Grandparent-Grandchild Relationship Variables
We clustered the articles in 5 categories based on the grandparent-grandchild relationship: the first four categories were based on the different grandparent-grandchild relationship variables that were investigated in direct association with ageist attitudes and are reported below in order of frequency; the fifth category, instead, grouped together variables used to explain or modulate the association between grandparent-grandchild relationship and grandchildren’s ageist attitudes (i.e., mediators and moderators). The first category included 8 studies and referred to global features of contact with the grandparent, in particular contact frequency and contact quality. In the first category, in fact, contact quality referred to a general perception of the relationship quality, rather than specific types of interaction (e.g., communication, support). Indeed, 4 studies examined communication processes, like self-disclosure (i.e., the willingness to share personal information in the grandparent-grandchild relationship) and accommodation (i.e., adjusting one’s communication to the other’s needs), and were therefore included in a second category. The third category comprised 3 studies and referred to features of closeness between grandchild and grandparent, measured in terms of perspective taking, empathy and inclusion of the other in the self. The fourth group, composed of 2 studies, concerned interaction anxiety with the grandparent, that is, apprehension arising from concerns about the interaction with the grandparent. Finally, the last category referred to factors (e.g., typicality, group salience) that may explain or modulate the association between the grandparent-grandchild relationship and ageism (i.e., mediators and moderators). In the next paragraphs, a review of the results concerning the categories outlined above and their associations with ageism are reported. The results concerned 17 articles out of 18 because Muntsant et al.’s (2021) work did not precisely fit into these categories, but we thought it relevant for this scoping literature review. Indeed, the authors studied beliefs, stereotypes, and knowledge about older people and grandparents and participants’ ageism awareness. Participation in this research helped participants, i.e., a sample of university students, to realize unconscious ageism, specifically toward the older population (Muntsant et al., 2021). Moreover, the authors highlighted the importance of grandparents in a sample of university students’ life observing the reference to grandparents in a great number of answers to a questionnaire about older adults in general but not vice versa. Thus, overall, this work seems to account for the findings of this scoping literature review regarding the association between ageism and the grandparent-grandchild relationship.
Category 1: Contact Quality and Contact Frequency (N = 8)
The importance of contact quality with grandparents emerged with several nuances. For example, youngsters who attended an intergenerational contact program often used their grandparent-grandchild relationship to conceptualize general older adults and older people met in the program, especially when thinking about positively framed aspects (Verhage et al., 2021). Indeed, thanks to the mutual fondness, familiarity turned out to be related to more positive views (Dow et al., 2016) and more positive children’s attitudes toward older individuals (Robinson & Howatson-Jones, 2014), to the point that grandparents themselves could be so admired that they had a powerful influence on nursing students’ attitudes, as reported in the experimental study conducted by Haight et al. (1994). Newsham and colleagues (2021) intended to compare attitudes towards older adults the respondents had more “extensive contact” with (i.e., their grandparents), with attitudes towards a general “old person”. It was found that college students associated grandparents with a clear prevalence of positive emotional terms (e.g., loving, proud, happy, caring) providing more equivocal terms when thinking about an “old person” (Newsham et al., 2021) and, similarly, in their cross-sectional study, Flamion and colleagues (2020) found that children who spontaneously evoked their grandparents, when they were asked to think about an ”old person”, reported better views of older people than those who did not evoke their grandparents in terms of images of aging (M = 23.7, SEM = 2.5 vs M = 13.4, SEM = 2.8 respectively; z = -2.3, p < .05) and stereotypes (M = 1.54, SEM = .23 vs M = -.27, SEM = .23 respectively; z = -4.7, p < .001). In other cross-sectional studies, it emerged that contact quality was associated with a more positive vision of aging (F = 3.61, p < .05, Cohen's d = 0.37; Flamion et al., 2019) and lower scores of ageism (F = 19.38, p < .001, Cohen's d = 0.69 and F = 22.36, p < .001, Cohen's d = 0.78; Flamion et al., 2019) in children and adolescents and with better explicit attitudes toward older adults in undergraduate and college students (respectively: Study 2: r = .32, p < .001, Cohen’s d = 0.68 in Harwood et al., 2005 and r = .30, p < .001, Cohen’s d = 0.63 in Liao et al., 2023). Harwood et al. (2005) also found that contact quality in high-frequency grandparent relationships (Study 1: b = .31, SE = .11, p = .007, Cohen's d ≈ 0.49) predicted better explicit attitudes toward older adults. Nevertheless, Hoffmann and Kornadt (2022) found that the quality of contact in the grandparent-grandchild relationship seemed not to be related to age stereotypes (i.e., “being old-fashioned”) but an experimental study showed that only grandparents with less positive contact with their grandchildren performed more poorly in a math test when reporting more stereotype threat (i.e., the risk of confirming a negative stereotype about one’s social group, which can undermine performance in the stereotyped domain, which occurs when individuals become aware of the stereotype and experience anxiety or pressure that hinders their abilities), thereby showing that contact quality protected grandparents from the negative effects of stereotype threat (simple slope for grandparents with low contact quality: b = -2.01, t(45) = 5.27, p < .001; Abrams et al., 2008).
