Succession, Identity, and Consumption Scale of Prescriptive Ageism (SIC)

Abstract

The Succession, Identity, and Consumption Scale of Prescriptive Ageism (SIC) is a psychometric instrument developed by North and Fiske (2013b) to measure specific, modern forms of ageism rooted in perceived intergenerational tension. Unlike descriptive ageism, which relies on stereotypes about what older adults are like, the SIC focuses on Prescriptive Ageism—biases concerning what older adults should or should not do, particularly regarding resource allocation and social roles.

The scale is structured around three distinct dimensions: Succession (the expectation that older generations relinquish political and professional power), Identity (the expectation that older adults adhere to age-appropriate behaviors and styles), and Consumption (the expectation that older adults limit their use of shared resources, such as healthcare or public funds). High scores on the SIC indicate strong endorsement of these prescriptive norms, suggesting underlying antagonism toward the older generation.

Keywords

Prescriptive Ageism, Intergenerational Tension, Stereotypes, Age Discrimination, Succession, Identity, Consumption, Prejudice, Social Psychology, Ageism

Authors

Michael S. North, Susan T. Fiske

Purpose

The primary purpose of the SIC scale is to provide researchers with a robust and targeted measure of modern prescriptive ageism, a critical and often overlooked component of age-related prejudice. Traditional measures of ageism often focus on explicit hostility or descriptive stereotypes; however, the SIC aims to capture the subtle yet powerful normative expectations that younger generations hold regarding the behavior and resource utilization of older adults.

The scale helps quantify the extent to which individuals believe that older people are violating implicit social contracts related to passing on resources, maintaining appropriate social boundaries, and stepping aside for younger generations. This measurement is crucial for understanding the psychological mechanisms driving intergenerational conflict and for developing effective interventions against age-based prejudice.

Construct

The SIC measures Prescriptive Ageism, which is defined as the belief that older adults are violating implicit social rules or norms, thereby attracting resentment and prejudice. This construct is fundamentally driven by perceived intergenerational competition over three scarce societal resources or domains:

• Succession: Biases related to the perceived refusal of older adults to relinquish power, status, or job positions, thereby blocking advancement for younger individuals.
• Consumption: Biases related to the perceived overconsumption of resources (e.g., healthcare, finances, public services) by older adults, often leading to the view that they are a societal burden.
• Identity: Biases related to the perceived failure of older adults to maintain age-appropriate behavior or identity (e.g., attempting to participate in youth culture or modern trends).

By focusing on these three specific domains, the SIC moves beyond generalized negative attitudes to capture the distinct, actionable reasons why individuals might feel antagonism toward the elderly population.

Validity

The development and validation of the SIC scale were thoroughly documented in North and Fiske (2013b). The instrument demonstrated strong evidence of construct validity, supporting the theoretical separation of prescriptive ageism into the three distinct factors: Succession, Identity, and Consumption. The validation process, which utilized multiple samples, confirmed that these factors load reliably onto a single higher-order factor representing overall prescriptive ageism.

Furthermore, the SIC was shown to possess significant discriminant validity, confirming that it measures a unique construct distinct from general measures of prejudice, such as generalized contempt, or other forms of stereotyping. The scale successfully captures intergenerational tension specifically, which is crucial for its utility in social psychological research.

Reliability

The SIC scale exhibits excellent internal consistency across diverse populations and multiple samples. The reliability was assessed using Cronbach’s alpha coefficients, yielding robust results:

• The total scale demonstrated high reliability, with Cronbach’s alpha coefficients ranging from .90 to .91 across the four primary samples analyzed by North and Fiske (2013b).
• The subscales also showed acceptable to high internal consistency:
  • Succession subscale: Alpha ranged from .84 to .85.
  • Identity subscale: Alpha ranged from .83 to .87.
  • Consumption subscale: Alpha ranged from .75 to .86.

Reliability was also confirmed in cross-cultural contexts; analyses conducted on Indian responses resulted in acceptable alphas, ranging from .80 to .86, further demonstrating the scale’s stability and generalizability.

