a “general prohibition of discrimination” if legislation did not explicitly address race or ethnicity but banned discrimination in an aspect of work for all workers. “No explicit prohibition” denotes when legislation did not take any of the approaches above. We separately analyzed whether prohibitions of discrimination included indirect discrimination, which would protect against seemingly neutral practices or criteria that have disparate impacts across race and/or ethnicity.

Intersecting characteristics

In many countries racial and/or ethnic discrimination is deeply intertwined with other characteristics, including social class, migration status, foreign national origin, and religion. Accordingly, we assessed whether laws prohibit discrimination based on both race and/or ethnicity and these intersecting characteristics.

Employer responsibilities

We assessed whether legislation required employers to take measures to prevent racial or ethnic discrimination in the workplace. In doing so, we distinguished between legislation that made it a general responsibility and legislation that outlined specific steps for employers to take. These specific prevention steps included requirements to create a code of conduct to prevent racial discrimination, establish disciplinary procedures, raise awareness of anti-discrimination laws, or conduct trainings to prevent discrimination.

Prohibitions of retaliation

To capture the extent to which provisions effectively covered the range of forms that retaliation can take, we coded the protections for individuals who reported discrimination, filed a complaint, or initiated litigation (any adverse action, disciplinary action, or retaliatory dismissal only) and whether prohibitions of retaliation covered all workers participating in the investigation.

Firm-based exceptions

In some countries, prohibitions of discrimination are weakened by provisions that exempt certain employers. We captured exceptions that broadly applied to prohibitions of discrimination or specifically in different aspects of work based on firm type for small businesses, charities and non-profits, and religious organizations.

All analyses were conducted using Stata MP 14.2. Differences were assessed by region using the Pearson's chi-square statistics. Region was categorized according to the World Bank's country and lending groups as of 2020 [ 1 ].

Globally, 153 countries prohibited at least some form of racial and/or ethnic discrimination at work in 2021, a modest increase from 148 countries in 2016 ( Figure 1 ). Three of the countries introducing these new prohibitions were in Sub-Saharan Africa (Mali, South Sudan, and Zambia), one in Europe (Iceland), and one in the South Pacific (Tuvalu). An additional five countries expanded existing prohibitions of racial and/or ethnic discrimination either to broadly prohibit discrimination at work in addition to specific prohibitions in certain areas (Barbados and Honduras) or to comprehensively cover discrimination at work in all areas, as well as indirect racial and/or ethnic discrimination (Andorra, Burundi, and Sao Tome and Principe).

Gaps in prohibitions are found in every region of the world. Countries in the Americas were the most likely to prohibit at least some form of racial discrimination at work, followed closely by Europe and Central Asia and sub-Saharan Africa. In each of these regions, only ten percent or fewer of countries lacked at least some form of prohibition. In contrast, a majority of countries lack prohibitions of racial discrimination in East Asia and Pacific and South Asia ( Figure 2 ). Differences were statistically significant between these two regions and the three regions with the highest levels of prohibitions ( p  < 0.01).

In 2016, 107 countries had a law that explicitly prohibited race-based discrimination in hiring. That number increased to 115 countries in 2021 (see Figure 2 ). An additional 27 countries in 2016 and 29 countries in 2021 had either a broad prohibition of race discrimination or a general prohibition of discrimination in hiring. Prohibitions of racial/ethnic discrimination in hiring were most common in Europe and Central Asia (91%) followed by sub-Saharan Africa (62%). In all other regions, fewer than half of countries prohibited racial discrimination in hiring ( Figure 3 ).

Training and promotions/demotions

Eighty countries in 2016 and 88 countries in 2021 prohibited discrimination based on race in training. Eighty-three countries in 2016 prohibited discrimination in promotions and demotions. In 2021, this number increased to 90 countries.

While less than three-quarters of countries prohibited racial discrimination in training in Europe and Central Asia (74%), these prohibitions were still more common than in every other region. Similar trends were found for promotions and/or demotions.

The number of countries guaranteeing equal pay for work of equal value, increased from 34 in 2016 to 41 in 2021. Overall, including guarantees both of equal pay for work of equal value and equal pay for equal work, 91 countries in 2016 and 96 countries in 2021 guaranteed equal pay across racial and ethnic groups. More countries in Europe and Central Asia (77%) prohibited racial discrimination in pay than those in sub-Saharan Africa (56%), the Middle East and North Africa (27%), and South Asia (27%).

Terminations

In 2016, 106 countries prohibited racial discrimination in terminating employment. That number increased to 112 countries in 2021. Prohibitions of racial/ethnic discrimination in terminations were most common in Europe and Central Asia (74%), Sub-Saharan Africa (71%), and the Americas (60%). In contrast, less than a third of countries prohibited racial discrimination in terminations in East Asia and Pacific (30%) and South Asia (25%).

Only 66 countries explicitly prohibited workplace harassment based on race/ethnicity in 2016. By 2021, that number had increased to 72. Only a minority of countries prohibited racial and/or ethnic harassment in all regions except Europe and Central Asia.

Indirect discrimination

Sixty-three countries prohibited indirect discrimination based on race and/or ethnicity in 2016, increasing to 71 countries in 2021. Only a third of countries in sub-Saharan Africa, a fifth of those in East Asia and Pacific and the Americas, and an eighth of those in South Asia explicitly addressed indirect racial/ethnic discrimination. No countries in the Middle East and North Africa did so.

Intertwined, multiple and intersectional discrimination

Prohibitions of discrimination based on both race and/or ethnicity and religion were widespread: 151 countries prohibited at least some aspect of workplace discrimination based on both characteristics in 2021. However, only 117 countries prohibited at least some aspect of workplace discrimination based on both race and/or ethnicity and social class. Even fewer prohibited discrimination based on both race and/or ethnicity and foreign national origin (90 countries) or migration status (81 countries).

Countries in sub-Saharan Africa were most likely to prohibit discrimination based on race and social class, as well as discrimination based on race and foreign national origin. While prohibitions of racial discrimination and religion, social class, or foreign national origin were comparatively high in the Americas, prohibitions of discrimination based on migration status were markedly lower. While nearly two-thirds of countries in Europe and Central Asia addressed migration status alongside race, only half prohibited discrimination based on foreign national origin ( Figure 4 ).

Finally, a minority of countries explicitly addressed the concepts of intersectionality or multiple discrimination in their discrimination legislation. Kenya's National Gender and Equality Commission Act recognizes intersectionality in defining marginalized groups to be people “disadvantaged by discrimination on one or more of the grounds in Article 27(4) of the Constitution” which includes “race, sex, pregnancy, marital status, health status, ethnic or social origin, colour, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, dress, language or birth” ( 2012 ). Australia's Racial Discrimination Act prohibits “acts done for 2 or more reasons” where “one of the reasons is the race, colour, descent or national or ethnic origin of a person” ( 1975 ). In Macedonia, the Law on Prevention of and Protection Against Discrimination defines multiple discrimination to be a severe form of discrimination ( 2010 ).

Only a smaller minority of countries (38) took the additional step of requiring employers to take one or more specific measures to prevent racial discrimination. An additional 8 countries had general language requiring employers to take preventative steps, without specifying what those steps would look like.

Protections in the event of discrimination

In the event that discrimination occurred and employees filed a report or initiated litigation, a modest majority of countries took the important step of prohibiting retaliation against the employee who filed the complaint. Seventy-eight countries prohibited employers from retaliating in any way, an additional 7 prohibited harassment or any disciplinary action, and 26 only prohibited dismissing the employee ( Table 1 ). A similar number of countries (76) protected employees who participated in investigations from being retaliated against.

Are any employers exempt?

When countries had laws in place prohibiting discrimination, they overwhelmingly applied to all employers. In rare cases small businesses were exempt, including in 5 countries in the case of hiring, 4 countries in the case of training and terminations, and 3 countries in the case of pay and promotions and demotions ( Table 2 ). Charities and nonprofits had similarly uncommon exemptions. The group that was most frequently exempted from these prohibitions of racial discrimination were religious organizations. Fourteen countries exempted religious organizations from bans on discriminations based on race in hiring, training, and terminations, 13 exempted religious organizations in terms of racial discrimination in promotions and demotions, and 9 in the case of pay.

Around the world there has been an explosion of demonstrations and attention to the critical issue of racial discrimination over the past two years, building on the many decades of activism urging action on racial injustices that came before. And while catalyzed by state violence, these recent demonstrations also clearly took aim at the deeply entrenched economic disparities across race that persist across countries, which were on full display as workers from marginalized racial and ethnic groups lost jobs in historic numbers two months into the pandemic.

In response, governments and companies worldwide pledged action. Ensuring that discrimination is clearly prohibited in every country is an essential first step both for changing norms and attitudes and for giving people who are discriminated against more tools to combat the discrimination. Modest progress has been made over the past five years in increasing guarantees of equality, regardless of race and ethnicity, around the world. Between 2016 and 2021, the number of countries legally prohibiting racial and ethnic discrimination in the workplace increased and the strength of provisions improved. Eight more countries prohibited discrimination in hiring and 6 more in terminations. Seven more countries guaranteed equal pay for work of equal value based on race. Moreover, 8 more countries prohibited indirect discrimination based on race and ethnicity.

Yet unconscionable gaps remain. More than 1 in 5 countries have no prohibition of workplace discrimination based on race. Moreover, more than 1 in 4 countries, 54 in total, have no prohibition against racial discrimination in pay. Furthermore, more than a dozen countries provide for exceptions to the prohibition of racial discrimination for religious organizations.

Many countries also fail to offer adequate legal protection against both direct racial discrimination and other forms of discrimination that often occur simultaneously, have disparate impacts on the basis of race, and/or serve as proxies for racial discrimination. For example, in many countries around the world, marginalized racial and ethnic groups are also disproportionately poor due to historic and ongoing economic exclusion. In settings where racial and ethnic discrimination is prohibited but social class-based discrimination remains allowed, class-based discrimination can be used to practically discriminate based on race and ethnicity, particularly if indirect discrimination is likewise unaddressed in the law. Yet 76 countries fail to prohibit discrimination based on both social class and race and/or ethnicity; 121 lack protections against indirect discrimination; and 58 countries lack either protection.

Similarly, while discrimination based both on race/ethnicity and migration status is pervasive, many countries lack comprehensive protections addressing these and related grounds. The evidence illustrating why stronger laws are needed is compelling. For example, a study on labor force participation in Western Europe found that migrants from sub-Saharan Africa, North Africa, the Middle East, and South Asia earned over 20% less income than Western European internal migrants. Compared to internal Western European migrants, external migrants from MENA and sub-Saharan Africa regions were also less likely to be employed and part of the labor force in Europe ( Kislev, 2017 ). National laws that formally and explicitly prohibit multiple forms of discrimination may help protect more individuals and reduce inequalities in employment opportunities. Yet, 112 countries fail to prohibit discrimination based on both migration status and race and/or ethnicity and 103 fail to do so for foreign national origin and race and/or ethnicity.

Finally, even when legal protections are in place, it is crucial that there are both prevention and enforcement mechanisms. 107 countries prohibited racial and ethnic discrimination but did not place any explicit requirements on employers to try to prevent discrimination. Only 38 countries required employers to take specific steps and only an additional 8 required employers generally to work towards prevention.

The critical need to accelerate progress

The significant overall gaps in protections, alongside the findings that the expansion over the past five years of laws prohibiting racial discrimination at work has been slow, underscores the need to accelerate the pace of change on legal reforms—as a matter of human rights, an important determinant of individual and household incomes, and a prerequisite for countries to reach their full potential. Ensuring equal opportunities in employment on the basis of race and ethnicity has vast implications for individuals, families, and their broader communities. A significant body of literature has documented how access to employment, job quality, and adequate income shape mental and physical health, overall life satisfaction, and the ability to meet material needs ( Calvo et al ., 2015 ; Murphy and Athansou, 1999 ). When work opportunities are unevenly distributed by race due to both individual and structural discrimination, these disparities drive broader inequalities.

Moreover, all countries have agreed to do so. The Sustainable Development Goals, adopted by all UN member states in 2015, commit governments to “empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status” and “[e]nsure equal opportunity and reduce inequalities of outcome, including by eliminating discriminatory laws, policies and practices and promoting appropriate legislation, policies and action in this regard” ( United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, 2015 ). By adopting the SDGs, countries worldwide agreed to realize these commitments by 2030. To meet that timeline, accelerating the pace of change on fundamental anti-discrimination protections is essential.

This builds on a long history of international agreements guaranteeing equal rights regardless of race or ethnicity, including in the field of employment. Many of these have been in place for decades. Foremost among them is the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination ( United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, 1965 ), which has been ratified by 182 countries ( United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, 2021c ), declares that States Parties have a duty to “prohibit and to eliminate racial discrimination in all its forms and to guarantee the right of everyone, without distinction as to race, colour, or national or ethnic origin, to equality before the law, notably in the enjoyment of (…) The rights to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work, to protection against unemployment, to equal pay for equal work, to just and favourable remuneration” ( United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, 1965 ).

