Next Article in Journal
Strategies to Improve Environmental Comfort of Institutionalized Older Adults: A Scoping Review
Previous Article in Journal
Power Distance and Indulgence Are Positively and Negatively Correlated with Ageism, Respectively: Evidence from 31 Countries
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
JAL
Volume 4
Issue 4
10.3390/jal4040023
jal-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Ageism Through the Informational Practices During Health Crisis: A Qualitative Study Among Older Adults in Quebec (Canada)

by
Nicolai Guzun
1,2,
André Tourigny
2,3,4,5,
Eve Dubé
3,6,
Alexandre Coutant
7 and
Maryline Vivion
2,3,*
1
Centre Intégré Universitaire de Santé et de Services Sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale, Québec City, QC G1C 3S2, Canada
2
Department of Social and Preventive Medicine, Université Laval, Québec City, QC G1V 0A6, Canada
3
CHU de Québec-Université Laval Research Center, Québec City, QC G1V 4G2, Canada
4
VITAM Centre de Recherche en Santé Durable, Québec City, QC G1J 2G1, Canada
5
Centre d’Excellence sur le Vieillissement de Québec, Québec City, QC G1S 4L8, Canada
6
Department of Anthropology, Université Laval, Québec City, QC G1V 0A6, Canada
7
Département de Communication Sociale et Publique, Université du Québec à Montréal, Montréal, QC H3C 3P8, Canada
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Ageing Longev. 2024, 4(4), 316-327; https://doi.org/10.3390/jal4040023
Submission received: 21 June 2024 / Revised: 9 October 2024 / Accepted: 16 October 2024 / Published: 17 October 2024
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This study explores the health-information-seeking practices of older adults. Conducted in Quebec, Canada, this qualitative research involved semi-structured interviews with 36 participants aged 60 and over, between 19 July and 20 August 2021, during the COVID-19 pandemic. The interviews, carried out via online platforms and telephone, focused on information sources, the method of information retrieval, and participants’ reflections on and use of pandemic-related information. Thematic content analysis was used to identify the presence of ageism. The study showed that participants favored government press conferences and traditional media, while remaining skeptical of social media. The analysis identified the concept of ageism (institutional, interpersonal, and self-directed) in about half of the interviews, with institutional ageism predominating in communications and actions of authorities and in the portrayal of older adults by media. The findings highlight the need for reliable, respectful communications reaching older adults for effective and relevant public health messages.

1. Introduction

The concept of information practices is key to address the specific needs of the older adults in the context of healthcare communication. Information practices are defined as “a set of socially and culturally established ways to identify, seek, use and share the information available in various sources such as television, newspapers, and the Internet” [1]. These practices also consider unintentional exposure to content, such as through social media [1]. The COVID-19 pandemic triggered an unparalleled surge in information, significantly complicating the search for reliable sources amid a global health crisis [2,3]. This overwhelming influx of information has particularly impacted older adults who, as major healthcare consumers, face not only the general challenges of the pandemic but also an increased susceptibility to the virus SARS-CoV-2 [4,5].
The daily barrage of pandemic-related information is likely to lead to an overload, making it challenging for individuals to process and utilize this data effectively [6]. In Canada, including Quebec, regular briefings by health authorities were a key source of information [6,7]. However, these briefings were often compromised by inconsistencies, like vaccine quality, symptoms, adverse reactions following vaccination, mixed dosing, and the explanation of vital public health strategies to curb virus transmission, which can be attributed partly to the evolving level of knowledge at different points in time throughout the pandemic [7,8]. Additionally, the mass media, traditionally a trusted information source, sometimes amplified pre-existing biases, such as emphasizing the fact that the virus originated in China, which led to the stigmatization of the Asian ethnic population [9]. Social media platforms also played a role in disseminating erroneous or fraudulent information during the pandemic [10]. The rapid advancement in information technology, led by the Internet, has created an excess of information, which can be overwhelming for users [11]. Studies suggest that older adults seek information from trusted health-related sources or health authorities [12].
The concept of information practices is intimately connected to informational reflexivity, as well as to the credibility and reliability of information. Informational reflexivity pertains to the introspective methods by which individuals evaluate their strategies for acquiring and scrutinizing information, fostering critical self-awareness in their informational interactions [13]. Simultaneously, the assessment of credibility entails a user-focused evaluation, during which the substance and the provider of information are reviewed to verify their authenticity, dependability, and applicability from the viewpoint of the end-user [13].
Considering these aspects of information practices, it is important to recognize that they are inherently dependent on the role of context, emotion, and uncertainty, and the interactions between the system and the user [13]. This interplay leads to communicational contracts that rely on various representations of the actors and their more or less egalitarian relationships, depending on how each one is described and qualified [14]. This kind of contract became particularly evident at the onset of the escalating COVID-19 outbreak in early March 2020, when global media frequently combined terms such as ‘vulnerable’ and ‘older people’ to describe the situation. Though well-intentioned, this labeling reinforced negative stereotypes about older adults [5,15]. Although several studies have focused on identifying forms of ageism in communications [5,15], ageism can hinder older adults’ ability to effectively access, interpret, and respond to health information, particularly during public health emergencies like the COVID-19 pandemic [16].
The World Health Organization defines ageism as “the stereotypes (how we think), prejudice (how we feel) and discrimination (how we act) directed towards people on the basis of their age”. Ageism is manifested in three forms: institutional, interpersonal, and self-directed [17]. Institutional ageism is present in the policies and practices of organizations, seen explicitly in age-based restrictions and implicitly in biases against older adults [17,18]. Interpersonal ageism occurs in daily interactions, often leading to condescending attitudes and assumptions about capabilities based on age [17]. Self-directed ageism involves individuals internalizing societal stereotypes, thereby adversely affecting their self-perception and well-being [17,18]. Studies indicate a global increase in ageism over time, impacting both individual and societal levels [19]. Despite widespread reports of age-based discrimination, ageism has received less attention in research compared to other forms of discrimination such as sexism and racism [20].
This research aims to answer the following research questions: (1) What were the informational practices of older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic? More specifically: (2) Which information sources were used? (3) How was their information reflexivity? and (4) Was ageism observed through those practices? To our knowledge, this is the first study to explore the link between informational practices of older adults and ageism.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Approach

