MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050987254 · doi:10.1177/0743558405274876

Chronological and Subjective Age in Emerging Adulthood

2005· article· en· W2050987254 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

VenueJournal of Adolescent Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicIdentity, Memory, and Therapy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyMaturity (psychological)PsychosocialFeelingYoung adultAutonomyDevelopmental psychologyContext (archaeology)Age groupsDemographySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explored the relationship between chronological age and subjective age in emerging adulthood. Predictors of variability in subjective age were also examined. A sample of 190 university students (140 females, 50 males) ages 17 to 29 completed questionnaires assessing their subjective age, psychosocial maturity, number of role transitions, financial dependence, economic pressure, and alcohol use. There was a negative linear relationship between subjective age and chronological age, with older individuals feeling younger than their chronological age. The crossover from an older to a younger subjective age occurred at about 25.5 years. Psychosocial maturity was the only significant predictor of subjective age, with higher maturity related to feeling older. The crossover from an older to a younger subjective age is discussed as a transition-linked turning point in which emerging adults redefine who they are in the context of changing reference groups and the newness of their recently acquired autonomy.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.324
Threshold uncertainty score0.546

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.449
Teacher spread0.358 · 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