Conference Agenda

More than 15 years ago, data from the fourth wave of the European Social Survey - ESS - showed that ageism was one of the most widespread forms of discrimination in Europe. Since then, the proportion of older adults has increased significantly, and although ageism can be experienced across the age spectrum, it is thought to have the most detrimental effects when experienced by older people. The greying of Europe therefore calls for a reassessment of the prevalence of ageism in European countries. In this paper we present Slovenian data on attitudes towards older people and age discrimination in Slovenia, collected through the nationally specific wave 3 of the ESS web panel survey - Cronos2 in 2022, and compare them with data collected through wave 4 of the ESS in 2008. The comparison is based on the remarkable opportunity offered by the replication of some questions from the European Social Survey in the Cronos2 panel. Moreover, the paper will extend the literature on age discrimination by presenting some structural differences at the level of specific sub-populations with regard to attitudes towards older people and perceptions of age discrimination, in particular at measurement point 2 (in 2022). The additional contribution of the presentation is to highlight the benefits of replicating the ESS ageism module (either in part or in full) through the Cronos panel, with the aim of furthering the understanding of the factors influencing ageism and developing evidence-based interventions to counter it.

The paper examines the links between individual religiosity (defined both as denomination and as subjective religiosity level), country-level average religiosity and attitudes toward immigrants of various religious backgrounds among Europeans. These links are being analyzed through the lenses of social identity theory and religious compassion theory. The former claims that individuals find a source of positive self-identification in their in-group; therefore, they perceive the ‘otherness’ (for instance, membership in a religious out-group, e.g. Muslims in European countries) as a symbolic threat to their identity. According to the latter theory, the more religious individuals are, the more they are committed to such values as compassion and care for those facing hardships, which makes them more sympathetic to such a vulnerable group as immigrants. At the same time, the level of such solidarity should be directly related to perceived ‘closeness’ of the particular immigrant groups in terms of their religion. Using the data from the 7th wave of the European Social Survey (ESS) on 20 European countries (fieldwork was conducted in 2014-2015, coinciding with the onset of the European migrant crisis), we test our hypotheses using two multilevel regression models, one with the hostility to Muslim immigrants and another with the importance of Christian background of immigrants as dependent variables. Our results indicate that Christians (both Catholics and Protestants) and people that are more religious value the Christian background of immigrants more, compared to the individuals who do not belong to any denomination and non-religious individuals respectively. The attitude towards Muslim immigrants, however, is not related neither to denomination nor to subjective religiosity. Country-level religiosity has no direct effect on intolerance, but leverages the effect of subjective religiosity on the importance of Christian background. These findings suggest that, in the European context, both the religious social identity theory and the religious compassion theory are only partly supported at best.

Migrants constitute a heavily discriminated-against group in Western societies. Several studies report high inequalities in terms of labour market participation, job applications, wages, housing, and performance in the education system. While this extensive literature primarily focuses on “real” discrimination, there is an often-overlooked issue: that of perceived discrimination, namely, the feeling of being part of a group that is the target of some form of discrimination, regardless of whether the discriminatory act is actually being perpetrated or not. This issue deserves attention for at least two main reasons. First, individuals who feel they are a member of a group discriminated against can cope with prejudice by increasing their identification with such a group. This can trigger a vicious cycle, leading to higher rates of actual discrimination due to increased visibility, thereby further hindering the integration of immigrants into the host society. Second, perceived discrimination is related to many other (negative) outcomes such as low self-esteem, emotional well-being, host-country identification, and trust in mainstream institutions in the host society.

This paper contributes knowledge on the topic by adopting a multi-group and multi-level approach, investigating individual features and characteristics related to both the origin and destination countries. In doing so, we examine three main mechanisms identified in the literature as fostering perceived group discrimination (PGD): (1) PGD as a result of ethnic discrimination/antipathy by the majority, (2) PGD linked to exposure and contacts with members of the majority, and (3) PGD as a result of attributional processes arising from both higher awareness and higher expectations by more integrated migrants. Based on (1), we expect that both Muslim migrants and migrants from Muslim-majority countries will perceive higher PGD, and the same to happen in countries with more negative attitudes toward migration. Drawing on a combination of (2) and (3), we expect second-generation migrants, particularly if Muslim, and higher-educated migrants to perceive higher group discrimination. The same expectations apply to countries with better integration policies.

The analysis relies on a subset of the European Social Survey dataset comprising both first- and second-generation migrants. The dependent variable is derived from the question “Would you describe yourself as being a member of a group that is discriminated against in this country?” and individual-level data are supplemented by contextual variables from various sources (e.g., ARDA and MIPEX). Regarding the modelling strategy, we consider migrants in our sample as contemporaneously embedded in both the destination country and the origin one, utilizing cross-classified multilevel models.

Preliminary results clearly demonstrate that individual characteristics play a crucial role in explaining migrants’ perceived group discrimination (PGD), with the most evident patterns emerging when examining migrants’ generation and religion. In assessing the influence of contextual features, the results are less conclusive, as a more welcoming integration setting is not necessarily linked with lower PGD. Overall, our findings offer some evidence for the so-called “Integration paradox,” highlighting the tendency for more integrated immigrants to report higher levels of PGD.

This research examined self-reports of ageism in relation to various external factors across 28 European countries. Overall, the level of self-reported ageism was low, but both young and old respondents reported more instances of ageism than middle-aged individuals. Differences were observed between countries, with more economically developed countries reporting, counterintuitively, lower ageism levels. However, this trend was different across age groups: young people reported more ageism in richer countries while older people reported more ageism in less affluent countries. Higher self-reports of ageism were correlated with higher education levels, belonging to an ethnic minority, and being female, suggesting these groups have a heightened sensitivity to discrimination. Interestingly, a higher income was associated with lower self-reported ageism.

This study expands existing ageism research by identifying vulnerable groups and individual and country factors that are associated with ageism. It suggests that perceived age discrimination does not perfectly reflect actual discriminatory practices being influenced by an individual sensitivity to discrimination and socio-economic factors.

Discrimination based on identities is widely recognized as a serious societal problem yet there are multiple ways to measure it and different ways often give contradictory results. Self-reported discrimination is a contested measure because it might indicate either objective discrimination or an increased sensitivity towards acts of discrimination. One way to distinguish these two sources of perceived discrimination is to simultaneously investigate minority status and personal values. The ESS Round 4 data provided an opportunity for such a study. Using multilevel regressions, we found that although minority statuses have ambiguous effects on self-reported discrimination, basic values exhibited a consistent, albeit surprising, pattern of effects. Respondents endorsing growth values (including universalism, self-direction, self-expression, and benevolence) reported lower levels of discrimination against themselves, whereas Europeans emphasizing self-protection values (such as self-enhancement) reported higher degrees of discrimination. These results were consistent across various types of discrimination (ageism, sexism, and racism), both before and after controlling for minority status. The associations were relatively stable across countries, and we failed to identify any country-level moderators. These findings support the notion that self-reported discrimination may be more rooted in feelings of entitlement and self-enhancement than in concerns about social fairness. We discuss the implications of our findings for the measurement of discrimination in survey research, comparing the benefits and limitations of self- and other-reported discrimination, and address the contradiction with several socio-psychological theories.