Based on a descriptive and exploratory methodology, this study used a qualitative methodological approach [21,22]. This approach has been employed to explore informational practices by several studies [23,24,25]. The present study is embedded within a broader project that investigates information practices during the COVID-19 pandemic among vulnerable populations. The initial phases of the study had already been laid out, including participant recruitment, data collection, and the preliminary coding of materials.

2.2. Recruitment and Participants

The recruitment process was streamlined due to the efforts made during the evaluation of adherence to pandemic-related health measures within the Quebec population, spearheaded by the teams at the Institut National de Santé Publique du Québec (INSPQ). To ensure balanced representation, a convenience sample aimed at having comparable numbers of participants based on gender and educational level was chosen.

2.3. Ethical Considerations

The research project has been approved by the CIUSSS du Centre-Sud-de-l’Île-de-Montréal ethics board (Project Removed for blinded review). All participants were provided with $30 in financial compensation.

2.4. Data Collection

Given the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, to ensure the safety of both the participants and the researchers, interviews were conducted using online platforms such as Zoom and Microsoft Teams, as well as telephone interviews. All interviews were carried out in French, with each session lasting approximately one hour on average. Individual interviews with 36 participants took place between 19 July 2021 and 20 August 2021. The design of the semi-structured interview guide was rooted in the theoretical framework of information practices [13]. The guide was organized into five main sections: sociodemographic data, information sources, search terms and the appropriation of information in the context of the pandemic, informational reflexivity, and information behaviors during the pandemic and their influence on health-related behaviors. It is noteworthy that the concept of ageism was not explicitly included in the interview guide, as the exploration of this specific notion was not a primary objective of the initial research.

2.5. Data Analysis

Preliminary thematic analysis and coding were undertaken by the initial project team, which facilitated the identification and organization of primary themes. Our team explored the concept of ageism using the theoretical framework developed by WHO (institutional ageism, interpersonal ageism, and self-directed ageism) [17]. This framework guided our coding process by allowing us to systematically identify and classify instances of ageism across these categories. Institutional ageism was coded when policies or practices within healthcare or media were found to implicitly or explicitly discriminate against older adults. Interpersonal ageism was captured through coding interactions that reflected condescending attitudes or assumptions about the capabilities of older adults. Finally, self-directed ageism was identified in instances where older adults internalized these societal stereotypes. Additionally, we classified each instance into stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination to further analyze the different dimensions of ageism [17]. A summary of the framework is presented in Table 1. The subsequent phase of thematic content analysis was executed using NVivo 14 software (Lumivero, Denver, CO, USA), a methodical approach that involves breaking down the corpus into discernible themes focused on ageism aligned with research objectives [26]. In this phase, the occurrences of ageism, which refer to examples of ageist attitudes, behaviors, and perceptions, were specifically identified within the interviews. The preliminary coding for the concept of ageism was the handiwork of NG and underwent thorough revision by MV and AT. Any ambiguous segments in the data were collaboratively deliberated upon by the three experts, aiming to establish unanimity in interpretation and subsequent coding. To ensure validity of findings, results extracted from data were discussed between authors considering their knowledge about ageism. A record of methodological and analytical decisions was kept, and the research team met to discuss methodological challenges and potential biases to ensure reliability of results. The verbatim transcripts used in this article were translated by a professional translator and subsequently validated by the author along with two research supervisors.

3. Results

In the study, a total of 36 participants were enlisted, comprising 18 men and 18 women. The majority, twenty-eight participants, fell within the age bracket of 60–69, while the remaining eight participants were aged 70 and above. Geographically, 20 participants resided in the central regions of the province of Quebec (Canada), encompassing the regions of Montréal, Laval, and Capitale Nationale, while the remaining 16 were from other regions in Quebec. In terms of level of education attained, the distribution was as follows: 12 participants held a university degree, 12 held a college degree, and 12 had completed secondary studies (Table 2).
We coded the types of sources of information used by participants and the instances of ageism using the WHO framework (institutional, interpersonal, self-directed).

