MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155540679 · doi:10.1037/a0029231

Developmental regulation across the life span: Toward a new synthesis.

2012· article· en· W2155540679 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Psychology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAging and Gerontology Research
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchStudienstiftung des Deutschen VolkesDeutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
KeywordsDisengagement theoryPsychologyLife spanDevelopmental psychologyCognitive psychologyDevelopmental stage theoriesSocial psychologyGerontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

How can individuals regulate their own development to live happy, healthy, and productive lives? Major theories of developmental regulation across the life span have been proposed (e.g., dual-process model of assimilation and accommodation; motivational theory of life-span development; model of selection, optimization, and compensation), but they have rarely been integrated. We provide an integration of key processes and predictions postulated by the 3 theories. Moreover, we present evidence from 2 age-heterogeneous, cross-sectional studies showing that the different processes of developmental regulation proposed by the different theories center around 3 key processes (i.e., goal engagement, goal disengagement, and metaregulation), which are positively associated with age and well-being. We conclude by proposing an agenda for future research.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.568
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.010

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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.288 · 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