Differences Between Lifelong Singles and Ever-Partnered Individuals in Big Five Personality Traits and Life Satisfaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Being romantically partnered is widely seen as a societal norm, and it has been shown to be positively associated with important life outcomes, such as physical and mental health. However, the percentage of singles is steadily increasing, with more people staying single for life. We used the Survey of Health, Ageing and Retirement in Europe (SHARE; N = 77,064, mainly ≥ 50 years, 27 countries) to investigate Big Five personality traits and life satisfaction in lifelong singles compared with ever-partnered individuals. Specification-curve analyses suggested that lifelong singles were less extraverted, less conscientious, less open to experiences (dependent on singlehood definition), and less satisfied with their lives. Effects were stronger for never-partnered than for never-cohabitating or never-married individuals and were partly moderated by gender, age, country-level singlehood, and gender ratio. Our study provides insights into the characteristics of lifelong singles and has implications for understanding mental health and structures of social support in older individuals.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".