MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167981589 · doi:10.1093/geronb/57.5.p396

Ethnic Variation in the Impact of Negative Affect and Emotion Inhibition on the Health of Older Adults

2002· article· en· W2167981589 on OpenAlexaff
Nathan S. Consedine, Carol Magai, Carl I. Cohen, Matthew J. Gillespie

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journals of Gerontology Series B · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHealth disparities and outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Institute on AgingNational Institute of General Medical SciencesLong Island University
KeywordsEthnic groupAffect (linguistics)PsychologyClinical psychologyDiseaseTraitDevelopmental psychologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relations between patterns of emotional experience, emotion inhibition, and physical health have been little studied in older adults or ethnically diverse samples. Testing hypotheses derived from work on younger adults, the authors examined the relations between negative affect and emotion inhibition and that of illness (hypertension, respiratory disease, arthritis, and sleep disorder) in a sample (N = 1,118) of community-dwelling older adults from four ethnic groups: U.S.-born African Americans, African Caribbeans, U.S.-born European Americans, and Eastern European immigrants. Participants completed measures of stress, lifestyle risk factors, health, social support, trait negative emotion, and emotion inhibition. As expected, the interaction of ethnicity with emotion inhibition, and, to a lesser extent, negative affect, was significantly related to illness, even when other known risk factors were controlled for. However, the relations among these variables were complex, and the patterns did not hold for all types of illness or operate in the same direction across ethnic groups. Implications for emotion-health relationships in ethnically diverse samples are discussed.

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)0.004
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.314 · 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

Citations85
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journals of Gerontology Series BSame topicHealth disparities and outcomesFrench-language works237,207