In fact, nearly every major global human rights agreement commits countries to treating all people equally regardless of race or ethnicity. These include, among others, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted as the first global agreement of the United Nations and considered binding on all countries ( United Nations General Assembly, 1948 ), the International Covenant on Economic Social and Cultural Rights, a binding treaty ratified by 171 countries ( United Nations General Assembly, 1966 ; United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, 2021b ), and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, ratified by 173 countries ( United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, 1966 , 2021a ).

Finally, beyond its importance to individuals, families, and communities and deep intrinsic value as a matter of human rights, ending racial discrimination in the labor market has significant implications for economies and companies. For example, in the US alone, estimates from the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco find that closing the racial gaps in employment-to-population ratios between 1990 and 2019 would have boosted 2019 GDP by over $150 billion ( Buckman et al. , 2021 ), while other research has forecast that closing the racial earnings gap by 2050 would boost GDP by 22% ( Turner, 2018 ). Likewise, a significant body of evidence demonstrates that greater racial and ethnic diversity within companies, including on boards, improves their financial performance and degree of innovation ( Erhardt et al. , 2003 ; Herring, 2009 ; Cheong and Sinnakkannu, 2014 ; Thomas et al. , 2016 ; Hunt et al. , 2018 ). For example, a study of 492 firms found a strong relationship between ethnic and linguistic diversity and total revenue, dividends, sales and productivity ( Churchill, 2019 ). Particularly as more companies work and hire trans-nationally, the extent to which laws in all countries prohibit racial and ethnic discrimination at work matters to overall performance.

Research limitations and the need for a broader research agenda on policies and outcomes

While this study provides an important first look at prohibitions against racial and ethnic discrimination at work in all the world's countries, it has important limitations. This study did not quantify laws related to intersectional discrimination, including, among others, gender, age, disability, sexual orientation, and gender identity. Yet as past scholarship and case law have shown, addressing each individual basis for discrimination still may not be enough to reach the unique forms of discrimination that arise when multiple grounds of discrimination intersect, particularly if workers are required to prove each of their discrimination claims discretely and sequentially. Explicit protections against intersectional discrimination, and judiciaries willing and trained to apply them, may be needed ( Crenshaw, 1989 ; Fredman, 2016 ).

Future research should also examine prohibitions of discrimination in working conditions, given the evidence of inequalities. For example, research has shown that non-Hispanic Black workers and foreign-born Hispanic workers are disproportionately hired into jobs with the higher injury risk and increased prevalence of work-related disability ( Seabury et al. , 2017 ). Another study on COVID-19 job exposures found that Latinx and Black frontline workers were overrepresented in lower status occupations associated with higher risk and less adequate COVID-19 protections, contributing to the higher prevalence of infection in these populations ( Goldman et al. , 2021 ).

Further, we need to measure laws that reduce bias in informal as well as formal mechanisms that play a large role in the recruitment, hiring, and promotion processes, as well as in determining working conditions. Evidence has shown social networks and informal relationships can not only impact recruitment, but also can contribute to inequities in salary negotiations and mentorship at the hiring stage ( Seidel et al. , 2000 ; Spafford et al. , 2006 ).

These expansions on the law and policy data presented here should be part of a broader research agenda on racial equity in the global labor market that examines not only which laws and policies are in place but what impacts they are having. As with other policy areas, developing longitudinal quantitative, globally comparative measures of anti-discrimination laws helps make it possible for researchers to rigorously analyze the relationship between policy change and outcomes, producing actionable evidence about “what works” across countries ( Raub et al. , 2022 ). However, even with the new policy data we have developed, improvements in outcomes data will be essential to measure the impact globally of advances and legal gaps. Globally comparative data on experiences of racial discrimination across countries which is essential for measuring the impact of legal change globally has been limited to date for several reasons including the wide range across countries of who suffers racial and ethnic discrimination and the variability of country willingness to collect data.

Addressing discrimination: a global responsibility

While the workplace is only one location where racial and ethnic discrimination occurs, it is a crucial one. Ensuring equal opportunity to be hired and equal treatment in pay, working conditions, and promotions together influences whether individuals can lead full work lives, contribute to household income, and not only meet basic needs but also invest in the future of their families and communities. Moreover, global agreements have committed countries around the world to combatting discrimination based on race and ethnicity, including in the specific context of employment.

For these international instruments to have full impact, however, specific country-level legislation that operationalizes their commitments and prohibits discrimination in the workplace is essential. To accelerate progress toward ending racial and ethnic discrimination in employment worldwide—a basic human right—we need to monitor the steps countries are taking to address and eliminate discrimination in all aspects of work, including hiring, promotion, pay, and terminations. While legal guarantees are not enough—and norm change, leadership, and social movements are likewise critical to successfully eliminating discrimination both at work and more broadly—clear stipulations that companies are not allowed to discriminate are essential, as are strong and regularly updated accountability mechanisms.

Do countries prohibit racial and/or ethnic discrimination in all aspects of work?

Number of countries prohibiting racial and/or ethnic discrimination at work by aspect of work and year

Percentage of countries prohibiting racial and/or ethnic discrimination at work by region and aspect of work

Number of countries prohibiting at least some discrimination at work based on race and/or ethnicity and intersecting characteristics by region

Countries with prohibitions of retaliation against those reporting discrimination

Countries with exceptions to prohibitions of racial and/or ethnic discrimination

The World Bank's (WB) regional classifications can be found here: https://datahelpdesk.worldbank.org/knowledgebase/articles/906519-world-bank-country-and-lending-groups . While Malta is classified as part of the Middle East and North Africa by the WB, it is also a member of the European Union (EU) and therefore more likely to have legislation reflecting the EU's principles and directives. Thus, we classified Malta as a part of Europe and Central Asia. All other countries retained their WB classifications.

Adisa , T.A. , Osabutey , E.L.C. , Gbadamosi , G. and Mordi , C. ( 2017 ), “ The challenges of employee resourcing: the perceptions of managers in Nigeria ”, The Career Development International , Vol.  22 No.  6 , pp.  703 - 723 .

Agocs , C. ( 2002 ), “ Canada's employment equity legislation and policy, 1987-2000: the gap between policy and practice ”, International Journal of Manpower , Vol.  23 No.  3 , pp.  256 - 276 .

Arceo-Gomez , E. and Campos-Vazquez , R. ( 2014 ), “ Race and marriage in the labor market: a discrimination correspondence study in a developing country ”, American Economic Review , Vol.  104 No.  5 , pp.  376 - 380 .

Baert , S. ( 2018 ), “ Hiring discrimination: an overview of (almost) all correspondence experiments since 2005 ”, Audit Studies: Behind the Scenes with Theory, Method, and Nuance , pp.  63 - 77 .

Bergman , M.E. , Langhout , R.D. , Palmieri , P.A. , Cortina , L.M. and Fitzgerald , L.F. ( 2002 ), “ The (un)reasonableness of reporting: antecedents and consequences of reporting sexual harassment ”, Journal of Applied Psychology , Vol.  87 No.  2 , pp.  230 - 242 .

Bertrand , M. and Duflo , E. ( 2017 ), “ Field experiments on discrimination ”, in Banerjee , A.V. and Duflo , E. (Eds), Handbook of Economic Field Experiments , Elsevier , Amsterdam , Vol.  1 , pp.  309 - 393 .

Buckman , S.R. , Choi , L.Y. , Daly , M.C. and Seitelman , L.M. ( 2021 ), The Economic Gains from Equity , Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco Working Paper , San Francisco .

Calvo , E. , Mair , C. and Sarkisian , N. ( 2015 ), “ Individual troubles, shared troubles: the multiplicative effect of individual and country-level unemployment on life satisfaction in 95 Nations (1981-2009) ”, Social Forces , Vol.  93 No.  4 , pp.  1625 - 1653 .

Chay , K.Y. ( 1998 ), “ The impact of federal civil rights policy on black economic progress: evidence from the equal employment opportunity act of 1972 ”, Industrial and Labor Relations Review , Vol.  51 No.  4 , pp.  608 - 632 .

Cheong , C.W.H. and Sinnakkannu , J. ( 2014 ), “ Ethnic diversity and firm financial performance: evidence from Malaysia ”, Journal of Asia-Pacific Business , Vol.  15 No.  1 , pp. 73 - 100 , doi: 10.1080/10599231.2014.872973 .

Churchill , S.A. ( 2019 ), “ Firm financial performance in sub-Saharan Africa: the role of ethnic diversity ”, Empirical Economics , Vol.  57 No.  3 , pp.  1 - 14 .

Coleman , M.G. ( 2003 ), “ Job skill and Black male wage discrimination ”, Social Science Quarterly , Vol.  84 , pp.  892 - 906 .

Collins , W.J. ( 2003 ), “ The labor market impact of state-level anti-discrimination laws, 1940-1960 ”, Industrial and Labor Relations Review , Vol.  56 No.  2 , pp.  244 - 272 .

Couch , K.A. and Fairlie , R. ( 2010 ), “ Last hired, first fired? Black-white unemployment and the business cycle ”, Demography , Vol.  47 No.  1 , pp.  227 - 247 .

Creese , G. ( 2010 ), “ Erasing English language competency: African migrants in Vancouver, Canada ”, International Migration and Integration , Vol.  11 No.  3 , pp.  295 - 313 , doi: 10.1007/s12134-010-0139-3 .

Crenshaw , K. ( 1989 ), “ Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: a black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics ”, The University of Chicago Legal Forum , p. 139 .

del Mar Alonso-Almeida , M. ( 2014 ), “ Women (and mothers) in the workforce: worldwide factors ”, Women's Studies International Forum , Vol.  44 , pp.  164 - 171 .

Demetriou , C. ( 2016 ), “ The equality body finds that restrictions in access to self-employment for third country nationals amount to unlawful discrimination, Cyprus ”, European Commission , available at: https://www.equalitylaw.eu/downloads/3840-cyprus-the-equality-body-finds-that-restrictions-in-access-to-self-employment-for-third-country-nationals-amount-to-unlawful-discrimination-pdf-95-kb ( accessed 7 January 2022 ).

Derous , E. and Pepermans , R. ( 2019 ), “ Gender discrimination in hiring: intersectional effects with ethnicity and cognitive job demands ”, Archives of Scientific Psychology , Vol.  7 No.  1 , pp.  40 - 49 .

Di Stasio , V. and Larsen , E.N. ( 2020 ), “ The racialized and gendered workplace: applying an intersectional lens to a field experiment on hiring discrimination in five european labor markets ”, Social Psychology Quarterly , Vol.  83 No.  3 , pp.  229 - 250 .

Donohue , J.J. and Heckman , J. ( 1991 ), “ Continuous versus episodic change: the impact of civil rights policy on the economic status of blacks ”, Journal of Economic Literature , Vol.  29 No.  4 , p. 1603 .

Dostie , B. and Javdani , M. ( 2020 ), “ Immigrants and workplace training: evidence from Canadian linked employer–employee data ”, Industrial Relations , Vol.  59 No.  2 , pp.  275 - 315 .

Drydakis , N. ( 2012 ), “ Roma women in Athenian firms: do they face wage bias? ”, Ethnic and Racial Studies , Vol.  35 No.  12 , pp.  2054 - 2074 .

Erhardt , N.L. , Werbel , J.D. and Shrader , C.B. ( 2003 ), “ Board of director diversity and firm financial performance ”, Corporate Governance , Vol.  11 No.  2 , pp. 102 - 111 , doi: 10.1111/1467-8683.00011 .

Fredman , S. ( 2016 ), “ Intersectional discrimination in EU gender equality and non-discrimination law ”, European Commission .

Goldman , N. , Pebley , A.R. , Lee , K. , Andrasfay , T. and Pratt , B. ( 2021 ), “ Racial and ethnic differentials in COVID-19-related job exposures by occupational standing in the US ”, PLoS One , Vol.  16 No.  9 .

Gorod , B.J. ( 2007 ), “ Rejecting reasonableness: a new look at title VII's anti-retaliation provision ”, American University Law Review , Vol.  56 No.  6 , pp.  1469 - 1524 .

Greene , D.W. ( 2017 ), “ Splitting hairs: the Eleventh Circuit’s take on workplace bans against Black women’s natural hair in EEOC v. Catastrophe Management Solutions ”, University of Miami Law Review , Vol.  71 , p. 987 .

Hatch , S.L. , Gazard , B. , Williams , D.R. , Frissa , S. , Goodwin , L. , SelcoH , S.T. and Hotopf , M. ( 2016 ), “ Discrimination and common mental disorder among migrant and ethnic groups: findings from a South East London Community sample ”, Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology , Vol.  51 No.  5 , pp.  689 - 701 .

Herring , C. ( 2009 ), “ Does diversity pay?: race, gender, and the business case for diversity ”, American Sociological Review , Vol.  74 No.  2 , pp. 208 - 224 , doi: 10.1177/000312240907400203 .

Hunt , V. , Prince , S. , Dixon-Fyle , S. and Yee , L. ( 2018 ), Delivering Through Diversity , McKinsey & Company , Los Angeles .

Javdani , M. ( 2020 ), “ Visible minorities and job mobility: evidence from a workplace panel survey ”, The Journal of Economic Inequality , Vol.  18 , pp. 491 - 524 .

Javdani , M. and McGee , A. ( 2018 ), “ Labor market mobility and the early-career outcomes of immigrant men ”, IZA Journal of Development and Migration , Vol.  8 No.  1 , pp.  1 - 28 .

