MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3114478277 · doi:10.1093/geroni/igaa057.2138

A Tale of Two Emotions: The Diverging Salience and Health Consequences of Calmness and Excitement in Old Age

2020· article· en· W3114478277 on OpenAlexaff
Jeremy M. Hamm, Carsten Wrosch, Meaghan Barlow, Ute Kunzmann

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation in Aging · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAging and Gerontology Research
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCalmnessPsychologyPerceived controlSalience (neuroscience)Developmental psychologyClinical psychologyCognitive psychologyPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Using two studies, we examined the late life prevalence and health consequences of discrete positive emotions posited to motivate rest and recovery (calmness) or pursuit of novelty and stimulation (excitement). Study 1 assessed the salience of these discrete emotions in older adults (n=73, Mage=73) relative to younger adults (n=73, Mage=23) over a one-week period. Multilevel models showed that older (vs. younger) adults reported higher calmness and lower excitement. Study 2 examined the longitudinal health consequences of calmness and excitement in old age (n=336, Mage=75), as moderated by perceived control. Multilevel growth models showed that calmness, but not excitement, buffered against 10-year declines in psychological well-being (perceived stress, depressive symptoms) and physical health (physical symptoms, chronic conditions) for older adults with low perceived control. Results suggest that positive emotions with disparate motivational functions become more (calmness) or less (excitement) salient and have diverging implications for health in old age.

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)0.002
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.140
GPT teacher head0.440
Teacher spread0.300 · 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInnovation in AgingSame topicAging and Gerontology ResearchFrench-language works237,207