Within age-gap relationships, older men & women were perceived as reaping greater rewards than their younger partners; perceived inequity predicted prejudice towards age-gap, but not age-matched, couples

Perceived inequity predicts prejudice towards age-gap relationships. Brian Collisson & Luciana Ponce De Leon. Current Psychology volume 39, pages2108–2115, Dec 2020. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12144-018-9895-6

Abstract: Age-gap couples often elicit negative stereotypes and prejudice. According to social exchange and equity theories, we predicted that prejudice towards age-gap couples may stem from perceived relational inequity. We hypothesized that age-gap, as compared to age-matched, couples were perceived as less equitable and, as a result, less liked. To test these hypotheses, people evaluated, and inferred the equity of, age-gap and age-matched relationships. We found that age-gap, as compared to age-matched, couples were more disliked and perceived as less equitable. Within age-gap relationships, older men and women were perceived as reaping greater rewards than their younger partners. Importantly, perceived inequity predicted prejudice towards age-gap, but not age-matched, couples. In exploratory analyses, age-gap couples consistently elicited significantly more prejudice than other types of couples. Implications for age-gap relationships and future research are discussed.

Discussion

In sum, our hypotheses were largely confirmed. People

expressed greater prejudice towards age-gap couples than

age-matched couples. People also perceived greater inequity

among age-gap couples, such that they perceived that older

partners reap greater rewards than their younger partners.

Furthermore, perceived inequity predicted prejudice towards

age-gap, but not age-matched, couples. That is, the more onesided

people perceived age-gap relationships to be, the more

prejudice they expressed.

However, it is also important to note that for both types of

age-gap couples (i.e., old man/young woman, young man/old

woman), people expressed greater prejudice and perceived

greater inequity than they did for age-matched couples (i.e.,

young man, young woman, old man/old woman). However,

the relation between perceived inequity and prejudice was

greater for old man/young woman couples than young man/

old woman. Although this null effect should be interpreted

cautiously, it does suggest that the degree to which people

perceive certain relationships as inequitable may better predict

prejudice towards some couples more than others.

Furthermore, our exploratory analyses found that participants

own age and gender did not moderate their prejudice

towards age-gap couples. However, exploratory analyses did

reveal differences in the amount of prejudice elicited by different

types of couples (e.g., those who differ in race, weight,

or finances). Interestingly, people evaluated age-gap couples

less favorably than interracial, mixed-weight, or mixedsocioeconomic

status couples. Because this finding was not

predicted, it should be interpreted cautiously. Nonetheless, it

suggests the need for further research on age-gap couples, in

general, and the potential reasons why age-gap couples might

elicit greater prejudice than other types of couples,

specifically.

Although exploratory analyses are interesting and potentially

meaningful for future theory development, exploratory

findings should be interpreted cautiously. They were not predicted

and are currently not supported by theory. For instance,

it is possible that people may perceive that age-gap couples are

more inequitable than other types of couples and therefore,

elicit greater prejudice. It is also possible that people perceive

age-related prejudice as more socially acceptable than race or

weight-related prejudice and therefore, feel more comfortable

rating age-gap couples negatively. Replicating and explaining

why age-gap couples elicit greater prejudice than other couples

may be a fruitful avenue for future research.

Implications

These findings may have implications for people currently

within, or who may later form, age-gap relationships. For those

currently in age-gap relationships, people’s perceptions of inequity

and corresponding prejudice may stigmatize the couple

and possibly lead to relationship dissolution. Indeed, age-gap

couples tend to be less committed to their relationships than

non-stigmatized couples (Lehmiller and Agnew 2006, 2008).

Future research is needed to more clearly identify how prejudice

towards age-gap relationships may lead to increased conflict,

dissatisfaction, and possibly relationship dissolution.

Future research studies may also explore whether age-gap,

and other marginalized, couples’ lower levels of commitment

to their relationships reflect societal disapproval and stigma or

true differences in inequity. More research is needed to survey

actual age-gap couples and determine the extent to which one

partner contributes more, or less, than the other. If people’s

stereotypic perceptions of inequity are accurate, then actual

age-gap couples may be less committed than other couples

because of their inequitable investment. Certainly, more research

is needed to explore the commitment experienced within

age-gap relationships.

