Skip to main content
Browse Subject Areas

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

  • Loading metrics

Videos about older adults on TikTok

  • Reuben Ng ,

    Roles Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliations Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore, Lloyd’s Register Foundation Institute for the Public Understanding of Risk, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore

  • Nicole Indran

    Roles Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing

    Affiliation Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy, National University of Singapore, Singapore, Singapore


Besides being one of the fastest growing platforms since entering the social media fray in 2016, TikTok is notably monopolized by teenagers, which makes it a veritable source of information not to be overlooked by gerontologists. Currently, most studies regarding age stereotypes on social media have examined content on Twitter and Facebook. Our study explores how older adults are portrayed on TikTok and the factors associated with these portrayals. We analyzed 673 videos with the hashtags #Boomer and/or #OkBoomer that received over 5.4 billion views and categorized them into nine topics. Five of these topics (e.g., ’Warmth/Coldness’) were extracted from previous studies on age stereotypes. The remaining four topics were unique to our dataset (e.g., ‘Wealth Gap’). The outcome variable was ‘Negative Age Stereotypes’ which was rated on a binary scale. One in two videos about older adults featured negative content. As hypothesized, videos containing negative age stereotypes were more likely to be about the ‘Values and Beliefs of Older Adults’ (7 times), ‘Negative Encounters with Older Adults’ (8 times) or ‘Older Adults Antagonizing the Young’ (13 times). Conversely, videos which portrayed older adults as ‘Warm’ were 43% less likely to contain negative stereotypes. As the phenomenon of an aging population fast unfolds, it is imperative that society relinquishes its tendency to stereotype individuals on the grounds of age. By examining the possible mechanisms driving negative stereotypes of older adults on TikTok, our study provides the basis upon which such stereotypes can be counteracted. In doing so, it paves the way both to improve the well-being of older persons and to foster intergenerational solidarity.


In its initial coinage, the term ‘Baby Boomer’ referred to those born between the early 1940s to the early 1960s, when the United States experienced a spike in the number of births after World War II. Today, the generational label has taken on a new meaning. Described by some as ‘Boomer Blaming’ [1], Baby Boomers are frequently pinpointed in public discourse as responsible for a bevy of social and economic issues [2]. In 2019, the phrase ‘Ok, Boomer’ went viral on social media, reflecting widespread beliefs among younger people that Baby Boomers are hindrances to societal progress [3]. By 2030, all Baby Boomers would be at least 65 years of age [4]. To bridge the generational divide and reap the benefits of intergenerational interaction [5], it is first necessary to determine the factors linked to negative stereotypes of older adults. Our study sheds light on this topic by analyzing videos with the hashtags #OkBoomer and/or #Boomer on TikTok.

Significance of study and hypotheses

Conceptually, this study is significant in that it is among the first to explore stereotypes of older adults on TikTok. Besides being one of the fastest growing platforms since entering the social media fray in 2016 [6]—the application took merely five years to hit a billion monthly active users [7]—TikTok is notably monopolized by teenagers [8], which makes it a veritable source of information not to be overlooked by gerontologists. Furthermore, age stereotypes are conventionally measured through surveys or questionnaires [9]. However, an analysis of videos may present nuances not captured by regular survey-based methods. In addition, older persons have recently begun embracing TikTok [10, 11]. As the usage of social media can affect the well-being and quality of life of older persons [1214], it is vital to understand how members of this cohort are being portrayed by their younger contemporaries on TikTok. From a practical perspective, this study provides insights into the mechanisms linked to negative stereotypes of older persons, which will in turn lay the foundation for improving their well-being as well as for cultivating intergenerational solidarity.

Existing literature on the way older persons are stereotyped on social media has looked primarily at Facebook [15], Twitter [1619] and Weibo [20], with only a handful mining content on TikTok. A content analysis of descriptions of publicly accessible Facebook groups about older people discovered that negative age stereotypes predominated [15]. Ageism was especially apparent on Twitter during the COVID-19 crisis [1619, 21], though calls for intergenerational solidarity were also observed on the application [17, 18]. A thematic analysis of posts uploaded on Weibo—a Chinese microblogging site with features that resemble those on Twitter—revealed that during the pandemic, older people were constructed as warm and competent individuals who actively exercised their agency [20].

Research in gerontology that centers on TikTok revolves largely around the use of the application among older adults [10, 11]. Only one study has examined how older persons are stereotyped by younger people on the platform [22]. This study unpacked videos on TikTok that featured younger people expressing a sense of hostility towards Baby Boomers [22]. Our study differs from the aforementioned in two key aspects. First, unlike the previous study which employed a qualitative approach, our study is quantitative in nature. This allows for a larger number of videos to be analyzed, which will in turn facilitate a more comprehensive understanding of the portrayal of older adults on TikTok. Second, while the previous study focused solely on videos where younger people evaluated Baby Boomers negatively, the current study analyzes videos with and without negative age stereotypes. Hence, our study lends a broader and more nuanced perspective on how older adults are viewed by younger people on TikTok.

