Family context, life transitions, and subjective well-being from age 18 to 50 years.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined how family context at age 18 (parent-adolescent conflict, parental support, parent education) predicted between-person variation in subjective well-being (SWB; depressive symptoms and self-esteem) trajectories from age 18 to 50 years. Timing of leaving home, getting married, and becoming a parent were explored as life transitions linking family context to within-person variation in SWB. The sample consisted of 604 participants residing in a western Canadian city at age 18 (50% female; 15% with non-White ethnic origin; 29% had at least one university-educated parent) and tracked for up to 32 years. Results of conditional latent curve models with structured residuals revealed that, amid a general increase in SWB from adolescence into midlife, those with lower parent-adolescent conflict and higher parent support had higher SWB at age 18, a between-person difference largely maintained to age 50. Parents' higher education also predicted higher self-esteem, sustained into midlife. Across analyses, transition timing inconsistently predicted within-person fluctuations in SWB, with on-time transitions associated with better than typical SWB. The most robust predictors of SWB at the within-person level were marital and parental status; getting married and becoming a parent were associated with better than typical SWB at ages 25, 43, and 50 years. Family context variables were generally not associated with transition timing, and there were no indirect associations from family context to within-person variation in SWB. Results suggest that family context influences one's well-being trajectory, but forming one's own family results in positive deviations from that path. (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 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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".