Giving back to the future: Generativity, future time perspective, and purpose
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research suggests that generativity may serve as a path to the experience of purpose in life. However, little is known about how this relationship is influenced by age and future time perspective (FTP). The present study aimed to investigate age and FTP as moderators of the association between generativity and sense of purpose. A total of 787 participants ranging in age from 19 to 94 years ( M = 50.23; SD = 16.47) completed self-report measures of generativity, FTP, and sense of purpose as part of a broader study. Correlational analyses revealed that generativity, age, and FTP were positively associated with a sense of purpose. Moderation analyses found that FTP, but not age, significantly moderated the relationship between generativity and sense of purpose. Specifically, individuals with a more limited FTP exhibited a stronger association between generativity and purpose. Findings lend support for a robust association between generativity and sense of purpose ( r = .54), and they suggest that generativity may be particularly important for sense of purpose when time is perceived as limited. This study paves the way for future research examining the role of FTP on the development of generativity across the lifespan.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".