Since Butler’s [23] pioneering work on ageism, age stereotypes have become a major subject of gerontological interest. Although negative views dominate the image of older people [2427], it should be noted that stereotypes of them are not wholly negative. Instead, the broad category of the older person is highly complex and differentiated into multiple subcategories [28, 29]. Positive stereotypes include being warm, generous and kind [30], while negative stereotypes include being slow, irrelevant and incompetent [24]. Recent studies have shown that age stereotypes in the United States have become more negative over the last two centuries [31, 32]—an alarming trend given that the assimilation of negative age stereotypes into one’s self-concept may adversely impact one’s health [33].

Various theories at the micro, meso and macro levels have been proffered to uncover the etiology of ageism [34]. One of these is social identity theory. Social identity refers to the aspects of one’s self-concept that are derived from one’s membership in a particular social group [35, 36]. At the core of social identity theory is the idea that individuals categorize themselves on the basis of perceived similarities and differences. In order to maintain a positive social identity, people engage in intergroup evaluations that favor the ingroup and discriminate against the outgroup [35, 36]. Individuals may also express negative attitudes towards outgroup members when the value of an ingroup is attacked [37]. Evidence has shown that people tend to denigrate younger generations [38]. Thus, we hypothesize that content about ‘Older Adults Antagonizing the Young’ will be linked to negative stereotypes of the older population (Hypothesis 1a).

Another perspective commonly used to account for ageism is that of intergroup threat theory. The theory proposes that prejudice towards particular social groups is rooted in the perception that these groups pose two kinds of threat: realistic and symbolic [39]. Realistic threats refer to threats to the group’s power, resources and welfare, while symbolic threats are threats to one’s worldview, belief system and values. Since Baby Boomers are frequently deemed to be obstructing the more progressive ideologies of the younger generation [3], we hypothesize that ‘Values and Beliefs of Older Adults’ will be linked to negative stereotypes of this population (Hypothesis 1b). Intergroup threat theory further postulates that experiences involving negative contact are a possible antecedent of perceptions of threat. Given the potential for negative intergroup contact to increase prejudice against outgroups [40], we hypothesize that videos concerning ‘Negative Encounters with Older Adults’ will be associated with negative age stereotypes (Hypothesis 1c).

Stereotype content model predicates that the stereotypes applied to social groups fall along two dimensions: warmth and competence [41]. Seen as occupying a low-status and non-competitive social position, the older demographic is typically perceived as a pitied group composed of warm but incompetent individuals [24, 41]. Hence, we hypothesize that content portraying older adults as ‘Warm’ will lessen the chances of negative stereotyping (Hypothesis 2).

In undertaking this study, some important points must be raised. Although interrelated, ‘age’ and ‘generation’ are conceptually distinct [42]. Mannheim [43] defined a generation as a group of people born within a specific period and whose worldviews distinguish them from other generations. According to Mannheim, one’s generational consciousness arises not simply from being part of a certain age cohort, but from the experiences that emerge from being subject to a specific set of social, cultural and historical conditions [44]. Our intention in using the hashtags #Boomer and #OkBoomer as a vehicle for understanding stereotypes of older persons is not to conflate age and generation. Rather, it is motivated by the possibility that many people, including the users creating these TikTok videos, are not actually cognizant of the official range of birth years—as defined by demographers—of Baby Boomers. Today, the term ‘generation’ is often used interchangeably with age [45]. The chances are therefore high that some younger people treat ‘Baby Boomers’ as a catch-all term for older adults.

Additionally, the use of generational categories will inevitably have ramifications on how society makes sense of age and age-related matters [45]. In fact, advocates have recently urged for the use of generational framing to be abolished [46]. In an ageist society, generational framing legitimizes segregation on the basis of age and foments ageism [46]. Moreover, while the phrase ‘Ok, Boomer’ may be a criticism of unprogressive mindsets rather than old age [47], we argue that the phrase ultimately paints older adults as problematic by singling out a particular group of individuals. We therefore analyze videos with the hashtags #Boomer and/or #OkBoomer as a way to understand younger people’s stereotypes of older adults, either in general or those from the Baby Boomer generation. In this study, we use the terms ‘young’ and ‘younger’ to refer to Millennials and members of Generation Z. ‘Old’ and ‘older’ are used to refer to users aged 57—the age of the youngest Baby Boomer in 2021 when the data were collected—and above.



Similar to earlier research [48], a new TikTok account was created to collate the videos. This was done to reduce bias since videos on the application are sorted based on a complex algorithm which takes into account the popularity of the post (measured by views, likes, comments and shares), the popularity of the creator (measured by followers and engagement), any previous content that was engaged with, as well as the geographical location of the device used to access the application [48]. No content was previously engaged with to guarantee a common user’s experience in navigating the platform [48].

