电商营销中的老年消费者的算法年龄偏见与破解策略
Algorithmic Age Bias against Elderly Consumers in E-Commerce Marketing and Mitigation Strategies
摘要: 随着人口老龄化进程加速,老年消费群体的潜力与数字权益保障成为电商领域的重要议题。本文聚焦电商营销中针对老年消费者的算法年龄偏见,系统分析其典型表现、生成机制及社会影响。研究发现,算法通过数据采集、模型训练与反馈机制,将社会固有年龄歧视内化为技术逻辑,表现为推送内容单一化、价格歧视、潮流商品排斥及适老化设计失效等问题。这种偏见不仅深化老年群体的“权利沟”,剥夺其多元化信息获取权,还导致社会资源错配与代际疏离。基于此,本文从法律保障、数据治理、商业责任与协同支持四方面提出破解策略,强调需建立算法透明机制、优化数据公平性、重构包容性商业逻辑,并构建多方联动的数字支持网络,以推动老年群体从“被动适应者”向“主动参与者”转型,助力全龄友好的数字生态建设。
Abstract: With the accelerating process of population aging, the potential of elderly consumers and the protection of their digital rights have become critical issues in the field of e-commerce. This study focuses on algorithmic age bias against elderly consumers in e-commerce marketing, systematically analyzing its typical manifestations, generative mechanisms, and societal impacts. The research reveals that algorithms internalize societal age discrimination into technical logic through data collection, model training, and feedback mechanisms, manifesting as homogenized content recommendations, price discrimination, exclusion from trending products, and ineffective age-friendly design. Such bias not only deepens the “rights divide” among elderly groups by depriving them of access to diverse information but also leads to resource misallocation and intergenerational alienation. To address these issues, this paper proposes mitigation strategies from four perspectives: legal safeguards, data governance, corporate accountability, and collaborative support. Key recommendations include establishing algorithmic transparency mechanisms, optimizing data fairness, reconstructing inclusive business models, and building multi-stakeholder digital support networks. These measures aim to transform elderly groups from “passive adapters” to “active participants” in the digital era, facilitating the construction of an age-inclusive digital ecosystem.
文章引用:陈倚路. 电商营销中的老年消费者的算法年龄偏见与破解策略[J]. 电子商务评论, 2025, 14(7): 398-403. https://doi.org/10.12677/ecl.2025.1472181

参考文献

[1] 于潇, 孙猛. 中国人口老龄化对消费的影响研究[J]. 吉林大学社会科学学报, 2012, 52(1): 141-147+160.
[2] 黄阳坤, 俞雅芸. 镜像与花园之辩: 算法歧视争议下的价值目标与伦理实践——基于工程师的访谈[J]. 国际新闻界, 2023, 45(10): 91-111.
[3] 郭小平, 秦艺轩. 解构智能传播的数据神话: 算法偏见的成因与风险治理路径[J]. 现代传播(中国传媒大学学报), 2019, 41(9): 19-24.
[4] Chu, C.H., Donato-Woodger, S., Khan, S.S., Nyrup, R., Leslie, K., Lyn, A., et al. (2023) Age-Related Bias and Artificial Intelligence: A Scoping Review. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 10, Article No. 510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[5] Todd, O.M., Burton, J.K., Dodds, R.M., Hollinghurst, J., Lyons, R.A., Quinn, T.J., et al. (2020) New Horizons in the Use of Routine Data for Ageing Research. Age and Ageing, 49, 716-722. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
[6] Buolamwini, J. and Gebru, T. (2018) Gender Shades: Intersectional Accuracy Disparities in Commercial Gender Classification. Conference on Fairness, Accountability and Transparency, New York, 23-24 February 2018, 77-91.
[7] Sweeney, L. (2013) Discrimination in Online Ad Delivery. Communications of the ACM, 56, 44-54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef
[8] Pariser, E. (2011) The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You. Penguin UK.
[9] 杨一帆, 潘君豪. 老年群体的数字融入困境及应对路径[J]. 新闻与写作, 2021(3): 22-29.
[10] Davis, F.D. (1989) Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319-340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef