SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Türk Uygulamalı Sosyal Hizmet Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 8 Sayı: 1

GLOBAL TRENDS IN AGEISM RESEARCH: A SYSTEMATIC BIBLIOMETRIC REVIEW

Yaş Ayrımcılığı Araştırmalarında Küresel Eğilimler: Sistematik Bir Bibliyometrik İnceleme

Uğur Atalar(Kahramanmaraş İstiklal Üniversitesi)0000-0003-1380-5783
Barış Demirel(KIRIKKALE ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-5916-4999
Pages
1–24
Publication Date
2025-06-30
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings reveal a significant increase in research output post-2010, with the COVID-19 pandemic further accelerating scholarly interest in this field.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study aims to conduct a bibliometric analysis of academic publications on ageism and age discrimination between 2000 and 2024.
📊
Key Findings & Data:A total of 3,932 articles indexed in the Web of Science (WoS) database were systematically analyzed to identify publication trends, citation networks, thematic clusters, and interdisciplinary collaborations.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings reveal a significant increase in research output post-2010, with the COVID-19 pandemic further accelerating scholarly interest in this field.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2000 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Bibliyometrik analiz · küresel eğilimler · sistematik inceleme

Abstract

This study aims to conduct a bibliometric analysis of academic publications on ageism and age discrimination between 2000 and 2024. A total of 3,932 articles indexed in the Web of Science (WoS) database were systematically analyzed to identify publication trends, citation networks, thematic clusters, and interdisciplinary collaborations. The findings reveal a significant increase in research output post-2010, with the COVID-19 pandemic further accelerating scholarly interest in this field. The majority of publications fall under the "Gerontology" category (30.74%), with the United States, the United Kingdom, and Canada leading in academic productivity. Keyword analysis highlights dominant themes such as "older workers," "healthcare inequalities," and "social stereotypes." The study underscores the critical role of academic research in combating ageism and calls for enhanced interdisciplinary collaborations and policy-oriented interventions in future studies.

Özet

Bu çalışma, yaş ayrımcılığı (ageism) ve yaşa dayalı ayrımcılık (age discrimination) konularında 2000-2024 yılları arasında yayımlanan akademik çalışmaları bibliyometrik analiz yöntemiyle incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Web of Science (WoS) veritabanından elde edilen 3.932 makale, yayın trendleri, atıf ağları, tematik yoğunluklar ve disiplinlerarası iş birlikleri açısından sistematik olarak analiz edilmiştir. Bulgular, yaş ayrımcılığı literatürünün özellikle 2010 sonrasında belirgin bir artış gösterdiğini ve COVID-19 pandemisinin bu alandaki araştırmaları hızlandırdığını ortaya koymaktadır. En fazla yayının "Gerontology" kategorisinde (%30,74) olduğu, ABD, İngiltere ve Kanada'nın öncü ülkeler arasında yer aldığı tespit edilmiştir. Anahtar kelime analizleri, çalışmaların "yaşlı çalışanlar", "sağlık eşitsizlikleri" ve "toplumsal önyargılar" gibi temalar etrafında yoğunlaştığını göstermektedir. Bu çalışma, yaş ayrımcılığıyla mücadelede akademik araştırmaların rolünü vurgularken, gelecekteki çalışmalar için disiplinlerarası iş birliklerinin ve politika odaklı müdahalelerin önemine dikkat çekmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Atalar, U., Demirel, B. (2025). GLOBAL TRENDS IN AGEISM RESEARCH: A SYSTEMATIC BIBLIOMETRIC REVIEW. Türk Uygulamalı Sosyal Hizmet Dergisi, Cilt: 8 Sayı: 1, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.54467/trjasw.1686187

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (59)