3.1. Sources of Information Used

Participants predominantly accessed their information through various sources, with the government’s daily briefings during the pandemic being one main source of information. A total of 28 participants reported relying on these conferences for their primary updates. One participant elucidated this preference, stating, “it’s television, and only with Mr. François Legault and Dr. Arruda when they hold their meetings at 1:00 or 5:00. It’s the only thing I listen to because you really get the straight goods. It couldn’t be better”. (Int06).
The majority of participants (n = 33) relied on local media to gather information, while international online resources were used by 11 participants. The use of international resources was influenced by their connections with individuals in foreign countries or by sheer curiosity about the global progression of the pandemic. These sentiments were captured in remarks such as, “I wanted to see what was happening elsewhere in the world, what was happening elsewhere in the scientific community” (Int25) and “CNN on TV because my sister-in-law was living in the United States”. (Int35).
A substantial fraction, nearly two-thirds (n = 22), reported not using social media platforms for COVID-19 updates despite being Internet users. Their sentiment towards social media was expressed by one as, “Yes, I use the internet. But I don’t rely on Facebook, or [laughs] Instagram for relevant information”. (Int05).
Further, almost half of the cohort (n = 16), leaned towards professional medical information sources. Whether it was direct interactions with healthcare professionals such as doctors, pharmacists and nurses or consulting official online medical sites, the medical community played an important role in disseminating information. This was echoed in statements such as, “Well, we had the doctor, my husband’s respirologist” (Int33) and “when you get vaccinated, I asked the nurse some questions”. (Int03).
While participants exhibited various information-seeking behaviors, their reliance on trusted sources, whether government briefings or medical professionals, was clear. Moreover, despite the ubiquity of online platforms, a significant portion remained cautious or selective about their Internet sources, favoring direct human interactions, traditional media, and official sources.

3.2. Reflection on the Conveyed Information

The overarching theme of the study revolves around the participants’ reception and interpretation of information disseminated by various authorities and platforms. A significant majority of the participants (n = 29) expressed confidence in the information presented by government and public health authorities. Their perception leaned towards viewing this information as generally trustworthy, even if there were moments when clarity was lacking. As one participant succinctly put it when speaking about authorities, “I have full confidence” (Int12). Another participant highlighted that even if the entire truth is not always disclosed, this does not equate to disappointment; rather, it might be a selective presentation of details, stating, “When they say, they don’t all tell us the truth, that’s true. But it’s not lying to you”. (Int30).
However, a contrasting perspective was observed in a smaller group (n = 7), who exhibited skepticism towards authorities. Their reservations were linked to potential political agendas or financial interests. This sentiment is encapsulated in the following statement: “politics is politics. They often want to make political capital” (Int17); another participant expressed, “Since the world began, governments have always been a bit of a mishmash, because, whether it’s a government or not, it’s all about money”. (Int33).
When it comes to the domain of social media, a substantial segment (n = 15) echoed a distrust in information from platforms like Facebook and Twitter (now X). The misinformation on these platforms was of significant concern, as one participant pointed out: “You can’t trust Facebook or either, so you really have to be discerning not to be fooled by false information”. (Int10).
On the other hand, the traditional media landscape was viewed through a more favorable lens. A group of 13 participants asserted a level of confidence in conventional media outlets, as in this quotation, “Well, uh, I was inclined to trust the traditional media”. (Int09). However, another group (n = 7) was less trustful in conventional media, and some pinpointed moments where these outlets might engage in sensationalism or use misleading headlines, with a case in point being, “Even at Radio-Canada, sometimes they’ll give me a nice headline that flashes and then you get to the article and realize that ah it’s not that at all”. (Int01).
In summary, while a predominant fraction of participants leaned towards trusting government and health authorities, voices of skepticism existed, particularly with respect to social media channels. Traditional media, despite being viewed as relatively reliable, did not escape criticism.

3.3. The Concept of Ageism

Within the analyzed interviews, ageism as a concept was identified across half of them (n = 17).

