MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3191219876 · doi:10.1080/13825585.2021.1962789

Age differences in social-cognitive abilities across the stages of adulthood and path model investigation of adult social cognition

2021· article· en· W3191219876 on OpenAlexaff
Catherine Gourlay, Pascal Collin, Camille D’Auteuil, Marie Jacques, Pier‐Olivier Caron, Peter Scherzer

Bibliographic record

VenueAging Neuropsychology and Cognition · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicPsychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
Canadian institutionsUniversité TÉLUQUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersUniversity of Pennsylvania
KeywordsPsychologyAttributionSocial cognitionTheory of mindCognitionDevelopmental psychologySocial cognitive theoryAssociation (psychology)BlameAge groupsSocial psychologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accumulating evidence points toward an association between older age and performance decrements in social cognition (SC). We explored age-related variations in four components of SC: emotion recognition, theory of mind, social judgment, and blame attributions. A total of 120 adults divided into three stages (18-34 years, 35-59 years, 60-85 years) completed a battery of SC. Between and within age-group differences in SC were investigated. Path analyses were used to identify relationships among the components. Emotion recognition and theory of mind showed differences beginning either in midlife, or after. Blame attributions and social judgment did not show a significant difference. However, social judgment varied significantly within groups. Path models revealed a relationship between emotion recognition and theory of mind. Findings highlight age-related differences in some components and a link between two components. Strategies promoting social functioning in aging might help to maintain or improve these abilities over time.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.800
Threshold uncertainty score0.421

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.223 · 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

Citations11
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAging Neuropsychology and CognitionSame topicPsychology of Moral and Emotional JudgmentFrench-language works237,207