Staff View
Gender and ageism

Descriptive

TitleInfo
Title
Gender and ageism
SubTitle
the role of aesthetic preferences in the aging double standard
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
McLean
NamePart (type = given)
Meghan
NamePart (type = date)
1989-
DisplayForm
Meghan McLean
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
author
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Rudman
NamePart (type = given)
Laurie A.
DisplayForm
Laurie A. Rudman
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
chair
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Wilder
NamePart (type = given)
David A.
DisplayForm
David A. Wilder
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
internal member
Name (type = personal)
NamePart (type = family)
Sanchez
NamePart (type = given)
Diana T.
DisplayForm
Diana T. Sanchez
Affiliation
Advisory Committee
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
internal member
Name (type = corporate)
NamePart
Rutgers University
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
degree grantor
Name (type = corporate)
NamePart
Graduate School - New Brunswick
Role
RoleTerm (authority = RULIB)
school
TypeOfResource
Text
Genre (authority = marcgt)
theses
OriginInfo
DateCreated (encoding = w3cdtf); (qualifier = exact)
2015
DateOther (qualifier = exact); (type = degree)
2015-01
CopyrightDate (encoding = w3cdtf); (qualifier = exact)
2015
Place
PlaceTerm (type = code)
xx
Language
LanguageTerm (authority = ISO639-2b); (type = code)
eng
Abstract (type = abstract)
Decades of research have investigated the implications of the “what is beautiful is good” stereotype, termed the halo effect for physical attractiveness whereby favorable personality traits are attributed to attractive people more so than unattractive people. This robust stereotype impacts important life outcomes with attractive people receiving more salary increases and job opportunities than unattractive people (Eagly et al., 1991; Eagly, 1987; Zebrowitz, 1997). People belonging to groups who do not meet their culture’s aesthetic standards are stigmatized and tend to show automatic outgroup preference (the elderly, the overweight, and African Americans; Goffman, 1963). In the U.S, a culture that values youth and beauty, older people are at a disadvantage (Kite, Whitely, Stockdale, & Johnson, 1995; see also Kotter-Gruhn & Hess, 2012; Kwart, Foulsham, & Kingstone, 2012) and older women are stigmatized more so than older men (Sontag, 1972). Sontag coined the term the “double standard of aging’’ which refers to the fact that men are valued for their accomplishments (which increase with age), whereas women are valued for their appearance (which diminishes with age). The present study investigated whether there is explicit and implicit evidence for the double standard of aging to help explain why the elderly automatically possess ageist attitudes that are as prevalent as those for young people (Nosek, Banaji, & Greenwald, 2002) by using the attitude, stereotype, and aesthetic Implicit Association Tests (IAT) and their self-report (explicit) counterparts. Consistent with the double standard, participants (N = 248, 167 Women, M age = 37.77) reported that society views young women as the most attractive group (Foos & Clark, 2011), and they also agreed that the advantage turns into a penalty such that older women are viewed as the least attractive group (Deutsch, Salenski, & Clark, 1986). Using the IATs, as expected, people automatically associated young people with positivity, attractiveness, and youthful traits more so than old people. I also expected to find evidence for the double standard for aging, such that implicit attitudes towards older women would be (1) more negative than attitudes toward older men, and (2) informed by aesthetic evaluations, whereas implicit attitudes towards older men were expected to be better informed by stereotypes. However, I did not find supporting evidence. Instead, attitudes, aesthetic preferences, and stereotypes were more positive toward young people than old people, regardless of target gender. In addition, all three IATs positively covaried to the same extent, regardless of target gender. However, because the measures were designed to assess ageism by contrasting young people with old people across two conditions (contrasting either young vs. old women or young vs. old men), it may be that pro-youth positivity overwhelmed responses. Future research should directly compare old men to old women using implicit measures to establish a better comparison between gender-based ageist associations and determine whether appearance stigma contributes to the double standard of aging.
Subject (authority = RUETD)
Topic
Psychology
RelatedItem (type = host)
TitleInfo
Title
Rutgers University Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Identifier (type = RULIB)
ETD
Identifier
ETD_6067
PhysicalDescription
Form (authority = gmd)
electronic resource
InternetMediaType
application/pdf
InternetMediaType
text/xml
Extent
1 online resource (vii, 45 p. : ill.)
Note (type = degree)
M.S.
Note (type = bibliography)
Includes bibliographical references
Subject (authority = ETD-LCSH)
Topic
Social psychology
Subject (authority = ETD-LCSH)
Topic
Age discrimination
Subject (authority = ETD-LCSH)
Topic
Sexism
Note (type = statement of responsibility)
by Meghan C. McLean
RelatedItem (type = host)
TitleInfo
Title
Graduate School - New Brunswick Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Identifier (type = local)
rucore19991600001
Location
PhysicalLocation (authority = marcorg); (displayLabel = Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey)
NjNbRU
Identifier (type = doi)
doi:10.7282/T3DB83K5
Genre (authority = ExL-Esploro)
ETD graduate
Back to the top

Rights

RightsDeclaration (ID = rulibRdec0006)
The author owns the copyright to this work.
RightsHolder (type = personal)
Name
FamilyName
McLean
GivenName
Meghan
Role
Copyright Holder
RightsEvent
Type
Permission or license
DateTime (encoding = w3cdtf); (qualifier = exact); (point = start)
2014-12-19 15:43:14
AssociatedEntity
Name
Meghan McLean
Role
Copyright holder
Affiliation
Rutgers University. Graduate School - New Brunswick
AssociatedObject
Type
License
Name
Author Agreement License
Detail
I hereby grant to the Rutgers University Libraries and to my school the non-exclusive right to archive, reproduce and distribute my thesis or dissertation, in whole or in part, and/or my abstract, in whole or in part, in and from an electronic format, subject to the release date subsequently stipulated in this submittal form and approved by my school. I represent and stipulate that the thesis or dissertation and its abstract are my original work, that they do not infringe or violate any rights of others, and that I make these grants as the sole owner of the rights to my thesis or dissertation and its abstract. I represent that I have obtained written permissions, when necessary, from the owner(s) of each third party copyrighted matter to be included in my thesis or dissertation and will supply copies of such upon request by my school. I acknowledge that RU ETD and my school will not distribute my thesis or dissertation or its abstract if, in their reasonable judgment, they believe all such rights have not been secured. I acknowledge that I retain ownership rights to the copyright of my work. I also retain the right to use all or part of this thesis or dissertation in future works, such as articles or books.
RightsEvent
DateTime (encoding = w3cdtf); (qualifier = exact); (point = start)
2015-01-31
DateTime (encoding = w3cdtf); (qualifier = exact); (point = end)
2015-08-02
Type
Embargo
Detail
Access to this PDF has been restricted at the author's request. It will be publicly available after August 2nd, 2015.
Copyright
Status
Copyright protected
Availability
Status
Open
Reason
Permission or license
Back to the top

Technical

RULTechMD (ID = TECHNICAL1)
ContentModel
ETD
OperatingSystem (VERSION = 5.1)
windows xp
Back to the top
Version 8.5.5
Rutgers University Libraries - Copyright ©2024