In last month's Research News, we focused on Australia's ageing population and researching ‘older people' and ‘elderly people'.

In reading the various articles, it occurred to Scott MacLean, a more ‘experienced' member of the editorial advisory group, that there was considerable variation in how the authors described these cohorts. In other words, were we talking about 50+, 65+, 60+ or something else?

So, he thought, why not ask the public what they would view as ‘old' or ‘elderly'?

Accordingly, with the kind pro bono help of Research Now (especially Tabitha Blair and Corinna Fenwick), a quick survey was fielded, asking the following questions:

Q1 What age would someone have to reach, before you would consider them as being ‘old'?

Q2 What age would someone have to reach, before you would consider them as being ‘elderly'?

Research Now obtained 1006 responses in the space of one and a half days, 501 from men and 505 from women.

As respondent age increased, so did the answer to the ‘how old is old' question.

In contrast, answers to the ‘how old is elderly' question were pretty much consistent regardless of respondent age.

Perhaps more interesting was the range of answers to the question: Why do you say that?
Here are some examples:

• ‘My mother in-law is 72 and still working full-time. 75 is not like it was 20 years ago. 75 is the new 60.'
• ‘Some people are born old.'
• ‘People today tend to look after themselves better especially the females with all the new and improved skin care products that are on the market.'
• ‘Most of our bodies start to fail 80 +, as well as memory. I have seen it first hand.'
  

This is a good reminder that we always need to look at an issue through the eyes of our respondents.

Download all of the open-ended responses here. 

Print this page



Other Articles in this edition