Making Up for Lost Opportunities: The Protective Role of Downward Social Comparisons for Coping With Regrets Across Adulthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two longitudinal studies showed that if adults confront low opportunities to overcome regrets, downward social comparisons can exert self-protective functions across the adult life span, irrespective of age (Study 1 N = 104 young and older adults, Study 2 N = 51 older adults). Both studies found that downward relative to upward social comparisons were associated with improvements in participants' positive (but not negative) affect, if they perceived low as opposed to high opportunities to overcome regrets. Moreover, Study 2 showed that this beneficial effect on change in positive affect mediated the experience of fewer cold symptoms over time. Supplemental analyses further indicated that the mechanism linking social comparison processes and opportunities with positive (but not negative) affect was associated with the capacity for goal reengagement. In addition, these analyses showed that the obtained effects were largely unrelated to the severity of regret-related consequences and thus ruled out an alternative explanation of the findings.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".