MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320497603 · doi:10.1007/s13644-022-00497-y

Religiosity over the Life Course and Flourishing: Are There Educational Differences?

2022· article· en· W4320497603 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Religious Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFlourishingReligiosityLife course approachPsychologyEducational attainmentDevelopmental psychologyMultilevel modelSocial psychologyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Human flourishing offers a more inclusive and comprehensive assessment of well-being beyond the absence of mental illness. Research on religion and well-being has generally focused on singular measure of mental or physical well-being and emphasized different stages rather than longer stretches of the life course. This study seeks to address these gaps. Purpose We focus on the interaction between transitions in religiosity and educational attainment in predicting flourishing in mid-life adults. By positioning the effects of transitions in religiosity across levels of education—a common axis of stratification for religious belief and behavior—we test the enhanced resource perspective that the better educated may benefit more from sustained or increased religiosity over the life course. Methods Data for this study come from MIDUS, a nationally representative sample of United States adults (N = 3030). We created a composite measure of flourishing across the psychological, social, and emotional domains and conducted a series of regression models. Results We observed that people with stable high religiosity between childhood and adulthood had the best flourishing profiles, suggesting that the association between religiosity and flourishing may begin to take shape in childhood. We found that both stable high or increases in religiosity between childhood and adulthood were found to be most beneficial for the flourishing scores of the college educated compared to those with less than a college degree. We found no support for the hypothesis that the less educated “substitute” religion as a compensatory mechanism for their deficiency in secular resources. Conclusion and Implications While flourishing has typically been excluded as an outcome of study in the burgeoning religion-health literature, the results of the current study suggest much could be learned from its inclusion. At the population level, studying flourishing—with attention to differences by educational and religious dimensions—might represent a more useful way to understand how people can achieve a state of happiness and come to realize more meaningful lives.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.720
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.433
Teacher spread0.358 · 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