3.3.1. Institutional Ageism

A single occurrence of prejudice was identified concerning media portrayal, with one participant expressing a strong aversion to news outlets, describing their coverage of deceased older adults in nursing homes as a source of sensationalism rather than informative. The interviewee stated: “For me, it’s not news, it’s entertainment. It’s using people’s deaths to make shows, and that’s absolutely repugnant to me. In fact, as far as television networks are concerned, honestly, there are certain cases where I’ve found them repulsive and I’d change the channel. I didn’t even watch it, I didn’t even want to watch it. I’d say to myself, “You don’t have to have a heart to show up in front of a CHSLD [long-term care facilities] where 98 people have died and try to make a show of it and interview everyone around you”. I find that disgusting”. (Int29).
Although only a single occurrence of prejudice was identified in media portrayal, institutional ageism was a common theme, identified in 11 interviews with a total of 17 occurrences. Of these, 13 occurrences were qualified as forms of discrimination. Participants often highlighted discriminatory institutional ageism in long-term care facilities that were present for a long time even prior to the pandemic. One participant emphasized, “People who go into CHSLD [long-term care facilities] rarely come out alive. [...] there were people there who are really vulnerable, and with the lack of equipment and the lack of information…” (Int36). In the context of measures intended to safeguard older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic, another participant expressed displeasure at feeling infantilized by the authorities, stating, “It’s like being told you’re old all of a sudden. It was like ‘woohoo’, I’m a senior [...] it bothered me to be infantilized like that”. (Int16). Within the institutional ageism references, stereotyping was apparent in three cases. One interviewee remarked, “So, you know, it puts us a little bit on edge in the sense […] it’s sure that, according to the information, well ok “seniors, and covid, covid, covid”. But it’s certain that some seniors were sick beforehand”. (Int17) highlighting the generalized association of older adults with illness during the COVID-19 outbreak. Another participant expressed discontentment with the prevailing notion that the majority of older adults are unwell and reside in care facilities, stating, “You get the impression that everyone who’s practically a senior is sick and living in a CHSLD [long-term care facilities], when that’s simply not true”. (Int16).

3.3.2. Interpersonal Ageism

Interpersonal ageism was prominent in eight of the conducted interviews, accounting for a total of 10 occurrences.
Within these occurrences, discrimination against older adults was found in three occurrences. Among these narratives, a participant shared their experience of being subjected to limitations imposed by younger family members: “We’re seniors and we were very quiet, then my son forced me “You don’t do this, you don’t do that”, so I listened carefully. We listened a lot. Of course, it was very difficult, but we followed all the instructions to the letter. Even now, we’re still scared”. (Int11). Another narrative from interview 31 drew attention to an unwarranted climate of violence that affected older adults during the pandemic. The participant expressed concern, stating, “The violence that developed immeasurably during this pandemic, which is almost inexplicable, inexcusable. Maybe this violence was lying dormant and isolation made us discover it, I don’t know, but it’s incredibly sad. We’ve had seniors who’ve been very shaken by gestures... it’s gratuitous violence that comes out of nowhere, and it scares us”. (Int31).
Within the occurrences of interpersonal ageism denoting stereotyping, five instances were observed. One participant shed light on the significance of communicative respect towards the older adults, critically noting the use of elderspeak: “Then, if you don’t talk to them in baby talk, if you talk to them at a level of understanding appropriate to their age, a good, well-understood French, you know, children do incredible things, they understand, it’s the same thing for adults, you have to talk to them at their level”. (Int10).
Conversely, certain participants used ageist statements themselves during interviews, demonstrating interpersonal ageism. A statement from a participant insinuated a notion of post-retirement inertia: “When you’re retired you sit around doing nothing at home time is long, so I keep busy” (Int06). Additionally, another participant stated the technological reluctance attributed to advanced age: “for 60+ or 65+ [...] it’s an age when some people aren’t computer-savvy, they don’t have computers, they don’t want to know anything about computers”. (Int17).
Two references provided evidence of age-based prejudice. An illustration is when a participant directly addressed the interviewer, highlighting the contrast in perceptions of age with the following statement: “at your age, you see yourself as eternal, you know, it’s not the same psychology. On top of that, the age difference also means that there’s a disassociation between the two of us. You see me as an old man. Then I look at you and you’re a young woman, and that creates a different reality for our two groups”. (Int10).

3.3.3. Self-Directed Ageism

Within the context of self-directed ageism, its manifestation was discernible in seven of the conducted interviews. All of these were exclusively of a stereotyping nature. For instance, one respondent commented on their decision regarding vaccination by stating, “I got vaccinated because I’m old […]” (Int06). Another participant alluded to generational differences, making the following remark: “I, you have to understand that I’m a person... I’m 65, I come from a different era”. (Int19).
In summary, the research uncovered that ageism was observed in several forms—through the structures of institutions, in daily personal interactions, and in how older adults actually see themselves. There were instances in which ageist undertones were identified in the actions of health authorities and media representations. Additional extracts from interviews representing different forms of ageism can be found in Supplementary Materials.

4. Discussion

In this qualitative study on ageism through information practices among older adults in the province of Quebec, Canada, it was found that government authorities served as the primary reference, followed by local sources and medical professionals, with social media being consulted to a lesser extent. In terms of reflection on these sources, there was a marked trust in government-originating information, although a minority expressed doubts; views on traditional media were mixed, while trust in social media was notably low.
Although ageism was not the primary focus of the initial study, nearly half of the interviews contained instances of ageism. Institutional ageism, particularly that involving authorities and the media, was the most frequently identified in participants’ accounts, but interpersonal and self-directed ageism were also present. Comments often related to experiences of discrimination, as well as stereotypes and prejudices.

