Greater perceived similarity between self and own-age others in older than young adults.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As people age, they increasingly incorporate age-stereotypes into their self-view. Based on this evidence we propose that older compared to young adults identify to a greater extent with their own-age group on personality traits, an effect that may be particularly pronounced for positive traits. Two studies tested these hypotheses by examining associations in young and older adults between evaluations of self and own-age others on personality traits that varied on valence. In both studies, young and older participants rated personality trait adjectives on age typicality, valence, and self-typicality. Converging results across both studies showed that older compared to young participants were more likely to endorse personality traits as self-typical when those traits were also perceived as more typical for their own-age group, independent of whether age was made salient to participants prior to evaluation. In addition, there was evidence that the association between evaluations of self and own-age others in older participants was greater for more positive personality traits. This age-differential pattern is discussed in the context of increased age salience in aging and its effect on the similarity between evaluations of self and own-age others in older compared to young adults. (PsycINFO Database Record
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".