We compiled publicly available videos (N = 1,937) catalogued under the hashtags #Boomer and #OkBoomer which garnered a total of 5.4 billion views. Videos were selected based on the following criteria: (1) Video was publicly available and created by a younger person i.e., videos created by older adults were excluded; (2) Video was in English; (3) Video featured content that was relevant to the hashtag i.e., video should be about older adults. All videos had a maximum duration of one minute as mandated by the platform during the period of the study.

To meet the first inclusion criterion, we processed users’ video frames via Microsoft Azure’s Face API [49]. The user’s profile picture was used in instances where the user’s face was not featured in the video. Microsoft Azure’s Face API extracts information regarding age and has been used in prior research on TikTok [50, 51]. In this study, ‘young’ and ‘younger’ were used to refer to Millennials and members of Generation Z. The maximum age of a ‘younger’ user was 40—the age of the oldest Millennial in 2021 when the data were collected—and due to ethical considerations, the minimum age was set as 16. We used ‘old’ and ‘older’ to refer to users aged 57—the age of the youngest Baby Boomer in 2021—and above. After applying both the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 673 videos were retained for analysis. Fig 1 depicts a flowchart of the data collection process.

Fig 1. Process of collating TikTok videos created by young people about older adults.

Ethical considerations

As the videos analyzed in our study were publicly available, we did not seek ethical approval or consent from the users whose posts were included in our dataset. However, we recognize that using publicly available data still carries ethical and privacy considerations [52]. Thus, we took steps to protect the privacy of all users whose videos were included in our study, such as by removing any identifying information. We also emphasize that our study does not provide any detailed descriptions of the content of the videos, which means it is difficult to trace the people who posted the videos. The collection of videos and method of analysis complied with the terms and conditions of TikTok.

Coding of predictors

Following previous research [53, 54], the codebook (Table 1) was developed through both inductive and deductive approaches [55]. In inductive content analyses, codes are derived directly from the data [56]. Meanwhile, analyses led by a directed or deductive approach begin with the identification of an initial set of codes based on past scholarship [56]. We adopted both inductive and deductive approaches to ensure that certain pertinent assumptions informed the analysis while also mindful that new categories would emerge inductively [55].

Table 1. Codebook for videos created by younger people about older adults on TikTok.

To develop a preliminary codebook, we first identified a set of categories based on past literature. These variables were collated from validated scales measuring age stereotypes as well as studies regarding perceptions of aging [29, 31]: (1) ‘Physical Functioning’ (e.g., protagonist comments on the physical abilities of an older person); (2) ‘Appearance’ (e.g., protagonist comments on the appearance of an older person); (3) ‘Illness/Death’; (4) ‘Warmth’ (i.e. whether the older person is viewed as warm or cold) [57]; (5) ‘Competence’ (e.g., whether the older person is viewed as competent or incompetent).

The content analysis was subsequently conducted in several stages, with each video viewed twice by two researchers trained in gerontology to ensure familiarity with and immersion in the data [56]. The goal of the first viewing was to confirm the validity of the initial set of categories, as well as to generate codes systematically across the entire dataset. Each researcher modified the codebook independently until all variables were refined and clearly defined. During the first viewing, a new category was added whenever a video featured a particular attribute which could not be suitably coded into any of the existing categories and which was recurrent in the data. During the second viewing, the two coders had frequent discussions during which any discrepancies were reviewed and adjudicated to ensure rigor in the analysis. At this point, the two coders discussed what the codes meant, ensured the relevance of the codes to the research question and identified areas of significant overlap so as to finalize the codebook.

Topics that surfaced prominently across multiple videos and that could not be appropriately coded into the aforementioned categories include: (6) ‘Wealth Gap’ (e.g., protagonist comments on the existence of a wealth gap between older and younger generations); (7) ‘Values and Beliefs of Older Adults’ (i.e., protagonist describes older adults as having beliefs that either violate or uphold cherished values and norms); (8) ‘Negative Encounters with Older Adults’ (e.g., protagonist describes an unpleasant encounter with an older adult); (9) ‘Older Adults Antagonizing the Young’ (e.g., protagonist reacts to negative evaluations of younger people by older adults). With the exception of the ‘Warm/Cold’ and ‘Competent/Incompetent’ variables (Fiske, 2018), both of which were rated on a 5-point scale from 1 (very cold/incompetent) to 5 (very warm/competent), all variables were rated on a binary scale, with the presence of the attribute in the video rated as 1 and the absence of it rated as 0.

