CONSCIENTIOUSNESS, ACTIVITY ENGAGEMENT AND MOMENTARY AFFECT IN OLDEST-OLD ADULTHOOD
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Participation in meaningful activities may be particularly important for late life well-being. We examined associations of moment to moment variability in meaningful activity engagement with positive and negative affect in the daily lives of oldest-old adults. Moderating effects of conscientiousness on meaning-affect associations were also examined considering recent theorising that late life declines in conscientiousness could reflect adaptive self-regulatory processes. Participants were 73 adults aged 84 and above from the Australian Longitudinal Study of Aging Daily Life Time-Sampling (ADuLTS) study, who provided self-report data on activity engagement (including ratings of meaning and degree of challenge associated with activities) and affect on five occasions per day over seven days. Within-person variability in meaningful activity engagement was associated with positive and negative affect; however, these associations were conditional upon the extent to which activities were rated as challenging. Specifically, positive affect tended to be lower on occasions when activities were rated as less meaningful, but also more challenging. Similarly, negative affect was rated as lower on occasions when activities were regarded as more meaningful, and at the same time less challenging. Participants who were higher in conscientiousness reported higher overall positive affect, and associations of higher conscientiousness with lower momentary negative affect were evident on occasions when activities were rated as more challenging. Engagement in meaningful activity is associated with higher positive, and lower negative affect in late life, with these associations dependent on the extent to which activities are challenging. Findings are discussed in the context of self-regulatory perspectives on adaptation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".