4.1. Information Practices and Reflection on the Information Conveyed by Older Adults During COVID-19

Our study has revealed a pattern of reliance on authorities’ briefings and traditional media, signaling a tendency among older adults to turn to established and trusted information sources in times of uncertainty. This finding aligns with the notion that during crises, public trust in information from familiar sources is crucial for the acceptance of health recommendations [27]. Also, the perception of risk, as older adults were portrayed as vulnerable [28], can be an important factor in the public’s trust in messages conveyed by authorities [27,29]. The trust in traditional media and authorities’ briefings is particularly noteworthy given that, outside of pandemic situations, existing literature suggests that older adults commonly prefer direct, in-person engagement with trusted sources for health-related information, in addition to seeking out diverse channels such as the Internet [4,27]. This divergence could be partly explained by COVID-19 measures that limited physical contact, necessitating reliance on more remote information sources.
Older adults’ reflection on the information received during the pandemic reveals a discerning and selective approach to information practices. The selectiveness displayed in avoiding social media, which could stem from its role in disseminating misinformation and fake news, underscores their concerns regarding the reliability of these platforms as credible sources of information. Participants’ avoidance of social media may have shielded them from the widespread misinformation prevalent during the pandemic [3,6]. It should also be noted that traditional media was not immune to criticism, as the participants in our study accused traditional media of coming up with big titles, but the information conveyed did not measure up to the title. These insights shed light on the complex nature of information needs among the aging population and the challenges they face in regarding credible sources with a discerning eye. Understanding these complexities is essential for developing public health interventions that align with and effectively reach older adults demographics. Future studies should delve into the methods older adults use to verify the credibility of information and how authorities, including public health, could increase the credibility of their messages.

4.2. Concept of Ageism

In our study, the concept of ageism emerged as a significant finding, with half of the interviews presenting some form of ageism. This is particularly noteworthy considering that ageism was not the primary focus of the interviews. This underlines the pervasiveness of ageist attitudes and practices, even when they are not the direct subject of inquiry.
Participants shared experiences suggesting ageist undertones in the actions of health authorities and in media portrayals during the COVID-19 pandemic. For instance, the emphasis on the vulnerability of older adults by authorities and mass media during pandemics has been linked to the spread of ageist discourse on social media, exemplified by trends like the “Boomer Remover” on Twitter (now X) [30]. These instances highlight an underlying issue that the potential for systemic bias within information-dissemination practices that may inadvertently marginalize older adults. Comparisons with broader literature indicate that such systemic biases are not isolated incidents but are rather part of a broader societal challenge [16,31].
In terms of interpersonal ageism, participants in our study reported having feelings of fear and vulnerability, a sentiment echoed in other pandemic studies [12]. Participants also criticized the use of “elderspeak”, which, despite often being used with caring intentions, can come across as patronizing to older adults, potentially undermining their trust [32].
In our study, self-directed ageism was found to be manifested exclusively in stereotypical forms. This type of ageism appears to stem from negative self-perceptions, where individuals categorize themselves as “old” [33]. This negative self-perception is reflective of societal stereotypes about aging, suggesting a shift from positive to negative feelings associated with aging [33]. Addressing and altering these societal representations of aging holds promise for changing societal perceptions of aging [34].
Several studies have investigated how older adults engage with information. In the health sector, research has mainly focused on their use of the Internet [35], their behaviors in seeking health information online [36], and how digital inequalities affect their access to information [37,38]. However, there is a gap concerning the influence of ageism on these information practices. The portrayal of older adults as a vulnerable group that should be protected reinforces the stereotypes of incompetence [39,40]. This perceived incompetence can be reflected in assumptions about older adults’ limited ability to navigate and evaluate online information effectively [41,42]. Such narratives not only suggest that older adults are inherently less capable of finding and evaluating information, but also have the potential to alter their information practices. By internalizing these ageist perceptions, older adults may limit their information sources or disengage from seeking out information altogether. Additionally, portraying older adults as a homogeneous vulnerable group creates an “us versus them” dichotomy, fostering negative stereotypes and potentially intensifying intergenerational tensions [30,43]. Recognizing and mitigating ageist biases can enhance the inclusivity and effectiveness of communications, thereby improving older adults’ engagement with health information and promoting more equitable intergenerational relationships.

4.3. Strengths and Limitations

The study’s methodological approach is a key strength of this study. A balanced demographic was carefully selected for the participant group to ensure comprehensive representation. The research design was thorough, beginning with preliminary coding of the data to create a rigorous thematic framework. A triple analysis process was implemented to enhance the study’s analytical rigor. Researchers NG, MV, and AT independently reviewed the initial coding, allowing for collaborative consensus on the key findings. This methodological approach enhanced the reliability and validity of the results.
Despite these strengths, several limitations warrant consideration. Firstly, the recruitment strategy, which primarily involved contacting participants by email, may have introduced a bias. To mitigate such bias, we ensured diversity in the participants’ educational levels. Another limitation stems from the remote nature of the interviews, with some conducted over the phone, thereby limiting access to non-verbal cues, which are crucial for comprehensive communication analysis. Additionally, the qualitative approach of this study may be subject to social desirability bias. Despite the involvement of experienced researchers to minimize this effect, it is possible that participants might have altered their responses based on what they perceived as expected or acceptable. Lastly, it is important to note that the concept of ageism was not explicitly introduced by the interviewers. This may have led to a lesser focus on ageism in the participants’ responses, potentially resulting in its underrepresentation in the study’s findings.

