Mattering and Self-Esteem as Bulwarks Against the Consequences of Financial Strain for Loneliness in Later Life: Differentiating Between- and Within-Person Processes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Financial strain likely constitutes a principal risk for loneliness in later-life, but a strong sense of mattering and self-esteem may mitigate these consequences by both offsetting and buffering the influence of financial strain. We test these arguments using data from a national longitudinal survey of older adults gathered between 2021 and 2022 ( N = 2384), as nations emerged from the COVID-19 pandemic. Application of a within-between modelling strategy facilitates differentiation of inter-individual (i.e., between-person) and intra-individual (i.e., within-person) factors. Between-person financial strain is associated with greater loneliness, but within- and between-person mattering and self-esteem offset this association by forestalling loneliness. Between-person mattering buffers between-person financial strain, but between-person self-esteem buffers within-person financial strain. Consequently, within-person financial strain is associated with greater loneliness only at low levels of between-person self-esteem. In summary, accruing a strong sense of worth contributes to protecting older adults from the adverse consequences of financial strain for loneliness.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".