Justesen , P. ( 2016 ), “ Board of Equal Treatment ruling on so-called ‘language barrier’, Denmark ”, European Commission , available at: https://www.equalitylaw.eu/downloads/3920-denmark-board-of-equal-treatment-ruling-on-so-called-language-barrier-pdf-131-kb ( accessed 7 January 2022 ).

Keenan , J.P. ( 1990 ), “ Upper-level managers and whistleblowing: determinants of perceptions of company encouragement and information about where to blow the whistle ”, Journal of Business and Psychology , Vol.  5 No.  2 , pp.  223 - 235 .

Kislev , E. ( 2017 ), “ Deciphering the ‘ethnic penalty’ of immigrants in Western Europe: a cross-classified multilevel analysis ”, Social Indicators Research , Vol.  134 No.  2 , pp.  725 - 745 , doi: 10.1007/s11205-016-1451-x .

Law on Prevention of and Protection Against Discrimination ( 2010 ), “ Skopje: constitutional court of the republic of Macedonia ”, No.  82 , available at: https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/5aa12ad47.pdf .

Leck , J.D. and Saunders , D.M. ( 1992 ), “ Canada's employment equity act: effects on employee selection ”, Population Research and Policy Review , Vol.  11 No.  1 , p. 21 .

Leck , J.D. , St. Onge, S. and Lalancette , I. ( 1995 ), “ Wage gap changes among organizations subject to the employment equity act ”, Canadian Public Policy , Vol.  21 No.  4 , pp.  387 - 400 .

Lessem , R. and Nakajima , K. ( 2019 ), “ Immigrant wages and recessions: evidence from undocumented Mexicans ”, European Economic Review , Vol.  114 , pp.  92 - 115 .

Luksyte , A. , Waite , E. , Avery , D.R. and Roy , R. ( 2013 ), “ Held to a different standard: racial differences in the impact of lateness on advancement opportunity ”, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology , Vol.  86 No.  2 , pp.  142 - 165 .

Mayiya , S. , Schachtebeck , C. and Diniso , C. ( 2019 ), “ Barriers to career progression of Black African middle managers: the South African perspective ”, Acta Universitatis Danubius Oeconomica , Vol.  15 No.  2 .

Mora , C. and Undurraga , E.A. ( 2013 ), “ Racialisation of immigrants at work: labour mobility and segmentation of Peruvian migrants in Chile ”, Bulletin of Latin American Research , Vol.  32 No.  3 , pp.  294 - 310 , doi: 10.1111/blar.12002 .

Murphy , G.C. and Athanasou , J.A. ( 1999 ), “ The effect of unemployment on mental health ”, Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology , Vol.  72 No.  1 , pp.  83 - 99 .

National Gender and Equality Commission Act ( 2012 ), “ Ch. 5C, Nairobi: national council for law reporting with the authority of the attorney-general ”, available at: www.kenyalaw.org .

Piazzalunga , D. ( 2015 ), “ Is there a double-negative effect? Gender and ethnic wage differentials in Italy ”, Labour , Vol.  29 No.  3 , pp.  243 - 269 .

Pillay , S. , Ramphul , N. , Dorasamy , N. and Meyer , D. ( 2018 ), “ Predictors of whistle-blowing intentions: an analysis of multi-level variables ”, Administration and Society , Vol.  50 No.  2 , pp.  186 - 216 .

Racial Discrimination Act ( 1975 ), “ Barton: attorney General's department, Australian government ”, available at: https://www.ag.gov.au/rights-and-protections/human-rights-and-anti-discrimination/australias-anti-discrimination-law .

Rafferty , A. ( 2020 ), “ Skill underutilization and under-skilling in Europe: the role of workplace discrimination ”, Work, Employment and Society , Vol.  34 No.  2 , pp.  317 - 335 .

Raub , A. , Sprague , A. , Waisath , W. , Nandi , A. , Atabay , E. , Vincent , I. , Moreno , G. , Earle , A. , Perry , N. and Heymann , J. ( 2022 ), “ Utilizing a comparative policy resource from the WORLD policy analysis center covering constitutional rights, laws, and policies across 193 countries for outcome analysis, monitoring, and accountability ”, Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice , Vol.  24 No.  4 , pp. 313 - 328 , doi: 10.1080/13876988.2021.1894073 .

Seabury , S.A. , Terp , S. and Boden , L.I. ( 2017 ), “ Racial and ethnic differences in the frequency of workplace injuries and prevalence of work-related disability ”, Health Affairs , Vol.  36 No.  2 , pp.  266 - 273 .

Seidel , M.-D.L. , Polzer , J.T. and Stewart , K.J. ( 2000 ), “ Friends in high places: the effects of social networks on discrimination in salary negotiations ”, Administrative Science Quarterly , Vol.  45 No.  1 , pp.  1 - 24 .

Spafford , M.M. , Nygaard , V.L. , Gregor , F. and Boyd , M.A. ( 2006 ), “ ‘Navigating the different spaces’”: experiences of inclusion and isolation among racially minoritized faculty in Canada ”, The Canadian Journal of Higher Education , Vol.  36 No.  1 , pp.  1 - 27 .

Stalker , P. ( 1994 ), The Work of Strangers: A Survey of International Labour Migration , International Labour Office , Geneva .

Sunstein , C. ( 1996 ), “ On the expressive function of law ”, University of Pennsylvania Law Review , Vol.  144 No.  5 , pp.  2021 - 2053 .

Thomas , A. , Dougherty , J. , Strand , S. , Nayar , A. and Janani , M. ( 2016 ), Decoding Diversity: The Financial and Economic Returns to Diversity in Tech , Intel Corporation and Dalberg Global Development Advisors , New York .

Tomlinson , J. , Valizade , D. , Muzio , D. , Charlwood , A. and Aulakh , S. ( 2019 ), “ Privileges and penalties in the legal profession: an intersectional analysis of career progression ”, The British Journal of Sociology , Vol.  6 No.  70 , pp.  1043 - 1066 .

Turner , A. ( 2018 ), The Business Case for Racial Equity: A Strategy for Growth , W.K. Kellogg Foundation and Altarum , Battle Creek, MI .

United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs ( 2015 ), “ Reduce inequality within and among countries, goal 10 ”, available at: https://sdgs.un.org/goals/goal10 (accessed 17 September 2021) .

United Nations General Assembly ( 1948 ), “ Universal declaration of human rights, resolution 217 A (III) ”, available at: http://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/ ( accessed 15 July 2021 ).

United Nations General Assembly ( 1966 ), “ International covenant on economic, social and cultural rights ”, available at: https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/cescr.aspx ( accessed 16 July 2021 ).

United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights ( 1965 ), “ International convention on the elimination of all forms of racial discrimination ”, available at: https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/cerd.aspx ( accessed 16 July 2021 ).

United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights ( 1966 ), “ International convention on civil and political rights ”, available at: https://www.ohchr.org/en/professionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspx ( accessed 16 July 2021 ).

United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights ( 2021a ), “ Status of ratification interactive dashboard - International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ”, available at: https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?chapter=4&clang=_en&mtdsg_no=IV-4&src=IND (accessed 16 July 2021) .

United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights ( 2021b ), “ Status of ratification interactive dashboard - International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights ”, available at: https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=IND&mtdsg_no=IV-3&chapter=4 (accessed 15 July 2021) .

United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights ( 2021c ), “ Status of ratification interactive dashboard - International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination ”, available at: https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=IND&mtdsg_no=IV-2&chapter=4&clang=_en (accessed 16 July 2021) .

Weichselbaumer , D. ( 2020 ), “ Multiple discrimination against female immigrants wearing headscarves ”, ILR Review , Vol.  73 No.  3 , pp.  600 - 627 .

Yap , M. ( 2010 ), “ The intersection of gender and race: effects on the incidence of promotions ”, Canadian Journal of Career Development , Vol.  9 No.  2 , pp. 22 - 32 .

Yap , M. and Konrad , A.M. ( 2009 ), “ Gender and racial differentials in promotions: is there a sticky floor, a mid-level bottleneck, or a glass ceiling? ”, Relations Industrielles/Industrial Relations , Vol.  64 No.  4 , pp.  593 - 619 .

Yu , H. ( 2020 ), “ Multiracial feminism: an intersectional approach to examining female officers’ occupational barriers in federal law enforcement ”, Women and Criminal Justice , Vol.  31 No.  5 , pp. 327 - 341 , doi: 10.1080/08974454.2020.1734146 .

Zabalza , Z. and Zafiris , T. ( 1985 ), “ The effect of Britain's anti-discriminatory legislation on relative pay and employment ”, The Economic Journal , Vol.  95 No.  379 , pp.  679 - 699 .

Zempi , I. ( 2020 ), “ ‘Looking back, I wouldn't join up again’: the lived experiences of police officers as victims of bias and prejudice perpetrated by fellow staff within an English police force ”, Police Practice and Research: An International Journal , Vol.  2 No.  21 , pp.  33 - 48 .

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful for funding from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Corresponding author

Related articles, all feedback is valuable.

Please share your general feedback

Report an issue or find answers to frequently asked questions

Contact Customer Support

Language selection

• Français fr

Discussion guide on ageism in Canada

List of abbreviations, alternate formats.

Discussion guide on ageism in Canada [ PDF - 341 KB ]

Purpose of the guide

The Forum of Federal, Provincial and Territorial (FPT) Ministers Responsible for Seniors (the Forum) has been working to address the social and economic impacts of ageism on older adults in Canada. Part of this work is to undertake consultations on ageism. The goal of the consultations will be to obtain a broader picture of how ageism is manifested. The Forum wants to better understand the impacts of ageism at the individual level, and at the community level. The consultations will also inform the development of a final report proposing approaches, initiatives and strategies to address ageism.

This discussion guide provides a background for participants to prepare to take part in the consultation. This guide can be used alongside the consultation toolkit as a resource for planning these conversations. This discussion guide focuses on ageism directed towards older adults.

This document was developed within the context of the United Nations Decade of Healthy Ageing (2021 to 2030), which includes the goal to combat ageism by changing how people think, feel, and act towards age and aging. Reference i

Consultation toolkit: Are you interested in hosting a group discussion on ageism? A consultation toolkit is available to help guide organizations that wish to host their own group discussion and contribute to the national conversation on ageism.

Ageism is complex. To help facilitate discussions, participants will discuss ageism through 5 themes:

• health and health care
• social inclusion
• safety and security
• media and social media

The following questions will guide the discussions for each theme:

• what are the most significant ageism issues related to each of the themes?
• what impacts has the COVID-19 pandemic had on ageism in each of the themes?
• what efforts are currently working to address ageism related to each of the themes?
• what more could be done (for example new strategies, initiatives or programs) to best address ageism related to each of the themes, and who should be involved?

Throughout the guide, there are text boxes that provide the “key findings” from research in each of the 5 themes and provide the reader with a quick summary of each topic. Further explanation of these findings and the references for them can be found in the main text. Note that examples of initiatives to address ageism are available in Annex 1 .

Another way to provide input is by participating in the online platform . The online platform includes a questionnaire and the opportunity to share your story on ageism.

A “What We Heard” report that summarizes input from the consultations will be available online. This will inform a subsequent Policy Options Report, to be submitted to FPT Ministers for their consideration. This report will propose approaches, initiatives, and strategies to address ageism in Canada.

Introduction of key concepts

Key findings:

• The World Health Organization defines ageism as “the stereotypes (how we think), prejudice (how we feel) and discrimination (how we act) towards others or oneself based on age”
• A stereotype is a belief that is generalized towards a whole group of people (for example, older adults lack technological skills)
• Self-ageism occurs when older adults begin to believe stereotypes and negative views about older people and aging
• People’s experiences of ageism can be influenced by other characteristics such as their gender or ethnicity

The World Health Organization defines ageism as “the stereotypes (how we think), prejudice (how we feel) and discrimination (how we act) towards others or oneself based on age.” Reference ii This discussion guide focuses on ageism directed towards older adults. Footnote 1 However, it is important to acknowledge that ageism can affect people of any age. Ageism can also be perpetrated by a wide range of actors (for example, younger people, employers, governments, media, health and social care systems, and older adults themselves).

Ageism includes both attitudes and beliefs towards older adults, as well as actions resulting from these attitudes and beliefs. Ageism can take many forms. Some examples of ageism include:

• jokes about a person’s age and making fun of older adults in general
• workplace or health care policies that discriminate against older adults
• older adults being patronized, ignored, or insulted
• assuming that an older adult is incapable of making their own decisions
• older adults being offered different screenings or medical treatments than individuals in other age groups

While society widely condemns other forms of discrimination such as racism and sexism, ageism remains accepted and unchallenged in many circumstances.

There has been limited research conducted on ageism in Canada. A Canadian survey found 63% of older adults surveyed felt they had been treated unfairly based on their age. Younger people, health care professionals, government policies, and employers were the most identified sources of age discrimination. Reference iii

Ageism is associated with a number of negative outcomes for older adults, such as reduced longevity, poverty and financial insecurity, poor health outcomes, and loss of self-esteem and confidence. Reference ii , Reference iv

Stereotypes and self-ageism

A stereotype is a belief that is generalized towards a whole group of people. Stereotypes can be both positive representations (for example, older people are sweet and friendly) and negative representations (for example, older people are forgetful).

