Social support and social strain from children and subsequent health and well-being among older U.S. adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social relationships contribute to well-being across the life course and may be especially vital resources for supporting healthy aging among older adults. This research examined associations between perceptions of social support and social strain from children assessed by older adult parents and 35 indicators of physical, behavioral, and psychosocial health and well-being. We utilized three waves of data from the Health and Retirement Study (HRS; N = 11,609), a diverse, national sample of U.S. adults over age 50. We found that increases in social support were associated with better subsequent outcomes on all psychological indicators (higher positive affect, life satisfaction, optimism, purpose in life, mastery, health mastery, financial mastery; lower depression, depressive symptoms, hopelessness, negative affect, perceived constraints) and most social factors (lower loneliness, greater likelihood of contact with children and other family) over the four-year follow-up period. Results also showed that increases in social strain were subsequently related to worse functioning across all indicators of psychological well-being and select social factors (i.e., higher loneliness) and psychological distress outcomes (i.e., higher hopelessness, negative affect, and perceived constraints). However, we did not find evidence that changes in social support and social strain were associated with physical health or health behavior outcomes.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".