  1. Abrams, D., Swift, H. J., & Drury, L. (2016). Old and unemployable? How age-based stereotypes affect willingness to hire job candidates. Journal of Social Issues, 72(1), 105-121. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12158
  2. Ayalon, L., & Tesch-Römer, C. (2018). Contemporary perspectives on ageism. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73820-8
  3. Alp, F., & Aslan, Y. (2025). Frailty in aging: A Web of Science-based bibliometric analysis (2015-2024) [Yaşlılıkta kırılganlık: Web of Science tabanlı bibliyometrik analiz (2015-2024)]. Journal of Health and Social Welfare Research, 7(1), 77-95.
  4. Arun, Ö., & Pamuk, D. (2014). Ageism in institutional care: Causes of discriminatory attitudes toward aging among elderly care staff and intervention proposals [Kurumsal bakım sektöründe ageism: Yaşlı bakım personelinin yaşlanma ve yaşlılığa ilişkin ayrımcı tutumlarının nedenleri ve müdahale önerileri]. Mediterranean Journal of Humanities, 4(2), 19-33. https://doi.org/10.13114/MJH.201428426
  5. Bengtson, V. L., & Settersten, R. A. (2023). Handbook of theories of aging (4th ed.). Springer.
  6. Boduroğlu, G. (2024). Bibliometric analysis of studies on substance abuse in social work [Sosyal hizmet alanında madde bağımlılığı konusuyla ilgili yapılan çalışmaların bibliyometrik analizi]. Journal of Medical Social Work, 12(24), 109-123.
  7. Bowling, A. (2007). Honour your father and mother: Ageism in medicine. British Journal of General Practice, 57(538), 347-348.
  8. Butler, R. N. (1969). Age-ism: Another form of bigotry. The Gerontologist, 9(4, Pt. 1), 243-246. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/9.4_Part_1.243
  9. Cuddy, A. J. C., Norton, M. I., & Fiske, S. T. (2005). This old stereotype: The pervasiveness and persistence of the elderly stereotype. Journal of Social Issues, 61(2), 267-285. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2005.00405.x
  10. Dikmen, R. D. (2023). Age discrimination: Effects and solutions [Yaş ayrımcılığı: Etkiler ve çözüm önerileri]. Journal of Geriatric Sciences, 6(1), Article e1163213. https://doi.org/10.47141/geriatrik.1163213
  11. Donovan, N. J., & Blazer, D. (2022). Social isolation and loneliness in older adults: Opportunities for social work. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 65(3), 227-247. https://doi.org/10.1080/01634372.2021.2019167
  12. Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
  13. Doron, I., et al. (2020). Ageism and legal systems: A scoping review. Journal of Aging & Social Policy, 32(3), 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959420.2020.1824542
  14. Hodge, D. R., & Lacasse, J. R. (2011). Evaluating journal quality in social work: A bibliometric analysis. Social Work Research, 35(2), 71-82. https://doi.org/10.1093/swr/35.2.71
  15. Karataş, M. & Özdemir, M.M.(2023). Bibliometric analysis on administrative detention in the focus on migration and its evaluation from the perspective of social work. Turkish Journal of Applied Social Work 6 (1), 45-69 https://doi.org/10.54467/trjasw.1291504
  16. Levy, S. R., & Macdonald, J. L. (2016). Progress on understanding ageism. Journal of Social Issues, 72(1), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12153
  17. Levy, S. R. (2022). Reducing ageism: Evidence-based strategies for population-level change. American Journal of Public Health, 112(S5), S345-S347. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.306963
  18. Leyva-Flores, R., Infante-Xibille, C., & Gutiérrez, J. P. (2017). Migration and health in social work research: A bibliometric analysis. Health & Social Work, 42(3), 167-174. https://doi.org/10.1093/hsw/hlx022
  19. Lytle, A., & Levy, S. R. (2017). Reducing ageism: Education about aging and extended contact with older adults. The Gerontologist, 57(6), 1169-1171. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnx177
  20. Lytle, A., et al. (2020). Reducing ageism through intergenerational contact. The Gerontologist, 60(3), e198-e209. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnz116