Some common stereotypes about older adults are:

• older adults lack technological skills, or cannot learn how to use new technology
• most older adults have dementia
• most older adults live in long-term care homes
• older workers are resistant to change

Stereotypes can be harmful. Over time, older people may begin to believe the stereotypes and negative views of aging that are present in society; some researchers call this “self-ageism”. When this happens, the stereotypes may become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Reference v For example, a stereotype about older adults is that they are all frail and dependent, and need to be cared for. Over time, older people may come to believe that they are unable to care for themselves and this may lead them to actually becoming dependent.

Ageism, gender, and ethnicity

Age is only one aspect of a person’s identity. Other aspects of a person’s identity can influence their experience of ageism, as can other forms of discrimination such as sexism and racism. Research shows how age, gender, and ethnicity can intersect to create unique experiences of ageism. For example, older women face more discrimination than older men in hiring processes due to age-based and sex-based discrimination. Reference iv

Initiatives to address ageism

In order to address ageism, governments, older adult organizations, and other stakeholders have implemented a variety of types of initiatives. Reference ii Annex 1 provides examples of common types of initiatives to address ageism, including intergenerational programs, initiatives to support older workers, ageism education and awareness campaigns, and age-friendly initiatives. While there has been limited research on the effectiveness of initiatives to address ageism, the available research suggests that initiatives that combine intergenerational interactions between older and younger generations with education are particularly promising. Reference iv

Ageism and employment

• Employers often believe stereotypes about older workers, which can lead to age-based discrimination in hiring and training practices
• Negative stereotypes about older workers may lead older adults to doubt their value as employees and result in them choosing to exit the workforce earlier
• The inclusion of older adults in the workforce can provide financial benefits to older adults, improve the performance of businesses, and strengthen Canada’s economic performance

Introduction

In the past, most Canadians retired permanently by age 65. Today, however, many Canadians are delaying retirement, or are retiring but continue to work part-time. In 2015, about 1 in 5 older Canadians continued to work past the age of 65. Reference vi Despite many older adults remaining in the workforce, ageist attitudes and age-based discrimination may continue to act as barriers to participating in the workforce.

Social and psychological impacts

Research has shown that employers often believe stereotypes about older workers. Reference vii Some of these stereotypes are positive (for example, older workers are loyal and reliable), but others are negative (for example, older workers are less productive). Reference vii Negative stereotypes can lead to age-based discrimination towards older workers.

For example, research has shown that:

• older workers have lower callback rates on job applications than younger workers Reference viii
• older women and members of ethnic minority groups in particular are discriminated against in hiring practices Reference vii Reference ix
• employers offer fewer training opportunities to older workers Reference x

Exposure to, and acceptance of, negative stereotypes may cause older workers to lose confidence in their abilities. They may see less value in themselves as employees, and consider retiring as a result. Reference xi

Economic impacts

While ageist employers and work environments can act as barriers to older workers participating in the workforce, the participation of older adults in the workforce has benefits for older adults, businesses, and society as a whole:

• benefits for older adults: working in later life can provide increased financial security. It has been estimated about half of workers aged 60 and older in Canada are working due to financial necessity rather than choice Reference xii
• benefits for businesses: creating age-friendly work environments can expand the pool of potential employees for businesses and benefit their productivity, performance, and innovation Reference iv
• benefits for society: older workers can strengthen the workforce and economic performance of a country. It has been estimated that $56 billion per year would be added to Canada’s gross domestic product Footnote 2 if the number of workers aged 55 to 69 was increased from 54% to the percentage in top performing countries such as Sweden, Japan, and the United States (62%) Reference xiii

Ageism and health and health care

• There is strong evidence that ageism impacts the health of older adults, including that it may contribute to declines in memory function, increased risk of developing dementia, and decreased life expectancy
• Ageism may lead to poor communication between health care providers and older adults, misdiagnosis of health conditions, and different recommendations for treatments for older people 
• Researchers in the United States estimate that the annual cost of ageism to their health care system is $63 billion

The majority of older Canadians are in good health; however, healthcare utilization does tend to increase as people get older, particularly for older adults at advanced ages or in the final years of life. Reference xiv , Reference xv For example, use of physician services increases from an annual average of 12.5 services per person aged 65 to 69 to 20.2 services per person aged 80 to 84 to 29.5 services per person aged 94 and up. Reference xiv Research has shown that ageism can impact the health of older Canadians by:

• contributing to the development of mental and physical health conditions; and
• contributing to the provision of poor quality health care due to discrimination by health care providers and the health care system Reference iv

These impacts in turn can lead to increased costs for individuals and the health care system. This is described further in the section on Economic Impacts below.

In a review of 422 studies on ageism and health from around the world, 95.5% of the studies found ageism negatively impacted the health of older adults through structural (for example, hindering access to health care, exclusion from health research) and individual effects (for example, contributing to mental and physical illness, risky health behaviours). Reference xvi

There are 3 pathways through which ageism may directly affect the health of individual older adults: Reference xvii

• psychological: ageist attitudes become a “self-fulfilling prophecy” where people come to believe that ageist stereotypes are true
• behavioural: when older adults accept negative stereotypes about their health, they may believe poor health is unavoidable. This may lead them to not engage in healthy behaviours 
• physiological: exposure to negative stereotypes causes stress and triggers cardiovascular stress responses (for example, increased blood pressure and heartrate, sweating, etc.), which, when repeatedly triggered, negatively impacts cardiovascular health

Self-ageism occurs when older adults begin to accept negative stereotypes about themselves. Research suggests that self-ageism can have a significant impact on physical and mental health. Research has shown that people with positive beliefs about aging:

• exhibit less decline in memory function over time Reference xviii
• are less likely to develop dementia, even if they have a high-risk gene for the disease; Reference xix and 
• live on average 7.5 years longer than people with negative beliefs about aging Reference xx

Ageism can also be expressed through the attitudes and behaviours of health care providers and the health care system. This can lead to the delivery of poor quality health care. For example:

• health care providers may be impatient, dismissive and less attentive to the health care needs of older adults Reference xxi
• health care providers may use condescending language and speak to older adults as if they were a child Reference xxii
• ageist assumptions about symptoms experienced by older adults (such as, assuming symptoms are merely a normal part of aging) can result in inaccurate diagnoses of health conditions Reference xxiii , Reference xxiv
• health care providers may lack the training necessary to recognize health conditions in older adults, as their symptoms may differ from younger people Reference xxiii , Reference xxiv
• health care providers may not recommend all the treatment options to older adults that are available to younger adults for physical and mental health issues Reference xxiii , Reference xxiv

The education offered to health care providers on caring for older people is often limited and inadequate. Researchers suggest that requiring robust geriatric content to be included in medical education may improve the diagnosis and treatment of older adults. Reference iv

Researchers attempted to calculate the costs of ageism on health conditions for people aged 60 and up in the United States. The researchers estimated that the annual cost of ageism to the United States health care system was $63 billion. Footnote 3

• $11.1 billion of this cost was attributed to age discrimination
• $28.5 billion was attributed to negative stereotypes; and
• $33.7 billion was attributed to negative self-perceptions of aging Reference xxv

The researchers also estimated that a 10% reduction in the prevalence of ageism could lead to 1.7 million fewer cases of 8 major heath conditions. Reference xxv

In addition to producing costs for the health care system, health issues can lead to direct financial costs for individuals and their families. For example, the costs of purchasing medications or taking time off work to go to the doctor.

Ageism and social inclusion

• Social inclusion “describes how a society values all of its citizens, respects their differences, ensures everyone’s basic needs are met, and welcomes and enables full participation in that society”
• Ageism is a barrier to the social inclusion of older adults
• Ageism may contribute to social isolation and feelings of loneliness experienced by older adults

Social inclusion “describes how a society values all of its citizens, respects their differences, ensures everyone’s basic needs are met, and welcomes and enables full participation in that society.” Reference xxvi Inclusive societies support the economic and social inclusion of older people, including those who are vulnerable or at increased risk of exclusion. Reference xxvii Previous consultations with older adults in Canada have identified ageism as a barrier to social inclusion. Reference xxvii

In recent years social isolation and loneliness Footnote 4 have become important public health concerns. Social isolation and loneliness have been linked to health conditions such as depression, cardiovascular disease, and dementia, as well as mortality. Reference xxviii , Reference xxix , Reference xxx During the COVID-19 pandemic, physical distancing has been associated with mental distress. Reference xxxi

Researchers believe that ageism contributes to loneliness among older adults through:

• negative attitudes that make older adults feel rejected and unwelcome, causing them to avoid social participation
• older adults accepting the stereotype that they will be lonely; and
• discriminatory practices and policies that exclude older adults from society Reference xxxii

A recent study from the United States found that social isolation (though not loneliness) had significant costs for the health care system. The study found that, on average, an extra $1,608 was spent each year on each socially isolated older adult. This amounted to $6.7 billion in additional health care costs. Reference xxxiii Another recent study from the United States reported that loneliness and social isolation can have combined effects. This study found older adults who were both lonely and socially isolated had higher health care costs than those who were just lonely or just socially isolated. Reference xxxiv

Ageism and safety and security

• As a result of ageist policies and practices, houses and neighbourhoods are often poorly designed to meet the needs of an aging population
• Discrimination in the rental market may hinder the ability of older adults to access housing
• Ageism and senior abuse are closely related, and ageism is a risk factor for senior abuse

Older adults should feel safe and secure in their home and community. Shelter is one of the most basic human needs, however, not all older Canadians have access to affordable, suitable, and adequate housing. Reference xxxv

Safety and security also means being free from any form of senior abuse. Footnote 5 Although there is no national definition of senior abuse, it is generally understood as “any action by someone in a relationship of trust that results in harm or distress to an older person”. This can include physical, sexual, psychological, emotional, and financial abuse and neglect. Reference xxxvi

Housing is one of the most important determinants of health. Lack of access to good quality and affordable housing can impact physical and mental health through safety and environmental issues (for example, mold, overcrowding), as well as psychological distress caused by housing insecurity. Reference xxxvii

Ageism can impact older adults’ access to a safe living space. As access to housing is strongly linked to income, ageism in employment can hinder older adults’ access to housing. In the rental market, landlords and housing providers may discriminate against older adults by: avoiding renting to older adults; imposing unfair internal rules in seniors’ housing (for example, limiting or preventing visitors); or refusing to make necessary repairs or modifications to address the health needs of older tenants. Reference xxxviii Ageist policies and practices also lead to housing and neighbourhoods being built without the accessibility features needed by older adults and people living with disabilities. Reference xxxviii , Reference xxxix

Ageism is also a risk factor for senior abuse. Reference xl Negative societal views about older adults can contribute to the acceptance of the mistreatment and neglect of older adults as a given within society. Reference xl , Reference xli , Reference xlii Due to ageism, service providers, health care professionals, and the general public may fail to recognize senior abuse, view it as a less serious issue, or adopt paternalistic approaches for dealing with senior abuse. Reference xli , Reference xliii For example, ageism may lead to:

• older adults not being believed when they report senior abuse (for example, discounting a report of senior abuse as unreliable due to the belief that older adults have poor memories) Reference xlii
• jurors having less sympathy for senior abuse victims and viewing the conduct of defendants less harshly; Reference xliv and
• paternalist approaches being adopted for dealing with senior abuse (for example, mandatory reporting) that remove decision-making control from older adults Reference xliii

Self-ageism may result in older adults who are being abused normalizing their situation or not recognizing it as abuse. Older adults may be reluctant to report senior abuse due to feeling voiceless and powerless within society. Reference xli

Ageism can hinder the ability of older adults to access affordable and accessible housing. Homelessness and lack of access to affordable housing have costs for society, as well as individuals. High housing costs can cause older adults to forego other necessities of daily life (for example, food, medications). Reference xxxviii At the societal level, research from the United States suggests that investing in permanent housing interventions for older adults who are homeless could result in reductions in housing and health care costs of up to $2,200 per person depending on the community and needs of the older adult. Reference xlv

Research suggests ageism is a risk factor for senior abuse. In addition to the psychosocial impacts, senior abuse has costs for individuals, businesses, and society. Costs of senior abuse include:

• health care costs
• costs of providing community, professional, and volunteer services
• costs for the justice system
• financial costs for individuals
• costs to financial, insurance, and housing businesses
• loss of tax revenue
• costs to government of providing income supports; and
• costs of prevention and research Reference xlvi

Ageism and media and social media

• Media play a key role in shaping the views of society. In particular, media can be an important influence on younger people who may have limited contact with older adults
• Older adults are underrepresented in the media. Media may spread both negative and positive age-based stereotypes
• Both negative and positive stereotypes can be harmful to older adults, as positive stereotypes can result in unrealistic expectations for older adults

Media Footnote 6 play a significant role in shaping our views and understanding of the world. It is important to consider how older adults are represented and discussed in the media and in social media Footnote 7 . 

