COVID-Related Perceptions of the Future and Well-Being Among Older Canadian Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Socioemotional Selectivity Theory (SST; Carstensen, 1993) posits that time horizons - or Future Time Perspective (FTP) - change with age and/or the priming of endings. Fung and Carstensen (2006) found that SARS-CoV in 2003 naturalistically primed fragility, with consequences for both FTP and well-being. The current SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic provides a similar context: During the early months of COVID-19, age and time horizon were related to greater emotional well-being for American adults (Carstensen et al., 2020); Dozois (2020) found that, for Canadian adults, anxiety and depression rose. The current study examines relationships between FTP, COVID-19 impact, and psychological well-being in older Canadian women (N = 190; Mage = 70.38). We found that COVID-19 impact and FTP were both related to well-being; additionally, COVID-19 impact moderated the relationship between FTP and well-being. The complexity of what remains or becomes increasingly important for older women during a global health crisis is discussed.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".