Fraboni Scale of Ageism (FSA)

Abstract

The Fraboni Scale of Ageism (FSA) is a specialized psychological scale developed in 1990 by Fraboni, Saltstone, and Hughes to provide a more precise and multidimensional measurement of ageism. Recognizing the complexity of prejudice toward the elderly, the FSA systematically divides ageist attitudes and behaviors into three distinct factors: attitudinal beliefs (labeled as Antilocution), indirect Discrimination, and behavioral avoidance. This structured approach allows researchers to differentiate between cognitive biases, acceptance of discriminatory practices, and active behavioral manifestations of prejudice against older adults.

Keywords

Ageism, Attitudes, Gerontology, Stereotypes, Antilocution, Discrimination, Avoidance, Psychological Assessment, Social Psychology, Elderly.

Authors

Fraboni, M., Saltstone, R., Hughes, S.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the FSA is to assess the prevalence and nature of ageism among respondents by capturing the full spectrum of ageist expression. Developed as an improvement over existing instruments, the scale sought to overcome limitations that failed to distinguish between various levels of prejudice—ranging from simple cognitive stereotypes to tangible discriminatory behaviors.

By employing three distinct subscales, the FSA provides a nuanced profile of the respondent’s attitudes and behavioral intentions toward older adults. This allows researchers to isolate and analyze specific dimensions of bias, such as subtle social avoidance versus overt support for policy-based discrimination.

Construct

The underlying construct measured by the FSA is ageism, conceptualized as a multi-faceted construct consisting of 29 items divided into three primary dimensions based on the severity and manifestation of the prejudice:

• Antilocution (A): This factor captures general attitudinal beliefs and negative stereotypes about older adults (e.g., beliefs about stinginess or excessive complaining). These are often verbal expressions of prejudice, representing cognitive biases. This subscale includes items 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 10, 13, 26, and 29.
• Discrimination (D): This factor measures beliefs supporting indirect or institutionalized forms of differential treatment regarding rights, privileges, and resources (e.g., access to community facilities or political voice). This subscale includes items 4, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, and 25.
• Avoidance (AV): This factor assesses behavior-based items concerning direct personal avoidance or expressions of discomfort in the presence of older adults (e.g., avoiding conversation or eye contact). This subscale includes items 5, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 23, 27, and 28.

Validity

The foundational research paper established the scale’s construct validity through its empirical demonstration of the hypothesized tripartite structure. The authors argued that the FSA achieved greater precision than its predecessors by successfully isolating and measuring three distinct, albeit correlated, factors of ageism.

The separation of attitudinal beliefs (Antilocution) from behavioral intentions (Avoidance and Discrimination) lends strong support to the scale’s ability to measure different stages of prejudice development. Subsequent research has utilized the FSA to assess criterion validity by correlating scores with observed interactions and other measures of social prejudice toward older populations.

Reliability

The reliability of the Fraboni Scale of Ageism is typically evaluated through measures of internal consistency, such as Cronbach’s coefficient alpha. The original 1990 study reported acceptable reliability coefficients for the total scale and for each of the three subscales (Antilocution, Discrimination, and Avoidance). This statistical evidence supports the instrument’s capacity to consistently measure the specific dimensions of ageist attitudes and behaviors across different administrations.

Factor Analysis

The development of the FSA centered on using factor analysis techniques to confirm the existence and independence of its hypothesized three-factor structure. This analysis successfully segregated the 29 items into the distinct subscales of Antilocution, Discrimination, and Avoidance.

The robust factor structure validates the FSA as a multidimensional tool, moving beyond simple generalized scores of prejudice. This allows researchers to analyze precisely how generalized cognitive stereotypes evolve into passive avoidance behaviors or active support for discriminatory practices.

Instrument

Test Type: Self-report psychological scale (Attitude Measure)

Format: 29 items, rated on a 5-point Likert scale.

Language Available: English (Original publication language).

Population Group: General population, often used with college students, young adults, and healthcare professionals.

Age Group: Adolescents and Adults (typically 18+).

Population Details: Originally standardized on a sample that included university students, the scale is designed to measure attitudes held by younger generations toward the elderly.

Test Methodology: Respondents are asked to indicate their level of agreement or disagreement with each statement using a 5-point Likert scale: 1 (strongly disagree), 2 (disagree), 3 (unanswered/neutral), 4 (agree), 5 (strongly agree). Several items are designated as reverse-scored to control for potential acquiescence bias.

Keywords

Ageism, Attitudes, Gerontology, Stereotypes, Antilocution, Discrimination, Avoidance, Psychological Assessment, Social Psychology, Elderly.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: N/A

Affiliation Email addresses: N/A

Correspondence Address: N/A (Refer to the original publication for correspondence details: Canadian Journal of Aging, 1990.)

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Fraboni Scale of Ageism (FSA) was first published in 1990. For current permissions and usage fees, particularly for commercial applications, researchers should consult the primary author, M. Fraboni, or the publisher, the Canadian Journal of Aging. The instrument is widely cited and often available for non-commercial academic research use. The original instrument can be found online at: http://digitalcommons.csbsju.edu/psychology_students/3

Reference’s

• Fraboni, M., Saltstone, R., & Hughes, S. (1990). The Fraboni Scale of Ageism (FSA): An attempt at a more precise measure of ageism. Canadian Journal of Aging, 9(1), 56-66.
• Hultgren, Kristin (2012). Speak Loud and Clear: Intergenerational Service-Learning To Ageism and Elderspeak. Psychology Student Work. Paper 3.

Items of the Fraboni Scale of Ageism (FSA)

Response Scale: 1, strongly disagree, 2, disagree, 3, unanswered, 4, agree, 5, strongly agree.

Reverse scored item: *

1. Many old people are stingy and hoard their money and possessions. A

2. Many old people are not interested in making new friends, preferring instead the circle of friends they have had for years. A

3. Many old people just live in the past. A

4. Most old people should not be trusted to take care of infants. D

5. Many old people are happiest when they are with people their own age. AV

6. Most old people would be considered to have poor personal hygiene. A

7. Most old people can be irritating because they tell the same stories over and over again. A

8. Old people complain more than other people do. A

9. I would prefer not to go to an open house at a senior’s club, if invited. AV

10. Teenage suicide is more tragic than suicide among the old. A

11. I sometimes avoid eye contact with old people when I see them. AV

12. I don’t like it when old people try to make conversation with me. AV

13. Complex and interesting conversation cannot be expected from most old people. A

14. Feeling depressed when around old people is probably a common feeling. AV

15. Old people should find friends their own age. AV

16. Old people should feel welcome at the social gatherings of young people. AV

17. Old people don’t really need to use our community sports facilities. D

18. It is best that old people live where they won’t bother anyone. D

19. The company of most old people is quite enjoyable. * D

20. It is sad to hear about the plight of the old in our society these days. * D

21. Old people should be encouraged to speak out politically. * D

22. Most old people are interesting, individualistic people. * D

23. I personally would not want to spend much time with an old person. AV

24. There should be special clubs set aside within sports facilities so that old people can compete at their own level. D

25. Old people deserve the same rights and freedoms as do other members of our society.* D

26. Most old people should not be allowed to renew their driver’s licenses. A

27. Old people can be very creative. * AV

28. I would prefer not to live with an old person. AV

29. Old people do not need much money to meet their needs. A

Subscale Item Distribution:

• Antilocution items: 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 10, 13, 26, 29
• Discrimination items: 4, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25
• Avoidance items: 5, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 16, 23, 27, 28