Researchers have observed 3 trends in representations of older adults in media:

• older adults, especially older women are underrepresented in the media
• the media spreads negative depictions and age-based stereotypes (for example, frailty, dependency); and
• the media spreads positive age-based stereotypes (such as, praising older adults for looking and acting middle-aged or younger) Reference iv

While positive stereotypes of older adults may not seem harmful, they can present unrealistic expectations for aging. The concept of “successful aging” refers to the absence of health conditions and/or physical limitations. Media may showcase older adults who are aging well as an example for others to follow. Reference xlvii However, researchers have criticized successful aging as stigmatizing older adults who are unable to meet these standards. Reference iv

Portrayals of older adults in the media can contribute to ageism between older and younger generations and within older generations. Reference iv Older and younger generations may have limited in-person contact with each other. Media can therefore play an important role in shaping how these generations perceive each other. Media may portray a growing older adult population as an unfair burden on younger generations and as a threat to the sustainability of health care and pension systems. Reference xlviii

As described in the previous sections, ageist attitudes and beliefs can result in costs for society and older adults in a variety of areas (for example, employment, health and health care, social isolation and loneliness, housing, senior abuse). Media and social media contribute to these economic costs through negative messages about the older adult population and stereotypical portrayals of older adults which influence the development of ageist attitudes and beliefs within society. For example, research shows when older workers accept negative media portrayals they are less satisfied with their work. They are more likely to want to leave their workplace, which results in a negative impact on the workforce and economy. Reference xlix

Ageism during the COVID-19 pandemic

The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted ageism within Canadian society and intensified ageism towards older adults in several of the theme areas. Reference xlvii In some cases, expressions of ageism have been explicit, including hostility towards older adults (for example, use of the hashtag #BoomerRemover on social media), blaming older adults for pandemic restrictions, and discriminating against older adults in health care decisions. In other cases, ageism has been unintentionally expressed through statements that portray older adults as vulnerable or helpless dependents and compare older adults to other age groups.

The COVID-19 pandemic has particularly impacted ageism related to health and health care. The majority of COVID-19 deaths in Canada (over two-thirds) have occurred in long-term care homes. Reference l Systemic ageism has been identified as a factor that has contributed to the longstanding neglect of long-term care homes in Canada (for example, historic underfunding, inadequate staffing levels, poor quality of care) and the failure to adequately prepare long-term care homes during the first waves of the pandemic and to equip them to manage subsequent waves. Consequently, systemic ageism contributed to the high rates of deaths experienced in long-term care during the pandemic. Reference li

The COVID-19 pandemic has also brought into question the value of the lives of older people in Canada. Age has been discussed or proposed as an exclusion criterion to be used in some critical care triage protocols in the event of insufficient health care resources during the pandemic. Reference lii

A review of 110 documents produced by the media, academics, older adults, and government in Canada during the pandemic found that the need to protect older adults and address issues within the health care system (for example, neglect in long-term care) have been prominent themes. Reference xlvii However, underlying these themes have been primarily negative depictions of aging and older adults who have been portrayed as vulnerable and victims of the pandemic. Furthermore, the costs and challenges of caring for older adults are common points of discussion. It is often implied that older adults are a burden on the health care system. Such portrayals reinforce the stereotype that older adults are helpless dependents and fail to recognize the diversity and contributions of the older adult population. These portrayals also promote narratives of comparison and competition between older adults and younger age groups and contribute to intergenerational tensions. Reference xlvii

Gaps in knowledge about ageism

There are significant gaps in knowledge and research about ageism. These gaps should also be taken into account when thinking about ageism and potential solutions for addressing ageism. For example:

• most research on ageism overlooks the significant diversity of older adults. Sub-populations of older adults (for example, Indigenous elders, newcomers and recent immigrants, 2SLGBTQ+) as well as different age groups (for example, 85+ age group) have potentially different needs and experiences Reference iv
• many initiatives to counter ageism have not been evaluated by researchers or organizations. Therefore, it is difficult to determine what approaches are the most effective Reference iv
• more research is needed to determine how and why ageist stereotypes and discrimination occur Reference iv

Ongoing research and consultations on ageism such as these, are a first step to help address gaps in our knowledge about ageism and gain a better understanding of experiences of ageism in Canada. This knowledge will contribute to the development of approaches, initiatives, and strategies to address ageism in Canada, and will contribute to Canada’s work supporting the UN Decade of Healthy Ageing.

Annex 1. Examples of initiatives to address ageism

Initiatives to address ageism are usually started by government or older adult organizations. Most initiatives to address ageism have focused on social inclusion, employment, or health care. Reference iv While not intended to be an exhaustive list, below are examples of common types of initiatives to address ageism.

Intergenerational programs and initiatives

Intergenerational programs (for example, intergenerational arts classes, skill-sharing programs, etc.) are a popular type of initiative that facilitates interactions between older and younger generations. Reference iv Programs that facilitate intergenerational contact have a significant impact on younger people’s attitudes towards older adults. These types of interventions are most effective when paired with educational interventions. Reference liii

Some examples of these types of initiatives include:

• GeriActors: this intergenerational theatre company in Edmonton brings together older adults and students. An evaluation found that participation in the GeriActors program increased the skills of participants, reduced ageism, and fostered intergenerational relationships Reference liv  
• Canada Homeshare: the National Initiative for Care for the Elderly matches older adults who have a spare room with students seeking affordable housing. The student provides up to 7 hours a week of companionship and/or assistance in exchange for reduced rent Reference lv

Initiatives to support older workers

Supporting older workers has been an important focus of government initiatives, with programs targeting older workers (for example, employment training programs) and employers (for example, wage subsidies for hiring older workers). Governments have also taken steps to reform pension systems (for example, provide incentives in pension policy for people to work longer) and change legislation (for example, anti-discrimination legislation). Evidence on the effectiveness of initiatives to promote the workforce participation of older adults has been limited. Reference iv

• Encore Careers: this 13-week program offered by Douglas College provides employment training for workers 55+. The program includes 5 weeks of in-class training (including digital literacy skills), plus 8 weeks of customized support. Work experience placements are also available Reference lvi
• Wage Subsidy for Older Workers: the Government of Quebec’s Wage Subsidy for Older Workers program provides employers with a subsidy for hiring older workers and provides older workers with job coaching Reference lvii

Ageism education and awareness campaigns

Governments and older adult organizations have introduced campaigns to increase education and awareness about ageism. They have also run campaigns to more generally celebrate older adults (for example, Seniors’ Weeks) or address specific issues (for example, senior abuse). These campaigns have not been evaluated to determine whether they impact individuals’ behaviours or decrease ageism. Reference iv

• collecting evidence on ageism and how it can be combatted
• forming a group of stakeholders to combat ageism; and
• raising awareness about ageism Reference lviii  
• Let’s Stop Ageism: the Alberta Council on Aging is implementing a 3-year campaign to eliminate ageism and promote the inclusion of older people. This campaign includes digital education and marketing, arts-based events, and educational and presentation materials Reference lix
• Every Age Counts: this national campaign in Australia was launched by an independent group of organizations and individuals committed to tackling ageism faced by older Australians Reference lx
• Ageism and Media Project: the Saskatchewan Seniors Mechanism’s Ageism and Media Project collects data on media representations of older adults. They compiled a report in 2017 to raise awareness about ageism in the media. They scheduled a second period of media monitoring in 2019 Reference lxi
• Anti-Ageism in the Workplace: the City of Toronto has launched an anti-ageism in the workplace campaign. The campaign includes conversation starters on ageism (a video and posters), information regarding ageism, and advice on creating age-friendly workplaces Reference lxii
• ageism and senior abuse awareness, education, and prevention
• development of senior abuse prevention networks; and
• teaching everyone about senior abuse Reference lxiii  

Age-friendly initiatives

While not exclusively targeting ageism, initiatives to build age-friendly communities are a common way to promote the social inclusion of older adults. While there has been limited evaluation of these types of programs, they may be a way to reduce negative attitudes and discrimination towards older adults. Reference iv

In Canada, age-friendly initiatives are often based on the age-friendly cities concept of the World Health Organization’s Global Age-Friendly Cities: A Guide. Reference lxiv Age-friendly environments are also an action area of the UN Decade of Healthy Ageing, with the goal of ensuring that communities foster the abilities of older people. The Public Health Agency of Canada has produced resources to guide communities that want to be age‑friendly. All ten provinces support age-friendly community initiatives. Reference lxv

Promoting the social inclusion of older adults is also one of the objectives of Employment and Social Development Canada’s New Horizons for Seniors Program (NHSP). NHSP projects have used a wide variety of approaches to promote the social inclusion of older adults.

Some examples of initiatives include:

• Age-Friendly Communities Grant Program: In British Columbia, grants are available to local and Indigenous governments that include age-friendly capacity building supports and resources. These grants and supports are newly delivered by BC Healthy Communities Society in 2022 and are designed to assist with policies, programs and services that support older adults to age-in-place, living active, socially engaged and independent lives. To date, over 160 communities have received funding for age-friendly assessments, planning and/or projects Reference lxvi  
• Age-Friendly Ottawa: the Council on Aging of Ottawa has worked with the City of Ottawa, community partners, and older adults to develop age-friendly community action plans. They have also developed an age-friendly evaluation framework for measuring their progress that includes an indicator for ageism Reference lxvii
• train volunteers and service providers to better meet the needs of isolated older adults
• increase transportation options for older adults; and
• engage with older adult leaders and community organizations to create more welcoming spaces for older adults Reference lxviii
• Age-Friendly Healthcare: Interprofessional Training Program: this University of Washington program is a telehealth training program for students from health professions. The training program focuses on how to deliver age-friendly health care in team-based settings Reference lxix

Page details

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Int J Environ Res Public Health

Scoping Review on Ageism against Younger Populations

Vânia de la fuente-núñez.

1 Demographic Change and Healthy Ageing Unit, Department of Social Determinants of Health, World Health Organization, 1202 Geneva, Switzerland

Ella Cohn-Schwartz

2 Department of Public Health, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva 8410501, Israel; li.ca.ugb@hcsalle

Senjooti Roy

3 Louis and Gabi Weisfeld School of Social Work, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan 5290002, Israel; ude.hoimaim@3syor (S.R.); [email protected] (L.A.)

Liat Ayalon

Associated data.

The data presented in this study are available in the article and supplementary material .

Systematic efforts have been carried out to study ageism against older populations. Less is known about ageism against younger populations, including how it is defined, how it manifests, its effects, and how it can be addressed. A scoping review was conducted aimed at identifying available evidence on these topics. A comprehensive search strategy was used across thirteen databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL. Records were screened by two independent reviewers. Data extraction was done by one rater and independently reviewed by a second rater. Of the 9270 records identified, 263 were eligible for inclusion. Most of the evidence focused on the manifestation of ageism (86%), followed by a focus on the determinants of ageism (17%), available interventions to address ageism (9%), and the effects of ageism (5%). This study points to the inconsistent terminology used to describe ageism against younger populations and the relatively limited theoretical rationale that guides existing studies. It also highlights key research gaps and points to the strengths of existing research.

1. Introduction

Ageism, defined as the stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination towards people on the basis of their age [ 1 ] can affect any age group. It can be directed towards others or towards oneself (e.g., self-directed ageism). To date, most of the existing literature on the topic has focused on ageism as it affects older adults, including several systematic reviews on the determinants, impact, and measurement of ageism and on available strategies to reduce this phenomenon [ 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ]. These same issues, however, have not been adequately or systematically explored in relation to younger age groups, including children, young adults, and middle-aged people [ 6 ]. This is particularly concerning given available data from several large scale social surveys showing that younger people, more so than other age groups, report exposure to discrimination based on age [ 7 , 8 ], and elicit more negative feelings than older adults among the public [ 9 ]. Moreover, past research has stressed how common it is for younger people to have to take on precarious, unstable jobs [ 10 ] or unpaid internships [ 11 ], and how they tend to be most affected during financial crises [ 12 ]. As ageism is directed towards any age group and has shown to have a negative impact on older adults [ 5 ], it is essential to review and summarize existing research concerning ageism directed towards younger populations.

To explore the current knowledgebase concerning ageism as it affects younger people, this study conducted a scoping review of available literature regarding ageism against younger populations, defined as those under 50 years of age for the purpose of this study. The rationale for including this age cut-off is that most evidence synthesis exploring ageism has included studies where people over the age of 50 were the target population [ 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ]. As past research has mainly addressed ageism in the second half of life, the scope of this review was on ageism towards this broader category of people under the age of 50, rather than towards smaller age groups. Where specific aspects applied only to a given age group or life stage (e.g., adolescence), this has been highlighted. A scoping review methodology was used as this type of knowledge synthesis is particularly useful when: (a) no prior synthesis has been undertaken on the topic; (b) studies have employed a range of data collection and analysis techniques; and (c) a narrow review question cannot be defined [ 13 , 14 , 15 ]. Scoping reviews are intended to provide analytical interpretation of the literature, identify key concepts, and types of evidence and may also provide the background for full systematic reviews or identify areas where existing research is limited or lacking [ 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 ].

This review was guided by the following five questions: (1) “What terms are used to refer to ageism towards younger populations?”, (2) “How prevalent is ageism towards younger populations and how does it manifest?”, (3) “What are the determinants of ageism towards younger populations?”, (4) “What are the effects of ageism towards younger populations?”, and (5) “What strategies exist to tackle ageism towards younger populations?”. The present study aims to serve as a platform for future research and policy on the topic of ageism against younger populations by summarizing existing evidence and pointing to potential knowledge gaps.

