MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115111110 · doi:10.1089/cyber.2014.0549

Internet Use and Well-Being in Older Adults

2015· article· en· W2115111110 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

VenueCyberpsychology Behavior and Social Networking · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTechnology Use by Older Adults
Canadian institutionsBrock University
FundersUniverzita Palackého v Olomouci
KeywordsLonelinessThe InternetLife satisfactionPsychologySocial supportWell-beingExtant taxonContext (archaeology)GerontologyHealth and Retirement StudyClinical psychologySocial psychologyMedicineWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Internet has become an important social context in the lives of older adults. Extant research has focused on the use of the Internet and how it influences well-being. However, conflicting findings exist. The purpose of the study was to develop an integrative research model in order to determine the nature of the relationships among Internet use, loneliness, social support, life satisfaction, and psychological well-being. Specifically, loneliness and social support were tested as potential mediators that may modify the relationship between Internet use and indicators of well-being. Data from the U.S. Health and Retirement Study (HRS) were used, and the association among Internet use, social support, loneliness, life satisfaction, and psychological well-being was explored. The sample consisted of 5,203 older adults (aged 65 years and older). The results indicated that higher levels of Internet use were significant predictors of higher levels of social support, reduced loneliness, and better life satisfaction and psychological well-being among 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.

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)0.001
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 score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.786

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.277 · 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