Existential Authenticity, Religiosity, and Mental Health: Age Differences in an Increasingly Secular Society
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the increasing secularization of society, uncertainty exists regarding how this age-related trend may be associated with mental health. Using online surveys, this study examined potential relationships among religiosity (i.e., intrinsic, extrinsic, and quest orientations), existential authenticity (i.e., behaving in ways that align with one’s true self), and mental health (i.e., anxiety, depression, and life satisfaction) among university student (n = 659) and older adult (n = 261) samples. Analyses revealed that among younger adults, intrinsic religiosity was associated with higher authenticity and greater life satisfaction, and authenticity also indirectly linked intrinsic religiosity to each mental health index. However, among older adults, only quest religious orientation was associated with greater authenticity, while authenticity also indirectly linked quest religiosity to each index of mental health. Taken together, these results suggest that religiosity may be differentially associated with mental health as a function of age, in part through uniquely linking to conceptualizations of one’s authentic self.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".