Aging and Self-Discrepancy: Evidence for Adaptive Change Across the Life Span
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND/STUDY CONTEXT: Higgins' self-discrepancy theory (SDT; Higgins, 1987, Psychological Review, 94, 319-340) postulates that individuals are motivated to decrease the discrepancy between their current and future selves. The objective of the current research was to investigate adult age differences in quantitative and qualitative aspects of self-discrepancy. METHODS: Higgins' self-guide strength measure (Higgins et al., 1997, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 515-525) was utilized to compare self-discrepancy in older (aged 65-84) and younger (aged 17-30) healthy, community-dwelling adults. Additionally, the possible selves generated in the task were analyzed thematically. RESULTS: Age was associated with lowered expectations concerning both current and future selves, but the magnitude of self-discrepancy remained constant across the life span. Thematically, interpersonal-related possible selves were important for both age groups, whereas significant age differences emerged in several other thematic domains: younger adults generated significantly more related to achievement, whereas older adults were significantly more concerned with duties, obligations, and health. DISCUSSION: These findings reflect adaptive age-related changes in expectations and motivational priorities in line with life span theories of development.
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 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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it