Downward social comparison and subjective well-being in late life: The moderating role of perceived control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Drawing from Heckhausen and Schulz's Motivational Theory of Life-span Development, this study examined perceived control as a moderator of the protective relationship between downward social comparison and subjective well-being among older adults. METHODS: Community-dwelling older adults (N = 97, 63% female, ages 79-97) were interviewed in their own homes at three time-points over a nine-year period. Interviews assessed older adults' perceived control over daily tasks, their use of downward social comparison in response to task restriction, and their subjective well-being. RESULTS: Regression analyses yielded a significant interaction between downward social comparison and perceived control for three subjective well-being outcomes: life satisfaction, perceived stress, and depressive symptoms. Follow-up analyses revealed that downward social comparison was associated with greater subjective well-being at low levels of perceived control; but was unrelated to subjective well-being at high levels of perceived control. CONCLUSION: These findings corroborate Heckhausen and Schulz's theorized goal-opportunity congruence premise and have implications for quality-of-life interventions to assist community-dwelling older adults.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".