5. Conclusions

This research aimed to explore the informational practices of older adults during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a specific focus on the sources they used, their reflexivity, and the presence of ageism. Answering the following specific questions: Which information sources were used? Older adults primarily relied on traditional media and government press briefings for pandemic-related information. Medical professionals also served as trusted sources for a significant portion of participants. Social media platforms were largely avoided. How was their information reflexivity? While a predominant fraction of participants leaned towards trusting government and health authorities, voices of skepticism existed. Traditional media, despite being viewed as relatively reliable, did not escape criticism, with participants expressing concerns about sensationalism. Social media channels were often avoided, with some participants having concerns about misinformation. Was ageism observed through those practices? There were instances in which ageist undertones were identified in the actions of health authorities and media representations, portraying older adults as particularly vulnerable. Ageism also manifested in dismissive personal interactions and was internalized by some older adults in how they viewed their own aging process.
Our findings highlight that ageism in official and media discourse influences how individuals are perceived based on their age. Overrepresenting older adults as a vulnerable and homogeneous group by trusted communication sources sustains internalized ageist beliefs within society. This reinforcement of negative stereotypes can foster intergenerational tensions and reduce the effectiveness of health communications targeted at older adults.

Future Research and Implications

Further research is needed to optimize reliable, clear, and respectful communications with older adults. To combat ageism, it is crucial for both the media and health officials to create strategies that address and prevent such biases. Communication should be respectful and involve the insights of older adults to ensure it is appropriate and relevant to their needs.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/jal4040023/s1, Table S1: Forms of ageism and instances of ageism in interviews.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.V., A.T., E.D. and A.C.; methodology, N.G., M.V. and A.T.; validation, M.V. and A.T.; formal analysis, N.G., A.T. and M.V.; investigation, M.V.; resources, M.V.; writing—original draft preparation, N.G.; writing—review and editing, M.V., A.T., N.G., E.D. and A.C.; visualization, M.V.; supervision, M.V.; project administration, M.V.; funding acquisition, M.V., A.T., E.D. and A.C. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), grant number MM1: 174884. The development of the research project was supported by the Reseau de recherche en santé des populations du Québec (RRSPQ) (Quebec Population Health Research Network). The APC was funded by Université Laval.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the CIUSSS du Centre-Sud-de-l’Île-de-Montréal (project 2022-829 approved the 28 June 2021).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank the participants for sharing their experiences and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) for funding our study. We are also grateful for the collaborative efforts of the Conference of the Regional Roundtables for Seniors in Quebec (CTRCAQ) throughout this entire project, as well as to all the participants who generously dedicated their time to our project. Additionally, we would like to thank Bertrand Gignac, Ariane Benoit, and Valérie Trottier for their invaluable support and contributions to our research.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript; or in the decision to publish the results.

