Stereotypes about very old people and perceived societal appreciation in very old age

Abstract

Background People in very old age (VOA) are expected to be confronted with particularly negative stereotypes. These influence societally shared behavior towards and judgements about them. Such external evaluations of individuals’ lives are considered a crucial part of their quality of life (QoL). Objective The present study elaborated a) the societal appreciation perceived by people in VOA and b) the stereotypes about people in VOA held by stakeholders from key societal areas. The aim was to discuss possible connections between these external standards and individual life results. Material and methods A parallel mixed methods design was employed. Cross-sectional data from a representative survey of people aged 80 years and older (n = 1863) were analyzed by means of χ2-tests and Kruskal-Wallis tests to examine differences in perceived societal appreciation (PSA) by characteristics of the person, their biography, and current lifestyle. Linear regression models were used to investigate the impact of these characteristics on PSA. Regarding stereotypes about people in VOA, semi-structured interviews with stakeholders from key societal areas (n = 22) were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. The quantitative and qualitative findings were juxtaposed for comparison. Results PSA was predicted by health-related variables and productive activities. Several societal stakeholders highlighted that age-related losses pose challenges on very old individuals, their families, and society, whereas remaining potentials in VOA can and should be used for the benefit of others; however, stakeholders‘ perceptions differed by the extent of their professional contact with (very) old people. Different pathways were proposed through which the observed stereotypes and determinants of PSA might be connected (e.g., stereotype internalization). Conclusion Our study illustrates the relevance of external standards for individual QoL and highlights the need for a normative perspective in the discussion about QoL and its enhancement.

Perceptions of General Attitudes towards Older Adults in Society: Is There a Link between Perceived Life Satisfaction, Self-Compassion, and Health-Related Quality of Life?

“…In this context, the finding that perceived attitudes explained 1.2% of the variance in life satisfaction presents a significant contribution to the existing literature on how older adults feel in old age. A previous study found that about 60% of older adults (80+) felt that they were rather not needed or not at all needed by society, and approximately 14% of them felt rather or strongly treated as a burden by society [ 40 ]. Though the feeling of being treated as a burden was highly predicted by health-related variables, their study did not cover the subjective well-being dimension.…”

“…Raising awareness of negative attitudes and treatment of older adults, and consciously using this knowledge in the care of older fail persons might support an increased quality of life. The topic of stereotypes highlights the need to have a normative discussion about subjective well-being and finding ways to improve it [ 40 ].…”

Nurses' perspectives on caring for and attitudes towards adults aged eighty years and older

“…Participants stated that it was not possible for them to generalise about persons above the age of 80, as they often saw patients who were active and healthy at this age, but they also saw patients under the age of 80 who needed complex care. In the study by Reissmann et al [40], the participants confirmed that older adults (≥ 80 years) are viewed as equally heterogeneous. Participants stated that the age of a person did not change individual differences.…”

Das gute Leben

“…Bei der Untersuchung dieser Stereotype in semistrukturierten Interviews mit unterschiedlichen Stakeholdern [12] wurde deutlich, dass die bevorzugten Werte hochaltriger Menschen teilweise im Kontrast zu vorherrschenden Alternsbildern stehen. Aufschlussreiche Unterschiede waren diesbezüglich zwischen solchen Akteuren zu verzeichnen, deren Arbeit in unmittelbarem Kontakt mit hochaltrigen Menschen erfolgt (Gruppe 1), und solchen, bei denen das nicht der Fall ist (Gruppe 2).…”