Coding of outcome variable

The outcome variable was ‘Negative Age Stereotypes’. The presence of negative stereotypes was rated 1 and the absence of it—regardless of whether the stereotype was positive or neutral—was rated 0. An example of a video rated 1 is one that featured a younger person saying that older adults have pillaged the economy. An example of a video rated 0 is one that described older adults as being kind. Inter-rater reliability was estimated using weighted Cohen’s kappa for the outcome variable. The percentage agreement between two coders was 97.5% with a weighted Cohen’s kappa of 0.94 (p < .001), indicating high inter-rater reliability.

Analytic strategy

We performed logistic regressions to test our hypotheses. Model 1 included variables extracted from previous studies on age stereotypes derived from a top-down approach: ‘Physical Functioning’, ‘Appearance’, ‘Illness/Death’, ‘Warmth’ and ‘Competence’. Model 2 consisted of variables from Model 1 as well as variables derived from a bottom-up approach: ‘Wealth Gap’, ‘Values and Beliefs of Older Adults’, ‘Negative Encounters with Older Adults’ and ‘Older Adults Antagonizing the Young.’ Analyses were conducted using R version 4.0.3.


Descriptive statistics

Overall, 1 in 2 videos (49.3%) contained negative age stereotypes. Of these videos, 79% were related to ‘Negative Encounters with Older Adults’, which is more than 4 times the number for videos without negative age stereotypes. About 58% of the videos included criticisms of the ‘Values and Beliefs of Older Adults’, which is also more than 4 times the number for posts without negative age stereotypes. About 40% featured ‘Older Adults Antagonizing the Young’, which was 18 times more than videos without negative age stereotypes. Negatively rated videos contained more stereotypes of older adults as ‘Cold’. See Table 2 for a summary.

Table 2. Description of topics based on whether videos created by younger people about older adults on TikTok include negative age stereotypes.

Logistic regression of factors associated with negative age stereotypes on TikTok

As hypothesized, videos criticizing the ‘Values and Beliefs of Older Adults’ were 7 times more likely to feature negative age stereotypes (p < .001). Videos about ‘Negative Encounters with Older Adults’ were 8 times more likely to contain evidence of negative stereotypes of older adults (p < .001). Content about ‘Older Adults Antagonizing the Young’ was 13 times more likely to contain negative age stereotypes (p < .001), controlling for other factors (Table 3). Taken together, these findings provide support for hypotheses 1a through 1c. Meanwhile, videos portraying older adults as ‘Warm’ were 43% less likely to contain negative stereotypes, providing support for Hypothesis 2. There was no evidence of multicollinearity as the variance inflation factor (VIF) scores for all variables were below the conservative threshold of 5.

Table 3. Logistic regression to analyze topics linked to negative age stereotypes in videos created by younger people about older adults on TikTok.


The objective of this study was to analyze the factors linked to negative age stereotypes in videos created by younger users on TikTok. Findings revealed that these factors include ‘Values and Beliefs of Older Adults’, ‘Negative Encounters with Older Adults’ and ‘Older Adults Antagonizing the Young’. Meanwhile, the depiction of older adults as ‘Warm’ was associated with reduced negative age stereotyping.

In over half of the videos, older adults were stereotyped by younger people as possessing values and beliefs at odds with those of the latter. This echoes past literature which indicates that younger persons tend to view their older counterparts as impeding their more progressive goals related to gender, sexuality and race [3, 22]. By framing their political concerns within the context of generational differences, these younger users assert their own generational consciousness around various social and political issues.

Many videos featured younger individuals reenacting encounters where they were subject to derision by older adults because of their youth. In these reenactments, younger people ranted about how they were frequently typecast as hypersensitive, narcissistic or addicted to technology. Protzko and Schooler [38] contended that certain cognitive mechanisms grant individuals a sense of illusory superiority, which consequently prompts them to disparage the present generation of youth more so than youth from earlier generations. In line with social identity theory [36, 37], negative attitudes towards older adults may function as a defense mechanism on the part of younger individuals.

Negative encounters with older adults significantly predicted negative age stereotyping. Videos on this topic featured younger people attributing the negativity of such encounters to the fact that these people were part of the older cohort. Consistent with intergroup threat theory, prior negative contact with a particular social group can be a key driver of anxiety towards that group [39]. Such negative contact may also intensify feelings of prejudice and the propensity to avoid members of a particular group due to the anticipation that future interactions might likewise be negative [58, 59].

Content portraying older adults as warm reduced the chances of negative age stereotyping. This reiterates past scholarly claims which suggest that older people are generally stereotyped as being high in warmth [57]. In these videos, the term ‘Baby Boomer’ was used more as a demographic label rather than a derogatory term, with younger people admiring older adults for traits such as friendliness and sincerity.

