The Relationship between Emotional Intelligence, Resiliency, and Mental Health in Older Adults: The Mediating Role of Savouring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Traditionally, mental and physical health have been considered indicators of successful aging. However, resiliency, the propensity to bounce back from negative events, is beginning to emerge as an important aspect of aging successfully. Further, possessing emotional intelligence (EI) has been associated with improved physical and mental health. Positive emotions consistently demonstrate numerous mental and physical health benefits, however savouring, the process through which positive emotions are focused on, has comparatively been under-studied. The present study hypothesized that savouring, resiliency and EI would predict physical health in older adults, and that savouring would mediate the relationship between resiliency, EI, and mental health. Contrary to hypotheses, none of the variables significantly predicted physical health. In partial support of hypotheses, savouring mediated the relationship between resiliency and mental health, but did not mediate the relationship between EI and mental health when the two models were combined.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".