Reimagine Aging: A Process-Based Intervention to Decrease Internalized Ageism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Exposure to ageism may be internalized in older adults, and this can have severe consequences. However, little research has addressed reducing internalized ageism. Thus, Reimagine Aging, a 6-week process-based intervention to reduce internalized ageism, was designed and implemented, using education, acceptance and commitment therapy, and attributional retraining to target theoretically based mechanisms of change. METHODS: = 70.4 years, SD = 6.4 years) participated in Reimagine Aging, consented to participate in this robust single-sample pilot study, and provided valid data. Participants completed questionnaires prior to, immediately following, and 2 months after the intervention. RESULTS: < .001) became significantly more positive, associated with large effect sizes. Furthermore, these positive gains were mediated by increases in psychological flexibility, mindfulness, and perceived control. DISCUSSION: This study provides initial support for this process-based intervention targeting a reduction of internalized ageism. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: This program has the potential to reduce the negative impact internalized ageism has on the health of older adults. Furthermore, it provides novel insights into intervention targets and tools that may be useful in achieving this reduction.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".