Under Pressure, but Together: Stressor Reactivity and Daily Social Connection in Middle and Later Adulthood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Social belonging has long been conceptualized and studied as a stable individual difference characteristic, shaped by temperament, personality, and childhood experiences. In this talk, we will discuss how feelings of social connection vary on a daily basis, and how these variations are related to stressor reactivity. Using eight days of daily diary data from the National Study of Daily Experiences (N = 2,022), we examine how daily social connection is related to negative affect experienced in response to a stressor in a national sample of midlife and later adulthood. Each day, participants reported whether they had experienced a daily stressor (e.g., an argument, a stressor at work, a stressor at home), and the extent to which they felt a sense of belonging across the past 24 hours. We used multilevel modelling to examine how levels of daily social belonging were related to changes in negative affect on days when people responded to stressors, after adjusting for average levels of positive affect, stressor exposure, and parental warmth. In a model examining the main effects, greater sense of belonging was related to lower levels of negative affect ( γ =-.022, p<.001), and stressor exposure was related to higher negative affect (γ =.127, p<.001). However, the addition of the within-person interaction indicated that negative affect was lower on stressor days when people felt a higher sense of belonging (γ = -0.065, p<.001). Results suggest that daily connection is important for well-being and how we respond to stressors in daily life.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".