MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7043846933

Understanding Personal Goals In Retirement And Their Relationship With Life Satisfaction: An Australian Perspective

2021· dissertation· en· W7043846933 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Sydney eScholarship Repository (The University of Sydney) · 2021
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRetirement, Disability, and Employment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Life satisfactionMeaning (existential)Quarter (Canadian coin)Socioeconomic statusQualitative researchIndependence (probability theory)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given Australians will spend almost a quarter of their life in retirement there has been little focus on the life satisfaction of this growing segment and specifically, a lack of research on how retirees themselves view the influences that contribute to a satisfying life. The primary aim of this thesis was to develop a more holistic understanding of how Australian retirees assess their life satisfaction and the factors contributing to it and what, if any, the role of goal-setting plays in enhancing life satisfaction. Drawing on HILDA data to provide a context-setting overview of research measuring the life satisfaction of Australians aged 55+ years revealed that higher satisfaction was associated with a range of demographic, socioeconomic and activity variables. These outcomes informed the primary qualitative study of the thesis involving in-depth interviews with 60 community-dwelling retirees aged 57 to 88 years living in New South Wales. This was done to explore 1) the subjective influences on life satisfaction important to the individual retiree; and 2) the perceived value and usefulness of goal-setting in retirement. With life satisfaction, findings revealed complex interactions between influencing factors driven by four underlying themes: independence and security; connection and contribution; meaning and enjoyment; outlook and acceptance. Goal-setting in retirement revealed that retirees attached different meanings and meaningfulness to the concept of goals with three profiles emerging: acceptor, rejector and ambivalent. Goal-setting motivations varied according to age and time in retirement with three typologies identified: ‘expansion and exploration’ (earlier retirement), ‘connection and contribution’ (later retirement) and ‘autonomy and survival’ (advanced age). The study outcomes provide a more nuanced understanding of factors that influence retiree life satisfaction and the relevance and value of goal-setting in the life satisfaction of older Australians.

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)0.003
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.216
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.131 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Sydney eScholarship Repository (The University of Sydney)Same topicRetirement, Disability, and EmploymentFrench-language works237,207