Ageism toward older adults during COVID-19: associations with emotional coping and intergenerational contact

The COVID-19 pandemic reshaped public discourse across the globe, forcing societies to grapple with unprecedented health risks, economic disruptions, and sweeping social isolation measures. In Australia, as in many other nations, the early days of the pandemic triggered intense public concern surrounding health and mortality. Amid this backdrop, older adults were frequently cast into a singular, homogenized category defined primarily by vulnerability. Public health directives and media narratives heavily emphasized that individuals over the age of seventy faced the highest risks of severe illness and death from the virus. While these epidemiological realities were grounded in medical data, the cultural rhetoric surrounding older populations raised significant concerns among sociologists and psychologists regarding a potential surge in systemic ageism. A study conducted by researchers at The University of Queensland has sought to examine these dynamics, investigating the complex interplay between pandemic-related stressors, intergenerational contact, aging expectations, and both hostile and benevolent forms of ageism within the Australian community.

The research sheds light on how public messaging during a global crisis can inadvertently reinforce harmful social stereotypes. Published in the academic literature, the study evaluates responses from 273 Australian residents collected via an online survey during the early phases of the pandemic response. Participants, ranging in age from 19 to 82 years, were surveyed to determine how their personal emotional coping mechanisms, views on aging, and frequency of positive or negative interactions with older adults related to ageist attitudes. The findings provide critical insights into how society perceives aging under conditions of acute collective stress and point to the nuanced ways that intergenerational relationships influence social attitudes.

Background Context and Timeline of the Pandemic Discourse

To fully understand the environment in which the study took place, it is necessary to examine the trajectory of public communication during the initial outbreaks of COVID-19 in early 2020. Following the World Health Organization’s declaration of the global health emergency in March 2020, Australian federal and state governments implemented strict physical distancing protocols, lockdowns, and border closures. Public health messaging routinely advised older citizens to isolate themselves strictly to protect their health, while political leaders frequently framed older Australians as a vulnerable demographic requiring insulation from the rest of society.

Concurrently, mainstream news outlets and social media platforms became breeding grounds for polarized narratives. On one hand, benevolent ageism manifested through paternalistic campaigns focused entirely on shielding the elderly, often portraying them as frail, helpless, and entirely dependent on younger generations for survival. On the other hand, a darker strain of hostile ageism emerged in digital spaces and public commentary. Some public debates questioned the economic cost of lockdowns, featuring rhetoric that downplayed the value of lives in advanced age and occasionally characterizing older demographics as a burdensome drain on societal resources. This toxic polarization prompted researchers to investigate whether the general public internalized these conflicting messages and how such views manifested in everyday attitudes.

Methodology and Participant Demographics

The University of Queensland study utilized an online, cross-sectional correlational design to capture a snapshot of Australian public opinion during this turbulent period. A total of 273 individuals completed the evaluation, comprising 49 male participants, 222 female participants, and two individuals identifying otherwise. The average age of the cohort was 40.73 years, offering a broad spectrum of perspectives spanning multiple adult generations.

The survey methodology incorporated several established measurement scales alongside novel items tailored specifically to the COVID-19 context. Emotional coping was evaluated using a two-item measure tracking self-perceived changes in emotional management before and after March 2020. Expectations regarding aging were measured using the 12-item Expectations Regarding Aging Survey (ERA-12), which assesses views on physical, mental, and cognitive decline. To capture ageist attitudes, the researchers adapted the Ambivalent Ageism Scale (AAS) to measure both hostile and benevolent ageism dimensions. Furthermore, participants reported the frequency and quality of their interactions with older adults using validated single-item contact measures and provided descriptive adjectives to characterize older populations.

Key Empirical Findings and Data Analysis

The empirical analysis yielded several distinct patterns regarding how Australians viewed older adults during the health crisis. Contrary to initial hypotheses, the study found no direct association between perceived changes in emotional coping and the endorsement of ageist beliefs. While the pandemic severely strained the mental health and emotional well-being of the broader population—with widespread reports of mild-to-moderate anxiety and depression—these internal stressors did not statistically predict whether an individual held hostile or benevolent ageist views.

However, significant correlations emerged concerning aging expectations and intergenerational contact. Participants who held more positive expectations regarding the aging process demonstrated significantly lower levels of hostile ageism. Interestingly, this relationship did not extend to benevolent ageism, suggesting that paternalistic views operate independently of general optimism regarding physical and mental longevity.

The quality of contact with older adults proved to be a powerful differentiator in shaping attitudes. Frequent positive contact was significantly associated with more favorable expectations of aging, less frequent negative contact, and lower levels of hostile ageism. Conversely, frequent negative contact correlated directly with higher hostile ageism and more pessimistic views on aging.

A particularly paradoxical finding involved benevolent ageism: more frequent positive contact with older adults was unexpectedly associated with higher scores of benevolent ageism. Researchers suggest that routine caregiving or well-intentioned assistance may inadvertently reinforce paternalistic stereotypes that view older individuals as inherently incompetent or frail, even when the interactions themselves are amicable.

Age-Group Comparisons and Generational Divides

Exploratory analyses within the study uncovered notable differences between younger participants (aged 64 and under) and older participants (aged 65 and above). The data revealed that older adults maintained significantly more positive expectations regarding aging compared to their younger counterparts, highlighting a psychological resilience and protective self-perception among the aging demographic itself. Additionally, older participants reported experiencing significantly more frequent positive contact with peers in their own age bracket.

When breaking down the correlations by age groups, the relationships between intergenerational contact, aging expectations, and ageism were predominantly observed among younger adults. For this younger cohort, negative expectations regarding aging directly mirrored higher levels of hostile ageism. This distinction supports theoretical models of intergroup contact, demonstrating that younger populations are particularly sensitive to the nature of their interactions with older generations when forming broader social attitudes.

Implications for Intergenerational Cohesion and Policy

The implications of these findings extend far beyond academic psychology, offering vital guidance for policymakers, public health communicators, and social welfare organizations. The study underscores the reality that ageism is not merely an abstract prejudice but a pervasive cultural current that can be exacerbated during major societal crises. When public health communications rely on broad, homogenous categorizations of vulnerability, they risk entrenching stereotypes that undermine the autonomy and dignity of older citizens.

The dual nature of ageism—spanning overt hostility and subtle, patronizing benevolence—demands sophisticated approaches to public education and social intervention. While programs that encourage intergenerational contact remain one of the most effective tools for dismantling prejudice, the research highlights that contact alone is insufficient if the quality of interaction perpetuates dependency. Initiatives aimed at reducing ageism must actively challenge paternalistic assumptions and promote inclusive representations of older adults as active, competent contributors to society.

Furthermore, the insights gained from the Australian pandemic response provide a valuable framework for future public health emergencies. As global populations continue to age, safeguarding social cohesion and protecting intergenerational solidarity are paramount. Addressing systemic ageism requires a concerted effort from media outlets, policymakers, and community leaders to ensure that public discourse respects the diversity and resilience of older adults, ultimately fostering a more equitable society for all generations.