2. Materials and Methods

The scoping review methodology was based on the framework outlined by Arksey and O’Malley and ensuing recommendations [ 14 , 20 , 21 ]. The review included the following key phases: (1) identifying the research question(s), (2) identifying relevant studies, (3) study selection, (4) charting the data, and (5) collating, summarizing, and reporting the results. The conceptual framework of ageism used in this scoping review was the one proposed by Iversen and colleagues [ 22 ].

2.1. Identifying Relevant Studies

The search strategy was developed by VFN in consultation with an information specialist. The primary search terms focused on the concepts of ageism (e.g., ageism, ageist) and younger populations (e.g., young population and middle-aged). The Boolean term “AND” was used between these two primary concepts. Additional terms used in the literature to specifically refer to ageism towards younger populations were also included (e.g., “youthism”, “kiddism”, and “adultism”). See Table S1 for the search strategy that was used for PubMed and translated to other databases.

The initial search was conducted on 29 May 2019, in 13 electronic databases, including Campbell, CINAHL, Cochrane, DARE, EBSCO, EMBASE, GMI, GreyLit, OpenGrey/GreyNet, ProQuest, Prospero, PsycInfo, and PubMed. No year restrictions were applied. The databases were selected to be comprehensive and to cover a broad range of disciplines.

A snowball search was conducted to identify additional records by using Google Scholar’s “cited by” and “related to” functions for each of the articles included in the original search [ 23 ]. The results of all searches were entered into the Covidence software program for reviews [ 24 ] and duplicates were removed.

2.2. Study Selection

A two-stage screening process was used to assess the relevance of studies identified in the search. First, titles and abstracts were screened by two independent reviewers (ECS and SR) with disagreements resolved through consensus with a third reviewer (VFN or LA). The full text of shortlisted articles was subsequently reviewed by two independent raters among the authors with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Eligible studies met the following inclusion criteria: (a) full text available in English, Spanish, or French with non-English language articles having English abstracts available, (b) peer-reviewed publication including both quantitative and qualitative research, and (c) research that focuses on ageism towards younger people (defined as those aged 50 or below). For articles that could not be obtained through institutional holdings available to the authors, attempts were made to contact the source author or journal for assistance in procuring the article. Opinion pieces, book chapters, theoretical discussions, and articles providing a description of a policy or law with no empirical findings were excluded. Studies including a study sample with an age cross-over (e.g., participants between ages 45 and 55) were also excluded. The search flow is represented in Figure 1 .

Study selection flowchart.

2.3. Charting the Data

A draft charting table based on the Cochrane data extraction tool was used. It included the following overarching themes: key study identifiers, study methodology, study sample characteristics, and study details/results. The charting table was piloted and refined by VFN and LA who independently charted the first ten studies to determine whether the approach to data extraction was consistent with the research questions and purpose [ 20 , 21 ]. The remaining studies were charted by one author (among all authors), with another author independently reviewing and confirming the data extraction. Disagreements were discussed among the authors until a consensus was reached.

2.4. Data Summary and Synthesis

The data were compiled in a single spreadsheet using Microsoft Excel for validation and coding. Data that met all inclusion criteria were summarized descriptively and a narrative synthesis was conducted to respond to each of the predefined research questions [ 25 ].

A total of 263 articles were included, published between 1970 and 2019 (see Figure 1 ). As can be seen in Figure 2 , the number of articles increased substantially from an average <5 for the first two decades of research on ageism to over 20 articles in 2017.

Publications per year on ageism against younger populations.

3.1. Study Characteristics

A total of 60 different countries are represented in the studies included in the scoping review. The vast majority of studies were conducted in the United States of America ( n = 145) followed by the United Kingdom ( n = 25), China ( n = 17), Germany ( n = 15), Australia ( n = 12), and Canada ( n = 11). Only 22 studies were conducted in two or more countries, simultaneously.

University and college students were the most common study samples ( n = 106). Other study samples included, employers and HR professionals, employees in various sectors, community dwellers, preschool children, primary and secondary school students, older adults living in nursing homes or assisted living communities, and people participating in intergenerational programs. In the vast majority of studies, women were either equally represented or more represented than men. The target age groups studied ranged between 0 and 49 years, with most studies looking at various age groups. Only a handful of studies looked specifically at populations below 18 as the target of ageism ( n = 26). Over half of the studies examined younger populations against older populations (50 years old and above) to demonstrate ageism ( n = 175).

The research evidence in this area mainly comes from quantitative studies ( n = 217). A relatively smaller number of studies used qualitative methodology ( n = 53), with some studies ( n = 7) using both quantitative and qualitative methods.

Of the 263 publications included in the scoping review, most focused on the manifestation of ageism (86%), followed by a focus on the determinants of ageism (17%), interventions to tackle ageism (9%), and effects of ageism (5%) (see Table 1 ). Many of these publications explored multiple questions as illustrated in Figure 3 . Table S2 presents the main characteristics of the 263 studies, organized alphabetically.

Topics addressed by the studies included in the scoping review.

Main areas of study of available research on ageism against younger populations.

NOTE. Records may be higher than articles as several articles included more than one sample.

3.2. First Research Question: What Terms Are Used to Refer to Ageism towards Younger Populations?

The articles used a variety of terms to refer to ageism towards younger populations, including not only ageism [ 71 , 140 , 206 ], but also reverse ageism [ 219 ], age-based bias [ 37 , 40 , 68 , 69 , 78 , 158 , 196 ], childism [ 194 ], and adultism [ 96 , 101 , 111 , 211 ].

Although initially defined as only regarding biases against older individuals, the term ageism is increasingly being used to apply to individuals across the spectrum of age, both old and young [ 178 , 252 ]. In turn, reverse ageism is generally used to refer to ageism directed at younger adults, who tend to be broadly defined as people in their 20s and 30s [ 219 ], and childism is used in the literature to specifically refer to a kind of unique bias against children [ 194 ].

The term adultism is used to refer to the stereotypes, feelings and behaviors of adults towards children and youth, which are based on the assumption that youth and children are naïve, inexperienced, or incompetent and that adults know better and are thus entitled to act upon them without their agreement [ 96 , 211 ]. Adultism represents the structural power that adults have over children in our society. Adultism can manifest in many ways including over-victimizing youth, infantilizing youth, romanticizing youth, and tokenizing youth and is often reinforced by social institutions, laws, and customs [ 101 , 111 ].

3.3. Second Research Question: How Prevalent Is Ageism towards Younger Populations and How Does It Manifest?

3.3.1. the overall prevalence and manifestation of ageism towards younger populations.

Only two of the studies included in the scoping review aimed at estimating the overall prevalence of ageism towards younger populations (e.g., did not focus on its prevalence in a specific sector like employment). Using the European Social Survey data, these two studies estimated the prevalence of age-based discrimination in 29 countries, reporting highest levels of perceived age discrimination among younger respondents, and a U-shaped distribution of age-discrimination, with greater levels among older and younger adults than middle-aged people [ 6 , 9 ].

Other studies looking at ageism outside of any one setting or institution ( n = 93) explored the ways in which it manifests, including whether younger populations trigger specific stereotypes and prejudice in relation to their personality, emotions, performance, mental and physical capacity, vitality, physical appearance, and sexuality. For example, one study examined the content and consistency of age stereotypes across more than 20 countries, finding important differences in the ratings of adolescents, adults and older adults with regards to traits such as impulsivity, activity, and openness. The study found that raters across countries tended to share similar beliefs about different age groups with adolescents seen as impulsive, rebellious, and undisciplined [ 97 ]. A meta-analysis of papers on attitudes towards younger and older people, found that younger people were rated less stereotypically, seen as more attractive and more competent, and were evaluated more favorably than older adults [ 46 ].

3.3.2. Ageism towards Younger Populations in Communication and Social Relations

A total of 21 different studies examined the manifestation of ageism towards younger people in communication and social relations, including intergenerational relations. Research shows that younger adults tend to interact with same age peers [ 103 , 155 , 168 , 186 , 199 , 244 ] and to hold positive interpersonal attitudes towards their own age group [ 134 , 155 , 205 , 244 ].

Research also found that younger people felt being patronized in interpersonal relations with older adults [ 137 ] and that both age groups rely on age stereotypes in interpersonal relations [ 171 ]. When opportunities for intergenerational relationships and shared spaces arose, age-based stereotypes were less likely to be applied [ 112 ].

Results concerning older adults’ attitudes towards younger people were mixed with some studies suggesting that older adults prefer younger people [ 98 , 103 ] or hold positive attitudes towards younger populations [ 200 ]. Other studies did not find this age-based preference or even reported negative stereotypes and prejudice from older persons towards younger persons [ 106 ].

3.3.3. Ageism towards Younger Populations in Specific Institutional Settings or Sectors

The vast majority of the literature exploring the manifestation of ageism has focused on its occurrence in specific settings or sectors, particularly in relation to employment ( n = 75), health and social care ( n = 26), power and politics ( n = 16), and justice ( n = 9). As illustrated in Table 2 , a few other sectors have also been studied but have received relatively little attention. The rest of this section will focus on the four sectors that have received most attention.

Manifestations of ageism against younger populations in specific institutional settings or sectors.

Employment: The articles that have explored ageism in employment have mainly looked at its manifestation in recruitment processes or in the workplace, once the person is employed. The general conclusion that can be drawn from the studies looking at ageism in recruitment is that younger populations have increased access to interviews and are favored in hiring decisions relative to both middle-aged adults and older adults [ 51 , 61 , 71 , 72 , 88 , 109 , 114 , 123 , 124 , 139 , 146 , 209 , 210 ]. However, variability in response exists and has been attributed to a variety of factors related to the characteristics of the workplace and the candidate [ 32 , 128 , 195 , 196 , 221 ]. Whilst these studies suggest that younger adults are less likely to experience discrimination in hiring processes, one study that looked at the intersection between age and sex did find significant discrimination against younger women applying for high skilled administrative jobs [ 212 ].

Age bias seems to manifest more crudely once younger adults are in the workplace. Younger workers report feeling more discriminated and disadvantaged because of their age than middle-aged and older people [ 183 , 238 ] and one study conducted in the UK showed that 1 in 3 younger workers reported experiences of age discrimination [ 178 ]. Other studies report that even if all age groups are affected by age discrimination in the workplace to some degree, younger adults, especially younger women, are most affected, especially in terms of pay and benefits [ 115 , 131 , 179 ]. In Iceland, this discrimination may even amount to child labor laws violations [ 116 ].

Younger workers report not feeling valued, receiving belittling comments and being generally perceived as incompetent because they look young, and receiving fewer development opportunities [ 183 , 193 , 219 ]. Another article makes a distinction between enacted stigma whereby a person makes explicit comments about a participant’s age, and felt stigma where the participant is made to feel uncomfortable and self-conscious about age, noting that whilst both older and younger workers report instances of felt stigma, only younger workers report instances of enacted stigma [ 189 ].

Available studies looking at ageism in performance evaluations generally conclude that there is no discernable age bias in ranking similarly performing employees by employers [ 113 , 228 ] or clients [ 53 , 65 ]. However, this may be dependent on the specific employment sector [ 226 ]. A literature review also found that age might be less important than individual skill and health on evaluation of job performance [ 216 ]. Whether there is an age effect on corrective actions taken to improve performance is also unclear: two studies showed that younger workers may be more likely than older adults to get recommended for training to improve performance [ 33 , 105 ] with another one finding no effect of age [ 85 ].

Age discrimination does seem to affect employees’ dismissal. One study conducted in Australia found that the dismissal of younger employees (15–24 years old) was most associated with bullying, harassment, and taking personal leave. Young men, compared to young women, were disproportionately likely to report allegations of misconduct as preceding dismissal, while women experienced higher rates of sexual harassment and discrimination [ 167 ]. Indeed, across all ages female employees appear to be more likely to experience ageist attitudes concerning appearance or sexuality [ 115 , 166 ].

Other studies examined whether specific stereotypes and prejudice were directed towards younger workers relative to middle-aged and older workers. Overall, research shows that stereotypes and prejudice are different depending on the age group. For example, younger workers tend to generate less empathy and are often perceived to be less conscientious, emotionally stable, and agreeable and at the same time more creative and extraverted than older adults [ 50 , 66 , 119 , 242 ]. They are also rated less favorably on experience, work ethics, and stability and higher on potential for development, interpersonal skills, flexibility, and performance capacity, among other attributes [ 58 , 125 , 133 , 188 ]. Middle-aged workers tend to hold more negative stereotypes of younger workers [ 252 ], and younger adults report perceiving more negative age based stereotypes than older adults [ 122 ].

Health and social care: The studies that have explored manifestations of ageism in relation to health and social care have generally looked at the attitudes and discrimination of health and social care workers towards younger clients presenting with different conditions. For example, one study conducted in the US looked at the attitudes of nurses towards patients of different ages, finding that young and middle aged adults are viewed most favorably and that only children and adolescents are viewed as negatively as older people [ 138 ].

