Methodological Differences in Measuring Age Bias among Doctoral Psychology Trainees

TL;DR

This study compares different methods for measuring age bias in psychology trainees and finds that method choice affects the results.

Contribution

The study reveals that indirect measures of age bias correlate more with explicit measures than implicit ones after accounting for social desirability.

Findings

Age bias was highest on the implicit Age IAT and followed by explicit measures.

The FSA Stereotypes subscale showed higher age bias than full-scale scores.

Indirect measures correlated significantly with explicit measures after controlling for social desirability.

Abstract

Nearly 90% of ageism measures utilize explicitly negative statements about older adults. Accurately measuring ageism with explicitly ageist statements may be hampered by social desirability bias, particularly among doctoral psychology trainees. To compare different methodological approaches to measuring ageism, 80 doctoral psychology trainees (23-33 years) completed explicit (FSA, ASD, AmbAS Hostile), implicit (Age IAT), and indirect (FAQ Negative Bias) ageism measures online, as well as a social desirability scale. Normalized to a 0-10 range for direct comparability, age bias was highest on the Age IAT (M = 2.70), followed by explicit measures (ASD, M = 2.67; FSA, M = 2.14; AmbAS Hostile, M = 2.10), and was least on the indirect measure (FAQ Negative Bias, M = 1.90). Follow-up analyses indicated the FSA Stereotypes subscale showed higher (M = 3.30) age bias than any full-scale score. Correlations of the Age IAT with explicit and indirect measures were non-significant. However, age bias measured indirectly (FAQ Negative Bias) correlated significantly with age bias measured explicitly (FSA total, FSA Stereotypes), even after partialling out social desirability; these correlations strengthened after controlling for social desirability. The indirect ageism measure overlapped more with explicit measures than the implicit measure and generally indicated less age bias, while explicit measures and the implicit measure, which focused on ageist stereotypes, produced higher age bias. Ageist stereotypes can operate unconsciously, which may pose harmful consequences in doctoral psychology trainees’ future work with older adult clients. Thus, different methodological approaches for measuring ageism influence the amount of self-reported ageism, suggesting that researchers and educators carefully consider their methodological approach when assessing ageism.