MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2617604191 · doi:10.1177/0165025417711056

Happiness is the way

2017· article· en· W2617604191 on OpenAlexafffund
Shichen Fang, Nancy L. Galambos, Matthew D. Johnson, Harvey Krahn

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Behavioral Development · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHappinessCivic engagementPsychologyMarital statusSocial psychologyUnemploymentDevelopmental psychologySocial engagementSubjective well-beingMultilevel modelPath analysis (statistics)Perspective (graphical)SociologyDemographyPoliticsPolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Directional associations between civic engagement and happiness were explored with longitudinal data from a community sample surveyed four times from age 22 to 43 ( n = 690). Autoregressive cross-lagged models, controlling for cross-time stabilities in happiness and civic engagement, examined whether happiness predicted future civic engagement, civic engagement predicted future happiness, or the temporal ordering was bidirectional. Marital status, parental status, and recent unemployment experience were included as time-varying covariates of civic engagement, and analyses controlled for parent education, self-esteem, and self-rated physical health at age 18. Results indicated consistent cross-lagged associations from higher happiness to higher future civic engagement. There was no support for the path from civic engagement to future happiness, nor for bidirectional associations. Parenthood at age 22 predicted lower civic engagement, while parenthood at ages 32 and 43 predicted higher civic engagement. Recent unemployment experience was associated with less civic engagement at age 32 but more engagement at age 43, and marital status was linked with more civic engagement at age 43. Results support a broaden-and-build theoretical perspective in which happiness predicts future civic engagement across the transition to adulthood and into midlife.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.334 · 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

Citations26
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Behavioral DevelopmentSame topicPsychological Well-being and Life SatisfactionFrench-language works237,207