  21. Makaroun, L. K., Bachrach, R. L., & Rosland, A.-M. (2020). Elder abuse in the time of COVID-19: Increased risks for older adults and their caregivers. The American Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry, 28(8), 876-880. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jagp.2020.05.017
  22. Martens, A., Goldenberg, J. L., & Greenberg, J. (2005). A terror management perspective on ageism. Journal of Social Issues, 61(2), 223-239. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2005.00403.x
  23. Martín-Martín, A., Thelwall, M., Orduna-Malea, E., & López-Cózar, E. D. (2021).“Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations’ COCI: A multidisciplinary comparison of coverage via citations. Scientometrics, 126(1), 871–906. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03690-4
  24. Moral-Muñoz, J. A., Herrera-Viedma, E., Santisteban-Espejo, A., & Cobo, M. J. (2020). Software tools for conducting bibliometric analysis in science: An up-to-date review. El Profesional de la Información, 29(1), e290103. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.ene.03
  25. Morrow-Howell, N., Galucia, N., & Swinford, E. (2020). Recovering from the COVID-19 pandemic: A focus on older adults. Journal of Aging & Social Policy, 32(4-5), 526-535. https://doi.org/10.1080/08959420.2020.1759758
  26. Nelson, T. D. (2005). Ageism: Prejudice against our feared future self. Journal of Social Issues, 61(2), 207-221. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.2005.00402.x
  27. Neves, B. B., & Vetere, F. (2023). Ageing and digital technology. Palgrave Macmillan.
  28. Ng, R., Allore, H. G., Trentalange, M., Monin, J. K., & Levy, B. R. (2015). Increasing negativity of age stereotypes across 200 years: Evidence from a database of 400 million words. PLoS ONE, 10(2), e0117086. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0117086
  29. North, M. S., & Fiske, S. T. (2012). An inconvenienced youth? Ageism and its potential intergenerational roots. Psychological Bulletin, 138(5), 982-997. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027843
  30. North, M. S., & Fiske, S. T. (2018). Resource scarcity and prescriptive attitudes generate modern ageism. Annual Review of Gerontology, 38(1), 147-172.
  31. Özbay, F. (2011). Family, city, population [Aile, kent, nüfus]. İletişim Yayınları.
  32. Palmore, E. B. (1999). Ageism: Negative and positive (2nd ed.). Springer.
  33. Sanders, S., & Swails, P. (2023). Integrating macro and micro perspectives in ageism research. Journal of Social Work Practice, 37(1), 45-60. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650533.2022.2057189
  34. UN Decade of Healthy Ageing. (2021). Global report on ageism. WHO. https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240020504
  35. Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2017). Citation-based clustering of publications using CitNetExplorer and
  36. VOSviewer. Scientometrics, 111(2), 1053-1070. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2300-7
  37. Vera-Baceta, M. A., Thelwall, M., & Kousha, K. (2019). Web of Science and Scopus language coverage. Scientometrics, 121(3), 1803–1813. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-019-03264-z
  38. WHO. (2022). Global status report on ageism. World Health Organization.
  39. Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429-472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629
  40. Xiang, X., et al. (2021). COVID-19 and older adults: Inequities in digital inclusion. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 40(8), 825-831. https://doi.org/10.1177/0733464821992587
  41. Kulzer, B., Albus, C., Herpertz, S., Kruse, J., Lange, K., Lederbogen, F., & Petrak, F. (2023). Psychosocial factors and diabetes. Experimental and Clinical Endocrinology & Diabetes, 131(1-02), 94-109. https://doi.org/10.1055/a-1946-3863
  42. Moini, J., Adams, M., & LoGalbo, A. (2022). Complications of Diabetes Mellitus A Global Perspective. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003226727-12