In terms of discrimination, available literature has explored age biases in access to treatment and care, and in diagnosis for different conditions, with most studies drawing a comparison between older and younger patients. Some of these studies show that younger people tend to be given preference over older adults. For example, in access to HIV antiretroviral treatment and heart transplant [ 127 ], and in terms of waiting lists [ 126 ]. There is also a significant preference for treating younger versus older patients in the vegetative state [ 43 ], and a perception that younger people deserve more psychosocial support [ 161 ]. The perceptions of social workers towards homeless people are also less harsh if the target is younger [ 162 ]. However, other research has shown that there may be considerable age biases in health and social care, which could ultimately affect health outcomes for younger people [ 78 , 132 , 147 , 176 ]. For example, the diagnosis and treatment options offered by doctors to patients presenting with sexual dysfunction varies depending on the age of the patient [ 132 ].

Other studies looked at the effect of intersectionality in health and social care, examining, for example the compounded effect of the age and gender of the target, or age and health status. For example, a study conducted in 2015, found that social workers were more likely to value younger heterosexual targets compared with same age gay or older clients, and recommend more aggressive treatment of terminal illnesses for these patients [ 164 ]. The gender and age of a child have also been found to affect whether a child is reported to be healthy or unhealthy in some communities and the type of treatment received, with parents reporting that females and younger children were sicker than males and older children, and females receiving more home care and fewer treatment involving cash payments [ 174 ].

The compounded effect of health and age on stigmatization and discrimination was also studied. One study found that younger adults with a mental illness may not be as stigmatized and discriminated against as other age groups [ 247 ], whereas another study showed that obese children are the population most at risk for being confronted with stigmatization [ 235 ], and yet another showed that younger people with one of several health conditions (e.g., blindness, depression, leg amputation, AIDS, and lung cancer) were more stigmatized and discriminated against than older people presenting with the same conditions [ 191 ].

Power and politics: A few of the studies included in this review looked at the status and power accorded to people on the basis of their age, showing that middle-aged adults, especially men, hold the greatest status, wealth, and power, and that younger adults are perceived to have the lowest status, wealth, and power [ 82 , 95 , 142 ].

Different qualitative studies also examined the manifestation of ageism in youth political and advocacy movements, showing that there is a tendency to doubt, deny, or dismiss the voices of youth and children [ 102 , 211 ], regulate their identities [ 111 ], and generally limit their efforts [ 101 , 111 , 232 ].

Other studies looked at the effect of intersectionality in power and politics, examining, for example the compounded effect of age and gender or ethnicity [ 160 , 206 , 225 ]. For example, one study looking at the experiences of a group of women labor activists participating in youth programs found that the age of the women intersected with their gender and racial identity to create systemic disadvantage and unfavorable experiences [ 160 ]. A couple of studies also looked at the existence of age bias in voting behaviors finding that ageism is a stronger factor in voting than sexism or racism, with middle-aged candidates being most preferred, followed by younger candidates [ 215 , 234 ].

Justice: In looking at the manifestation of ageism in justice, available studies explored whether the age of an offender or criminal or the age of the victim could affect the evaluation of a given crime and its punitiveness. The four studies that explored whether the age of an offender or criminal made a difference on the judgments made found that crimes committed by younger offenders elicited greater anger and were perceived to be more serious transgressions, and rated to deserve more severe punishment [ 34 , 89 , 99 ]. One study suggested that this age effect might not apply equally across ethnic groups [ 159 ].

The studies that examined whether the age of the victim of a crime or accident made a difference on judgments found inconsistent results. Two studies showed that transgressions were evaluated more seriously and received more severe punishment recommendations if the victim was an older adult [ 89 , 99 ], whereas two other studies showed no effect of age on judgments [ 157 , 231 ]. Another study looking at child sexual abuse of 15 versus 12 year old girls found that while attributions toward the perpetrator did not differ based on the victim’s age for women, men tended to blame the perpetrator more when victims were younger and the family more when the victim was more physically mature [ 56 ]. One study suggested that the age of the victim might be particularly influential in these decisions when the victim is perceived to be innocent [ 92 ].

The other study classified as exploring the manifestation of ageism in justice, looked at age-discrimination in employment cases in the United States, reporting that employers were most likely to win a case when the employee was younger, particularly between 40 and 49 years old [ 192 ].

3.4. Third Research Question: What Are the Determinants of Ageism towards Younger Populations?

A relatively large number of articles included in the review ( n = 45) explored this research question, mainly focusing on the determinants of interpersonal ageism. A few articles also explored possible determinants of self-directed ageism.

3.4.1. Inter-Personal Ageism

Characteristics of the respondent and their context: Rater age was one of the most studied drivers of ageism towards younger populations. Some studies looked at the influence or rater’s age on the preference for or stereotyping of targets of various ages [ 48 , 64 , 66 , 67 , 69 ], showing inconsistent results. Other studies explored the influence of this determinant in performance evaluations of targets of different ages by either employers [ 30 ] or clients [ 53 , 65 ] or in treatment decisions for younger and older patients [ 43 ]. These studies generally found no or minimal effect of rater age. Several studies also looked specifically at the effect of the rater and ratee having the same age and whether this “same age effect” was a determinant for increased prejudice and discrimination, but the results were inconsistent. For example, McNamara and colleagues found that workers rated those at the same age most highly, followed by relatively older workers, then relatively younger workers [ 68 ]. Another study found that when rater and ratee have the same age, the respondent experiences greater anger, less sympathy, and recommends more severe punishment for a thief [ 34 ].

The rater’s sex or gender was also studied as a potential driver of ageism towards younger populations with studies showing inconsistent findings. For example, two studies found no significant effect of rater’s age in ageist behaviors or stereotyping [ 42 , 51 ]. Two additional studies examining this driver did find that the sex of the respondent had an influence on whether the respondent had an age-biased behavior either in relation to the provision of psychotherapy to patients of different ages [ 55 ] and with regards to attributions of blame for a crime [ 56 ]. Another study also found that men were more likely than women to use age as a basis for similarity categorization, and men’s preferences clearly revealed a bias in the direction of youth [ 48 ].

Different personality traits including agreeableness, positivity, and conscientiousness of respondents were also evaluated as possible determinants of ageism towards younger people, indicating that more agreeable and positive participants were more likely to have positive evaluations for people of other age groups [ 36 ], and that high conscientiousness raters would be more likely to evaluate the performance of younger coworkers lower than that of older coworkers [ 47 ]. The religiosity of respondents [ 9 ] was also examined as a possible driver of ageism towards younger people and, in the context of therapy, respondents’ level of clinical training was assessed as a possible driver of age-biased evaluations of couples [ 44 ].

The framing of targets (i.e., the way in which they are presented) was also explored as a potential determinant of ageism. For example, one study looked at whether the framing of a specific job role influenced whether there would be an age-bias towards potential candidates [ 32 ], and another one explored whether being in a specific context and engaging in a certain behavioral activity could determine the activation of age stereotypes [ 29 ]. Other studies looked at the influence of the amount of information provided about the target, finding that the more information provided, the less likely that age bias would present [ 46 , 61 ]. Whether the framing involves a comparison with another age group [ 28 ] or an expectation of competition or cooperation can also result in age bias, for example, in hiring decisions [ 50 ].

Access to age-related information was also examined as a possible determinant of ageism with a study finding that under a neutral information condition, managers preferred hiring the young applicant for the low-status job, and students favored the old candidate for the high-status position. Under the age-related information condition, managers shifted to favoring the old candidate for the low-status job, and students preferred the young applicant for both the low- and high-status positions [ 59 ]. Exposure to age-biased information or stereotypes [ 37 , 62 ] or to disliked vs. admired young individuals [ 31 ] can also influence whether someone is ageist towards younger populations. Other studies also explored whether situations of pressure [ 33 ] or increased accountability [ 38 , 141 ] of the respondent in making decisions influenced the likelihood of someone being ageist towards younger people.

Contact or general exposure with younger people was studied as another possible driver of ageism with most studies finding that individuals who have increased contact with younger people, especially high quality contact, are less likely to be ageist or biased towards them [ 26 , 57 ]. Other literature looked at the effect of own-age exposure on age-related attitudes but found that this factor only made unique contributions to explaining better recognition memory for own-age than other-age faces [ 40 ].

The centrality of age in job prototypes was also examined as a possible determinant of age biases in selection processes for employment [ 54 ]. Following this same logic, [ 58 ] looked into the profession of the target as a possible driver or determinant recognizing that certain professions (e.g., accounting) were seen as stereotypically younger-person jobs whereas others (e.g., medicine) were considered as stereotypically older-person occupations. The influence of national and organizational culture on age stereotypes was also explored [ 57 ].

Characteristics of the target: The target’s sex was also studied as a potential driver and was generally found to affect age-biases in relation to the emotions that respondents’ perceived a girl/woman/boy/man would express [ 45 ]. It also affected performance evaluation, with young men’s high quality performance being evaluated more positively than identical performance by a young female or old man [ 148 ]. Other individual level factors affecting the target explored in the literature include the target’s health status [ 35 ] and physical appearance [ 41 ].

3.4.2. Self-Directed Ageism

A few studies explored possible determinants of subjective age including health status [ 27 ], future self-views [ 49 ], and respondent’s age and sex [ 60 ]. Another study looked at whether the evaluations of own age group would influence evaluations of self in young adults, finding no significant effect, which the authors argued could suggest that age is not a salient factor when young adults evaluate themselves in comparison to others [ 52 ].

3.5. Fourth Research Question: What Are the Effects of Ageism towards Younger Populations?

Only 12 studies examined the effects of ageism on health, cognition, performance, overall wellbeing, and social distance. For example one study found that age discrimination alone was not associated with mental disorders in younger people but that the simultaneous reporting of age discrimination with skin color, race, and class was associated with a higher occurrence of common mental disorders [ 86 ]. Another study found that exposure to stereotypical information regarding memory capacity and age had a negative impact on memory performance across individuals with lower education [ 258 ]. When younger people see themselves under the control of powerful others, exposure to negative age-relevant stereotypes can have a positive impact on their performance, which suggests that younger adults’ reactivity to age-relevant threats is in the opposite direction of the damaging effects observed in older adults [ 260 ]. This is based on the hypothesis that younger adults would show efforts to disconfirm that they are “(too) young and inexperienced” by performing well on tasks described as requiring life experience. The impact of perceived age discrimination on wellbeing is contested with one study finding that discrimination does not harm wellbeing [ 259 ] and another finding that it does have harmful effects on the subjective wellbeing of all persons regardless of their age, but especially middle-aged people [ 261 ]. The possible effect of dual age identification (based on age group and generation) on psychological wellbeing was also studied but the findings suggested that it only has an effect on older adults (i.e., older adults’ identification with their age group led to lower levels of psychological well-being and the reverse was true when they identified with their generation), not having any significant effect on younger or middle-aged adults [ 263 ].

Perceived ageism can also have an effect on satisfaction with coworkers [ 224 ], on employees’ affective commitment to their organization [ 238 , 262 ], and on work identities, including how perceived discrimination could result in younger workers consciously portraying themselves as older and less feminine through dress, speech, and behavior [ 264 ].

Perceptions of age-biased communication behaviors (i.e., accommodative or non-accommodative behavior, avoidant behavior, and respectful behavior) were also found to have an impact on younger adults’ self-esteem and life satisfaction [ 200 ].

3.6. Fifth Research Question: What Strategies Exist to Tackle Ageism towards Younger Populations?

A total of 24 articles examined strategies to tackle ageism towards younger populations. Most of the strategies examined in the literature focus on intergenerational activities ( n = 16) and generally find that these result in a reduction of negative attitudes towards younger populations, improved feelings of communion between generations, increased respect and understanding and sense of comfort with intergenerational interaction [ 103 , 112 , 265 , 267 , 269 , 270 , 271 , 272 , 274 , 275 , 277 , 278 , 279 ]. Still, two studies that used quantitative [ 268 ] and qualitative methodologies [ 106 ] found a very small effect or no effect of intergenerational programs in reducing ageism and a third study was unable to derive meaningful conclusions [ 266 ]. The types of activities that younger and older generations engaged in part of these programs was very diverse ranging from playing videogames [ 269 ], instrument playing interventions [ 267 ], and sharing life stories [ 106 ] to the joint preparation of a photographic poster exhibition [ 103 ] or glove puppets [ 275 ], among others.

Policies and laws have also been explored empirically as possible strategies to tackle ageism towards younger people, though to a very limited extent. For example, one study looked at the effects of legislation prohibiting age discrimination on the age characteristics specified in job advertisements, recruiters’, and employers’ references to age in the recruitment process, and people’s perceived age references in past job interviews. The study found that only 5.9% of all job ads appeared to be open to all age groups, recruiters asked about age of pseudo-applicants in 18% of cases, employers still acknowledged asking about age in approximately 32% of cases and 44% of respondents remembered being asked about their age in interviews [ 88 ]. Still, the interpretation of these findings is challenging because there was no baseline data. Another cross-sectional study explored whether equity norms reduced age discrimination, finding that such norms can help increase enthusiasm for both young and old applicants but did not necessarily reduce age-based hiring discrimination [ 281 ]. One study also found that proportional representation electoral systems favor the election of younger members of parliament even after controlling for multiple alternative explanations [ 282 ].

