MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2911821187 · doi:10.1037/pag0000331

Modeling long-term changes in daily within-person associations: An application of multilevel SEM.

2019· article· en· W2911821187 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jonathan Rush, Philippe Rast, David M. Almeida, Scott M. Hofer

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology and Aging · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaNational Institute on AgingNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsPsychologyMultilevel modelTerm (time)Developmental psychologyStructural equation modelingStatistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Short-term within-person associations are considered to reflect unique dynamic characteristics of an individual and are frequently used to predict distal outcomes. These effects are typically examined with a 2-step statistical process. The present research demonstrates how long-term changes in short-term within-person associations can be modeled simultaneously within a multilevel structural equation modeling framework. We demonstrate the utility of this model using measurement burst data from the National Study of Daily Experiences (NSDE) embedded within the Midlife in the United States (MIDUS) longitudinal study. Two measurement bursts were separated by 9 years, with each containing daily measures of stress and affect across 8 consecutive days. Measures of life satisfaction and psychological well-being were also assessed across the 9-year period. Three-level structural equation models were fit to simultaneously model short-term within-person associations between stress and negative affect and long-term changes in these associations over the 9-year period. Individual differences in long-term changes of the short-term dynamics between stress and affect predicted well-being levels. We highlight how characterizing individuals based on the strength of their within-person associations across multiple time scales can be informative in predicting distal outcomes. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.581

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.318 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations37
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychology and AgingSame topicPsychological Well-being and Life SatisfactionFrench-language works237,207