THE INTERPLAY BETWEEN DAILY POSITIVE EVENTS AND DAILY STRESS SEVERITY ON INFLAMMATION IN ADULTHOOD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In examining the dynamics between positive and negative experiences on health, previous studies suggest two possible pathways – the buffering hypothesis and blunting hypothesis. Buffering hypothesis suggests that positive experiences offset the harmful effects of negative experiences, while blunting hypothesis predicts that negative experiences will nullify the benefits of positive experiences. To test these hypotheses, this study examined interactions between daily positive events and daily stress severity on inflammation and whether the associations differ by age. Sample used were adults aged 34 to 82 (N = 597) from the Midlife in the United States Study Wave 2. Reports of respondents’ daily experiences of positive events and stress severity were used as predictors, and log-transformed interleukin-6 (IL-6) and C-reactive protein (CRP) were used as outcome variables. Results showed significant interaction between daily stress severity and daily positive events, with evidence supporting the blunting hypothesis. Specifically, daily positive events were associated with lower levels of IL-6 (b = -0.16, p < .01) and CRP (b = -0.27, p < .01) among adults with lower levels of stress severity, but not for those with high stress severity. Buffering hypothesis was not supported; that is, daily positive events did not attenuate the associations between daily stress severity and IL-6 or CRP. Age did not moderate the interaction between daily positive events and stress severity on inflammation. Findings suggest that with severely stressful experiences, the benefits of positive events on inflammation diminishes significantly among midlife and older adults.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".