Other strategies have been studied, which can prevent age stereotypes’ influence on behavior. For example, one study found that self-awareness manipulations could help prevent age stereotypes from entering into deliberation and influencing social judgments [ 280 ]. Another study found that direct debiasing in the form of explicit informative warnings can reduce the influence of age stereotypes on performance appraisal and that indirect debiasing can influence hiring decisions, though this was mainly studied in relation to older candidates [ 109 ].

A final set of strategies that has been studied includes interventions that can affect how an individual copes with experiences of ageism. For example, Finkelstein and Zacher examined whether having a higher self-concept could influence how a person reacts to specific stereotypes [ 122 ]. In turn, Worth described different strategies used by young women to cope with the intersections of ageism/sexism in the workplace, explaining that while some employ conscious strategies to be “taken seriously” through dress, small talk, and even taking on stereotypical traits of masculinity to be recognized as competent, others explicitly confront inequality through “girlie feminism” with a profemininity work identity that challenges the masculine-coded norms of how a successful workplace operates and what it looks like [ 264 ].

Two broader strategies referred to in the literature to reduce ageism relate to the use of participatory action research in schools, given the role that sociocultural context plays in creating spaces where students gain skills to become change agents within their context [ 273 ]. Similarly, another study examined how partnering with youth in planning community based activities can enhance younger adults’ confidence in voicing their concerns and contributing [ 276 ].

4. Discussion

This article aimed to identify and summarize available literature on ageism towards younger populations. Research on ageism has increased since the word ageism was first coined by Butler in 1969, though it has mainly focused on older people. In the case of ageism against older people, the field has used multiple definitions that have changed over time [ 1 , 283 , 284 , 285 ]. This potentially challenges communication about and the development of a coherent body of research on the topic. The findings from this study show that in the case of ageism towards younger persons and children, the terminology might be even more fragmented as different words have been used to describe similar concepts, thus impairing the development of a coherent body of knowledge.

The study also found that most studies come from North America or Europe and have focused on the manifestations of ageism towards younger populations, particularly in relation to employment, health and social care, power and politics, and justice. The available evidence does not enable an estimation of the global prevalence of ageism against younger people but suggests that ageism is present across institutions and prominent throughout the life course including in early life stages. It also shows that younger people might be more likely to report perceived ageism compared to other age groups.

Determinants of ageism against younger people also received a substantial amount of attention, with most studies focusing on interpersonal characteristics that may affect people’s interaction with younger people (e.g., the respondent’s personality traits). These studies, similarly to the studies that examined the manifestation of ageism towards younger people were largely a-theoretical. In fact, most of the knowledge was derived from studies that focused on ageism against older people, with younger people examined mainly as a comparison group. This can be contrasted with the literature on ageism against older persons that has attempted to explain ageism against this population group, using varied theoretical perspectives [ 285 ].

Unexpectedly, the effects of ageism against younger people have largely been understudied. This is particularly evident against the plethora of knowledge on the negative effects of ageism against older people at all levels, including the macrolevel (e.g., cost of ageism in the healthcare system [ 286 ]), and at the microlevel (e.g., negative impact of ageism on the individual’s health and wellbeing [ 5 ]). This blind spot concerning the potential impact of ageism against younger populations is particularly unfortunate and may be interpreted as yet another sign of ageism towards younger people, this time, directed by the research community, which has failed to properly examine the effects of ageism on this population group. Finally, as in the case of ageism towards older people [ 3 ], our findings show that intergenerational contact may be a useful tool to reduce ageism towards younger people. Policies might also be relevant in addressing ageism towards younger populations. However, most papers described policies without providing empirical evidence to their effect. Hence, these papers were excluded from the present review.

4.1. Knowledge Gaps

Several important observations emerged while reviewing the data. The first concerns the varied and somewhat inconsistent terminology used to describe ageism towards younger people. This makes the integration of the entire field complicated, as even search terms are inconsistent. Without a clear conceptual understanding of what ageism towards younger populations entails, a coherent body of knowledge cannot be formalized. In addition, many of the reviewed articles had a stated aim of examining ageism towards both younger and older adults, yet they generally focused on older adults and were derived from research and theory on ageism towards older adults. This attests to the relative research neglect of ageism towards younger people, a field that has developed mainly as a side-effect of research on older adults, with younger people serving mainly as a comparison group, and not necessarily seen as deserving research attention on their own right.

Although the manifestations of ageism towards younger people have received increasing attention over time, this attention has mostly focused on manifestations of ageism in the field of employment. It is therefore unclear whether, how, and to what extent ageism manifests in other institutional settings and sectors such as media or education, for instance. Moreover, the focus on manifestations is largely a-theoretical, thus stressing the empirical, rather than theoretical nature of research on ageism towards younger people. Indeed, there is currently no coherent theory on ageism as it affects younger populations. In addition, our review identified a paucity of research on the effects of ageism towards younger populations, which is surprising if a comparison is drawn with the abundance of evidence on the impact of this phenomenon on the health and wellbeing of older adults [ 5 ]. This study also found little published work on interventions to reduce or eliminate ageism against younger people, and the few studies that are available do not always provide a clear evaluation of the impact of the intervention, which indicates a gap for evidence-based practice, which is also apparent in research on interventions to address ageism against older people [ 3 , 285 ].

The limited research on children under the age of 18 is unfortunate and should be reviewed in light of the substantial reliance on college students as participants. Hence, most of our knowledge concerning ageism towards younger populations is derived from university students. Moreover, the limited research from countries outside of North America and Europe is not surprising [ 287 ], but suggests that our current knowledgebase is limited. Future research could also study the differences that may exist in experiences of ageism at different ages within the broader category of people aged 50 or below. For example, do adolescents experience ageism differently to young adults or children?

Finally, though some of the articles included in the scoping review explored how ageism can intersect with other forms of stereotyping, prejudice and discrimination, and result in cumulative disadvantage, this is an area that warrants further research. As in the case of ageism against older people, ageism against younger populations should be viewed from an intersectional perspective [ 166 ]. This is because young women, people of different ethnicities and young people of lower socioeconomic status are particularly disadvantaged in society [ 288 ]. This is illustrated by some of the evidence gathered through this scoping review which showcases the differentiated experiences of ageism when it intersects with other forms of bias.

4.2. Limitations

Given that this was a scoping review, no quality assessment of reviewed sources was conducted [ 289 ]. However, the review was restricted to peer-reviewed articles, whose quality was at least determined through the peer review process. It is possible that this review missed relevant articles, especially given the varied terminology used in the field. For instance, whereas terms such as youthism or kiddism are rarely used in reference to ageism towards younger people, it is possible that other research on the representations of youth might have indirectly examined ageism towards younger people. This may have been missed in our search strategy. Nevertheless, due to the inclusive search strategy and the large number of studies included, the authors believe that the current review provides a comprehensive picture of the available literature on ageism towards younger populations defined in this study as those under the age of 50. Another limitation concerns our reliance on a very crude criterion of those under 50 to identify research on ageism against younger populations. This criterion was inspired by the fact that most research on ageism against older people, and ageism more broadly, has focused on those over the age of 50 as representing the older age group [ 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ]. To cover the existing knowledge gap on ageism against younger people, this study tried to identify all available evidence on ageism towards people aged 50 or below. Clearly, a more nuanced classification of individuals under the age of 50 is required to better understand ageism towards younger age groups in different contexts and settings. However, as this is the first scoping review on the topic, we decided to adopt the proposed age categorization previously used in research on ageism towards older people to develop a common and acceptable understanding of this topic. Last, this review was limited to articles in English, Spanish, and French. It is possible that research on ageism has been conducted in other languages. Future research will benefit from conducting a similar review using additional languages to better capture the manifestation of ageism in other contexts, including in low- and middle- income countries. Since the analysis for this paper was conducted, more emphasis has been given to the importance of conducting research to further explore ageism against younger populations, including in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic [ 290 , 291 , 292 ].

5. Conclusions

This scoping review of 263 studies covers an important gap in the research field of ageism, which has mainly focused on this phenomenon with regards to older people. It not only summarizes available evidence on ageism towards younger populations, but also highlights theoretical limitations and key research gaps, such as the limited evidence that is available on the impact of ageism towards younger people. Understanding the impact of ageism towards younger populations in the shorter term and cumulatively over the life course is key to establishing how serious a problem it is and what priority it deserves.

Supplementary Materials

The following are available online at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/ijerph18083988/s1 , Table S1: Search strategy for PubMed, Table S2: Study characteristics.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, V.d.l.F.-N., S.R., L.A.; methodology, V.d.l.F.-N., E.C.-S., S.R., L.A.; formal analysis, V.d.l.F.-N., E.C.-S., S.R., L.A.; investigation, V.d.l.F.-N., E.C.-S., S.R., L.A.; resources, V.d.l.F.-N.; data curation, V.d.l.F.-N.; writing—original draft preparation, V.d.l.F.-N.; writing—review and editing, V.d.l.F.-N., E.C.-S., S.R., L.A. The authors alone are responsible for the views expressed in this article and they do not necessarily represent the views, decisions or policies of the institutions in which they are affiliated. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Data availability statement, conflicts of interest.

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Six ways to break down age barriers in your workplace

iStockPhoto / Getty Images

Age discrimination in the workplace is a growing concern. In Indeed’s recent study, “Breaking Down Barriers: For a Brighter and Fairer Future of Work,” we found that 14 per cent of workers in Canada perceive their age as a barrier to work – and this number doubles to 28 per cent in individuals aged 65 or older. Despite efforts to increase work force diversity, current data suggests that ageism can be problematic for the youngest and oldest cohorts. In this article, we identify age discrimination at work and review six strategies to reduce ageism to create a productive multi-generational work force.

What is age discrimination in the workplace?

Age discrimination in the workplace, or work-related ageism, is when an employer discriminates against a candidate or employee because of their age. While both younger and older generations can experience age discrimination, individuals over 50 are typically the most targeted.

Human rights legislation protects employees and job seekers over 18 from age discrimination in all Canadian provinces and territories. Despite these protections, Indeed’s study found that age was the highest reported type of discrimination in Canada. While 42 per cent of respondents who experienced discrimination said it was due to age, this number increased to 54 per cent among those between age 50-64 and 69 per cent for those 65 or older. The youngest cohort also reported age-related discrimination. Almost half of respondents (45 per cent) aged 18-24 experienced workplace discrimination due to their age.

How to identify age discrimination in the workplace

Age discrimination can take many forms, so what constitutes age discrimination at work? Some common examples include:

• Microaggressions: Even if they aren’t intentional, age-related microaggressions, such as impulsive comments, jokes, or behavioural slights that demean or diminish someone because of their age, have no place at work.
• Stereotyping: Age-related stereotypes, like saying “ older workers are less productive, incapable of learning new skills, and can’t use technology , ” or that “younger workers are lazy, irresponsible, and unreliable .” Inaccurate age-related stereotypes create barriers to a productive work environment, as they fail to respect employees as individuals and build unnecessary generational divides.
• Overlooking older or younger employees: Younger and more senior employees may be unfairly dismissed for important projects or promotions. Employers may tell older workers that they should step aside to let others have a chance to grow. In contrast, younger workers may hear that they need more experience to advance even when they demonstrate all the necessary skills.
• Forced retirement: While federal and provincial human rights codes prohibit mandatory retirement based on age (unless age or physical capability are genuine job requirements), corporate policy and social pressure can still push workers to retire before they feel ready. Some employers even terminate employees as they approach 65 or target older workers in layoffs .

Addressing age discrimination in the workplace

How can employers create a more inclusive, multi-generational workplace? Here are six ways to address ageism at work:

• Re-word job postings: Job posting phrasing may unintentionally bias searches toward a specific age group. Review and revise job postings that use terms like “fresh talent” or “digital native,” which can unfairly dictate applicant age.
• Create an inclusive screening and interview process: To create an inclusive hiring process , look for skills rather than years of experience. Also, try to avoid screening out candidates due to age-based assumptions. For example, an older applicant may be interested in a more junior position when considering a career change. In comparison, a younger applicant may have the skills to excel in a senior role.
• Address ageism in your company policies. Age is an often-overlooked component of a company’s approach to diversity. To tackle ageism, explicitly address age discrimination in your diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging trategy, behavioural code of conduct, and other corporate policies. You can also reflect your commitment to generational diversity in your candidate-focused branding materials, such as your company profile .
• Offer training and development opportunities to all workers. Consider creating clear expectations for promotions and pay raises through an institutionalized career development plan. Allowing all employees to develop new skills and advance their careers, regardless of age, can build loyalty among your employees.
• Forge cross-generational ties. Break down intergenerational barriers through a mentorship program that connects older and younger employees. You can also encourage employee-led initiatives, such as an age-focused inclusion business resource group, to discuss the opportunities and challenges of a multi-generational workplace.
• Track age-related demographics. It’s challenging to address problems that you don’t see. Monitoring age-related demographics can help you better understand the generational breakdown of your work force, identify potentially worrying trends as they develop, and track the efficacy of changes.

Embracing a multi-generational work force

Addressing age discrimination at work is well worth the effort. Age-diverse organizations can gain a competitive advantage through improved employee loyalty and wellbeing, and by harnessing the institutional knowledge and diverse viewpoints of a multi-generational work force.

Learn how Indeed is making hiring faster, simpler, and more human.

Advertising feature provided by Indeed. The Globe and Mail’s editorial department was not involved.

Interact with The Globe