Lastly, Hoffmann and Kornadt (2022), in their cross-sectional study, showed how contact quality was negatively associated with two domains of self-perceptions of ageing, i.e., physical decline (e.g., the perception of being less vital and fit; r = -.15, p < .05, Cohen’s d ≈ -0.30) and social loss (e.g., the feeling of being lonely; r = -.17, p < .001, Cohen’s d ≈ -0.35), but not with continued growth (i.e., the possibility to realize one’s own ideas). Moreover, analyses regarding the model that considered both frequency and quality of contact showed that contact quality was significantly related to all three domains of ageing self-perceptions: continued growth (b = .10, SE = .04, β = .17, p < .05, estimated Cohen’s d ≈ 0.30), social loss (b = -.10, SE = .04, β = -.18, p < .001, Cohen’s d ≈ -0.30) and physical decline (b = -.09, SE = .04, β = -.17, p < .05, Cohen’s d ≈ -0.27; Hoffmann & Kornadt, 2022). In sum, research consistently found that higher contact quality between grandparents and grandchildren was associated with better attitudes towards aging and older people.
Research regarding contact frequency in the grandparent-grandchild relationship seemed to be less consistent and its findings were solely based on cross-sectional studies. It was found that frequency of contact was positively related to better explicit attitudes toward older people (r = .36, p < .001, Cohen’s d ≈ 0.77) in a sample of college students (Liao et al., 2023) and that more frequent past and current contact with grandparents were related to more positive stereotypes toward older people (b = -.12, 95% CI [-.22, -.01], β = -.20, p = .036, estimated Cohen’s d ≈ -0.44 ; Bellingtier et al., 2022). Additionally, past contact with grandparents positively moderated age differences in young people’s attitudes toward public policies supporting older adults (past contact M = 2.53 vs. no past contact M = 1.63, b = -.066, p < .05; Silverstein & Parrott, 1997). Specifically, among youth who had no contact with grandparents during their childhood, young adults (18-24 years old) had more negative attitudes compared to youth over 25 years, but among those who had more contact this difference was reduced (Silverstein & Parrott, 1997).
Other studies, however, revealed that contact frequency was not associated with ageism (Flamion et al., 2019), nor with self-perceptions of aging and age stereotypes (Hoffmann & Kornadt, 2022), while some research revealed that contact frequency was associated with higher ageism. Indeed, Kim et al. (2020) revealed that Japanese students who had lived with grandparents had a higher probability of considering older adults slow (OR = 1.955, p = .032, estimated Cohen’s d ≈ 0.37) compared to Japanese students who had never lived with their grandparents. Similarly, Korean students who had never lived with their grandparents tended to perceive older adults as plainer compared to Korean students who had lived with their grandparents (74.0% vs. 63.2%, χ2 = 4.57, p = .039, estimated Cohen’s d ≈ 0.33; Kim et al., 2020). These results, however, can be interpreted in light of findings from Smith and Charlton (2020) who found that growing up with an older person was correlated with lower current opinions (r = -.180, p < .05, estimated Cohen’s d ≈ -0.37) and perceptions of more negative current interactions with other older adults (r = -.127, p < .05, estimated Cohen’s d ≈ -0.26), but this association was stronger if the current contact with older adults was low (simple slope: t = -3.24, p = .001, estimated Cohen’s d ≈ -0.37) or average (simple slope: t = -2.44, p = .02, estimated Cohen’s d ≈ -0.28) rather than high (simple slope: t = -.315, p = .75, estimated Cohen’s d ≈ -0.37). Smith and Charlton (2020) concluded that these results confirmed the literature on the positive effect of intergroup contact on the evaluation of the outgroup and the role of contact frequency.
Overall, we could conclude that both quality and frequency of contact with grandparents are potentially important factors associated with a reduction of ageism and stereotypes and an improvement of attitudes toward older people and the aging process. Nonetheless, while the positive effect of contact quality appeared consistent, less consistent findings emerged regarding contact frequency. Moreover, some studies showed that the relationship between contact with the grandparent and ageism was qualified by other variables, such as typicality, grandparent’s health, and interaction anxiety (see Category 5: factors influencing the process).
