DAILY STRESS AND SAME-DAY SUBJECTIVE MEMORY: AGE DIFFERENCES AND PHYSICAL ACTIVITY AS A BUFFER
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Growing research indicates that daily stress is associated with poor same-day memory performance, but it is unclear whether this relationship varies by age and whether moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MPVA) might offset the within-person link between stress and memory in daily life. Ecological momentary assessment data were collected from adults aged 25-88 across British Columbia, Canada. For 14 days, participants (N = 249) wore a tri-axial physical activity monitor, reported stressor occurrence and perceived stressfulness of the events in mobile surveys 4 times per day, and rated their memory at the end of each day. Multilevel modeling was run to evaluate daily perceived stressfulness as a predictor of subjective memory, with same-day MVPA engagement (activity counts >570 counts/60s) and age (years) entered as moderators. At the within-person level, on days when stressors were perceived as more stressful than usual, subjective memory was rated as relatively worse (b = -0.037, CI[-0.061, -0.017], p < .001). MVPA did not buffer against the within-person associations of daily stress with subjective memory, nor did age (p > .05). Future work could examine the mechanisms that might explain the link between stress and memory, for example cortisol, as well as the associations of different intensity and forms of physical activity on stress across age groups.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".