References

  1. Savolainen, R. Everyday Information Practices: A Social Phenomenological Perspective; Scarecrow Press: Lanham, MD, USA, 2008; p. 248. [Google Scholar]
  2. Cuan-Baltazar, J.Y.; Muñoz-Perez, M.J.; Robledo-Vega, C.; Pérez-Zepeda, M.F.; Soto-Vega, E. Misinformation of COVID-19 on the Internet: Infodemiology Study. JMIR Public Health Surveill. 2020, 6, e18444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Kouzy, R.; Abi Jaoude, J.; Kraitem, A.; El Alam, M.B.; Karam, B.; Adib, E.; Zarka, J.; Traboulsi, C.; Akl, E.W.; Baddour, K. Coronavirus Goes Viral: Quantifying the COVID-19 Misinformation Epidemic on Twitter. Cureus 2020, 12, e7255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Chaudhuri, S.; Le, T.; White, C.; Thompson, H.; Demiris, G. Examining Health Information–Seeking Behaviors of Older Adults. Comput. Inf. Nurs. 2013, 31, 547–553. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Ayalon, L. There is nothing new under the sun: Ageism and intergenerational tension in the age of the COVID-19 outbreak. Int. Psychogeriatr. 2020, 32, 1221–1224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Mohammed, F.; Al-Kumaim, N.H.; Alzahrani, A.I.; Fazea, Y. The Impact of Social Media Shared Health Content on Protective Behavior against COVID-19. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2023, 20, 1775. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Alami, H.; Lehoux, P.; Fleet, R.; Fortin, J.-P.; Liu, J.; Attieh, R.; Cadeddu, S.B.M.; Samri, M.A.; Savoldelli, M.; Ahmed, M.A.A. How Can Health Systems Better Prepare for the Next Pandemic? Lessons Learned From the Management of COVID-19 in Quebec (Canada). Front. Public Health 2021, 9, 671833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Lowe, M.; Harmon, S.H.E.; Kholina, K.; Parker, R.; Graham, J.E. Public health communication in Canada during the COVID-19 pandemic. Can. J. Public Health 2022, 113, 34–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Anwar, A.; Malik, M.; Raees, V.; Anwar, A. Role of Mass Media and Public Health Communications in the COVID-19 Pandemic. Cureus 2020, 12, e10453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Grimes, D.R. Health disinformation & social media. EMBO Rep. 2020, 21, e51819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Ma, X.; Liu, Y.; Zhang, P.; Qi, R.; Meng, F. Understanding online health information seeking behavior of older adults: A social cognitive perspective. Front. Public Health 2023, 11, 1147789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Sangrar, R.; Porter, M.M.; Chesser, S. Exploring the Interpretation of COVID-19 Messaging on Older Adults’ Experiences of Vulnerability. Can. J. Aging/La Rev. Can. Du Vieil. 2021, 40, 533–542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Gallant, N.; Supeno, E.; Atkin, S. Pratiques Informationnelles Dans L’intégration Professionnelle des Jeunes Adultes et des Immigrants: Revue de Littérature; INRS Centre—Urbanisation Culture Société: Montréal, QC, Canada, 2016; p. 64. [Google Scholar]
  14. Charaudeau, P.; Maingueneau, D.; Adam, J.-M. Dictionnaire D’analyse du Discours; Seuil: Paris, France, 2002; p. 661. [Google Scholar]
  15. Derrer-Merk, E.; Reyes-Rodriguez, M.; Salazar, A.; Guevara, M.; Rodríguez, G.; Fonseca, A.; Camacho, N.; Ferson, S.; Mannis, A.; Bentall, R.P.; et al. Is Protecting Older Adults from COVID-19 Ageism? A Comparative Cross-cultural Constructive Grounded Theory from the United Kingdom and Colombia. J. Soc. Issues 2022, 78, 900–923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Jen, S.; Jeong, M.; Kang, H.; Riquino, M. Ageism in COVID-Related Newspaper Coverage: The First Month of a Pandemic. J. Gerontol. Ser. B Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 2021, 76, 1904–1912. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Global Report on Ageism. Available online: https://www.who.int/teams/social-determinants-of-health/demographic-change-and-healthy-ageing/combatting-ageism/global-report-on-ageism (accessed on 20 June 2024).
  18. Iversen, T.N.; Larsen, L.; Solem, P.E. A conceptual analysis of ageism. Nord. Psychol. 2009, 61, 4–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Chang, E.-S.; Kannoth, S.; Levy, S.; Wang, S.-Y.; Lee, J.E.; Levy, B.R. Global reach of ageism on older persons’ health: A systematic review. PLoS ONE 2020, 15, e0220857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Visintin, E.P. Contact with older people, ageism, and containment behaviours during the COVID-19 pandemic. J. Community Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2021, 31, 314–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Balard, F.; Kivits, J.; Voléry, I.; Schrecker, C. Chapitre 9. L’analyse qualitative en santé. In Les Recherches Qualitatives en Santé; Armand Colin: Paris, France, 2016; pp. 167–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Paillé, P.; Mucchielli, A. L’analyse qualitative en sciences humaines et sociales. In L’analyse Qualitative en Sciences Humaines et Sociales; Arman Colin: Paris, France, 2008; pp. 123–145. [Google Scholar]
