Research confirms that how job advertisements are written may deter applicants age 40 and older.
Research confirms that language used in job advertisements can deter applicants aged 40 and older from applying. Published by the National Bureau of Economic Research, the study "Help Really Wanted? The Impact of Age Stereotypes in Job Ads on Applications from Older Workers" was conducted by Ian Burn (University of Liverpool, UK), Daniel Firoozi, Daniel Ladd and David Neumark (UC Irvine, US).
Ageist language that deters older workers from applying for jobs has the same effect as direct age discrimination; both reduce the employment of older workers.
The study team created and randomly posted a bank of fake job ads to determine how job-ad languaging impacted applicant response by age. The researchers selected the roles of administrative assistant, retail sales and security guard since those jobs generally demonstrate a higher hire rate for workers over 40. To test the impact of language, the advertisements focused on three common age stereotypes–communications skills, physical ability and technology skills.
Findings showed that job-ad language related to ageist stereotypes, even when the language was not blatantly or specifically age-related, deterred job seekers age 40 and older from applying. In some cases, languaging resulted in a lower application rate from older workers extending down to about age 35.
This research follows a 2019 study demonstrating employers discriminate against older workers by using fake resumes to apply for actual jobs. By comparison, the recent study created fake jobs to test the language on real applicants and showed that even a subtle shift in language “might signal that an employer holds ageist stereotypes about older workers or is otherwise less interested in hiring older workers.”
Ageist Language
In an email, Dr. Neumark reaffirmed the team’s surprise with the results of machine learning-generated phrases, which are quite subtle. “It’s not surprising that blatant ageist language is perceived as blatant,” he wrote. “Our evidence speaks to real-world job ads and phrases that do not include these kinds of blatant–and exceptional–language. What I do find surprising is the magnitude of the effect—that the discouragement of older workers from applying is as large as the effect of direct discrimination from our 2019 study.”
The study focused on three common age stereotypes and used language pulled from real-world job postings. An example of required communications skills for an administrative assistant job ad shows the shifts in language.
Not Ageist (control): You must be good at working without supervision.
Subtly Ageist (machine learning calculations of the relationship between the text of the job ads and specific age stereotypes): You must have good communication and teamwork on tasks.
Highly Ageist (from AARP studies): You must be up-to-date with current industry jargon and communicate with a dynamic workforce.
Because ageism is often combined with ableism, questioning physical ability becomes an ageist default through which employers discriminate. For example, You must be able to lift 40 pounds (subtly ageist) and You must be a fit and energetic person (highly ageist).
Finally, ageist stereotypes often point to the assumption that older workers, in particular, are not skilled with tech and have a lower ability to learn new technologies. An example in job postings might be, You must use accounting software systems like Netsuite, Freshbook and QuickBooks (subtly ageist) and You must be a digital native and have a background in social media (highly ageist).
Last year the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) made it clear that job postings using words like recent graduate, young and energetic convey preference and could be a sign of systemic age discrimination. Understanding how age bias is expressed in everyday language not only helps companies reduce potential discrimination in hiring practices but also helps educate job seekers of all ages on a potential sign of an ageist work environment.
Why This Research Matters
As Neumark writes in the study’s introduction, “Lengthening work lives for those able to work is a crucial part of the policy response to population aging.” People are living longer and healthier lives, which translates to a need or desire to work longer.
Extensive research documents the extent to which employers discriminate against older workers in hiring. The more research pointing to the impact of language, and other behavioral responses, on disenfranchised groups–including older applicants and workers–the better educated everyone becomes on how to prevent it.
