The issue of ageism remains a critical concern in social work, as this profession is deeply rooted in principles of social justice and advocacy for vulnerable populations. Given the increasing aging population worldwide, understanding ageism within social work practice is essential to ensuring the fair and respectful treatment of older adults. Despite its significance, defining and measuring ageism has been a complex challenge, as various conceptual and operational definitions exist in the literature. This study systematically reviews the operational definitions of ageism used in empirical research within the field of social work, shedding light on the prevalent measurement frameworks, existing gaps, and implications for future research and practice.

Introduction

Ageism, first coined by Robert Butler in 1969, refers to prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination based on age. It is often considered the third major form of discrimination, following racism and sexism. While ageism affects all age groups, older adults are particularly vulnerable to its negative consequences. These include social exclusion, reduced healthcare quality, and limited opportunities for employment or meaningful participation in society.

In social work, ageism is particularly relevant, as professionals in this field are responsible for advocating for older adults and ensuring their access to adequate care and services. However, research indicates that ageist attitudes persist among social workers, often due to societal stereotypes, limited exposure to older adults, or misconceptions about aging. This study examines how ageism has been operationalized in quantitative studies within social work to understand how it is measured and conceptualized.

Conceptual Framework

A clear definition of ageism is crucial for developing interventions to combat it. This study utilizes the framework of São José and Amado (2017), which builds upon Iversen et al. (2009) and defines ageism as negative or positive stereotypes, prejudices, or discrimination based on chronological age or perceptions of aging. Ageism can manifest in various forms:

• Cognitive (stereotypes): Beliefs about aging, such as associating older adults with frailty or cognitive decline.
• Affective (prejudice): Emotional responses to older individuals, such as fear, discomfort, or admiration.
• Behavioral (discrimination): Actions influenced by age-based bias, including exclusion, neglect, or preferential treatment.

Additionally, ageism can be:

• Explicit or implicit: Conscious vs. unconscious biases.
• Self-directed or other-directed: Internalized by the individual or imposed by others.
• Positive or negative: Favoring older adults or discriminating against them.

Understanding these dimensions is essential to effectively measuring and addressing ageism in social work practice.

Methods

A systematic literature review was conducted using the PRISMA guidelines. The search focused on four academic databases (Scopus, PubMed, Taylor & Francis, and Springer) covering the period from 2000 to 2020. Keywords included “ageism” and “social work.” Inclusion criteria required that studies be empirical, quantitative, peer-reviewed, and focused on ageism among social work students or practitioners in Western countries. Qualitative studies, policy papers, and literature reviews were excluded.

Results

Study Characteristics

A total of 414 studies were initially identified, with 12 meeting the inclusion criteria. Most studies were conducted in the United States, while others took place in Greece, Spain, and England. Participants included social work students, practitioners, and faculty members.

Various validated scales were used to measure ageism, including the Attitudes Towards Older People Scale (Kogan, 1961), the Relating to Old People Evaluation (Cherry & Palmore, 2008), and the Facts on Aging Quiz (Harris et al., 1996). These scales primarily measured explicit, other-directed ageism.

Components of Ageism in Social Work

Findings indicate that ageism in social work is predominantly measured through cognitive and behavioral components, with limited attention to affective elements. The most frequently identified forms of ageism were:

• Cognitive – Other-directed – Explicit – Negative: The most common form, involving negative stereotypes about older adults.
• Cognitive – Other-directed – Explicit – Positive: Reflecting benevolent but potentially paternalistic views of older people.
• Behavioral – Other-directed – Explicit – Negative: Observable discriminatory behaviors towards older individuals.

Notably, implicit and self-directed ageism were absent from the reviewed studies, indicating a gap in the literature and a need for broader measurement approaches.

Discussion

This systematic review highlights several key findings. First, the studies primarily focus on explicit, other-directed ageism, neglecting self-directed and implicit biases. This omission is critical, as implicit biases influence behavior in subtle ways that are difficult to detect yet have significant impacts on older individuals. Self-directed ageism, where older adults internalize negative stereotypes, is also underexplored despite its known psychological and physical health consequences.

Additionally, while most research examines negative ageism, the phenomenon of positive ageism—where older adults are stereotyped as wise, kind, or in need of special care—is also relevant. While seemingly benevolent, positive ageism can contribute to infantilization and disempowerment.

Strengths and Limitations

This review systematically examined empirical studies on ageism in social work, providing a comprehensive overview of how the phenomenon is operationalized. However, several limitations exist. The exclusion of qualitative studies means that nuanced insights into social workers’ attitudes and experiences may be missing. Additionally, most studies were conducted in Western countries, limiting the generalizability of findings to non-Western contexts. Finally, the absence of studies on implicit ageism suggests a need for further research using alternative methodologies, such as implicit association tests or observational studies.

Recommendations for Future Research and Social Work Education

To improve understanding and mitigation of ageism in social work, future research should:

1. Expand measurement approaches: Develop scales that capture implicit and self-directed ageism to provide a more complete picture of how ageism manifests.
2. Diversify study populations: Conduct research in non-Western settings to explore cultural variations in ageist attitudes.
3. Investigate positive ageism: Examine how seemingly favorable stereotypes about aging influence social work practice and policy.
4. Utilize mixed methods: Combine quantitative and qualitative research to gain deeper insights into the lived experiences of older adults and social workers.

In social work education, programs should:

1. Integrate gerontological training: Ensure that all social work students receive education on aging issues to counteract stereotypes.
2. Foster intergenerational interactions: Provide students with opportunities to engage with older adults in diverse settings.
3. Encourage self-reflection: Train social workers to recognize and challenge their biases through critical reflection and discussion.

Conclusion

This systematic review underscores the importance of understanding and addressing ageism in social work. While significant progress has been made in measuring explicit and other-directed ageism, further research is needed to explore implicit and self-directed biases. By adopting a more comprehensive approach to studying ageism, social work as a profession can better advocate for older adults, ensuring equitable and respectful treatment in all areas of practice.

Source