  23. Lin, C.A.; Atkin, D.J.; Cappotto, C.; Davis, C.; Dean, J.; Eisenbaum, J.; House, K.; Lange, R.; Merceron, A.; Metzger, J.; et al. Ethnicity, digital divides and uses of the Internet for health information. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2015, 51, 216–223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Baines, A.; Seo, H.; Ittefaq, M.; Shayesteh, F.; Kamanga, U.; Liu, Y. Race/ethnicity, online information and COVID-19 vaccination: Study of minority immigrants’ internet use for health-related information. Convergence 2023, 29, 268–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Wagner, M.C.; Boczkowski, P.J. The Reception of Fake News: The Interpretations and Practices That Shape the Consumption of Perceived Misinformation. Digit. J. 2019, 7, 870–885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Dhakal, K. NVivo. J. Med. Libr. Assoc. 2022, 110, 270–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Majid, U.; Wasim, A.; Truong, J.; Bakshi, S. Public trust in governments, health care providers, and the media during pandemics: A systematic review. J. Trust Res. 2021, 11, 119–141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Rahman, A.; Jahan, Y. Defining a ‘Risk Group’ and Ageism in the Era of COVID-19. J. Loss Trauma 2020, 25, 631–634. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Brankston, G.; Merkley, E.; Fisman, D.N.; Tuite, A.R.; Poljak, Z.; Loewen, P.J.; Greer, A.L. Socio-demographic disparities in knowledge, practices, and ability to comply with COVID-19 public health measures in Canada. Can. J. Public Health 2021, 112, 363–375. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Meisner, B.A. Are You OK, Boomer? Intensification of Ageism and Intergenerational Tensions on Social Media Amid COVID-19. Leis. Sci. 2021, 43, 56–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Lagacé, M. A Case Study on Ageism During the COVID-19 Pandemic; Employment and Social Development: Gatineau, QC, Canada, 2022. [Google Scholar]
  32. Shaw, C.; Gordon, J.; Williams, K. Understanding Elderspeak: An Evolutionary Concept Analysis. Innov. Aging 2021, 5, igab023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Minichiello, V.; Browne, J.; Kendig, H. Perceptions and consequences of ageism: Views of older people. Ageing Soc. 2000, 20, 253–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Marques, S.; Mariano, J.; Mendonça, J.; De Tavernier, W.; Hess, M.; Naegele, L.; Peixeiro, F.; Martins, D. Determinants of Ageism against Older Adults: A Systematic Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 2560. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Hunsaker, A.; Hargittai, E. A review of Internet use among older adults. New Media Soc. 2018, 20, 3937–3954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Zhao, Y.C.; Zhao, M.; Song, S. Online Health Information Seeking Behaviors among Older Adults: Systematic Scoping Review. J. Med. Internet Res. 2022, 24, e34790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Friemel, T.N. The digital divide has grown old: Determinants of a digital divide among seniors. New Media Soc. 2016, 18, 313–331. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Hargittai, E.; Piper, A.M.; Morris, M.R. From internet access to internet skills: Digital inequality among older adults. Univers. Access Inf. Soc. 2019, 18, 881–890. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Fraser, S.A.; Kenyon, V.; Lagacé, M.; Wittich, W.; Southall, K.E. Stereotypes Associated with Age-related Conditions and Assistive Device Use in Canadian Media. Gerontologist 2016, 56, 1023–1032. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Boudjemadi, V.; Świątkowski, W.; Vieira, L.; Carrier, A.; Rohmer, O. “Old” Does Not Always Mean “Incompetent”: The Implication of Respect in the Perception of Older People Subtypes. Can. J. Aging/Rev. Can. Vieil. 2023, 42, 475–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Guess, A.; Nagler, J.; Tucker, J. Less than you think: Prevalence and predictors of fake news dissemination on Facebook. Sci. Adv. 2019, 5, eaau4586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Moore, R.C.; Hancock, J.T. A digital media literacy intervention for older adults improves resilience to fake news. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 6008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Levy, S.R.; Lytle, A.; Macdonald, J. The worldwide ageism crisis. J. Soc. Issues 2022, 78, 743–768. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table 1. WHO Ageism framework.
Table 1. WHO Ageism framework.
Types of Ageism
InstitutionalInterpersonalSelf-Directed
-
Policies
-
Government communications
-
Media portrayal
-
Employment practices
-
Hiring discrimination
-
Inconsistent healthcare access
-
Social interactions
-
Language use
-
Assumptions about capabilities based on age
-
Patronizing behavior (e.g., elderspeak)
-
Internalized beliefs about age-related limitations
-
Self-limiting behaviors based on perceived age
-
Negative self-perception due to age
Stereotypes (how we think)—Prejudice (how we feel)—Discrimination (how we act)
Table 2. Participants’ demographics.
Table 2. Participants’ demographics.
Characteristicn
Gender
Men18
Women18
Age
60–69 years old28
70 years old and over8
Geographical region
Central regions of Quebec20
Other regions of Quebec16
Educational level attained
Secondary school diploma12
College diploma12
University degree12
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Guzun, N.; Tourigny, A.; Dubé, E.; Coutant, A.; Vivion, M. Ageism Through the Informational Practices During Health Crisis: A Qualitative Study Among Older Adults in Quebec (Canada). J. Ageing Longev. 2024, 4, 316-327. https://doi.org/10.3390/jal4040023

AMA Style

Guzun N, Tourigny A, Dubé E, Coutant A, Vivion M. Ageism Through the Informational Practices During Health Crisis: A Qualitative Study Among Older Adults in Quebec (Canada). Journal of Ageing and Longevity. 2024; 4(4):316-327. https://doi.org/10.3390/jal4040023

Chicago/Turabian Style

Guzun, Nicolai, André Tourigny, Eve Dubé, Alexandre Coutant, and Maryline Vivion. 2024. "Ageism Through the Informational Practices During Health Crisis: A Qualitative Study Among Older Adults in Quebec (Canada)" Journal of Ageing and Longevity 4, no. 4: 316-327. https://doi.org/10.3390/jal4040023

APA Style

Guzun, N., Tourigny, A., Dubé, E., Coutant, A., & Vivion, M. (2024). Ageism Through the Informational Practices During Health Crisis: A Qualitative Study Among Older Adults in Quebec (Canada). Journal of Ageing and Longevity, 4(4), 316-327. https://doi.org/10.3390/jal4040023

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop