Information-Seeking Triggered by Age

Hung, Shiao-Pei; Giles, Howard; Moody, Joanna

doi:10.2190/1uv0-uyql-7aqv-v6un

Cited by 16 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This serves to illustrate the reverse side of the same coin-individuals are age conscious. Thus, age cues will trigger information seeking (Ng, Giles, & Moody, 1991), and individuals will search for age cues (Hummert, 1994). Being ageist (age conscious), individuals are susceptible to the influence of old-age stereotypes when communicating with older adults.…”

Section: Linguistic Routinization Of Discriminationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Language-Based Discrimination

2007

Journal of Language and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article integrates the language-discrimination nexus under four headings: the linguistic justification of discrimination and its linguistic encoding, enactment, and routinization. (a) Barriers to jobs, education, and citizenship can be legally justified on the basis of language requirements to exclude particular groups. Once legalized, the language requirement provides a stowaway for more subtle discrimination against other target groups. (b) Language is a cultural repository of ideas for portraying particular out-groups. These ideas and the language in which they are encoded reflect power inequalities and associated discriminations (e.g., sexist, racist, and ageist languages). (c) Language can be manipulated to produce linguistic masking devices that, when coupled with the choice of verbs to influence the attribution of causality, offer tools for subtly enacting discrimination while masking reality and reducing perceived conflict of interest. (d) Language routinizes (normalizes) discrimination by turning discriminatory scripts and practices into part of taken-for-granted, everyday discourse.

show abstract

Section: Linguistic Routinization Of Discriminationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Language-Based Discrimination

2007

Journal of Language and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This effect has been noted particularly with older adults, whose symptoms are treated as a "normal" part of old age, as opposed to being treated in a way that would be routine for younger patients (Hamel et al, 2000;Rayburn & Stonecypher, 1996;Uncapher & Arean, 2000). The way in which information seeking can be driven by stereotypes has been documented (Ng, Giles, & Moody, 1991). Hence, further attention to the role of stereotypes in doctor-patient encounters is warranted (Greene & Adelman, 2001).…”

Section: Primary Identitiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Identity and Health: An Intergroup Communication Approach to Cancer

Harwood¹,

Sparks²

2003

Health Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article describes the ways in which group identifications and stereotypes can inform our understanding of cancer prevention and treatment as well as more general social processes surrounding the experience of cancer. From a perspective grounded in social identity theory, we describe the ways in which understanding primary identities (i.e., those associated with large social collectives such as cultural groups), secondary identities (i.e., those associated with health behaviors), and tertiary identities (i.e., those associated with cancer) can help explain certain cancer-related social processes. We forward a series of propositions to stimulate further research on this topic.This article examines the role of social group memberships in health communication. Much work has focused on the ways in which individuals are influenced by their group memberships. People orient to one another in terms of not only individual characteristics but also group identifications. This occurs in terms of individuals' perceptions of their own groups (social identities), and their perceptions of others' group memberships (e.g., stereotypes). Identities and stereotypes influence how we communicate with others. We term this an intergroup approach, grounded in the pioneering work of Tajfel (Robinson, 1996;Tajfel & Turner, 1986). We contend that intergroup processes are relevant to health communication. Although HEALTH COMMUNICATION, 15(2),[145][146][147][148][149][150][151][152][153][154][155][156][157][158][159]

show abstract

“…Several studies provide evidence for the claim that age stereotyping, perceptions, and expectations about age-associated communication behavior is not a one-way street with elders as the sole recipients of stereotypical reactions and age-adjusted talk (Williams & Giles, 1998). A study by Ng, Moody, and Giles (1991) asked respondents to formulate questions to put to targets of varying ages (i.e., aged 16 to 91) who had ostensibly had a car accident, the cause of which was ambiguous (see also Franklyn-Stokes, Harriman, Giles, & Coupland, 1988). Respondents rated questions about health, physical condition, and mental alertness as most appropriate for the older protagonists whereas for younger protagonists, questions about alcohol consumption and speeding were among those deemed most appropriate.…”

Section: Stereotypes and Ageism Toward Youthmentioning

confidence: 99%

Communication Evaluations Across the Life Span

Williams

Garrett

2002

Journal of Language and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, 490 community adults aged 20 to 59 evaluated their experiences with non-family members aged 13 to 16 years, 65 to 85 years, and their own age, in terms of their perceptions of both the others’ and their own communicative behavior. As well as validating previous research that suggested that nonaccommodation, accommodation, and respect/obligation are important evaluative dimensions for communication between younger and older people, these results revealed two relatively new evaluative dimensions—noncommunication and self-promotion—which seem particularly relevant for perceptions of communication with 13- to 16-year-olds. Overall, although elders are perceived as more nonaccommodative, 13- to 16-year-olds were viewed as more noncommunicative, less accommodative, and more self-promotional. Findings also suggest changes in evaluations across the lifespan. For example, the older respondents tended to view elders more favorably. Results are discussed in the context of a plea for more research taking a developmental lifespan perspective on intergenerational communication.

show abstract

Information-Seeking Triggered by Age

Cited by 16 publications

References 11 publications

Language-Based Discrimination

Language-Based Discrimination

Social Identity and Health: An Intergroup Communication Approach to Cancer

Communication Evaluations Across the Life Span

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About