MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022188989 · doi:10.1159/000211948

Spousal Interrelations in Old Age – A Mini-Review

2009· review· en· W2022188989 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGerontology · 2009
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAttachment and Relationship Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftGeorgia Institute of Technology
KeywordsPsychologyCognitionDevelopmental psychologyCognitive agingCognitive psychologyGerontologyMedicineNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We review findings on spousal interrelations in old age in such key domains as cognition, well-being, and health. Therein, we demonstrate that spousal interrelations may extend developmental options but may also make an individual vulnerable to the experience of loss. We address theoretical questions concerning possible underlying mechanisms, e.g. individual and spousal goal-related processes. Furthermore, we draw attention to important methodological challenges such as identifying processes that operate along different time scales and employing adequate data analytic tools. We propose that aging research may benefit from an examination of interrelations in developmental pathways of multiple co-developing individuals such as spouses and point to the need to disentangle individual from relationship-specific effects.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.974
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.139
GPT teacher head0.508
Teacher spread0.369 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it