A tale of two emotions: The diverging salience and health consequences of calmness and excitement in old age.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the benefits of positive affect in old age have been well established, little is known about the late-life salience or adaptive value of discrete positive emotions that have contrasting motivational functions. In two studies, we examined the prevalence and health consequences of individual differences in positive emotions posited to motivate a present-focused mindset that fosters rest and recovery (calmness) or a future-focused mindset that motivates pursuit of novelty and stimulation (excitement). Study 1 was based on a 1-week daily diary study (n = 146) that assessed the salience of these discrete emotions in older adults (M age = 75, SD = 6.82) relative to younger adults (M age = 23, SD = 3.91). Results from multilevel models showed that older adults experienced higher average levels of calmness and lower levels of excitement in comparison to younger adults. Study 2 was based on a 10-year study (n = 336, M age = 75, SD = 6.64) and examined the longitudinal health consequences of individual differences in calmness and excitement for older adults who perceived varying levels of control over their life circumstances. Results from multilevel growth models showed that calmness, but not excitement, buffered against longitudinal declines in psychological well-being (perceived stress, depressive symptoms) and physical health (physical symptoms, chronic conditions) for older adults experiencing low control circumstances. Findings inform theories of emotional aging in showing that positive emotions with disparate motivational functions become more or less salient with age and have diverging consequences for health in late life. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 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 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".