Factor Analysis

The factor structure of the SIC scale was confirmed through advanced statistical methods, likely involving Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) or Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), as indicated by the authors’ notation regarding co-varying items. The analyses consistently supported a clear, three-factor model corresponding precisely to the theoretical domains:

• Factor 1: Consumption (concerns over resource use and financial burden).
• Factor 2: Succession (concerns over political and professional advancement blockage).
• Factor 3: Identity (concerns over appropriate behavior and social boundaries).

The authors noted that certain items within the scale were similar or potentially redundant (*, +, x), suggesting that they co-varied strongly within the Structural Equation Model. This suggests a highly integrated structure within each factor, reinforcing the coherence of the subscales.

Instrument

Test Type: Psychometric Scale, Self-Report Instrument

Format: Multiple items rated on a 6-point Likert scale.

Language Available: English (Primary validation), validated in Indian samples (suggesting potential translations).

Population Group: General population, primarily focusing on younger and middle-aged adults whose attitudes toward older adults are being measured.

Age Group: Typically administered to adults capable of responding to complex attitudinal statements.

Population Details: Validated across four primary samples in the US and also tested on Indian respondents (North & Fiske, under review).

Test Methodology: Respondents indicate their level of agreement with each statement using the following 6-point scale:

1. disagree strongly
2. disagree
3. disagree slightly
4. agree slightly
5. agree
6. agree strongly

Keywords

Psychological Assessment, Intergenerational Conflict, Prescriptive Norms, Social Dominance, Resource Competition, Healthcare Burden, Retirement, Cronbach’s alpha, Likert scale

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not provided in source.

Affiliation Email addresses: [email protected], [email protected]

Correspondence Address: Not provided in source. (Authors affiliated with Princeton University and Columbia University at the time of publication).

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Test Year: 2013 (Publication of validation study: North & Fiske, 2013b).

Permissions and Copyright: The scale is copyrighted by Michael S. North & Susan T. Fiske. Its use for nonprofit research is freely granted. Any commercial use must be cleared directly with the authors.

Fee: No fee for non-profit academic use.

The instrument is publicly available online. The original article detailing the scale construction and validation can be accessed via the PubMed Central link: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3912745/

Reference’s

• North, M. S., & Fiske, S. T. (2012). An inconvenienced youth? Ageism and its potential intergenerational roots. Psychological Bulletin, 138(5), 982-997.
• North, M.S., & Fiske, S.T. (2013a). Act your (old) age: Prescriptive, ageist biases over Succession, Consumption, and Identity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(6), 720-734.
• North, M. S., & Fiske, S. T. (2013b). A prescriptive, intergenerational-tension ageism scale: Succession, Identity, and Consumption. Psychological Assessment, 25(3), 706-713.

Items of the Succession‚ Identity‚ and Consumption Scale of Prescriptive Ageism (SIC)

Note: *+x Similar items‚ potentially redundant‚ denoted as co-varying in the structural equation model.

Factor 1: Consumption

• Doctors spend too much time treating sickly older people.*
• Older people are too big a burden on the healthcare system.*
• Older people are often too much of a burden on families.
• At a certain point‚ older people’s maximum benefit to society is passing along their resources.
• Older people shouldn’t be so miserly with their money if younger relatives need it.
• Older people don’t really need to get the best seats on buses and trains.
• AARP (American Association of Retired Persons) wastes ch‎arity money.

Factor 2: Succession

• If it weren’t for older people opposed to changing the way things are‚ we could probably progress much more rapidly as a society.
• The older generation has an unfair amount of political power compared to younger people.
• Most older people don’t know when to make way for younger people.+
• Most older workers don’t know when it’s time to make way for the younger generation.+
• Older people are often too stubborn to realize they don’t function like they used to.
• Younger people are usually more productive than older people at their jobs.
• Job promotions shouldn’t be based on older workers’ experience rather than their productivity.
• It is unfair that older people get to vote on issues that will impact younger people much more.

Factor 3: Identity

• Older people typically shouldn’t go to places where younger people hang out. x
• In general‚ older people shouldn’t hang out at places for younger people. x
• Generally older people shouldn’t go clubbing.
• Older people probably should use Facebook.
• Older people shouldn’t even try to act cool.