Coping mediates the relationships between reminiscence and psychological well-being among older adults
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cross-sectional and longitudinal studies have demonstrated an association between various functions of reminiscence and well-being in later adulthood. This study investigates to what extent the links between reminiscence (self-positive and self-negative functions) and psychological well-being (depressive symptoms, anxiety level and life satisfaction) are mediated by assimilative and accommodative coping. This mediational model was tested using structural equation modelling. The results support the hypothesis that coping completely mediates the links between reminiscence and psychological well-being. Specifically, self-positive reminiscences are related to improved psychological well-being via assimilative and accommodative coping, while, in contrast, self-negative reminiscences are associated to reduced psychological well-being through their negative relationships with both coping modes. These findings suggest that reminiscence contributes to psychological well-being in part because it promotes assimilative and accommodative coping, which are protective mechanisms through which the self-system constructs continuity and meaning over the life course.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it