  43. NIDDK. (2016). Symptoms & causes of diabetes. Retrieved November 8, 2024, from https://www-niddk-nih-gov.translate.goog/health-information/diabetes/overview/symptoms-causes?_x_tr_sl=en&_x_tr_tl=tr&_x_tr_hl=tr&_x_tr_pto=tc
  44. Ong, K. L., Stafford, L. K., McLaughlin, S. A., Boyko, E. J., Vollset, S. E., Smith, A. E., Dalton, B. E., Duprey, J., Cruz, J. A., Hagins, H., Lindstedt, P. A., Aali, A., Abate, Y. H., Abate, M. D., Abbasian, M., Abbasi-Kangevari, Z., Abbasi-Kangevari, M., Abd ElHafeez, S., Abd-Rabu, R., Vos, T. (2023). Global, regional, and national burden of diabetes from 1990 to 2021, with projections of prevalence to 2050: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2021. The Lancet, 402(10397), 203-234. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(23)01301-6
  45. Özbesler, C. (2013). Hasta yaşam kalitesinde tibbi sosyal hizmet uygulamalarinin önemi. Tıbbi Sosyal Hizmet Dergisi, (2), 6-12.
  46. Özel, Y., & Bay Karabulut, A. (2018). Günlük yaşam ve stres yönetimi. Türkiye Sağlık Bilimleri ve Araştırmaları Dergisi, 1(1), 48-56.
  47. Özen, A., & Sertdemir, T. (2022). Hemodiyaliz tedavisi alan diabetes mellituslu hastalarda hemşirelik bakımının yönetimi. Turkish Journal of Diabetes Nursing, 2(1), 15-21. https://doi.org/10.29228/tjdn.58308 Polonsky, W. (2020). Psychosocial aspects of diabetes technology. Endocrinology and Metabolism Clinics of North America, 49(1), 143-155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecl.2019.10.003
  48. Sugandh, F., Chandio, M., Raveena, F., Kumar, L., Karishma, F., Khuwaja, S., Memon, U. A., Bai, K., Kashif, M., Varrassi, G., Khatri, M., & Kumar, S. (2023). Advances in the management of diabetes mellitus: A focus on personalized medicine. Cureus. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.43697
  49. Sütçü, S. (2023). Kronik hastalıklarda sosyal hizmet. Doğu Karadeniz Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, 2(1), 50-59.
  50. Sütçü, S., & Demirel, A. C. (2022). Sosyal hizmet uzmanının sahip olması gereken beceriler. Y. Özkan & O. Selçuk (Ed.). In Genelci Sosyal Hizmet Uygulaması. (p. 93-116). Nobel Yayınevi.
  51. Tavakoli, M., Mojaddidi, M., Fadavi, H., & Malik, R. A. (2008). Pathophysiology and treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy. Current Pain and Headache Reports, 12(3), 192-197. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11916-008-0034-1
  52. Tong, H., Qiu, F., & Fan, L. (2022). Characterising common challenges faced by parental caregivers of children with type 1 diabetes mellitus in mainland China: a qualitative study. BMJ Open, 12(1), e048763. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-048763
  53. Upchurch Sweeney, C. R., Turner, J. R., Turner, J. R., Barrett, C., Soto, A. V., Whang, W., Korbel, C., Matwin, S., Gorrin, D., Schroeder, B., Turner, J. R., Dekker, J., Levin, B., Turner, J. R., Pishori, A. Z., Grabowski, J., Yard, S., Nelson, K., Denton, E.-g., … Rieckmann, N. (2013). Diabetes: Psychosocial Factors. Encyclopedia of Behavioral Medicine, 581-586. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1005-9_1188
  54. Vinall, M., & Pouwer, F. (2013). Psychosocial issues in diabetes. MD Conference Express, 13(17), 6-7. https://doi.org/10.1177/155989771317002
  55. WHO. (2024). Diabetes. Retrieved October 31, 2024 from https://www.who.int/health-topics/diabetes#tab=tab_1
  56. Wilson, V. (2022). Psychology in Diabetes Care and Practice. Routledge Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003260219-3
  57. Zahn, D., & Kubiak, T. (2015). Diabetes: psychosocial aspects. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 337-341. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-08-097086-8.14089-9
  58. Ziegler, D. (2006). Treatment of diabetic polyneuropathy. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1084(1), 250-266. https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1372.008
  59. Zilliox, L., & Russell, J. W. (2011). Treatment of diabetic sensory polyneuropathy. Current Treatment Options in Neurology, 13(2), 143-159. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11940-011-0113-1