It is about time: Daily relationships between temporal perspective and well-being
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
This study examined the day-to-day relationships between temporal perspective and well-being. Temporal perspective has predominantly been measured with single-occasion measurement designs, which ignore the potential for within-person variations that may be important in accounting for fluctuations in well-being. A 14-day daily diary design was employed to examine the dimensions of temporal perspective (temporal focus, temporal attitude, and temporal distance) and their dynamic relationships with daily well-being. The results from multilevel analyses indicated that: (a) there is evidence of within-person variability in daily temporal perspective, and (b) this within-person variability in temporal perspective fluctuated systematically with fluctuations in daily well-being. Each temporal perspective dimension was useful in predicting daily well-being. Temporal perspective dimensions interacted with each other such that the daily relationships with well-being depended on both the temporal region (past, present, or future) and the nature of the thoughts (pleasant vs. unpleasant; near vs. far).
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 | 0.004 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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