MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041327753 · doi:10.1037/0278-6133.24.4.393

Optimistic Social Comparisons of Older Adults Low in Primary Control: A Prospective Analysis of Hospitalization and Mortality.

2005· article· en· W2041327753 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel S. Bailis, Judith G. Chipperfield, Raymond P. Perry

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth Psychology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAging and Gerontology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaResearch Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGerontologyOddsHealth and Retirement StudyPsychologySocial supportLocus of controlPerceptionMedicineOdds ratioDemographyDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyLogistic regression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social comparison can be used strategically to bolster the self-concept. Such use may constitute secondary striving for control, when primary striving through action is unattainable. On the basis of the life span theory of control, the authors hypothesized and found that social comparison judgments would predict physical health outcomes among older adults with low primary control perceptions in the health domain. Only among such respondents, after age, sex, activities of daily living, chronic conditions, and prior hospitalization were adjusted for, did more positive social comparison judgments predict significantly lower odds of hospitalization and death over the next 2--6 years as reported in provincial health records. In later life, optimistic social comparisons may contribute to better health by providing secondary control.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.409 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations58
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth PsychologySame topicAging and Gerontology ResearchFrench-language works237,207