Practical significance

These findings offer several insights for practitioners. First, more effort should be made to raise public awareness of ageism as a form of prejudice. This is especially critical in view of recent findings unveiling that individuals with egalitarian beliefs—specifically those who champion gender and racial equality—are actually more likely to endorse ageist beliefs [60]. Second, policymakers must pay heed to the fact that unfavorable attitudes towards older adults may stem from a history of negative contact with them. Since the depiction of older adults as being warm lessened the chances of negative stereotyping, it is crucial that younger people are exposed to counter-stereotypical exemplars of older adults, such as those who are more sociable [57]. While stereotypes of warmth may reinforce benevolent ageism [61], they may nevertheless provide a protective buffer against stereotypes of older adults as being antagonistic.

Third, attempts to reframe aging [6264] as well as to build intergenerational solidarity should be premised on the understanding that ageism cuts both ways. Just as younger people should be mindful not to homogenize older adults as sharing the same values and beliefs, effort should be made to alert older individuals to their own cognitive biases [38] and the effects of these biases on the way they treat younger people. At present, there is limited literature on interventions to tackle ageism against younger people [65]. More research in this area should therefore be conducted to ensure that the needs and interests of younger people are not neglected in the global campaign to combat ageism [66]. Finally, in order not to divert attention from more important questions of power and inequality, the media should steer clear of the notion that certain societal problems, such as climate change or economic strife, can simply be ascribed to any one age group or generation [46]. Rather than sensationalize differences between older and younger groups, the media ought to promote a sense of communality by emphasizing collective goals and cross-generational collaboration [67]. Intergenerational connection will ultimately promote the well-being of both older and younger groups [5].

Limitations and future directions

This study has several limitations. First, the facial recognition software used to determine users’ ages may have a margin of error [50, 51]. Consequently, some of the videos analyzed may not have been created by users belonging to our desired age range. Attitudes towards older adults could be explored using alternative methods such as interviews, surveys [6872] and big data analytics [7381]. Second, most videos were created by individuals from the West. Negative age stereotypes may assume a different form in Asia, where the value of filial piety is generally believed to influence attitudes towards older persons [8284]. Future research could consider analyzing content from other platforms like Weibo or Douyin, both of which are widely used in China. Third, the videos analyzed represent only a fraction of all videos about older adults on TikTok. The hashtags #Boomer and #OkBoomer were queried because they were widely used on the platform at the time of analysis. Future studies should query other search terms to build a more extensive dataset. Fourth, as we did not have information regarding users’ intentions for uploading the videos, the conclusions drawn were heavily dependent on our coding criteria. To minimize any biases, each video was rated independently by two researchers—a process which yielded high inter-rater reliability.


With Baby Boomers swelling the ranks of the aging population, it is imperative that society relinquishes its tendency to stereotype individuals on the grounds of age. By examining the possible mechanisms driving negative stereotypes of older adults on TikTok, our study provides the basis upon which such stereotypes can be counteracted. In doing so, it paves the way both to improve the well-being of older persons and to foster intergenerational solidarity.


