DAILY POSITIVE EVENTS ARE ASSOCIATED WITH MORE FAVORABLE PERCEPTIONS OF SAME-DAY STRESSORS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Positive events frequently occur in the context of stress. Rather than happening by chance, positive events may be intentionally sought out as part of the coping process and may predict more favorable perceptions of stressors. The purpose of this study was to examine whether daily positive events predicted same-day ratings of subjective stressor severity, perceived control, and primary appraisals of threat. In the National Study of Daily Experiences Refresher, 782 adults ages 26–77 completed 8 days of telephone interviews. Stressors were reported on 42% of interview days; positive events occurred on 81% of these stressor days. When positive events occurred alongside stressors (compared to stressor days without positive events), participants rated themselves has having more control over stressors, and the stressors were rated as less severe and as posing less threat to one’s daily routine (p’s < 0.05). Discussion will focus on possible mechanisms linking positive events to stress appraisals.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".