From Embedded to Explicit: Reconsidering Ageism In Sexual and Gender Minority Aging Research

Background and Purpose:

Ageism is increasingly recognized as a significant dimension of inequality shaping later life; however, its conceptual and empirical position within research on sexual and gender minority (SGM) older adults remains insufficiently specified. Although scholarship on SGM populations has expanded substantially, experiences of marginalization are most often examined through broader frameworks of cumulative stigma, minority stress, and intersectionality. Within these approaches, age-related marginalization is frequently embedded within composite measures of discrimination, limiting the ability to analytically isolate ageism as a distinct construct. The purpose of this study is to systematically examine how ageism is conceptualized, operationalized, and measured within empirical research on SGM older adults.

Methods:

A scoping review was conducted following PRISMA-ScR guidelines. A comprehensive search of four electronic databases (Scopus, PsycINFO, PubMed, and CINAHL) was performed in February 2026 with no date restrictions. Inclusion criteria were: (1) empirical, peer-reviewed studies; (2) focus on SGM populations aged 50 and older; and (3) explicit examination of ageism beyond use as a demographic covariate. Studies were excluded if they were theoretical, review-based, or did not substantively address age-based marginalization. After screening and full-text review, 34 studies were included. Data were extracted and analyzed using a structured framework capturing study characteristics, conceptualizations of ageism, measurement approaches, and outcome domains.

Results:

Findings indicate that ageism is rarely examined as a distinct analytic construct within SGM aging research. Instead, age-related marginalization is most often embedded within broader indices of discrimination or cumulative stigma. When explicitly addressed, ageism appears across multiple dimensions, including internalized ageism, interpersonal discrimination, and structural exclusion, particularly in healthcare and long-term care settings. However, considerable variability exists in how ageism is defined and measured, with many studies relying on indirect or non-validated indicators. This conceptual and methodological inconsistency limits the field’s ability to systematically assess age-based marginalization and compare findings across studies.

Conclusions and Implications:

The findings suggest that the current state of the literature may obscure how ageism is experienced and interpreted in later life among SGM populations. This has implications for social work research committed to advancing equity and democratic inclusion, as the inability to clearly identify age-based marginalization may hinder the development of targeted interventions and policies. This study contributes by identifying a critical gap in the literature and advancing a conceptual reframing of ageism as a temporally situated form of marginalization emerging in later life. Ongoing research builds on these findings using qualitative oral history methods to examine how lesbian and gay older adults with histories of social justice activism interpret ageism in relation to earlier experiences of marginalization. Together, this work supports more precise and actionable approaches to addressing inequality in aging SGM populations.

---