A Cross-National Comparison of Reminiscence Functions Between Canadian and Israeli Older Adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Recently, a model of reminiscence and well-being has emerged in which reminiscence functions have been shown to predict both the mental and physical health of middle-aged and older adults. Yet this model has thus far been verified only with North American, Western European, and Australian participants. This study was undertaken to compare the latent structure of responses between Canadian and Israeli older adults to ascertain if 8 distinct reminiscence functions map onto 3 second-order factors which, in turn, contribute significantly to measurement of an overarching reminiscence latent construct. METHOD: For this study, 336 English Canadian and 206 Jewish Israeli adults more than 49 years of age provided responses for this study via an Internet website constructed specifically for this study. RESULTS: Our findings demonstrate the psychometric equivalence as well as various cross-cultural differences in the relative strength of association between latent constructs (boredom reduction, bitterness revival, identity, and the overall contribution of self-negative functions to overall reminiscence). DISCUSSION: We discuss various historical and geo-political factors that may account for these differences. For instance, recurrent war, ongoing terror, and regional instability make living and aging in Israel distinct from Canada. This model of reminiscence functions would appear sufficiently sensitive to capture cross-national differences.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".