Vassilis Saroglou, Stefan Agrigoroaei, Antonella Giorgio, Alix Fraselle
{"title":"善意和敌意的年龄歧视表达真的不同吗?社会态度、个性、价值观、情感和信仰的潜在作用","authors":"Vassilis Saroglou, Stefan Agrigoroaei, Antonella Giorgio, Alix Fraselle","doi":"10.1002/casp.70169","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Are individual differences sustaining benevolent and hostile ageism similar or different? Across two studies (<i>Ns</i> = 254 and 292), we investigated key individual differences hypothesised to sustain benevolent ageism and hostile expressions of ageism, that is, hostile ageism and intergenerational tension (consumption, succession, identity): social attitudes, personality, values, emotions, belief flexibility, religiosity, and intergenerational contact. Both benevolent and hostile expressions of ageism denote typical prejudicial dispositions: high authoritarianism and social dominance, low self-transcendent values, lower belief flexibility, and lower education. Additionally, hostile expressions of ageism reflect indifference and depreciation: lower compassion, agreeableness, and contact with older persons, and highly valuing self-enhancement (power, achievement). Benevolent ageism represents an ambivalent mixture of pity/compassion, collectivism (tradition, religiosity), and fear (security, death anxiety). Mediational analyses indicated that religiosity's link with conservatism (authoritarianism) can lead to ageism, but religiosity's link with compassion explains religious people's tendency to show benevolent, not hostile ageism.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47850,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology","volume":"35 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do Benevolent and Hostile Expressions of Ageism Really Differ? The Underlying Role of Social Attitudes, Personality, Values, Emotions, and Beliefs\",\"authors\":\"Vassilis Saroglou, Stefan Agrigoroaei, Antonella Giorgio, Alix Fraselle\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/casp.70169\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <p>Are individual differences sustaining benevolent and hostile ageism similar or different? Across two studies (<i>Ns</i> = 254 and 292), we investigated key individual differences hypothesised to sustain benevolent ageism and hostile expressions of ageism, that is, hostile ageism and intergenerational tension (consumption, succession, identity): social attitudes, personality, values, emotions, belief flexibility, religiosity, and intergenerational contact. Both benevolent and hostile expressions of ageism denote typical prejudicial dispositions: high authoritarianism and social dominance, low self-transcendent values, lower belief flexibility, and lower education. Additionally, hostile expressions of ageism reflect indifference and depreciation: lower compassion, agreeableness, and contact with older persons, and highly valuing self-enhancement (power, achievement). Benevolent ageism represents an ambivalent mixture of pity/compassion, collectivism (tradition, religiosity), and fear (security, death anxiety). Mediational analyses indicated that religiosity's link with conservatism (authoritarianism) can lead to ageism, but religiosity's link with compassion explains religious people's tendency to show benevolent, not hostile ageism.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47850,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology\",\"volume\":\"35 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/casp.70169\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/casp.70169","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
Do Benevolent and Hostile Expressions of Ageism Really Differ? The Underlying Role of Social Attitudes, Personality, Values, Emotions, and Beliefs
Are individual differences sustaining benevolent and hostile ageism similar or different? Across two studies (Ns = 254 and 292), we investigated key individual differences hypothesised to sustain benevolent ageism and hostile expressions of ageism, that is, hostile ageism and intergenerational tension (consumption, succession, identity): social attitudes, personality, values, emotions, belief flexibility, religiosity, and intergenerational contact. Both benevolent and hostile expressions of ageism denote typical prejudicial dispositions: high authoritarianism and social dominance, low self-transcendent values, lower belief flexibility, and lower education. Additionally, hostile expressions of ageism reflect indifference and depreciation: lower compassion, agreeableness, and contact with older persons, and highly valuing self-enhancement (power, achievement). Benevolent ageism represents an ambivalent mixture of pity/compassion, collectivism (tradition, religiosity), and fear (security, death anxiety). Mediational analyses indicated that religiosity's link with conservatism (authoritarianism) can lead to ageism, but religiosity's link with compassion explains religious people's tendency to show benevolent, not hostile ageism.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology publishes papers regarding social behaviour in relation to community problems and strengths. The journal is international in scope, reflecting the common concerns of scholars and community practitioners in Europe and worldwide.