  1. 1. Bristow J. Stop Mugging Grandma: The “Generation Wars” and Why Boomer Blaming Won’t Solve Anything. Yale University Press; 2019.
  2. 2. Martin G, Roberts S. Exploring legacies of the baby boomers in the twenty-first century. The Sociological Review. 2021; 00380261211006326.
  3. 3. Gonyea JG, Hudson RB. In an Era of Deepening Partisan Divide, What is the Meaning of Age or Generational Differences in Political Values? Public Policy & Aging Report. 2020;30: 52–55.
  4. 4. United States Census Bureau. 2020 Census Will Help Policymakers Prepare for the Incoming Wave of Aging Boomers. In: [Internet]. 10 Dec 2019 [cited 20 Oct 2021].
  5. 5. Boger J, Mercer K. Technology for fostering intergenerational connectivity: scoping review protocol. Systematic Reviews. 2017;6: 250. pmid:29216904
  6. 6. Fishwick S. How to get started on TikTok—an adult’s guide. London Evening Standard. 5 May 2020. Accessed 3 Feb 2021.
  7. 7. Dellatto M. TikTok Hits 1 Billion Monthly Active Users. Forbes. 27 Sep 2021. Accessed 21 Oct 2021.
  8. 8. Muliadi B. Council Post: What The Rise Of TikTok Says About Generation Z. Forbes. 7 Jul 2020. Accessed 10 Jul 2021.
  9. 9. Ayalon L, Dolberg P, Mikulionienė S, Perek-Białas J, Rapolienė G, Stypinska J, et al. A systematic review of existing ageism scales. Ageing Res Rev. 2019;54: 100919. pmid:31228647
  10. 10. Ng R, Indran N. Not Too Old for TikTok: How Older Adults Are Reframing Aging. The Gerontologist. 2022;62: 1207–1216. pmid:35512401
  11. 11. Ng R, Indran N. Granfluencers on TikTok: Factors linked to positive self-portrayals of older adults on social media. PLOS ONE. 2023;18: e0280281. pmid:36749797
  12. 12. Cotten SR, Schuster AM, Seifert A. Social media use and well-being among older adults. Curr Opin Psychol. 2022;45: 101293. pmid:35065352
  13. 13. Ractham P, Techatassanasoontorn A, Kaewkitipong L. Old But Not Out: Social Media Use and Older Adults’ Life Satisfaction. Australasian Journal of Information Systems. 2022;26.
  14. 14. Harriger JA, Thompson JK, Tiggemann M. TikTok, TikTok, the time is now: Future directions in social media and body image. Body Image. 2023;44: 222–226. pmid:36739627
  15. 15. Levy BR, Chung PH, Bedford T, Navrazhina K. Facebook as a Site for Negative Age Stereotypes. The Gerontologist. 2014;54: 172–176. pmid:23392643
  16. 16. Jimenez‐Sotomayor MR, Gomez‐Moreno C, Soto‐Perez‐de‐Celis E. Coronavirus, Ageism, and Twitter: An Evaluation of Tweets about Older Adults and COVID-19. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 2020;68: 1661–1665. pmid:32338787
  17. 17. Skipper AD, Rose DJ. #BoomerRemover: COVID-19, ageism, and the intergenerational twitter response. Journal of Aging Studies. 2021;57: 100929. pmid:34082999
  18. 18. Ng R, Indran N, Liu L. Ageism on Twitter during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Social Issues. 2022;78: 842–859. pmid:35942488
  19. 19. Xiang X, Lu X, Halavanau A, Xue J, Sun Y, Lai PHL, et al. Modern Senicide in the Face of a Pandemic: An Examination of Public Discourse and Sentiment About Older Adults and COVID-19 Using Machine Learning. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B. 2021;76: e190–e200. pmid:32785620
  20. 20. Xi W, Xu W, Zhang X, Ayalon L. A Thematic Analysis of Weibo Topics (Chinese Twitter Hashtags) Regarding Older Adults During the COVID-19 Outbreak. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2021;76: e306–e312. pmid:32882029
  21. 21. Ng R, Chow TYJ, Yang W. Culture Linked to Increasing Ageism during Covid-19: Evidence from a 10-billion-word Corpus across 20 Countries. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B. 2021;76: 1808–1816. pmid:33786581
  22. 22. Ng R, Indran N. Hostility Toward Baby Boomers on TikTok. The Gerontologist. 2022;62: 1196–1206. pmid:35106587
  23. 23. Butler RN. Age-Ism: Another Form of Bigotry. The Gerontologist. 1969;9: 243–246. pmid:5366225
  24. 24. North MS, Fiske ST. An Inconvenienced Youth? Ageism and its Potential Intergenerational Roots. Psychol Bull. 2012;138. pmid:22448913
  25. 25. Ng R. Societal Age Stereotypes in the U.S. and U.K. from a Media Database of 1.1 Billion Words. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021;18: 8822. pmid:34444578
  26. 26. Ng R, Lim SQ, Saw SY, Tan KB. 40-Year Projections of Disability and Social Isolation of Older Adults for Long-Range Policy Planning in Singapore. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020;17: 4950. pmid:32659983
  27. 27. Ng R, Indran N, Yang W. Portrayals of older adults in over 3000 films around the world. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 2023. pmid:37314013
  28. 28. Hummert ML. Multiple Stereotypes of Elderly and Young Adults: A Comparison of Structure and Evaluations. Psychology and Aging. 1990;5: 182–193. pmid:2378684
  29. 29. Schmidt DE, Boland SM. Structure of Perceptions of Older Adults: Evidence for Multiple Stereotypes. Psychology and Aging. 1986;1: 255–260. pmid:3267406