Category 2: Communication Processes (N = 4)
Cross-sectional studies regarding communication processes found associations between positive attitudes toward older adults and both a) greater self-disclosure (i.e., mutual disclosure, r = .27, p < .01 in Harwood et al., 2005; self-disclosure with the grandparent, in terms of having good or very good communication with grandparents, b = 2.69, SE = .66, β = .17, t = 4.04, p < .001 in Sönmez et al., 2022) and b) higher grandparent-grandchild accommodation (r = .41, p < .001; Harwood et al., 2005), that is, adapting the communication (in terms of content and style) to the needs of one’s relationship partner (i.e., the grandparent and the grandchild) which is related to their closeness (Harwood et al., 2000). Harwood et al. (2005) hypothesized that accommodation, for example, enacted by a grandchild, could lead grandchildren to start more sensitive communication with their grandparent that could be easily extended to other older adults and facilitate the expression of better attitudes toward older individuals. However, it’s important to pay attention to the risks of over-accommodation (e.g., over-activating more than required to meet someone else’s needs; Giles & Williams, 1994) and under-accommodation (e.g., neglecting someone else's needs; Coupland et al., 1988b) that could have negative effects on the other person.
Regarding stereotypes, Kim et al. (2020) conducted a cross-sectional study reporting how Korean students who had more possibilities of talking to their grandparents and who had more positive memories of them were more likely to consider older people as wise than Korean students with fewer possibilities and less positive memories (73.4% vs. 60.7%, χ2 = 7.10, p = .01), whereas Japanese students who had more possibilities of talking to their grandparents and who had more positive memories of them were less likely to assess them as conservative (60.4% vs. 76.0%, χ2 = 8.62, p = .01) and slow (70.1% vs. 84.3%, χ2 = 8.77, p = .004) than counterparts with fewer possibilities and positive memories. Furthermore, Verhage and colleagues (2021) found that stereotypes towards older people living in a long-term care facility were reduced the more similar the person was perceived to be to the respondents’ grandparents in terms of communication style (i.e., the kind of questions they asked and their interest in the respondent’s life). Such a similarity in communication encouraged an open and natural contact with older residents, mutual self-disclosure, and the acknowledgement of older adults’ heterogeneity (Verhage et al., 2021).
Summarizing, it seems that higher quality communication in the grandparent-grandchild relationship was related to better attitudes and stereotypes toward older adults and, in general, a greater acknowledgement of the variety and diversity of older people that could counteract a stereotypical view of them.
Category 3: Closeness (N = 3)
Less represented were studies examining closeness in the grandparent-grandchild relationship, in terms of perspective taking (i.e., the act of perceiving a situation or understanding a concept from an alternative point of view), empathy (i.e., the action of understanding, being aware of, being sensitive to, and vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experiences of another) and inclusion of the other into the self (i.e., the extent to which individuals include others in their self-concept). From these cross-sectional studies it emerged that more positive explicit attitudes towards older adults were associated with all three variables: perspective taking (r = .48, p < .001; Harwood et al., 2005), empathy (r = .38, p < .01; Tam et al., 2006) and inclusion of the grandparent in the self (r = .34, p < .001, Liao et al., 2023).
Category 4: Interaction Anxiety (N = 2)
Only 2 articles focused on interaction anxiety in the grandparent-grandchild relationship. Both cross-sectional studies showed that interaction anxiety with grandparents was associated with worse explicit attitudes towards older people (r = -.46, p < .001 in Harwood et al., 2005; r = -.37, p < .01 in Tam et al., 2006).
Category 5: Factors Influencing the Process
Some cross-sectional studies examined factors that could influence the association between ageism and the grandparent–grandchild relationship - namely, variables acting as mediators and moderators. Five variables concerning the grandparent–grandchild relationship, previously identified in terms of their direct association with ageism, were also examined as potential mediators in the association between grandparent-grandchild relationship and ageism. These factors pertained to the three dimensions of closeness discussed above - i.e., perspective-taking, empathy, and inclusion of the grandparent into the self - as well as interaction anxiety and accommodation. In terms of moderators, two variables were especially considered: typicality (i.e., how typical of older adults was the grandparent) and the grandparent’s health.
With regard to the mechanisms underlying the relationship between the grandparent-grandchild relationship and ageism (i.e., mediators), the reviewed literature showed that the inclusion of the grandparent into the self mediated the relationship between contact and explicit attitudes toward older individuals: more frequent and higher quality contact with the grandparent was associated with greater inclusion of the grandparent into one’s self (IE = 1.13, 95% CI [0.26, 2.20]; IE = 2.61, 95% CI [0.26, 5.00] for contact frequency and quality respectively), which, in turn, was related to better attitudes toward older adults. Moreover, Harwood and colleagues (2005) found that higher accommodation (b = .21, SE = .04, p < .01), lower interaction anxiety (b = -.64, SE = .09, p < .01) and higher perspective taking (b = .48, SE = .07, p < .001) mediated the effects of higher contact quality with the grandparent on better explicit attitudes towards older adults. When all these mediators were included simultaneously in the model, only perspective taking remained a significant mediator in the relationship between contact quality and explicit attitudes (b = .48, SE = .07, p < .05; Harwood et al., 2005). Lastly, according to Tam et al. (2006), both lower interaction anxiety and higher empathy mediated the effects of higher self-disclosure on better explicit attitudes toward older people (zαzβ = 5.60, p < .01; zαzβ = 6.26, p < .01, for interaction anxiety and empathy respectively). Regarding interaction anxiety, Smith and Charlton (2020) highlighted that growing up with an older adult affected by an illness was correlated to decreased interaction positivity (r = -.20, p < .05) and lower opinions about older people in general (r = -.27, p < .05). Through further analysis, the authors explained these results in light of the role of current interaction anxiety with general older adults, such that higher levels of anxiety observed in those who grew up with an ill grandparent mediated the association with lower opinions of the outgroup.
