Older adults showed reduced tendency to distinguish between credible and noncredible advertisement. Although learning opportunities exist in everyday life, such as public promotion and news reports exposing fraudulent practices, little is known about how younger and older adults differ in their ability to learn from these feedback. In this study, we addressed this question by adopting a 2 (Age Group: Younger vs. Older adults; between-subject) x 2 (Credibility: Noncredible vs. Credible; within-subject) x 2 (Feedback: Random vs. Accurate; between-subject) x 2 (Phase: Baseline vs. Testing; within-subject) study design. We recruited 92 older (M = 67.6, SD = 5.19, 55 - 80) and 94 younger adults (M = 21.4, SD = 4.55, 18 - 37). During the baseline, participants read 16 advertisements (8 credible and 8 noncredible) and reported whether they would recommend this product to their friends or family after each advertisement. Then, participants received either accurate or random feedback on the credibility of the advertisement they have read. In the testing phase, the same procedure as in the baseline was repeated with a new set of credible and noncredible advertisements. We found a significant 4-way Age Group x Feedback x Credibility x Phase interaction (b = -0.99, p = .03). When feedback was accurate, the Credibility x Phase x Age Group interaction was significant. Both younger and older adults were more likely to recommend the products when the advertisements were credible (vs. noncredible) in the testing phase than the baseline phase. This learning effect was larger in younger adults than in older adults. When feedback was random, learning did not occur in either age group. Our results suggested that older adults benefitted less from feedback than did younger adults. Future studies should investigate the underlying mechanisms of this age difference and explore potential interventions to enhance older adults' learning.