  30. 30. Casper C, Rothermund K, Wentura D. The Activation of Specific Facets of Age Stereotypes Depends on Individuating Information. Social Cognition. 2011;29: 393–414.
  31. 31. Ng R, Allore HG, Trentalange M, Monin JK, Levy BR. Increasing Negativity of Age Stereotypes across 200 Years: Evidence from a Database of 400 Million Words. PLOS ONE. 2015;10: e0117086. pmid:25675438
  32. 32. Ng R, Chow TYJ. Aging Narratives over 210 years (1810–2019). The Journals of Gerontology: Series B. 2021;76: 1799–1807. pmid:33300996
  33. 33. Levy B. Stereotype Embodiment. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2009;18: 332–336.
  34. 34. Ayalon L, Tesch-Römer C. Introduction to the Section: Ageism—Concept and Origins. In: Ayalon L, Tesch-Römer C, editors. Contemporary Perspectives on Ageism. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2018. pp. 1–10.
  35. 35. Tajfel H. Social identity and intergroup behaviour. Social Science Information. 1974;13: 65–93.
  36. 36. Tajfel H, Turner JC. The Social Identity Theory of Intergroup Behavior. 2nd ed. In: Worchel S, Austin WG, editors. Psychology of intergroup relations. 2nd ed. Chicago: Nelson-Hall; 1985. pp. 7–24.
  37. 37. Branscombe NR, Ellemers N, Spears R, Doosje B. The context and content of social identity threat. In: Ellemers E, Spears R, Doosje B, editors. Social identity: Context, commitment, content. Oxford, England: Blackwell Science; 1999. pp. 35–58.
  38. 38. Protzko J, Schooler J. Kids these days: Why the youth of today seem lacking. Science Advances. 2019;5: eaav5916. pmid:31663012
  39. 39. Stephan W, Ybarra O, Rios K. Intergroup Threat Theory. In: Nelson T, editor. Handbook of Prejudice. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Elbaum Associates; 2009. pp. 43–59.
  40. 40. Meleady R, Forder L. When contact goes wrong: Negative intergroup contact promotes generalized outgroup avoidance. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations. 2019;22: 688–707.
  41. 41. Fiske ST, Cuddy AJC, Glick P, Xu J. A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2002;82: 878–902. pmid:12051578
  42. 42. Meinich J, Sang K. “It does not help to look young and dumb…”: Ageism and intergenerational contact in the Norwegian technical industry. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal. 2018;37: 202–218.
  43. 43. Mannheim K. The Problem of Generations. In: Kecskemeti P, editor. Essays on the Sociology of Knowledge. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul; 1952. pp. 276–320.
  44. 44. Purhonen S. Generations on paper: Bourdieu and the critique of “generationalism.” Social Science Information. 2016;55: 94–114.
  45. 45. Pritchard K, Whiting R. Baby Boomers and the Lost Generation: On the Discursive Construction of Generations at Work. Organization Studies. 2014;35: 1605–1626.
  46. 46. Applewhite A. Let’s Climb Out of the Generation Trap. Next Avenue. 29 Jun 2021. Accessed 31 Oct 2021.
  47. 47. Fabris J. “OK, boomer” attacks a mindset, not a generation. The Occidental News. 19 Nov 2019. Accessed 2 Nov 2021.
  48. 48. Herrick SSC, Hallward L, Duncan LR. “This is just how I cope”: An inductive thematic analysis of eating disorder recovery content created and shared on TikTok using #EDrecovery. International Journal of Eating Disorders. 2020;54: 516–526. pmid:33382136
  49. 49. Face API: An AI service that analyzes faces in images. In: Microsoft Azure [Internet]. 2021 [cited 4 Nov 2021].
  50. 50. Fiallos A, Fiallos C, Figueroa S. TikTok and Education: Discovering Knowledge through Learning Videos. 2021 Eighth International Conference on eDemocracy & eGovernment (ICEDEG). Quito, Ecuador: IEEE; 2021. pp. 172–176.
  51. 51. Serrano JCM, Papakyriakopoulos O, Hegelich S. Dancing to the Partisan Beat: A First Analysis of Political Communication on TikTok. 12th ACM Conference on Web Science. Southampton United Kingdom: ACM; 2020. pp. 257–266.
  52. 52. Stommel W, de Rijk L. Ethical approval: none sought. How discourse analysts report ethical issues around publicly available online data. Research Ethics. 2021;17: 275–297.
  53. 53. Sipocz D, Freeman JD, Elton J. “A Toxic Trend?”: Generational Conflict and Connectivity in Twitter Discourse Under the #BoomerRemover Hashtag. Bowers BJ, editor. The Gerontologist. 2021;61: 166–175. pmid:33159524
  54. 54. Ng R, Indran N. Age Advocacy on Twitter over 12 years. The Gerontologist. 2022; gnac183. pmid:36516463
  55. 55. Armat MR, Assarroudi A, Rad M, Sharifi H, Heydari A. Inductive and Deductive: Ambiguous Labels in Qualitative Content Analysis. The Qualitative Report. 2018;23: 219–221.
  56. 56. Hsieh H-F, Shannon SE. Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis. Qual Health Res. 2005;15: 1277–1288. pmid:16204405
  57. 57. Fiske ST. Stereotype Content: Warmth and Competence Endure. Curr Dir Psychol Sci. 2018;27: 67–73. pmid:29755213
  58. 58. Barlow FK, Paolini S, Pedersen A, Hornsey MJ, Radke HRM, Harwood J, et al. The Contact Caveat: Negative Contact Predicts Increased Prejudice More Than Positive Contact Predicts Reduced Prejudice. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2012;38: 1629–1643. pmid:22941796
  59. 59. Hayward LE, Tropp LR, Hornsey MJ, Barlow FK. Toward a Comprehensive Understanding of Intergroup Contact: Descriptions and Mediators of Positive and Negative Contact Among Majority and Minority Groups. Pers Soc Psychol Bull. 2017;43: 347–364. pmid:28903695
  60. 60. Martin AE, North MS. Equality for (almost) all: Egalitarian advocacy predicts lower endorsement of sexism and racism, but not ageism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2021 [cited 1 Aug 2021]. pmid:33464112
  61. 61. Cary LA, Chasteen AL, Remedios J. The Ambivalent Ageism Scale: Developing and Validating a Scale to Measure Benevolent and Hostile Ageism. The Gerontologist. 2017;57: e27–e36. pmid:27520730
  62. 62. Ng R, Indran N. Role-Based Framing of Older Adults Linked to Decreased Ageism Over 210 Years: Evidence From a 600-Million-Word Historical Corpus. The Gerontologist. 2022;62: 589–597. pmid:34323967
  63. 63. Ng R, Indran N. Reframing aging during COVID-19: Familial role-based framing of older adults linked to decreased ageism. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 2022;70: 60–66. pmid:34674224
  64. 64. Ng R, Indran N, Liu L. A playbook for effective age advocacy on Twitter. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 2022;70: 2363–2370. pmid:35748402
  65. 65. de la Fuente-Núñez V, Cohn-Schwartz E, Roy S, Ayalon L. Scoping Review on Ageism against Younger Populations. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18: 3988. pmid:33920114
  66. 66. de la Fuente-Núñez V, Officer A, Demographic Change and Healthy Ageing Unit. The Global Campaign to Combat Ageism calls on us to act together. Nature Aging. 2021;1: 146–146. pmid:37118635
  67. 67. Burke RJ, Richardsen AM. Creating Psychologically Healthy Workplaces. Edward Elgar Publishing; 2019.
  68. 68. El-Muttardi N, Lancaster K, Ng R, Mercer D. The sandwich omental flap for abdominal wall defect reconstruction. Br J Plast Surg. 2005;58: 841–844. pmid:16086992
  69. 69. Ng R, Allore HG, Monin JK, Levy BR. Retirement as Meaningful: Positive Retirement Stereotypes Associated with Longevity. J Soc Issues. 2016;72: 69–85. pmid:27346893
  70. 70. Ng R, Allore HG, Levy BR. Self-Acceptance and Interdependence Promote Longevity: Evidence From a 20-year Prospective Cohort Study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2020;17: 5980. pmid:32824658
  71. 71. Ng R, Levy B. Pettiness: Conceptualization, measurement and cross-cultural differences. PLOS ONE. 2018;13: e0191252. pmid:29385157
  72. 72. Ng R, Rayner S. Integrating psychometric and cultural theory approaches to formulate an alternative measure of risk perception. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research. 2010;23: 85–100.
  73. 73. Giest S, Ng R. Big Data Applications in Governance and Policy. Politics and Governance. 2018;6: 1–4.
  74. 74. Ng R, Tan KB. Implementing an Individual-Centric Discharge Process across Singapore Public Hospitals. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021;18: 8700. pmid:34444448
  75. 75. Ng R, Chow TYJ, Yang W. News media narratives of Covid-19 across 20 countries: Early global convergence and later regional divergence. PLOS ONE. 2021;16: e0256358. pmid:34469446
  76. 76. Ng R, Chow TYJ, Yang W. The Impact of Aging Policy on Societal Age Stereotypes and Ageism. The Gerontologist. 2022;62: 598–606. pmid:34636402
  77. 77. Ng R, Tan YW. Diversity of COVID-19 News Media Coverage across 17 Countries: The Influence of Cultural Values, Government Stringency and Pandemic Severity. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021;18: 11768. pmid:34831524
  78. 78. Ng R, Tan YW. Media attention toward COVID-19 across 18 countries: The influence of cultural values and pandemic severity. PLOS ONE. 2022;17: e0271961. pmid:36477463
  79. 79. Ng R. Anti-Asian Sentiments During the COVID-19 Pandemic Across 20 Countries: Analysis of a 12-Billion-Word News Media Database. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2021;23: e28305. pmid:34678754
  80. 80. Ng R, Indran N. Impact of Old Age on an Occupation’s Image Over 210 Years: An Age Premium for Doctors, Lawyers, and Soldiers. J Appl Gerontol. 2023;42: 1345–1355. pmid:37092180
  81. 81. Ng R, Indran N. Innovations for an Aging Society through the Lens of Patent Data. The Gerontologist. 2023.
  82. 82. Ng R, Indran N. Societal Narratives on Caregivers in Asia. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2021;18: 11241. pmid:34769759
  83. 83. Ng R, Indran N. Societal perceptions of caregivers linked to culture across 20 countries: Evidence from a 10-billion-word database. PLOS ONE. 2021;16: e0251161. pmid:34197470
  84. 84. Ng R, Lim-Soh JW. Ageism Linked to Culture, Not Demographics: Evidence From an 8-Billion-Word Corpus Across 20 Countries. The Journals of Gerontology: Series B. 2021;76: 1791–1798. pmid:33099600