For those who may later form age-gap relationships, a

younger partner may stereotypically infer that the older partner

contributes more to the relationship as an effort to equalize

the partnership. Similarly, it is possibly that the partner perceived

to benefit more may feel pressure to highlight the rewards

he or she may bring to a relationship to provide equity.

For instance, older partners may highlight their wealth or

wisdom to attract younger partners and combat perceived inequity

inferences from others (e.g., friends and family).

Conversely, people may stereotypically infer that the younger

partner in an age-gap relationship contributes more than

his or her partner. It is possible that this inference may pressure

younger partners to downplay his or her contributions to the

relationship and thus avoid perceived inequity from others.

Future studies which survey the experiences of actual couples

within age-gap relationships seems like a logical extension of

the current research.

Furthermore, the current research may also have implications

for later stigma-reduction interventions. If perceived inequity

underlies people’s prejudice towards age-gap couples,

then future studies which manipulate perceived equity may

find decreases in prejudice. Indeed, other studies regarding

Bmismatched^ couples, such as interracial relationships

(Miller et al. 2004a, b) and mixed-weight relationships

(Collisson et al. 2016) show that perceived inequity is indeed

related to people’s attitudes towards couples. It is possible that

highlighting equity among age-gap couples, and other dissimilar

couples, may reduce prejudice.

Strengths & Limitations

The current research has many strengths, as well as limitations.

In regard to strengths, first, the current research replicates

and extends the only study which qualitatively assessed

age-gap prejudice (Banks and Arnold 2001) and provides theoretical

support for the role of equity within age-gap relationships

(Lehmiller and Agnew 2011). Second, the current research

draws upon social exchange and relationship theories

to offer an empirically supported explanation regarding why

people may dislike age-gap relationships. Indeed, it bridges

romantic relationship and prejudice literatures in a novel and

theoretically meaningful way. Third, the current research

shows the relationship between perceived inequity and prejudice

towards age-gap couples in a hypothetical context.

Indeed, people may describe unknown couples in such generic

terms, such as the Byoung man^ dating the Bolder woman.^

Regardless, given psychology’s concern about replicability

(see Klein et al., 2014), these findings would be replicated

using other, more naturalistic paradigms. Indeed, viewing a

picture or video of an age-gap couple may be another way to

assess people’s perceived inequity and prejudicial attitudes. In

the current study, it may have been difficult for participants to

imagine age-gap couples given its hypothetical and generic

wording. In more realistic scenarios, people may have more

information of the couple to base their level of prejudice and

perceptions of equity. When this information is lacking, it

appears that people generally express prejudice towards agegap

couples and perceive them as inequitable.

Furthermore, people’s prejudicial attitudes towards agegap

couples were limited to response scales. Future research

may choose to assess prejudice and potential discrimination

towards age-gap couples in more ecologically valid, real

world situations, such as dating scenes or marriage venues.

Additionally, the findings were limited in their experimental

realism. For instance, asking participants to rate hypothetical

couples not reflect the true feelings people may experience

when witnessing such couples. Future studies may ethically

replicate and extend the current research in more natural

settings.

In addition, the current research offered a more general

description of age-gaps (e.g., a young person dating an old

person). Future studies may choose to use more specific interval

ranges (e.g., dating someone 5, 10, 15 years younger/

older). More specific age ranges would allow researchers to

test whether the specific age range affects people’s prejudice

and perceptions of equity.

Another limitation of the current research is in regard to its

online sample of participants. Although Amazon’s

Mechanical Turk allows researchers to recruit a significantly

more diverse and representative sample than traditional college

students (Buhrmester, Kwang,&Gosling, 2011), it still is

not a fully representative sample. Online samples tend to be

more educated and participate for intrinsically motivating reasons,

such as enjoyment of research. Future studies may

choose to selectively recruit a representative sample which

varies more widely in age, education, and ethnicity to more

aptly test whether participants’ own demographic variables

relate to their perceptions of age-gap couples. It may be possible,

for instance, that younger people may give greater

weight to appearance and vitality; whereas, older people

may give greater weight to financial stability and life management

skills.