With regard to the factors that modulated the relationship between grandparent-grandchild relationship and ageism (i.e., moderators), typicality was shown to have a moderating role on the positive association between quality of contact and better explicit attitudes (b = .96, SE = .30, t = 3.26, p < .01), which was stronger when typicality was high (b = 11.24, p < .001) rather than low (b = 8.21, p < .001). It also moderated the association between better implicit attitudes and higher contact frequency (b = .05, SE = .01, t = 3.94, p < .001), which was stronger if the respondents were more in contact with grandparents who were considered highly typical older adults (b = .07, p < .01; Liao et al., 2023). Regarding grandparent's health, Flamion et al. (2019) found that youth who rated their grandparents as being in very good health exhibited a more positive perception of aging, lower scores of ageism, and more positive evaluations of older adults, when compared to those who rated their grandparents’ health as simply good or not good (perception of aging: F = 6.27, p < .01; ageism: F = 3.49, p < .05; evaluation of older adults: F = 4.85, p < .01). Hoffmann and Kornadt (2022) found that the correlation between better perceptions of one’s own aging (in terms of less physical decline and more growth) and higher contact quality was significant only if the grandparent was not ill, F(1,285) = 5.67, p < .02, 95% CI [-.25, -.06]. Moreover, according to Sönmez et al. (2022), having older family members with high care needs was identified as a factor associated with ageism, compared to individuals with low care need older family members. The effect was interpreted in terms of the significant emotional and physical demands on caregivers of high care need parents, potentially resulting in adverse outcomes (e.g., depression, burnout) which could foster more negative views of aging and attitudes toward older people. Another interesting variable was group salience (i.e., how aware participants were of the respective groups of belonging, in terms of age: grandparent vs. grandchild). In their first study, Harwood et al. (2005) found that contact quality in high-frequency grandparent-grandchild relationships predicted undergraduate students’ better explicit attitudes toward older adults exclusively when group salience was high (b = .51, SE = .12, p < .001). These results were confirmed in a second study in which contact quality was associated with better explicit attitudes, only when group salience was high (b = .59, SE = .14, p < .001).
Moderated mediations were also tested by some studies. For example, the mediation role of greater accommodation, lower interaction anxiety and higher perspective taking in the relation between higher contact quality with the grandparent and better explicit attitudes towards older adults was significant exclusively in a high group salience condition (Goodman test = 2.01, p < .05; Goodman test = 1.72, p < .09; Goodman test = 2.06, p < .04, for accommodation, interaction anxiety, and perspective taking respectively). Specifically, when group salience was high, grandchildren’s perspective taking in the relationship with the grandparent was the most powerful mediator of the positive relationship between contact quality and positive explicit attitudes toward older adults (Harwood et al., 2005).
In summary, several variables were identified as playing a mediating or moderating role in the process under investigation. Specifically: a) the inclusion of the grandparent in the self mediated the relationship between: a.1) quality of contact with grandparents and explicit attitudes toward older adults and a.2) contact quantity with grandparents and explicit attitudes toward older people; b) intergroup anxiety mediated the relationship between explicit attitudes toward older adults and: b.1) quality of contact with grandparents and b.2) self-disclosure with grandparents; c) both accommodation and perspective taking mediated the relationship between the quality of contact with grandparents and explicit attitudes toward older adults; d) empathy mediated the relationship between self-disclosure with grandparents and explicit attitudes toward older adults; e) grandparent’s health moderated the relationship between contact quality with grandparents and individuals’ perceptions of their own aging; f) typicality moderated the relationship between: f.1) the quality of contact with grandparents and explicit attitudes toward older adults and f.2) contact frequency with grandparents and implicit attitudes toward older adults; g) group salience moderated the relationship between g.1) quality of contact with grandparents and explicit attitudes toward older people, mediated by frequency of contact with grandparents and g.2) contact quality with grandparents and explicit attitudes toward older adults, mediated by accommodation, intergroup anxiety, and perspective taking.