MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409968526 · doi:10.1038/s44184-024-00109-3

When the glass is half full: early life experiences and adult optimism in 22 countries

2025· article· en· W4409968526 on OpenAlexaff
Ying Chen, Laura D. Kubzansky, Eric S. Kim, Hayami K. Koga, R. Noah Padgett, Renae Wilkinson, Byron R. Johnson, Tyler J. VanderWeele

Bibliographic record

Venuenpj Mental Health Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicOptimism, Hope, and Well-being
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersTempleton World Charity FoundationTempleton Religion TrustFetzer InstituteJohn Templeton Foundation
KeywordsOptimismPsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Little is known about early-life experiences that may lead to higher optimism levels in adulthood. Using data from 202,898 adults in 22 countries, we evaluated childhood candidate antecedents of optimism. We examined the associations between retrospectively reported childhood experiences and adult optimism levels in each country separately, and cross-nationally by pooling results across countries. Our pooled results suggest that higher adult optimism levels were associated with childhood experiences of having positive relationships with both parents, higher subjective financial status, better childhood self-rated health, frequent religious service attendance, an earlier year of birth, and being female. Conversely, lower adult optimism was associated with childhood experiences of parental divorce, abuse, financial hardship, and feeling like an outsider in the family. However, country-specific analyses showed substantial between-country variations in these associations, suggesting diverse societal influences. This study provides valuable insights into the association between early-life experiences and adult optimism levels across national contexts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.067
GPT teacher head0.448
Teacher spread0.382 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuenpj Mental Health ResearchSame topicOptimism, Hope, and Well-beingFrench-language works237,207